BF2S Forums Trouble Ahead?

Pubic wrote:

Those munitions won't be used to target Israel, they'll be used to target soft Palestinian targets - mosques, hospitals, schools etc.  These attacks will be blamed on Israel, and used to justify further attacks by Hamas.

mafia996630 wrote:

FEOS wrote:

mafia996630 wrote:

Nothing wrong with taking munitions that were dropped to blow innocent people up with originally.

One: Absolutely something wrong with taking munitions that they were supposed to be guarding for the UN. Did the UN give them permission to take the munitions? They were in effect in the custody of the UN...yet Hamas decided to take them.

Two: Those munitions were not "dropped to blow innocent people up" originally. They were dropped to take out specific, Hamas-related targets. The fact that there were civilians around was the fault of Hamas...and no one else.

One:Guarding for the UN ? CUstody of the UN? wtf. All of a sudden you think the UN controls Gaza,lulz. Hamas collected the explosives and then guarded it for the UN like the article says.

mafia99630 wrote:

Two: Lets not go there again.

mafia996630 wrote:

FEOS wrote:

mafia996630 wrote:

One:Guarding for the UN ? CUstody of the UN? wtf. All of a sudden you think the UN controls Gaza,lulz. Hamas collected the explosives and then guarded it for the UN like the article says.

Guarded it for the UN. That means it was in the custody of the UN. Otherwise, they would've been "guarding" it for someone else.

mafia99630 wrote:

Two: Lets not go there again.

I wouldn't want to go there again if I were you, either.

Wtf is wrong with you ? when the fuk does the UN have any custody in Gaza ? If they had custody in Gaza, why the fuk don't they arrest Hamas ? Why the fuk don't they stop innocent deaths ? Who the fuk gave then custody ?

This is so retarded.

mafia996630 wrote:

FEOS wrote:

mafia996630 wrote:

Wtf is wrong with you ? when the fuk does the UN have any custody in Gaza ? If they had custody in Gaza, why the fuk don't they arrest Hamas ? Why the fuk don't they stop innocent deaths ? Who the fuk gave then custody ?

This is so retarded.

Custody of the weapons. Weapons.

That neither stated nor implied that the UN has custody of all of Gaza, ffs.

Have international arrest warrants from the Hague been issued for Hamas? No? Perhaps that's why they haven't arrested Hamas. That, and it's not their fucking job.

Reading comprehension ftw.

So what makes you think UN had custody of the weapons ? Was a warrant issued for the weapons to be seized ?

M.O.A.B wrote:

mafia996630 wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Custody of the weapons. Weapons.

That neither stated nor implied that the UN has custody of all of Gaza, ffs.

Have international arrest warrants from the Hague been issued for Hamas? No? Perhaps that's why they haven't arrested Hamas. That, and it's not their fucking job.

Reading comprehension ftw.

So what makes you think UN had custody of the weapons ? Was a warrant issued for the weapons to be seized ?

The article says they were stockpiled to await disposal by the UN and were put under guard by Hamas. The UN (wrongfully) trusted Hamas.

M.O.A.B wrote:

mafia996630 wrote:

M.O.A.B wrote:

The article says they were stockpiled to await disposal by the UN and were put under guard by Hamas. The UN (wrongfully) trusted Hamas.

The article also says that Hamas collected the weapons and were guarding it for the UN. HAMAS WAS NOT ORDERED by the UN to guard it. Hamas found the weapons and therefore has full claim to it.

Tell you what, maybe Hamas should give the fuking weapons to a lost property office! yeahhh.

So why say you're going to guard it, and then run off with them?

It shows their true colours (not that this was the first time) that they don't want weapons disarmed, they want them to keep so they can use later. In conclusion, Hamas doesn't give a rat shit about what happens to the Pals because they'd be willing to detonate 500 + lb bombs and recieve the consequences to bolster support.

mafia996630 wrote:

M.O.A.B wrote:

So why say you're going to guard it, and then run off with them?

It shows their true colours (not that this was the first time) that they don't want weapons disarmed, they want them to keep so they can use later. In conclusion, Hamas doesn't give a rat shit about what happens to the Pals because they'd be willing to detonate 500 + lb bombs and recieve the consequences to bolster support.

Because no one in the history of warfare has ever changed their mind.

