Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Israel escalates attacks on medics in Lebanon with deadly 'quadruple tap'

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–286 of 286 posts

Re: Israel escalates attacks on medics in Lebanon with deadly 'quadruple tap'

#281

Post by f33d5173 »

goldfishgold wrote: post #280
khaledh wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Notice the four characteristics mentioned here (all of them must be satisfied): - do not believe in Allāh or in the Last Day - do not consider unlawful what Allāh and His Messenger have made unlawful - do not adopt the religion of truth (doesn't necessarily mean Islam, since true Christianity and Judaism believe in one God) - from those who were given the Scripture. That includes Muslims themselves by the way, since…

I don't know Arabic, but I read the English differently. I see "fight against those who X, and those who B, and those who C" as different groups, all of whom one is supposed to fight against. I find it quite hard to read this passage like you do and see this as evidence of equality of treatment between Muslims and non-Muslims. Even the translator interprets 'religion of truth' to mean Islam. Plus I think in general y…

As apologetics what he's saying is complete nonsense. The jizyah has been interpreted by every islamic society as a tax on non muslims, not a fine for those who break the law. You could argue that the passage doesn't actually say that the purpose of jizyah is to humiliate people (humbling is different) or that islamic societies in practice didn't (typically) use it as a means of ridicule, but saying that actually it was just a fine is utter make believe.

Re: Israel escalates attacks on medics in Lebanon with deadly 'quadruple tap'

#282

Post by notepad0x90 »

mxkopy wrote: post #256
notepad0x90 wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yes the international community has an obligation to prevent genocide, and the destruction of a nation state if that coincides with the destruction of its people No, it does not. That's not how sovereignty works. nation states' obligations are only towards their own nation. Even honoring of treaties is expected only in so far as it is in the best interest of their nation to do so. There is no grand human coalition…

This viewpoint is basically that there is no international community at all, and that’s a broader argument

In the sense that humans as a species exist, and nation states exist on the same planet, I suppose there is. But sovereign nationhood means a nation isn't subject to any higher earthly organization. Each nation does whatever it wants more or less. A community implies participation in a shared social structure. Even the UN is at best a diplomatic organization, not an organization that is an extension of its member states. Typically, when you hear about the "international community" that means the US and certain western European nations using that diplomatic cover to justify something. It isn't Paraguay and south Sudan chipping in their troops to take some action, or funding some effort.

In simpler terms, for any supposed international community to be valid, similar to governments, it needs the threat of violence to enforce its will. That means you have to volunteer yourself or your children to enforce that community's will. The rest is just details, I'm sure you'd want to have a say in exactly what the agreement is over the specifics of the "international community's" will would be, and therein lies the obstacle.

In the 90's there was some post-soviet political capital and overall good will credited to the US and its allies as a result of a new era of hope and prosperity and all that soft power stuff. That's why bombing Serbia and things like war crimes for milosevich and his pals was a thing. It was NATO, not the international community then. same as Afghanistan. There has never been any actual "international community" that did anything but pass resolutions at the UN. There has never been even so much as a truly international peace keeping force deployed anywhere by the UN.

It all just comes down to whether this supposed community has the right to do anything over other non-participating nations' sovereign real while maintaining any semblance of legitimacy. interference is interference, whether the US is kidnapping a dictator, or bombing one, or assassinating another, it can be done, but not with any legitimacy, and it is usually the US that's the arm that swings the sword.

Re: Israel escalates attacks on medics in Lebanon with deadly 'quadruple tap'

#283

Post by nielsbot »

karim79 wrote: post #79
aeonfox wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who's the 'non-zionist' choice in the US?

The only one I can think of offhand is Bernie Sanders.

And even he was saying Zionist things just a few years ago. He’s not a paragon of anti-Zionism but glad he’s moved on this. At least publicly.

