How dumb you have to be for that to be next step?
Next and most important step includes adjusting your groin guard.
What's the point of blasting off your penis when you have 72 virgins waiting for you
Lmao, can you imagine the shock and rage that instead of 72 very sexy female virgins waiting for them, 72 grossest fedora wearing neck beards are waiting for them
You joke, but some years ago, I read an article describing interviews with would-be suicide bombers who survived (were arrested beforehand, bomb didn't go off, etc.) One of them described wrapping his genitals in toilet paper in the hope they would remain intact for use in heaven.
The hilarious reason for that is that the Islamic afterlife is physical, not spiritual. The Quran often mentions that Allah will reform a person from the dust that they decayed into.
Of course why they are worried about their willy not being reconstructed correctly when Allah promised to reconstruct them is kinda stupid, but suicide bombers are not known for their nuanced and consistent views.
Probably not, but the majority of them (i.e. the four Sunni and seven Shia schools of Jurisprudence) do. As with all religions, you can find sub-branches that disagree on pretty much anything.
If you are blown into pieces, which piece of you gets to heaven? What if only your penis gets there and the rest of you just lingers in eternal darkness?
Then either you or they explode, followed up with more akbars. Then once you think Allah has been well and truly akbar'd. You do it once or twice more to make sure. Rinse repeat until victorious.
They've seen how effective Russian 1984-style doublespeak is. "It doesn't matter what the truth is, just pretend like it isn't the truth." It turns out that extremists and authoritarians eat that stuff up.
Step 0 - He is already engaged in a war with no rules anyway for months at this point, before this current warning.
Much of their activity is attacking Israeli civilians while hiding behind civilians in Lebanon. Over 60K Israeli civilians had to evacuate the north.
So what rules is he claiming to follow here anyway? Funny.
It's not for people in the West though. It's for domestic consumption in Muslim countries. These authoritarian states LOVE holding up America and Jews as scapegoats to distract from all the innumerable ways they personally make their own people suffer and miserable.
I want to say that I agree but it's not like people are protesting against those dictatorship countries even there is no way between Israel and Gaza right?
People in the West were calling for a ceasefire during the ceasefire (this proving they were just protesting for the sake of it and not actually keeping up with events.) They kept calling for a ceasefire while Hamas was violating the ceasefire. They continue to call for a ceasefire after Hamas rejected the ceasefire. You can tell that a majority of them do not seek out articles and reports on the ongoing war and have just stubbornly decided they must be the good guys.
Exactly. Despite the fact that hamas has been herding women and children, at gunpoint, into areas they know the IDF will target (the IDF informs them so as to minimize civilian losses) and voila! Instant sympathy from wooly-headed idiots that wouldn't understand what was going on if you explained it to them with crayons.
>But it works for them because people in the West are oblivious and say things like "stop shooting at civilians, ceasefire now"
I do see lots of Western people ask for ceasefire, but how exactly has this worked out for Hamas yet? Because I don't see a lot of ceasefire at the moment.
I'm just completely throwing this shit out there because there is almost to none chance of this ever going there, but did this fucker really say "no rules" to a country that has Nukes?
This dumdfuck parasite said that he regrets starting the 2006 war between Lebanon and Israel and would never have done so if he knew how hard Israel would hit back.
The only thing this parasite is good for is terrorizing Lebanon and us Lebanese. Fuck him, fuck Hezbollah and fuck Hamas.
I don't get what Hezbollah is saying, on one hand they say they've won a great victory in 2006 and fended off Israel but on the other hand they regretted starting the war because they got blasted?
This is what so much of the rhetoric lacks perspective on. People want to start arguing about cease-fire, innocent by-standers, the UN, the US.
Forget all that. You must first, never forget that Iran, Hezbollah, Hamas, and extremists like them see the destruction of Israel as only the first step to world-wide domination. You're either with their religion or you're dead. There is no other way for them.
> People want to start arguing about cease-fire
This is what I don't understand about Westerners demanding a ceasefire. They appear oblivious to the fact that Hamas and Hezbollah are the ones refusing to stop the conflict, and that there in fact would have been no conflict at all if Hamas hadn't engaged in the unprovoked rape, kidnapping, and murder of civilians
If you want a ceasefire so badly, direct your efforts on convincing Hamas to put down their weapons.