IN FUKIN CONCLUSION, the UN has/had NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOooooooooooooooooooooooo custody of the weapons, a claim stated by you far too many post's ago and i can't fuking believe it took this long.

Yeah yeah, Hamas suck, blah blah.

Wat...


When did I claim the UN had no custody of the weapons? The UN is disarming weapons, Hamas guarded the place where the weapons were stored. Now for some reason they let the UN in to do their work and then for some reason they take off with all the weapons. Why do that?

This 'they have a right to keep them' bullshit is exactly the same reason Hamas keeps popping ordnance over the border. You want this to end then the UN boys have to be able to disarm those weapons. But of course, that wouldn't be helping Hamas then would it?

M.O.A.B wrote:

mafia996630 wrote:

Wat...


When did I claim the UN had no custody of the weapons? The UN is disarming weapons, Hamas guarded the place where the weapons were stored. Now for some reason they let the UN in to do their work and then for some reason they take off with all the weapons. Why do that?

So you still believe that UN has custody over the weapons ? tbh i reckon they called the UN because A. They couldn't do it themselves and B.To give them good pr.  And they took of with them because they changed their mind and probz thought they could get some kills.

This 'they have a right to keep them' bullshit is exactly the same reason Hamas keeps popping ordnance over the border. You want this to end then the UN boys have to be able to disarm those weapons. But of course, that wouldn't be helping Hamas then would it?

How about not bomb the shit out of Gaza in the first fuking place ?

Ok your losing me completely here. Where did I say at any point that the UN has custody of those weapons? Nowhere. What I'm getting at is that Hamas should honour whatever friggin agreements it comes to and let them disarm them. It allowed UN teams in but then suddenly decided to take off with the rest. They never really wanted those weapons disarmed, they wanted, like you said, publicity, they're the same old group they've always been.

In terms of Gaza being bombed, that was a retaliatory strike against Hamas for firing weapons over the border, which the taking of these weapons is more than likely to be a part of all over again.

FEOS wrote:

mafia996630 wrote:

M.O.A.B wrote:

Ok your losing me completely here. Where did I say at any point that the UN has custody of those weapons? Nowhere. What I'm getting at is that Hamas should honour whatever friggin agreements it comes to and let them disarm them. It allowed UN teams in but then suddenly decided to take off with the rest. They never really wanted those weapons disarmed, they wanted, like you said, publicity, they're the same old group they've always been.

In terms of Gaza being bombed, that was a retaliatory strike against Hamas for firing weapons over the border, which the taking of these weapons is more than likely to be a part of all over again.

Sry dude, thought you was FEOS. fuk. Anyway would love to debate with you MOAB but now i feel really like a dick and also am really confused. see ya.

Custody was determined when this happened:

mafia wrote:

tbh i reckon they called the UN because A. They couldn't do it themselves and B.To give them good pr.

When they called the UN to "help", they abrogated their custody. Then they offered to "guard" them for the UN. And the UN believed that. That's like agreeing to having the heroin addict guard the Police Dept's narco evidence locker. Don't see what could possibly go wrong there.

FEOS wrote:

mafia996630 wrote:

FEOS wrote:

mafia996630 wrote:

Sry dude, thought you was FEOS. fuk. Anyway would love to debate with you MOAB but now i feel really like a dick and also am really confused. see ya.

Custody was determined when this happened:


When they called the UN to "help", they abrogated their custody. Then they offered to "guard" them for the UN. And the UN believed that. That's like agreeing to having the heroin addict guard the Police Dept's narco evidence locker. Don't see what could possibly go wrong there.

dude seriously stop with the fukin comparisons. seriously! 

Ok, when i said that, i wasn't even sure. Maybe the UN was there to see what crimes the isreali have committed? Maybe the UN was there to see how many people the isreali manged to kill by "ACCIDENT". Are you even sure Hamas called them ? Maybe the UN offered to dispose of the weapons and some low ranking Hamas member said yes but then a high ranking member thought no.......the point being, why are you using what i said against me when i clearly said "I reckon".

I don't know...what's the title of this forum again?

Pug wrote:

Who cares what you really think?  Your opinions lack depth since apparently you never back anything up.

Pug wrote:

how about just explaining your point of view?  it seems like you are happy the munitions were stolen.  i'd like to know why.

maybe i'm old fashioned, but i kind of like people to answer the question instead of redirecting and baiting.

Last edited by mafia996630 (2009-02-20 07:09:02)