881–890 of 968 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
> Calling what happened in 2006 “an election” is not a good idea. From Wikipedia: > An 84-delegate international observer delegation monitored the elections. It judged the elections to have been peaceful and well-administered.[33] Twenty-seven members of the European parliament were included. Edward McMillan-Scott, the British Conservative head of the European Parliament's monitoring team described the polls as "extr…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Let's be generous and take Israeli estimates: 10,000 civilians, excluding Hamas fighters. The initial militant attack took 253 people hostage. As reprehensible as that is, it's not worth 10,000 civilian deaths.
You would be correct were the war about retaliation. It is not retaliation. It is a military operation. It is a military operation to remove an implacable enemy who deliberately positions military hardware such as rocket launchers in and around civilians and civilian infrastructure. This is an enemy who would kill more than 30,000 Israeli citizens if it could. Hamas would kill every single Israeli if it acquired the…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Calling what happened in 2006 “an election” is not a good idea. From Wikipedia: > An 84-delegate international observer delegation monitored the elections. It judged the elections to have been peaceful and well-administered.[33] Twenty-seven members of the European parliament were included. Edward McMillan-Scott, the British Conservative head of the European Parliament's monitoring team described the polls as "extr…
[flagged]
> Because Hamas have physically killed all major opposition politicians prior to these elections.
The Palestinian Civil War (aka the Battle for Gaza) was after this election. The onset was much more complex then “Hamas killed all opposition”. But even if it was, this civil war had no effect on the election because it happened after it. If you are not referring the the civil war, which instances of political violence are you referring to? The dozens of international observers observing the election certainly didn’t see any? Were they all wrong? Is there some conspiracy we don’t know about?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
> but all you can muster is evidence that journalists are not being targeted but are rather being killed at rates of other civilians. No, they are being killed at much faster rate, to the point of depletion in relation to other civilians. Look at this plot: https://imgur.com/a/SWNSYOn In my first post in this thread I did a detailed estimate that for the curve to bend this way, the journalists must be decimated with…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You would be correct were the war about retaliation. It is not retaliation. It is a military operation. It is a military operation to remove an implacable enemy who deliberately positions military hardware such as rocket launchers in and around civilians and civilian infrastructure. This is an enemy who would kill more than 30,000 Israeli citizens if it could. Hamas would kill every single Israeli if it acquired the…
Then it's a wildy disproportionate military operation. Israeli lives are not worth 40x Palestinian ones.
I think much of what's been done in Gaza is indefensible (the culpability is shared, but it's an enormous amount of culpability, there's plenty for Netanyahu to account for). But the logic of X Israelis to Y Palestinians doesn't hold and doesn't illuminate.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You might identify as a fact vending machine, but don't count on others buying your processed snacks. > Fact: This began in 1948... Let's add a breakpoint there. You haven't defined "this", and everyone knows any measure of "this" goes back before 1948. Speaking of 1948, just 3 years after WW2 ended, the Jews who suffered some of the worst death and despair of WW2, were attacked again in 1948 from all sides in the Ar…
[flagged]
This is one of those things that you can probably reasonably debate, if you're extraordinarily careful how you write about it (is it worth it? it's not as if it changes the calculus of how horrible Hamas is), but you can't reasonably claim is "debunked".
(The comment you were replying to was dismissive and uncivil; I'm just taking issue with a specific point you raised.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
The rape allegations have not been debunked. The UN Special Representative on Sexual Violence in Conflict just yesterday announced convincing evidence not just of organized sexual violence on October 7th, but of sexual violence against the hostages themselves, including evidence that such abuse is ongoing. It's been a Twitter talking point for the last 2 weeks that the rape accusations are hoaxes; some of that is the…
We know what using sexual violence as a weapon of war looks like as we have plenty of evidence the Israel army doing exactly that and we have no evidence of Hamas doing it.
> some of that is the New York Times fault for mishandling a story
This is putting it mildly. The NYT propagandized these allegations to support a pro-Israeli narrative. What they did was not only lie about Hamas’ true crimes, but also use a horrible crime—which no doubt some victims of oct. 7 experienced—as a way to justify other horrible crimes, including other sexual violence committed by the IDF in the aftermath.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The rape allegations have not been debunked. The UN Special Representative on Sexual Violence in Conflict just yesterday announced convincing evidence not just of organized sexual violence on October 7th, but of sexual violence against the hostages themselves, including evidence that such abuse is ongoing. It's been a Twitter talking point for the last 2 weeks that the rape accusations are hoaxes; some of that is the…
While the allegations are credible (off course they are, these are a bunch of violent men brutalizing civilians) they have been far from proven. But what has been pretty much debunked at this point is Hamas using sexual violence as a weapon of war. We know what using sexual violence as a weapon of war looks like as we have plenty of evidence the Israel army doing exactly that and we have no evidence of Hamas doing it…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You posted a video of tunnels being used for civilian smuggling. That is not a military facility of any kind, let alone an 'evil Hamas terror facilty'. The denials are really getting ridiculous now.
i guess the result of that civilian smuggling is the access to food, medicine and other lifesaving goods for the civilians? oh, no, it seems like it is weapons and hostages.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Twitter/X, especially for an issue like this one, is not at all a credible source IMHO. Disinformation and misinformation on Twitter is a cliche; it's overwhelming.
These are photos published by the IDF, not random users on X even if you don’t trust the IDF, you could easily verify if those are the photos of the same journalist by looking at them.
People are easily misled by those things, including you and me. We don't have time or skill or resources to do the verification. But one efficient solution is for someone to develop those skills and resources professionally, and to spend the time to use them. Those people are called journalists, among other things.
Stop reading X, which we can't interpret accurately (as is extremely well demonstrated billions of times) and start reading something professionally verified. That's my advice, at least.
If you are pro-Israeli, realize that Hamas uses X to mislead and influence public opinion. If you believe there is truth to Israel's position, then X - probably the world's leading mechanism for disinformation and misinformation - is a threat to Israel.