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

ICJ orders Israel to prevent genocide in Gaza, stops short of ordering ceasefire

apnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

961–970 of 1001 posts

Re: ICJ orders Israel to prevent genocide in Gaza, stops short of ordering ceasefire

#961

Post by [deleted] »

throwaway587 wrote: post #279
voisin wrote: post #6

Perhaps I am unlearned in this area but I am unclear why the Jewish state, after its people experienced the atrocities of World War II, would act in this manner toward the Palestinians. Can anyone shed light on this? I understand completely the need to rid the world of Hamas terrorists, but in the process they have shown a reckless disregard (to put it mildly) for Palestinian people and their wellbeing.

This is a question you need to ask Jewish people, not HN. The response you'll get here obviously won't answer this question, because the people responding are either not Jewish, or the format doesn't lend itself to a genuine answer. But, a mistake you make in asking the question is two-fold, one - the Holocaust was not a lesson taught to Jews so they'll learn empathy. It was something horrible and traumatic that was…

[deleted]

Re: ICJ orders Israel to prevent genocide in Gaza, stops short of ordering ceasefire

#962

Post by tptacek »

throwaway587 wrote: post #279
voisin wrote: post #6

Perhaps I am unlearned in this area but I am unclear why the Jewish state, after its people experienced the atrocities of World War II, would act in this manner toward the Palestinians. Can anyone shed light on this? I understand completely the need to rid the world of Hamas terrorists, but in the process they have shown a reckless disregard (to put it mildly) for Palestinian people and their wellbeing.

This is a question you need to ask Jewish people, not HN. The response you'll get here obviously won't answer this question, because the people responding are either not Jewish, or the format doesn't lend itself to a genuine answer. But, a mistake you make in asking the question is two-fold, one - the Holocaust was not a lesson taught to Jews so they'll learn empathy. It was something horrible and traumatic that was…

The question we're discussing is about the attitudes of people of "the Jewish state", by which they clearly mean Israel. Almost half of the world's Jewish People are Americans, not Israelis. I think you'll get interesting answers about Palestine from Jewish Americans (I've sure learned a whole lot these past few months), but a casual reading of your comment suggests that those people have a responsibility to account for Israeli policy, and they don't. This is an extraordinarily common complaint about the Israeli/Palestine debate --- that charges of "antisemitism" are weaponized against those who criticize Israel --- and it seems that there may be a kernel of truth on both sides of that complaint.

I wrote a much more strident and knee-jerk response to this at first (I'm sorry about that, and I should have read through the whole comment instead of snagging at the first sentence), but that first sentence is quite a snag! It seemed to upset other people who replied, and I can't really blame them too much for that.

Re: ICJ orders Israel to prevent genocide in Gaza, stops short of ordering ceasefire

#963

Post by theyinwhy »

Sporktacular wrote: post #218
theyinwhy wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US, under whichever administration, is in a very difficult position here. If the US stops all support immediately, this could be the end of Israel. Would that be just? I see a president carefully dancing on the thin line of supporting the Israel state while using the US leverage to stop the war (latest example: sending the CIA chief to the negotiating table). But this needs to be done without enabling Israel's bi…

Israel has nuclear weapons. By the logic of even developing them, there's no reason not to deploy them if it faces conquest. Any existential crisis facing Israel will not come from outside.

Is deploying nuclear weapons against a close ally of Russia really a feasible scenario?

Re: ICJ orders Israel to prevent genocide in Gaza, stops short of ordering ceasefire

#964

Post by zmgsabst »

dang wrote: post #575
zmgsabst wrote: post #403

[flagged]

You've been breaking the site guidelines badly in this thread and your comments are very much not in the intended spirit, as I tried to explain it at the top. Please stop posting like this. (In case anyone is worried: yes, the exact same thing applies to the commenters you disagree with.) We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39148089 . Edit: it turns out we've had to ask you this many…

Perhaps your comment would be more constructive if you could say how my comments break the rules. Help me grow and help me follow the rules by being specific.

- - -

You say that you’d equally critique the opposite viewpoint, but that’s been factually untrue before:

You censored people for pointing out in purely neutral terms, using videos of the people themselves giving interviews, that BLM was a Marxist organization — on the basis that it’s an “inherent flame war” to say true things the community is upset by.