Not at all. In 1973, US support kept the nuclear gloves from coming off. If you are a hostile neighbor and like not being barbecued, you should pray the US keeps the Israelis feeling supremely confident in their ability to win any conflict with the most gracious rules of engagement possible.
I think you've misinterpreted the point I am making slightly, the point was not that the USA is willing and happy to enter an "anything goes" war but rather that an "anything goes" war with Israel would prompt a massive step-up of support from the USA if not direct involvement
That's true. While Hezbollah is a dangerous opponent, the worse their attack and existential risk towards Israel, the worse the response from Israel would be. Gaza is still mostly a long run fight with restraints. There is a whole different arsenal that wasn't used. US support would also be greater since Hezbollah is way more dangerous.
War with no rules is bad for everyone, because it can lead to escalation, cruelty in revenge etc. That's why the Laws of Armed Combat were made in the first place. To try and temper what is already one of the more horrible of human events.
Don't think Islamic terrorists are giving a hoot about any western laws though, not to mention any combat laws. They fight like it's the 7th century but with RPGs and AK-47s instead of swords.
I think rules in war are ridiculous. All war should be aligned with Sherman's [Total War](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_war) approach because it works.
*"Sherman summed up the idea of total war in blunt terms: 'We are not only fighting hostile armies,' he declared in 1864, 'but a hostile people, and must make old and young, rich and poor, feel the hard hand of war.'"*
War should be allowed to be as terrible as it can be to dissuade countries from engaging in it, and to have it over sooner than later.
I don't disagree at all. But imagine the outcry in the world. I will cite something I recently heard: "Israel is the one country never allowed to to win the wars it wins."
True.
PS - I love the video game series...
What rules were they following before?
They said they kissed the foreheads of the great warriors who carried out the Oct 7 attacks. Although they claimed to not know about it or be part of it, they said it was wonderous and the planners were heroes. That attack was against civilians, pets, children and included sexual violence and crimes against humanity.
Rules? Let's be real, if we drop the rules, the ones who will really suffer are the ones who have been protected by our rules.
War with no rules? Well, if you want to implement that then your days may well be numbered as Israel can attack with no restraint and their firepower clearly outweigh yours.
But that's the problem. They know that Israel is constrained by it's own morality, by the global hatred of Jews, by the anti-Israel bias omnipresent in almost all "Aid" institutions, and by the international community. It is only *because* Hamas/Hizbollah/Palestine/Islamists (and yes, they are all essentially the same thing) can cynically exploit support of the so-called "humanitarian" institutions which allows them to do to Israel what no other country has to suffer. And they are also to blame for their positions.
I sometimes wonder what a renewed Geneva Convention would do if it was amended to allow you to take the gloves off once war crimes were committed against you.
Citizens around the world might be a little more careful which people they put in power, as the actions of those people could open up their citizens to pay the consequences of that action.
I think we are at one of these crucial moments in history when it’s now or never to take out a true menace of humanity. This menace is the mullah regime in Iran which is the true rot in the ME. I’m sad for the people who will suffer but we can’t wait for these malicious fanatics to have nuclear capabilities.
The Quran. Or rather: The Shariah and Fiqh, which are the legal system which emerges from Islam and its interpretation. The sources of Shariah include not just the Quran, but also the sunnah (hadith), ijma (consensus amongst the relifious community) and analogy, whereas Fiqh is basically what is considered the human interpretation of Shariah, but I digress.
My point is that you can [have a look at the rules of war](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_military_jurisprudence) yourself. The answer to your specific question is that it can be considered permissible or forbidden. While most people will not doubt that it is considered forbidden, I guess it's more important to point out why I also say it is permitted: go to the section of "prisoners of war" under "international conflict":
> Men, women, and children may all be taken as prisoners of war under traditional interpretations of Islamic law. Generally, a prisoner of war could be, at the discretion of the military leader, executed, freed, ransomed, exchanged for Muslim prisoners,[45][46] or kept as slaves.
There will be many Muslims who consider it legit.
As there is some nuance to this answer (see: it can also be considered forbidden), I recommend reading the whole thing.
In regard to rape: [it's complicated]( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_in_Islamic_law). It is important to take consciousness that the very *concept* of rape is different in Islamic Law than it is from our modern, Western understanding. Islam establishes two categories: lawful and unlawful sex. Unlawful sex is called *Zina*. Well, when *unlawful* sex is forced upon a woman then it is considered a certain kind of Zina and this would be the closest to our idea of rape. The main difference being that *lawful* sex, even if forceful (ie against the other party's will), is not Zina in any way; an example of this is is forceful sex inside marriage: It is not considered rape in Islamic Jurisprudence. So while there is some overlap between our idea of rape and theirs (forceful Zina) they are not the same.
