Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree with the premise that Hamas wouldn't be able to fight open battles. But it doesn't make using human shields (directly by putting military infrastructure in civilian ones or indirectly by not distinguishing themselves) not their fault. The death of human shields is their responsibility, and their alone (without getting into details of which part of dead civilians is actually due to being human shields). Of cou…
No, the responsibility is always on who is shooting at civilians. If you can't beat the Hamas in Gaza without shooting civilians, don't shoot, retreat in Israel and focus on protecting Israel.
Journalist casualties in the Israel-Gaza war
831–840 of 968 posts
Re: Journalist casualties in the Israel-Gaza war
#832Earlier quoted context omitted.
> No recent war has seen anywhere near the deplorable civilian:combatant death ratio that we see here. Can you give the numbers for comparison? What are acceptable rate in your opinion?
No rate is acceptable. The debate is not about abiding to any modern war KPIs but rather the intent to minimize civilian casualties. Israel definitely does NOT do that by actively engaging with their current strategy of retaliation and that's already enough to say that, from a human perspective, Israel needs to stop right now and enable any sort of progression into a longer holding peace in that area.
> intent to minimize civilian casualties
Intent is very hard to argue about. Especially when talking about proportionality which is not rigorously defined. Numbers are easier to argue about. It is reasonable to expect that civilian casualty rate will be higher in cases where there is no intent to minimize civilian casualties compared to cases where it is; comparing numbers with conflict in similar conditions where you believe there was such intent is a good starting point
> enable any sort of progression into a longer holding peace in that area
Getting rid of terrorist government who promised to repeat 7th of October looks like necessary condition for peace.
Re: Journalist casualties in the Israel-Gaza war
#833Earlier quoted context omitted.
> whereas Israel really doesn't want Gaza. Like, if Israel doesn't want the Gaza strip/west bank, then why hasn't there been a two state solution? > The UK was always Northern Ireland's government and controlled all state functions. This is 100% not true, Ulster (the majority of which is in Northern Ireland) was historically the part of Ireland that resisted British/English invasions the most, such that the British b…
> Like, if Israel doesn't want the Gaza strip/west bank, then why hasn't there been a two state solution? Because Hamas wants Israel destroyed, and a state actor doing that is a much bigger problem for Israel than a non-state actor.
Israel has had a long-standing policy of propping up Hamas in order to divide Palestinians and thwart the creation of a Palestinian state. Here's an actual quote from Netanyahu on this from 2019 :
“Anyone who wants to thwart the establishment of a Palestinian state has to support bolstering Hamas and transferring money to Hamas … This is part of our strategy – to isolate the Palestinians in Gaza from the Palestinians in the West Bank.”
> https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/oct/20/benjam...
Re: Journalist casualties in the Israel-Gaza war
#834Judgment not on group basis, but individual basis with massive surveillance as basis for review..
Could send the extremists of both sides to the bad place for bonus points.
Re: Journalist casualties in the Israel-Gaza war
#835Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn't the logical extension of this supportive of complete genocide? I don't care about either side in this conflict, but I fail to see how anything short of genocide stops this. This is what I see: P: Hamas attacks civilians I: Responds by saying that this is will never happen again, and they will put their youth into urban combat to ensure it never happens again by eradicating Hamas P: Engages in urban combat via i…
The problem with your breakdown is the implication that this all started with October 7th, as if Hamas is simply a terrorist group that attacked Israel, unprovoked, for no legitimate reason. I know this is the narrative Israel wants everyone to believe, but the reality proves otherwise. If the average American had to live for even just a full week under the conditions that Palestinians live under, they would categori…
My phrasing was specific to the Oct 7 attack because that event was the provication of the current conflict.
Despite policies like "mowing the grass" being catalysts for the Oct 7 attack, my point is that Isreal has stated a clear objective: elimination of Hamas. Their terror tactics are described in the Wiki link you provided appear to be supportive of that goal too.
Hamas has also stated a clear objective so far as I know: destruction of the Isreal state (potentially also of all Jews, but let's give them the benefit of the doubt and say just the state).