- - -

Again, my comment doesn’t seem any different than many others here you didn’t feel the need to critique.

To me, that seems like the antisemitism we witnessed from Harvard et al — who censor speech on campus, then cry “free speech” when making calls for genocide.

Re: ICJ orders Israel to prevent genocide in Gaza, stops short of ordering ceasefire

#966

Post by anon84873628 »

ethics13 wrote: post #960
anon84873628 wrote: post #585

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>All correct and yet, what should happen? Israel stops their campaign. And then? And then everyone who wants peace invests lots of money and expertise over a long time to build a modern, prosperous, stable Palestinian society, despite whatever setbacks, attacks, and sabotage occur from within and without. The only way to have peace is to give people a better option than becoming terrorists.

It is an incredibly naive outlook as that has been in place since 2005 in Gaza.

Only for Israel to bomb it all away after one setback? What a waste. The Oct 7 attacks were horrible but the response was not proportionate or productive.

Over 47% of Palestinians are under the age of 18, meaning they have grown up only knowing the post-2005 situation. Which can rightly be described as an open air prison with no hope of the opportunities all humans deserve.

Israel - and the rest of the complicit world - allowed a generation of prisoners to be born under Hamas and is now massacring them like fish in a barrel. You can call that a naive view too, but I doubt history will look kindly on all the justifications.

Re: ICJ orders Israel to prevent genocide in Gaza, stops short of ordering ceasefire

#967

Post by surume »

rsoto2 wrote: post #952
surume wrote: post #783

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is your proposed alternative that you're alluding to? That seems oddly missing in your comment.

Make peace with the Palestinians and stop committing genocide

We tried. They weren't interested in peace. Plus there's a difference between Gazans (Hamas) and West Bank arabs (Fatah). We are not committing genocide, but Hamas definitely are trying to.

Re: ICJ orders Israel to prevent genocide in Gaza, stops short of ordering ceasefire

#968

Post by surume »

Aeolun wrote: post #876
surume wrote: post #783

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is your proposed alternative that you're alluding to? That seems oddly missing in your comment.

Good question, I’m fairly certain that doing exactly nothing, while of course politically untenable, would be preferable to this. Kind of a “we don’t negotiate with terrorists” kind of deal. Find the kidnappers and then surgically take them out. If you’ve no clue how to do that get your single big ally to help you out with that, as they have about 20 years of experience doing exactly that thing. Even better if your l…

Sorry, but that won't work. Hamas still have 130 hostages, and they shoot mortars, missiles and kamikaze drones into Israel with increasing technology and firepower. They have 20,000 combat soldiers left, so unless we leave several division on their border (which would be insane), they're just break through the fence and slaughter us again. I appreciate your attempt to come up with a solution, but it is not at all connected to reality. Hamas will not just sit in Gaza and wait. They showed us that on October 7th. Either we wipe them out or they will slaughter us again.

Re: ICJ orders Israel to prevent genocide in Gaza, stops short of ordering ceasefire

#969

Post by edanm »

wahnfrieden wrote: post #942
edanm wrote: post #882

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As far as has been credibly reported, it wasn't a "sizeable fraction", it was a very small number. There's only one incident I know of that is verified. I'm sure more will surface - such is war. Therefore I want to make it very clear - it is not an important detail , despite you calling it such. Hamas are the ones that attacked - if in the process of trying to stop these attacks, the IDF inadvertantly killed Israeli…

IDF's own reporting calls the amount of friendly fire casualties on Oct 7 "immense". Your interpretation is more conservative than IDF's own analysis and reporting on their own evidence - that's suspicious. Furthermore there is Israeli reporting on the practical use of Hannibal Directive during Oct 7, which is deliberate killing of military and civilian hostages. Israeli reporting claims that the use of this directiv…

EDIT: Mis-wrote something, see further comments for details.

I went down the rabbit-hole trying to find out exactly what was said and meant. I don't consider Electronic Intifada a credible source (I mean, the bias is in the name!), but they are citing specific statements made by an Israeli army reporter.