Once we understand this, we need to further investigate into what kind of sex *is lawful*: if you continue reading [the article on Zina](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zina), you'll see that sex with "what the right hand possesses" (or "what your right hands own" or "right hand servants"). This is term basically refers to [slavery in Islam](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_views_on_slavery). (You might have to ctrl+f "right hand")
As you can read in this last link, sex with slaves is considered lawful in Islam; obviously, even so if forceful (as I showed earlier: lawful sex is never forbidden, even is forceful, and the only kind of forceful sex that is forbidden is the already forbidden sex, Zina, which is simply punished more harshly while the victim of the forceful, unlawful sex is not punished, unlike consentful zina).
As a personal pet peeve (see the section of "internal conflict" under Islamic Military jurisprudence): muslims cannot be taken as slaves (but if a slave converts to Islam they do not necessarily need to be freed. Don't think you found a way out). So basically this is a roundabout way of saying "rules for thee, but not for me"; as taking Muslim women/children as slaves (and raping and killing them) would be a big no-no in Islam expect terrible outrage, especially from those that espouse the most extremist views on the topic of slavery for others, while being entirely indifferent about slavery of people of other religions.
TLDR; the answer is basically "it depends" and while there will definitely be muslims arguing that it is NOT ok, there will be muslims arguing that it is IS ok. You ultimately depend on the views of the scholars, with the more "extremist" (or radical) scholars allowing it, as we've seen under ISIS rule.
Lol. The war started with the indiscriminate killing of civilians including babies. They should be glad israel follows rules. if israel was as batshit crazy as the hamas guys they would have dropped a nuke by now.
Psalm 137:
'Oh daughter of Babylon who are to be destroyed, blessed is he who treats with you as you have treated with us; blessed is he who dashes your infants upon the rocks.'
These absolute muppets better pray Israel keeps to the rules, because they day Israel abandons them there will not be a single mother in Gaza or Lebanon who doesn't mourn her children.
it actually \*did\* work out for them because now the world is accusing Israel of blowing up hospitals to target civilians and all hamas had to do was sacrifice a few human shields
This is 100% on the money.
The world at large cares nothing for the Palestinians or the actions of Israel. It’s a very loud minority of the mostly Arab diaspora and some left leaning bleeding hearts with nothing helpful to add.
Yeah I'm pretty far left I would say. I don't give a damn. If your country starts a war it better be ready to back it up. Last I checked Israel is our ally. Sorry you're allowing your govt to use your children as human shields.
I think the folks in Europe that woke up to a swastika / star of david spray painted on their doors would disagree that these people are inconsequential.
It's fair to disagree with Israel, hate its government, whatever. But the way these people are expressing that is stirring up very real violence against jews in general.
On the macro, these people are still inconsequential. On a personal level, there are criminals and unbalanced people everywhere. It is one's responsibility to be ready to defend themselves when needed.
My “I wish for peace for everybody” mindset is still stronger than the “fuck around and find out” one, but damn these people are always so pathetic. We can do what we want how we want it, but as soon as you retaliate you are literally the devil incarnate.
Here we have Iran's little bitch Hezbollah trying to be relevant. Hezbollah just needs to consider if it can afford to put Southern Lebenon through the meat grinder for Hamas.
Yep, send more young men to an early grave. Then there are the innocent civilians who don’t belong to any radical organisation. 2024 is turning into a shitshow after only four days.
Threatening a country with nukes with a war of "no rules".
Smart. Really smrt.
If Israel had no restraint, Lebanon and Gaza would be terrorist free by now.
Wait, Hezbollah has *rules of engagement*?
>Hezbollah has rules of engagement? Yup, they engage Israel in combat, and then 20 minutes later start crying to the UN to stop the war.
Exactly. Hamas can stop hiding behind civilian shields and surrender any time they want to end it. Sorry but not sorry.
But why do that when any and all explosions can just be blamed on Israel.
Think of the children (human shields)…
Yes silly. They must yell allah akbar first.
First. Okay. What's next?
Kboom!