I'm undereducated on the issue, but to me it seems that there is no reconciliation of these goals. They are not simultaneously achievable.
My estimate is this conflict could end today if Hamas conceded. What would become of Palestine is a different matter. Their current authority, the PA, seems to have a policy of paying familes for insurgent deaths. Isreal probably won't want them running the show,and they definitely won't want Hamas running it. Other bordering countries like Jordan and Egypt seem to want nothing to do with Palestinians. The Palestinian children appear to be raised to hate Isrealies and are taught to murder, perhaps justifiably (and maybe this is wrong and only propaganda).
I want this fixed, and I can see a path forward where Palestine embraces sovereignty and becomes a mecca of the world by operating as a tax haven for businesses. But in order to do that they need to determine their goal is peace, and ally with other countries for protection against Isrealie aggression. But that is a hard path forward when starting at current state, including the world view held by Palestinians.
And maybe I'm entirely wrong in this post. But my GP post was specific to my perceived, orthogonal objectives of both sides.
Re: Journalist casualties in the Israel-Gaza war
#836Earlier quoted context omitted.
Much as I asked the other commenter, how many school shooters would need to be in the school before we believe it's valid? Let's change the analogy: ISIS terrorists take over the MIT campus. Inside the university are 50 armed terrorists. Is it valid to now bomb the university? What if there are 100 terrorists? There is no issue with scale here. No matter how much it scales, you won't reach a point where there is an e…
So what do you think would happen if terrorists took over the MIT campus, students sympathized with them, rockets were launched from it, and the US police had no presence there and very sparse intelligence?
So we're back to 'all of them are guilty'
The shame here is what you described is literally Hamas' reasoning for carrying out the October attacks. Dehumanization, hyper aggression, and hiding it all behind 'the opposition is inherently evil, guilty by association, so we are fundamentally justified'.
Re: Journalist casualties in the Israel-Gaza war
#837Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because once they leave, Israel won't allow them back.
Russia doesn't allow ukrainians back to the occupied territories, they deport the non-complicit ones and the remaining ones are heavily oppressed. That should be the excuse for Poland or the rest of EU to not let the refugees in?
> Russia doesn't allow ukrainians back to the occupied territories
I don't know that to be true. AFAIK, Russia would like the population there too.
Re: Journalist casualties in the Israel-Gaza war
#838Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, there are things that cannot be bozt-sided: Everything that violates human right for example. Or direct threats to democracy.
Some of us will happily take the non-normative side on things like this as well.
Re: Journalist casualties in the Israel-Gaza war
#839Earlier quoted context omitted.
The fact that journalists in war zones died doesn't mean these were "targeted exclusively" is there any evidence that Israel has targeted journalists intentionally that weren't involved in the fighting?
> is there any evidence that Israel has targeted journalists intentionally that weren't involved in the fighting? Yes my dear, there's plenty. Many journalists had an airstrike called on their homes. Some were not in it at the time, others were killd with their families while not involved in the fighting or on the frontline. Many journalists also received direct threats from Israeli intelligence agencies pushing them…
I am not saying journalists weren’t targeted when they were involved in the fighting or part of Hamas.
I am saying whether you have evidence that journalists were targeted for being journalists like you are implying, and that is evidence i don’t think you have
Re: Journalist casualties in the Israel-Gaza war
#840Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Hamas is notorious for colocating themselves among civilians. I despise Hamas, but this claim is disingenuous propaganda (by the leaders who make it, not the parent who repeats it): First, Hamas is 'notorious' for it because it's endlessly repeated by their enemies. That rhetoric doesn't make anything true. (Haven't we had the Internet long enough that people know it well by now?) Second, Hamas is an assymetric, ir…
>> Hamas is notorious for colocating themselves among civilians. > this claim is disingenuous propaganda > Hamas is an assymetric, irregular force, and assymetric forces cannot operate bases or fight open battles anywhere; they all must blend in with civilians Is the hangup on the word "notorious"? Because you appear to first claim the notion of colocation to be propaganda before explaining why it's also a logistical…
Hamas does a lot of bad things; they still are 'notorious'; but this thing is just fundamental asymmetric operations, at least generally speaking.