| Submit your comments on this article |
| Israel-Palestine-Jordan |
| Two Palestinians, not three killed on Gaza border |
| 2006-06-16 |
| Ooooops. Hate when that happens... GAZA CITY (AFP) - Two Palestinian militants, rather than three as initially reported, were killed by Israeli troops on the border with the Gaza Strip, a medic said. The source, who had said three Palestinians were killed in the incident near the Kissufim border crossing, attributed the confusion to the state of the remains, which had made assessment of the number of dead difficult. Blowed up REAL good!!! Witnesses had also spoken of a three-man Palestinian commando. Maybe the third guy got vaporized... The medic named the dead as Mohammed Abu Tanjara, 22, and Salam Abu Zubeida, 23, both from the armed wing of the Islamic Jihad faction. They were both buried after the main weekly Muslim prayers in Gaza City. Rest in Pieces. An Israeli military spokesman said an elite infantry unit on patrol with air support intercepted and fired at Palestinian gunmen preparing to plant a bomb. Surprise, surprise, surprise! |
| Posted by:tu3031 |
| #7 Kalle you also have to keep in mind that the fellow who wasn't killed may have been an IDF intel asset probably there are hundreds, if not thousands of Paleos who are IDF assets of one kind or another and there are some (granted not that many) non intel asset Paleo who are genuinely peaceful people having said that, it is also possible, maybe likely that, if there was a third person in the IJihad squad, the 3rd person was probably a blood thirsty terrorists who will try to murder again Unfortunately the moral calculus is really complicated. |
| Posted by: mhw 2006-06-16 13:38 |
| #6 If there was a third man, hwo got away, i would regret that Israeli troops were ineffective. If there were two terrorists, rather than three, id be glad there were less terrorists attacking Israel. Im glad when the IDF protects Israel by killing terrorists. I do NOT see that as part of a strategy to reduce the Palestinian population, or even to reduce the number of members of Hamas and Fatah. I would NOT want, say, 500 terrorist to charge the border to give the IDF a chance to kill them. I do not want more people to take terrorists actions, so they can be killed. I want fewer to do so. And I want less blood on the IDFs hands, even guilty blood. 1, for the political benefit of Israel (has anyone noticed that new polls show growing support for Israel in France and Germany - moderation has its fruits) and cause the men and women of the IDF are my sisters and my brothers, and I know that killing even the guilty is traumatic for them, and if they can defend Israel with less killing, I think thats better for them. I hate the terrorists for FORCING my brothers and sisters to have to kill in order to live in relative peace. If they are not forced to kill as much, thats good. At least for me, this is different from when Hamas and Fatah militants kill EACH OTHER. |
| Posted by: liberalhawk 2006-06-16 11:35 |
| #5 Must've been that Jooooooish laser-vaporizer thingy we sold 'em. Looks like the testing phase is now over, so they can use 'em en masse. And, how come, I'm flashing back to the scene of the former Hamas "spiritual leader" who was in a wheelchair being "vaporized." Probably not much left of him either after that airstrike [I remember the smokin' wheel of the wheel chair was about all that was left...and of course, the Paleos first wheelchair swarm(tm)]. |
| Posted by: Haliburton - Vaporizer Division 2006-06-16 11:06 |
| #4 liberalhawk you are so wrong. The more Paleo-terrorists Israel manages to kill today, the better for the security of Israel. Killing Islamofascists is always a good thing, especially in large numbers. NOT killing terrorists is an invitation to further slaughter of innocents. |
| Posted by: Kalle (kafir forever) 2006-06-16 10:45 |
| #3 The fewer people Israel kills to day, the more that live to kill Joooos tomorrow. OTH, the fewer the kill today, the less Arab seething there is tomorrow. I doubt the difference between two and three means anything to the Paleos, but the seething thing probably holds true if we compare two to say, two hundred. And that only matters to people who care about Paleo seething. |
| Posted by: Mike N. 2006-06-16 09:55 |
| #2 So you should be happy. It was two instead of three. |
| Posted by: tu3031 2006-06-16 09:43 |
| #1 "Ooooops. Hate when that happens..." No, the fewer deaths Israel needs to inflict to protect its security, the better. |
| Posted by: liberalhawk 2006-06-16 09:34 |