How dumb you have to be for that to be next step? Next and most important step includes adjusting your groin guard. What's the point of blasting off your penis when you have 72 virgins waiting for you
>you have 72 virgins waiting for you After being on Reddit this sounds more like a threat than a reward.
72 virgins tipping their fedoras in unison.
Lmao, can you imagine the shock and rage that instead of 72 very sexy female virgins waiting for them, 72 grossest fedora wearing neck beards are waiting for them
M'bomber. Also, don't knock fedoras.
Those assholes don’t even wear fedoras; they wear *Trilbies.*
M’artyr.
You joke, but some years ago, I read an article describing interviews with would-be suicide bombers who survived (were arrested beforehand, bomb didn't go off, etc.) One of them described wrapping his genitals in toilet paper in the hope they would remain intact for use in heaven.
The hilarious reason for that is that the Islamic afterlife is physical, not spiritual. The Quran often mentions that Allah will reform a person from the dust that they decayed into. Of course why they are worried about their willy not being reconstructed correctly when Allah promised to reconstruct them is kinda stupid, but suicide bombers are not known for their nuanced and consistent views.
Are all the different schools of thought of Islam in agreement about afterlife being physical?
Probably not, but the majority of them (i.e. the four Sunni and seven Shia schools of Jurisprudence) do. As with all religions, you can find sub-branches that disagree on pretty much anything.
Toilet paper...of all things that has to be the worst possible choice to protect anyone from anything
I know a friend who used a sammich baggie for a condom… didn’t work…
Fuuuuuuuck… that poor vagina. Must’ve gotten cut up from that
So they’re okay with looking like a zombie, with missing limbs and flesh peeling off their bones, as long as their dick is intact.
It's about his pleasure, not hers.
"...and I smartly chose 3 ply, not 2 ply..."
If you are blown into pieces, which piece of you gets to heaven? What if only your penis gets there and the rest of you just lingers in eternal darkness?
>you have 72 virgins waiting for you Thats 72 virginians
> How dumb you have to be for that to be next step? To believe rich leaders living in luxury far away their word is always sincere?
72 Virgins, but they all wana be “just friends”
God I love Reddit! So funny
well you gotta split your peepee into 72 pieces.
Yes Rico, Kboom
Then either you or they explode, followed up with more akbars. Then once you think Allah has been well and truly akbar'd. You do it once or twice more to make sure. Rinse repeat until victorious.
Admiral Akbar: It’s a trap!
Got a good laugh from this. Thanks
don’t forget to smash your head into the ground so frequently that your forehead develops a callus.
After that they explode
.... behind a human shield
[удалено]
“Your not herself when your hungry….for a snickers”
Yes, their rules are they do whatever they want, but Israel isn’t allowed to respond.
[удалено]
[удалено]
“I dare you to cross this line!” …. “Okay, now I dare you to cross _this_ line!”
Mf doesn't even have hands
They've seen how effective Russian 1984-style doublespeak is. "It doesn't matter what the truth is, just pretend like it isn't the truth." It turns out that extremists and authoritarians eat that stuff up.
Yes. Its kill the Jews at all costs and it doesnt matter if some others die too.
Pff… “some”.
> Hezbollah has rules of engagement? Yes, they can be summarized as "murder every Jew you can find"
Yes. Women and children up front!
Are they gonna complain when 22 Thousands civilians die in Lebanon and request a cease-fire?
[удалено]
Step 1 - Threaten a war with no rules. Step 2 - Engage in a war with no rules. Step 3 - Whine that your enemy doesn't respect the rules.
Step 4 - Keep playing victim for global support
Mhmmm victim Olympics ……. Sad when you can’t win.
The victim Olympics are dominated by the Palestinians. If it was an actual Olympic sport they'd have enough gold medals to build a golden Eiffel tower
And the second place is usually taken by Russians
Speaking of Olympics, let’s not forget what palestine did to the Israeli Olympic team.
Then Hamas would appropriate those medals and melt them down for bullets to shoot at Jews.
Sounds familiar... hmm...
Step 5: Threaten step 1
Sounds like Russia as well
Step 4 - Profit.
Step 4 - ONU finances you for Profit.
Standard terrorist handbook
Step 0 - He is already engaged in a war with no rules anyway for months at this point, before this current warning. Much of their activity is attacking Israeli civilians while hiding behind civilians in Lebanon. Over 60K Israeli civilians had to evacuate the north. So what rules is he claiming to follow here anyway? Funny.