Re: Israel escalates attacks on medics in Lebanon with deadly 'quadruple tap'

#285

Post by thisislife2 »

camgunz wrote: post #275
thisislife2 wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The use of such “Hannibal” strikes are confirmed in a UN report published in June. - Fire from Israeli helicopters, drones, tanks and even ground troops was deliberately undertaken in order to prevent Palestinian fighters from taking live Israeli captives who could be exchanged for Palestinian prisoners. > The HRC report does not say this: "227. The Commission verified information indicating that, in at least two o…

> Really? What's the factual difference between the two statements? What EI wrote is a terse summary from the report confirming the fact that the IDF killed its own civilians. No, what EI wrote is: "Hundreds of Israelis were likely killed by Israel itself in “Hannibal” targeting incidents as well as unintentional crossfire." This is wrong, and also propaganda. Why would they do this? Think for yourself, question auth…

> "Hundreds of Israelis were likely killed by Israel itself in “Hannibal” targeting incidents as well as unintentional crossfire." - This is wrong, and also propaganda. Why would they do this?

Propaganda can be factual and based on truth too. Isn't everything in that statement factual? The Hannibal Directive specifically authorises the IDF to kill its own citizens. Multiple sources confirm the order was given. And EI doesn't claim that all of the dead civilians were killed only due to the Hannibal Directive, but also because of "unintentional crossfire" (i.e. collateral damage). This is also true and confirmed by multiple sources. Moreover, Israel was totally unprepared for the attacks and its response was poor and chaotic - Israel's own media has extensively reported on this and EI cites them (it has even provided English translation of those articles). In fact, Israel's own media accuses the Netanyahu government of deliberately not releasing the report on the intelligence failures leading to Oct 7 massacre and data on how many Israeli citizens (soldiers and civilians) were killed by the IDF, deliberately or unintentionally, as he faces an election and doesn't want the failures of Oct 7 to be an election issue.

We don't know each other, and communicating this way is hard because the lack of non-verbal cues make it easy to misunderstand each other. I understand your concern about political biases of the media that I have cited. I am aware of their biases too - I read both left- and right- leaning medias. And, as you suggest, I don't blindly believe everything I read and judge them on how logical and verifiable they are. The EI article I cited has many references, from reputable sources, that back up their assertions (so I find it credible and believe their claim that they spent over a year investigating it). The WSWS article also cites Israel's media. JPost is an Israeli media outlet.

Re: Israel escalates attacks on medics in Lebanon with deadly 'quadruple tap'

#286

Post by camgunz »

thisislife2 wrote: post #285
camgunz wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Really? What's the factual difference between the two statements? What EI wrote is a terse summary from the report confirming the fact that the IDF killed its own civilians. No, what EI wrote is: "Hundreds of Israelis were likely killed by Israel itself in “Hannibal” targeting incidents as well as unintentional crossfire." This is wrong, and also propaganda. Why would they do this? Think for yourself, question auth…

> "Hundreds of Israelis were likely killed by Israel itself in “Hannibal” targeting incidents as well as unintentional crossfire." - This is wrong, and also propaganda. Why would they do this? Propaganda can be factual and based on truth too. Isn't everything in that statement factual? The Hannibal Directive specifically authorises the IDF to kill its own citizens. Multiple sources confirm the order was given. And EI…

Because I have a superhuman intellect, I can straddle the positions of "Israel has done monstrous things to the people of Gaza in the wake of Hamas' heinous attacks on Oct 7" and "there are lots of people who stand to benefit from the demonization of Israel and Jewish people writ large". EI maintains--incredibly--Hamas committed no rapes on Oct 7. Again this is completely false, and again anyone echoing that talking point is immediately on my propaganda radar. EI and other outlets argue that IDF was responsible for most of the civilian casualties because of the Hannibal Directive or incompetence. Also false, also propaganda. Etc etc.

Anyway, I think we agree on the main points. One thing I'd add is Netanyahu's corruption trial--which he'll almost certainly lose--was only suspended because of Israel's ongoing military operations, which are winding down. He's got a pattern of spinning military operations up to continue to defer this though (this isn't just me talking, this is former Israeli PM Ehud Olmert) so I mean, look for that to keep happening.

Post reply on HN