"name your charity and I will repeat my offer of a generous donation"

I did and you failed to even discuss the point I had brought up. It seems that YOU get to make the definitions, and they shift with each iteration.


As for

"You mean like you and Bobad were when when he trivailised the situation if the six-million Jews about to go to their deaths in the Nazi extermination camps"

Never have trivialized that- Some realatives of mine were certainly in those camps- the entire Polish/Latvian/Russian sides of the family that had not left by 1927.




"Bobad holds the record for longest postings by far with his six-pages worth of Islamophobic filth claiming Muslims have been musderous cultural degenerate since Roman times - all gleaned from extremist racist sites such as 'Muslim-Watch' and 'White Supremacist'
If you would like me to link you to it, I'm think I can oblige - I'm sure you don't"

Than you are wrong, as you seem to usually be when you decide what others are thinking.






"The rest of your postings, especially the claim that nuclear facilitated Israel is fighting for its existence from attacks by poorly armed, poorly trained Third-World Arabs - has been dealt with ad-nausem"

So NOW you claim that Israel would use nuclear weapons against poorly armed, poorly trained Third-World Arabs?

RThey are fighting against a non-sysmetric threat to their civilian population. I think you would say that the Palestinians are as well, but would not want to tell YOU how to think.

"Technological superiority usually is cancelled by more vulnerable infrastructure which can be targeted with devastating results. Destruction of multiple electric lines, roads or water supply systems in highly populated areas could have devastating effects on economy and morale, while the weaker side may not have these structures at all.

f the inferior power is in an aggressive position, however, and/or turns to tactics prohibited by the laws of war (jus in bello), its success depends on the superior power's refraining from like tactics. For example, the law of land warfare prohibits the use of a flag of truce or clearly marked medical vehicles as cover for an attack or ambush, but an asymmetric combatant using this prohibited tactic to its advantage depends on the superior power's obedience to the corresponding law. Similarly, laws of warfare prohibit combatants from using civilian settlements, populations or facilities as military bases, but when an inferior power uses this tactic, it depends on the premise that the superior power will respect the law that the other is violating, and will not attack that civilian target, or if they do the propaganda advantage will outweigh the material loss"


NOTE"the law of land warfare prohibits the use of a flag of truce or clearly marked medical vehicles as cover for an attack or ambush, Similarly, laws of warfare prohibit combatants from using civilian settlements, populations or facilities as military bases, "

All done- documented in many past posts - by the Palestinians.