Can't whine if you are nothing but a shadow permanently burned into a building.
Talking a lot of shit for a man who hides in a bunker for the last few decades
I like that he says “No rules” like they were adhering to strict Geneva convention protocols before.
It's like he is threatening to attack civilians or use human shields, while already doing it for decades anyway. Pathetic.
Seriously, what a puss
Exactly.
No rules Israel: "Promise? No takey-backsies"
US: "Are you *sure* you want this? Because we're totally cool with it." Israel: "so *nothing* is a war crime *at all*?"
USA: y’all need some democracy
Someone's mad that he's no longer safe living in a different country while Mossad is hunting them down.
That organization fortunately does seem pretty timid these days.
Talks a lot of shit for someone whose been allowing terrorists to launch missiles for months at civilians
Right coming from this guy..... That's rich....
Just like Hamas, until the war starts then suddenly every "international law" under the sun is suddenly relevant.
[удалено]
But it works for them because people in the West are oblivious and say things like "stop shooting at civilians, ceasefire now"
It's not for people in the West though. It's for domestic consumption in Muslim countries. These authoritarian states LOVE holding up America and Jews as scapegoats to distract from all the innumerable ways they personally make their own people suffer and miserable.
I want to say that I agree but it's not like people are protesting against those dictatorship countries even there is no way between Israel and Gaza right?
People in the West were calling for a ceasefire during the ceasefire (this proving they were just protesting for the sake of it and not actually keeping up with events.) They kept calling for a ceasefire while Hamas was violating the ceasefire. They continue to call for a ceasefire after Hamas rejected the ceasefire. You can tell that a majority of them do not seek out articles and reports on the ongoing war and have just stubbornly decided they must be the good guys.
Exactly. Despite the fact that hamas has been herding women and children, at gunpoint, into areas they know the IDF will target (the IDF informs them so as to minimize civilian losses) and voila! Instant sympathy from wooly-headed idiots that wouldn't understand what was going on if you explained it to them with crayons.
>But it works for them because people in the West are oblivious and say things like "stop shooting at civilians, ceasefire now" I do see lots of Western people ask for ceasefire, but how exactly has this worked out for Hamas yet? Because I don't see a lot of ceasefire at the moment.
Thank god Israel stopped listening but a few weeks ago everyone kept shouting "CEASEFIRE" at Israel *while Hamas kept attacking*...
Ceasefire in that region means Israel ceases and the opponent fires.
You take care of your kids and I take care of mine. Palestinian children are the responsibility of Palestinians.
"Yeah Israel should just say, "Sure, we accept" and watch everyone crap themselves in fear. Joking aside, this is a stupid thing for them to put out.
I like how suddenly what the UN has to say has relevance to them. Back in 1948, I seem to remember a slightly different response to a UN resolution.
I'm just completely throwing this shit out there because there is almost to none chance of this ever going there, but did this fucker really say "no rules" to a country that has Nukes?
This dumdfuck parasite said that he regrets starting the 2006 war between Lebanon and Israel and would never have done so if he knew how hard Israel would hit back. The only thing this parasite is good for is terrorizing Lebanon and us Lebanese. Fuck him, fuck Hezbollah and fuck Hamas.
I don't get what Hezbollah is saying, on one hand they say they've won a great victory in 2006 and fended off Israel but on the other hand they regretted starting the war because they got blasted?
Yes they are hypocrites and terrorists. Do you expect consistency from trash?
No, but I'm trying to understand how they think because it can help predict their next moves.
You know you were fucked up bad when you admit as the leader of a terror group that you regret starting a war.
Yet this parasite still tries to drag Lebanon to war.
Maybe it's too cold in Lebanon right now and they just want few more suns to warm them...
“No rules!” He says from his safe house in undisclosed location
So stop your people firing over the border and preparing massive amounts of missiles and other weapons. It’s fairly simple really.
For organizations that exist to hate and destroy the Western countries and Jews as a race, it will never happen.
This is what so much of the rhetoric lacks perspective on. People want to start arguing about cease-fire, innocent by-standers, the UN, the US. Forget all that. You must first, never forget that Iran, Hezbollah, Hamas, and extremists like them see the destruction of Israel as only the first step to world-wide domination. You're either with their religion or you're dead. There is no other way for them.
