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

IDF killed Gaza aid workers at point blank range in 2025 massacre: Report

dropsitenews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

781–790 of 1001 posts

Re: IDF killed Gaza aid workers at point blank range in 2025 massacre: Report

#781

Post by kakacik »

dijit wrote: post #757
esseph wrote: post #661

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would an insurgent force against an occupier ever wear uniforms? Ever? Is there any case of this happening in history?

Pretty much all of them. National Guard and HomeGuard in every allied country has a uniform. The ones that don't are using what would be considered unlawful tactics these days. You're an 'unlawful combatant' if you don't wear one: the Geneva Convention still technically applies to you, just not in any way you'd find comforting.

Why should they play by some foreign made up book just because it would suit the oppressor who massively overpowers you in every aspect? Come on, lets get real, if you defend your homeland from invader any tactic is good tactic. Thats not some higher moral ground just basic logic.

Geneva convention is just a piece of paper, sometimes adhered to by some parties, and thats about it. And thats something coming from a person living and working in Geneva lol. russians keep breaking those rules every day for years on ukraine and not much is happening, is it.

Re: IDF killed Gaza aid workers at point blank range in 2025 massacre: Report

#783

Post by nearbuy »

YZF wrote: post #667
Qem wrote: post #2

Full report: https://content.forensic-architecture.org/wp-content/uploads...

[flagged]

> "The emergency lights and markings of the victims’ vehicles would have been clearly visible to the soldiers at the time of the attacks." -> speculative. The soldiers argued they were wearing night vision equipment and did not see either the markings or the emergency lights. This is at least plausible (as someone who has used thermal night vision equipment).

Is it plausible?

There were four ambulances and a fire truck with flashing lights on the roofs and the report says the soldiers had a clear view from the elevated sandbank. Night vision would obscure the markings, but lights still show in both thermal and image-intensified NVG. Even if they weren't sure they were ambulances, they should still be wondering about the emergency lights. And if they weren't sure, did no soldier look even briefly without night vision? This occurred during twilight, about half an hour before sunrise.

If they could see so little that they couldn't recognize 4 ambulances and a fire truck with emergency lights, and the aid workers never fired shot, why did they open fire?

It doesn't explain well why they initially said the vehicles were acting suspiciously by driving with their lights off and only changed their story after video emerged. And it doesn't explain why they shot at the "clearly marked UN vehicle" when it arrived well after sunrise.

Re: IDF killed Gaza aid workers at point blank range in 2025 massacre: Report

#785

Post by dijit »

kakacik wrote: post #781
dijit wrote: post #757

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretty much all of them. National Guard and HomeGuard in every allied country has a uniform. The ones that don't are using what would be considered unlawful tactics these days. You're an 'unlawful combatant' if you don't wear one: the Geneva Convention still technically applies to you, just not in any way you'd find comforting.

Why should they play by some foreign made up book just because it would suit the oppressor who massively overpowers you in every aspect? Come on, lets get real, if you defend your homeland from invader any tactic is good tactic. Thats not some higher moral ground just basic logic. Geneva convention is just a piece of paper, sometimes adhered to by some parties, and thats about it. And thats something coming from a pe…

The Geneva Convention wasn't written by oppressors to protect oppressors; it was written largely because of what happens to civilians and prisoners when there are no rules. The protections run both ways: your wounded, your captured fighters, your civilian population all benefit from it. Tear it up and you're not sticking it to the powerful, you're just guaranteeing that nobody on either side has any protection at all.

And yes, Russia breaks the rules constantly in Ukraine. The response to that is not 'therefore rules are worthless,' it's 'therefore we need better enforcement.' A legal system with imperfect enforcement is not the same thing as no legal system; by that logic you'd abolish murder laws because people still get murdered.

'Any tactic is a good tactic' is also, incidentally, exactly what the oppressor says.

Re: IDF killed Gaza aid workers at point blank range in 2025 massacre: Report

#786

Post by smashah »

smashah wrote: post #706

In the last 3 years, many users on HN have justified Genocide constantly and openly while downvoting any dissenting opinion trying to speak up against this genocide. And all of them, without fail, when convenient, without consequence, will lie and act like they were against it. Once the genocidaires have built waterfront property upon the fresh tiny bones once the Board of Holocaust Profiteering is done with its demo…

Of course, the Epsteinists have woken up and are now in a downvote spree.