That said, I think they (and you) are making things seem very different by the way in which you're quoting the statements. I wrote there are only a few known cases of friendly fire on civilians, and you wrote that the army thinks the number is "immense", which contradicts what I said.

Except, if you look at the context of that statement from the article, I think it doesn't actually contradict it. Here's the whole paragraph:

> Casualties fell as a result of friendly fire on October 7, but the IDF believes that beyond the operational investigations of the events, it would not be morally sound to investigate these incidents due to the immense and complex quantity of them that took place in the kibbutzim and southern Israeli communities due to the challenging situations the soldiers were in at the time.

The "immense and complex quantity" statement here refers to why the army says it's not morally sound to investigate the incidents. There could've been 100 incidents - e.g. 100 cases of cars bombed trying to cross back into Gaza, which may or may not have had hostages in them (which is I believe where the IDF supposedly invoked the "Hannibal doctrine").

A hundred potential incidents to investigate could absolutely qualify as someone saying there are an "immense number", while still only representing a tiny fraction of victims compared to the numbers we know for certain were killed by Hamas.

I honestly think that if your case hinges on the specific phrasing used to describe what someone from the IDF said, and which doesn't even necessarily prove anything - then your case is incredibly weak. This could've been a translation error (I couldn't find the original Hebrew version of this article), this could've been the reporter slightly exaggerating what they heard (even unknowingly), etc.

Do you have any other sources except for this? I'd love to see them.

Though again, let's be clear - there are already hundreds (possibly over a thousand?) known victims of Hamas that are verified. There might be some friendly-fire incidents too, but there are an incredibly large number that are absolutely known to have been killed by Hamas, many of which were captured on video by Hamas itself!

Trying to claim otherwise is just completely ignoring all real evidence in favor of conspiracy.

Re: ICJ orders Israel to prevent genocide in Gaza, stops short of ordering ceasefire

#970

Post by edanm »

SomeoneFromCA wrote: post #896
edanm wrote: post #882

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As far as has been credibly reported, it wasn't a "sizeable fraction", it was a very small number. There's only one incident I know of that is verified. I'm sure more will surface - such is war. Therefore I want to make it very clear - it is not an important detail , despite you calling it such. Hamas are the ones that attacked - if in the process of trying to stop these attacks, the IDF inadvertantly killed Israeli…

It is absolutely not "true both legally and morally." It all depends on scale and purpose of the operation. If israeli military acted with disregard to the lives of non combatants, that would account to war crimes, against their own population. They have history of war crimes against their own forces, called Hannibal doctrine, so I won't surprised if they have same directives against civilians.

> It is absolutely not "true both legally and morally." It all depends on scale and purpose of the operation.

Well I wasn't making a general statement - I was talking in this specific case.

Let's give an analogy - if a bunch of bank robbers have taken hostages and are threatening to kill them, and if the police is reasonably certain there is no way of actually getting them out - the police is morally justified in sending in SWAT to try and rescue as many hostages as possible. Even if they know that many hostages will die.

The moral fault is with the bank robbers, not the police.

> If [I]sraeli military acted with disregard to the lives of non combatants, that would account to war crimes, against their own population.

I think that's a totally valid internal matter for debate within Israel. Should this kind of doctrine be the rule? Is it appropriate to attempt to stop militants by any means necessary, including possibly at the cost of your own population? This is in the same vein as "we don't negotiate with terrorists", a principled position that theoretically cuts down on terror, but that has brutal immediate ramaficiations in specific cases.

That all said, I don't think this doctrine amounts to war crimes (I'm not sure how it possibly could amount to war crimes). And I think it's an internal matter for debate inside the country, but don't really see how it matters to anyone else.

In fact, it kind of proves the opposite of what many people think - that the IDF is specifically trying to kill Gazan civilians. I'm often asked "what would the IDF do if the innocent civilians around a Hamas militant were Jews, not Palestinians, would you still bomb them even though it might cause collateral damage?". And while I think that question has a lot of answers, I think the "Hannibal directive", if implemented on October 7th (as appears likely), is actually proof that the IDF acts consistently, if terribly brutally - civilians are sometimes collateral damage, even if they're Israelis.

Post reply on HN