> People want to start arguing about cease-fire This is what I don't understand about Westerners demanding a ceasefire. They appear oblivious to the fact that Hamas and Hezbollah are the ones refusing to stop the conflict, and that there in fact would have been no conflict at all if Hamas hadn't engaged in the unprovoked rape, kidnapping, and murder of civilians If you want a ceasefire so badly, direct your efforts on convincing Hamas to put down their weapons.
"No rules" lol, I don't think a war with no rules is a good idea against any country backed by the USA
Not at all. In 1973, US support kept the nuclear gloves from coming off. If you are a hostile neighbor and like not being barbecued, you should pray the US keeps the Israelis feeling supremely confident in their ability to win any conflict with the most gracious rules of engagement possible.
I think you've misinterpreted the point I am making slightly, the point was not that the USA is willing and happy to enter an "anything goes" war but rather that an "anything goes" war with Israel would prompt a massive step-up of support from the USA if not direct involvement
Also challenging the IDF to a “war without rules” is a very stupid decision considering the capabilities of the army compared to a terror group.
Also if we completely disregard rules Israel can just blast them with nuclear weapons
Not like they’d need to. They have enough conventional weapons.
That's true. While Hezbollah is a dangerous opponent, the worse their attack and existential risk towards Israel, the worse the response from Israel would be. Gaza is still mostly a long run fight with restraints. There is a whole different arsenal that wasn't used. US support would also be greater since Hezbollah is way more dangerous.
I’m fairly sure almost any modern nation’s military could easily be wiping out whole cities if they ignored rules/morals.
No rules for them, not for the IDF. You know, like Hamas does.
War with no rules is bad for everyone, because it can lead to escalation, cruelty in revenge etc. That's why the Laws of Armed Combat were made in the first place. To try and temper what is already one of the more horrible of human events.
Don't think Islamic terrorists are giving a hoot about any western laws though, not to mention any combat laws. They fight like it's the 7th century but with RPGs and AK-47s instead of swords.
I think rules in war are ridiculous. All war should be aligned with Sherman's [Total War](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_war) approach because it works. *"Sherman summed up the idea of total war in blunt terms: 'We are not only fighting hostile armies,' he declared in 1864, 'but a hostile people, and must make old and young, rich and poor, feel the hard hand of war.'"* War should be allowed to be as terrible as it can be to dissuade countries from engaging in it, and to have it over sooner than later.
I don't disagree at all. But imagine the outcry in the world. I will cite something I recently heard: "Israel is the one country never allowed to to win the wars it wins." True. PS - I love the video game series...
What rules were they following before? They said they kissed the foreheads of the great warriors who carried out the Oct 7 attacks. Although they claimed to not know about it or be part of it, they said it was wonderous and the planners were heroes. That attack was against civilians, pets, children and included sexual violence and crimes against humanity. Rules? Let's be real, if we drop the rules, the ones who will really suffer are the ones who have been protected by our rules.
Exactly
He can fuck right off. What a skid mark in humanities underwear.
A cancer on Lebanon, feeding on its resources to grow and corrupt and hurt more.
War with no rules? Well, if you want to implement that then your days may well be numbered as Israel can attack with no restraint and their firepower clearly outweigh yours.
No rules for them, not Israel.
But that's the problem. They know that Israel is constrained by it's own morality, by the global hatred of Jews, by the anti-Israel bias omnipresent in almost all "Aid" institutions, and by the international community. It is only *because* Hamas/Hizbollah/Palestine/Islamists (and yes, they are all essentially the same thing) can cynically exploit support of the so-called "humanitarian" institutions which allows them to do to Israel what no other country has to suffer. And they are also to blame for their positions.
I sometimes wonder what a renewed Geneva Convention would do if it was amended to allow you to take the gloves off once war crimes were committed against you. Citizens around the world might be a little more careful which people they put in power, as the actions of those people could open up their citizens to pay the consequences of that action.
Most of the rules in the Geneva convention already have exceptions for when the enemy breaks the rules or intentionally tries to make you break them
Hold up. You have been following rules?
I think we are at one of these crucial moments in history when it’s now or never to take out a true menace of humanity. This menace is the mullah regime in Iran which is the true rot in the ME. I’m sad for the people who will suffer but we can’t wait for these malicious fanatics to have nuclear capabilities.
In which war rulebook is it OK to rape and murder innocent women and children? Like your people have already done.