Re: IDF killed Gaza aid workers at point blank range in 2025 massacre: Report

#787

Post by kennywinker »

bawolff wrote: post #754
kennywinker wrote: post #740

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It is the nature of how Hamas wages war in Gaza that is driving the assumptions here When the bad guys use human shields, it’s on the “good guys” to somehow resist the “good guy” urge to blow the whole city up. Hamas has killed something in the order of 800 idf soldiers during this conflict, if we exclude the ones killed on oct 7th. In that same time at least 75,000 palestinians have been killed - most of which wer…

I think he's saying that this is par for the course for asymmetric conflicts with deeply rooted insurgent groups. So if you are going to say the handling of this conflict has more to do with Israeli training/mindset/etc and is not related to the type of conflict, do you have other armies in mind that have fought similar conflicts and done better?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_journalists_killed_in_...

> the single deadliest conflict for journalists in all known conflicts in the history of the world, according to the Costs of War Project

Does that sound like “par for the course”?

By that measure, every other army in every other war prior has done better.

This “war” (genocide) is not normal.

Re: IDF killed Gaza aid workers at point blank range in 2025 massacre: Report

#788

Post by raducu »

dijit wrote: post #756
jcranmer wrote: post #675

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When the first attack on an aid convoy to provoke outrage came out, I saw someone put it best: there is a difference between "war is chaos, and no matter how hard we try, some incidents regrettably occur" and "our rules of engagement are designed in such a manner to make these incidents almost certain." And the IDF... is pretty clearly in the latter category. > I imagine most of the armchair critics here have never b…

> Attempting to use this as a defense requires conceding that the default assumption is that someone is a terrorist until proven otherwise All other things being equal, if your opponent engages actively in hiding among medical and press workers as a type of guerrilla warfare, then the reality does become this. I'm trying to say this dispassionately because I'm aware that people get defensive, but lets say that you ha…

> All other things being equal, if your opponent engages actively in hiding among medical and press workers as a type of guerrilla warfare, then the reality does become this.

So let me check this reasoning: if there was a single US soldier in the WTC towers, the 9/11 attacks were justified because the soldiers were hiding among the civilians?

Or if Hamas killed a single israelian soldier in their horrendous attacks in private homes, then it's justified because there were soldiers in those houses?

Or if the israelian reservists have their weapons at home and can be called upon directly from home to action, does that mean Iran or Hamas are justified at flattening residential buildings in Israel because those could host soldiers?

Re: IDF killed Gaza aid workers at point blank range in 2025 massacre: Report

#789

Post by philosopher1234 »

yoavm wrote: post #765
karim79 wrote: post #679

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually got accused of being racist for saying that anti-zionism and anti-semitism are not the same thing.

I know Zionism as the idea that Jewish people have the right to self-determination. Do you: 1 - Think that it is something different? 2 - Think that it is, but Jewish people specifically do not have it? (I believe this is racist) 3 - Think that no people have it? 4 - Something else? If you think that Jewish people have it but just not in Palestine, where in the world do you think they should have had it?

Jews don’t have a right to an ethnostate. No one does. Jews have a right to live within any country in the world, but not run an apartheid government or commit genocide.

Re: IDF killed Gaza aid workers at point blank range in 2025 massacre: Report

#790

Post by bawolff »

dataflow wrote: post #749
bawolff wrote: post #695

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the only defense here would be if the soldiers came up with some reasonable explanation of why they thought the vehicles were hostile. Its kind of hard to imagine, especially with shooting the follow up vehicles, but motive seems like the only unclear part where there is any potential for a defense. One part that is really confusing, is if they knowingly intentionally targeted the ambulance because they thoug…

> One part that is really confusing, is if they knowingly intentionally targeted the ambulance because they thought they could get away with it if they destroyed the evidence, why leave witnesses alive? If you assume the motive was an intentional massacre with point blank executions, it doesn't entirely make logical sense to leave witnesses. Couldn't the ability to make this very argument be a reason why?

Without the witness we probably wouldn't be having this conversation at all.
Post reply on HN