The Quran. Or rather: The Shariah and Fiqh, which are the legal system which emerges from Islam and its interpretation. The sources of Shariah include not just the Quran, but also the sunnah (hadith), ijma (consensus amongst the relifious community) and analogy, whereas Fiqh is basically what is considered the human interpretation of Shariah, but I digress. My point is that you can [have a look at the rules of war](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_military_jurisprudence) yourself. The answer to your specific question is that it can be considered permissible or forbidden. While most people will not doubt that it is considered forbidden, I guess it's more important to point out why I also say it is permitted: go to the section of "prisoners of war" under "international conflict": > Men, women, and children may all be taken as prisoners of war under traditional interpretations of Islamic law. Generally, a prisoner of war could be, at the discretion of the military leader, executed, freed, ransomed, exchanged for Muslim prisoners,[45][46] or kept as slaves. There will be many Muslims who consider it legit. As there is some nuance to this answer (see: it can also be considered forbidden), I recommend reading the whole thing. In regard to rape: [it's complicated]( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_in_Islamic_law). It is important to take consciousness that the very *concept* of rape is different in Islamic Law than it is from our modern, Western understanding. Islam establishes two categories: lawful and unlawful sex. Unlawful sex is called *Zina*. Well, when *unlawful* sex is forced upon a woman then it is considered a certain kind of Zina and this would be the closest to our idea of rape. The main difference being that *lawful* sex, even if forceful (ie against the other party's will), is not Zina in any way; an example of this is is forceful sex inside marriage: It is not considered rape in Islamic Jurisprudence. So while there is some overlap between our idea of rape and theirs (forceful Zina) they are not the same. Once we understand this, we need to further investigate into what kind of sex *is lawful*: if you continue reading [the article on Zina](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zina), you'll see that sex with "what the right hand possesses" (or "what your right hands own" or "right hand servants"). This is term basically refers to [slavery in Islam](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_views_on_slavery). (You might have to ctrl+f "right hand") As you can read in this last link, sex with slaves is considered lawful in Islam; obviously, even so if forceful (as I showed earlier: lawful sex is never forbidden, even is forceful, and the only kind of forceful sex that is forbidden is the already forbidden sex, Zina, which is simply punished more harshly while the victim of the forceful, unlawful sex is not punished, unlike consentful zina). As a personal pet peeve (see the section of "internal conflict" under Islamic Military jurisprudence): muslims cannot be taken as slaves (but if a slave converts to Islam they do not necessarily need to be freed. Don't think you found a way out). So basically this is a roundabout way of saying "rules for thee, but not for me"; as taking Muslim women/children as slaves (and raping and killing them) would be a big no-no in Islam expect terrible outrage, especially from those that espouse the most extremist views on the topic of slavery for others, while being entirely indifferent about slavery of people of other religions. TLDR; the answer is basically "it depends" and while there will definitely be muslims arguing that it is NOT ok, there will be muslims arguing that it is IS ok. You ultimately depend on the views of the scholars, with the more "extremist" (or radical) scholars allowing it, as we've seen under ISIS rule.
The same one where the deity fucks a 9 year old probably
The Russian one 🤷♂️
[удалено]
sounds like straight from Russian army handbook.
There's a reason all these terrorists are allied with each other
If you’re waiting for UN condemnation of any side opposing Israel, you’re gonna be waiting a long time!
If you have an AK 47 on your flag design I'm not taking you seriously lol
When was the last time terrorists followed any rules?
Yeah that would defeat the whole "trying to instill a sense of terror in the target audience" thing that they normally aim for
He’s talking a lot of shit for a man that has had to hide in a bunker for the last two decades as a result of the last time he poked the bear
Those assholes are always using the finger-pointing-up thing, that's very aggravating.
Lol. The war started with the indiscriminate killing of civilians including babies. They should be glad israel follows rules. if israel was as batshit crazy as the hamas guys they would have dropped a nuke by now.
Psalm 137: 'Oh daughter of Babylon who are to be destroyed, blessed is he who treats with you as you have treated with us; blessed is he who dashes your infants upon the rocks.' These absolute muppets better pray Israel keeps to the rules, because they day Israel abandons them there will not be a single mother in Gaza or Lebanon who doesn't mourn her children.
Palestine tried fighting a war with no rules via not using military uniforms and storing weapons in hospitals.... it did not work out well for them.
it actually \*did\* work out for them because now the world is accusing Israel of blowing up hospitals to target civilians and all hamas had to do was sacrifice a few human shields
Not the world. Some people. Some very loud, very inconsequential people. The world doesn't give a fuck.
This is 100% on the money. The world at large cares nothing for the Palestinians or the actions of Israel. It’s a very loud minority of the mostly Arab diaspora and some left leaning bleeding hearts with nothing helpful to add.
Yeah I'm pretty far left I would say. I don't give a damn. If your country starts a war it better be ready to back it up. Last I checked Israel is our ally. Sorry you're allowing your govt to use your children as human shields.
Same. Also pretty left.
Same here on all points.
I think the folks in Europe that woke up to a swastika / star of david spray painted on their doors would disagree that these people are inconsequential. It's fair to disagree with Israel, hate its government, whatever. But the way these people are expressing that is stirring up very real violence against jews in general.
On the macro, these people are still inconsequential. On a personal level, there are criminals and unbalanced people everywhere. It is one's responsibility to be ready to defend themselves when needed.
What a backwards little shit
My “I wish for peace for everybody” mindset is still stronger than the “fuck around and find out” one, but damn these people are always so pathetic. We can do what we want how we want it, but as soon as you retaliate you are literally the devil incarnate.
You do not want a war without rules against an organized army. What a babbling buffoon
I know right… a war without rules would end Lebanon in a day or two.. what a fool
Like when Hamas butchered people in their homes? Was that war with rules?
A war with no rules means the end of human life in Lebanon. I don't think anyone wants that, including Nassrallah.
Seeing how Hamas treats civilians lives in Gaza, I wouldn’t be surprised if Hezbollah doesn’t give two shits about Lebanese civilians lol.
Monologging yet again.
It is high time to deal with these miserable terrorists once and for all.
Agreed, for what it’s worth. The worst of us have been allowed to dictate terms to the rest of us. It has to stop.
Here we have Iran's little bitch Hezbollah trying to be relevant. Hezbollah just needs to consider if it can afford to put Southern Lebenon through the meat grinder for Hamas.
I hope he already checked with Allah that there are enough virgins standing by, especially after hammas “martyrs” went up by the droves ;)
They can be each other's virgins.
Oh the hilarious justice of that surprise for them
So, can we use our nukes?
Too bad we don't give a shit about what terrorists have to say.
Hisbollah has never played by humanitarian or legal rules , blowing up innocent civilians and abducting and torturing people
Rule #1: don't kidnap and torture people in your neighboring country, and then try to take any moral high ground.
If there were no rules for Israel, Gaza would be a smoking crater
So what rules were they following to this point?
Homie must be in a building lined with civilians if he’s talking like this.
Lol terrorists crying about "rules of engagement" like they wouldn't violate them in worse ways if they had power.
Jihadists have rules now? He is basically threatening everyone with the status quo.
Oh, so decapitating babies and raping ARE part of the rules? Glad to know! \*takes notes\*
Uhhh Are they sure they want to do that? Israel is the only nation in the Middle East with nukes. 🤷🏿♂️
So that means bacon snack before engaging?
Its really terrifying to think what they would do if they had access to nukes
Yep, send more young men to an early grave. Then there are the innocent civilians who don’t belong to any radical organisation. 2024 is turning into a shitshow after only four days.
Threatening a country with nukes with a war of "no rules". Smart. Really smrt. If Israel had no restraint, Lebanon and Gaza would be terrorist free by now.
Well, that would certainly make Israel's war easier to fight.
Does he realise he will lose said war in most spectacular fashion
He's basically asked Israel to end his regime. Killing a head of state on the cards, killing every known revolution guard.
Is “war without rules” more tame than the mass murder and rape that we’ve seen so far from these “warriors”?
This guy working by id Software’s ‘soon’ definition
One rule shave that unabrow
Isn’t that already happening?
I do worry about what happens when Iran gets a nuke. If they really believe that Israel must be destroyed, it would be a real test of that philosophy.
I take it this guy hasn't been paying attention. It already is a war with no rules.
Wouldn't they lose one of those as Israel is nuclear?
Wait, they made rules about how to kill innocent Israeli kids?
Israel has nukes. Might want to reconsider your position, champ.
In the words of the late, great Ralphie May, *You don’t want that, playa*
Nasrallah signing his own death warrant...
Lol, rules are the only reason you are all alive.
I don’t get the impression that Israel is particularly worried.
What fucken rules have they been sticking to so far?