TrueMetis

9 hours ago, Relic said:

I would start with not shooting shields, and work from there. If you kill civilians, and then continue to kill civilians, guess what? You're the bad guy too. Israel has crossed a line here, and even its allies are starting to realize it. 

Crossed that line a long time ago, indeed I'm trying to think of a crime Hamas has committed that Israel hasn't, mass deliberate killing of civilians? Yep, even if you handwave the current bombing as "acceptable causalities from acceptable targets" we have IDF snipers bragging about killing civilians. Hostage taking? Thousands of Palestianans are being held by Israel on no charge, including children. Sexual violence? Again, yep. IDF soldiers have raped women and sexual violence is commonplace in the prison those hostages are kept. This isn't bad guy vs good guy, it's bad guy vs bad guy with a whole lot of innocent civilians caught in between with some people only caring about one group of civilians.

https://www.thenationalnews.com/world/mena/gaza-s-walking-wounded-israeli-snipers-have-shot-6-392-protesters-in-lower-limbs-this-year-1.800691

https://mondoweiss.net/2020/03/i-remember-the-knee-in-the-crosshairs-bursting-open-israeli-snipers-boast-of-shooting-ducks-in-gaza/

Anyway back to the hospital, it should be noted that Hamas rejects the claim the hospital is being used for military purposes, and you might say Hamas is untrustworthy and you're right, but they're not any less untrustworthy than the IDF. If only there was a organization that was tasked with looking into these kind of things, except there is, this is exactly the type of thing the UN is for. To bad the IDF keeps killing their workers.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/10/27/hamas-rejects-israeli-claim-over-installations-under-al-shifa-hospital

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-11-12/israel-gaza-war-latest-updates-al-shifa-hospital-video/103094596

Directors of the hospital reject the claims to, but again could be lies.

https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/israeli-forces-approach-key-gaza-hospital-what-will-they-do-2023-11-09/

Also you know, Israel keeps bombing the places they call safe, so why leave for another area you might be killed?

So we've moved from "Israel didn't attack the hospital" to "it's fine Israel attacked the hospital, they did warn you."

Didn't take long did it?

To give cover for all the murdered journalists.

13 hours ago, Fragile Bird said:

I’ve searched today’s, Friday Nov. 10 NYT, and there is no mention of this special issue on the front page. Nor in the very long list of articles they list. I’ve googled various versions of “NYT says it has blood on it’s hands” and nothing comes up. I’ve Googled “NYT Nov. 11 2023 special edition” and nothing comes up. Do you have a better link than this guy? Is this for real? 

If the NYT has announced it had “blood on its hands”, and this guy has an advanced copy of the front page, why doesn’t every newspaper in the US and Canada have a front page story about it? 

In that list of journalists, why aren’t the papers or news organizations or broadcast networks they are affiliated with listed beside their names?

Don't you think if the NYT announced it was responsible for their deaths they just opened themselves up to hundred million dollar lawsuits from the families?

 

... Yes Bird, obviously that isn't an actual NYT paper.

Okay got it, from here on I'll make sure to write "THIS IS A FICTITIOUS ARTICLE USING SATIRE TO MAKE A POINT" in bold if I ever link something similar again.

ETA: Though in case you think the fictitious part includes the journalists themselves.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_journalists_killed_in_the_2023_Israel–Hamas_war

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/10/19/journalists-killed-israel-gaza-war/

Half of all journalists reporting from Gaza dead. *Half*.

Well there's a whole bunch of people held in indefinite detention without any charges, including literal children, so they could start with those.

You know, hostages for hostages?

1 hour ago, GrimTuesday said:

Yeah, these guys really seem to have been making a good faith effort to create something more workable. Bear in mind Deir Yassin took place in April 1948, a month prior to Israel being given statehood.

 

just for some context, in the 1980's the IDF created a ribbon, the Lehi Ribbon, for members of Lehi. An "award for activity in the struggle for the establishment of Israel" Lehi being the one of the two groups that carried out this massacre.

Lehi also tried to ally with the Nazis against Britain. Former Israeli PM Yitzhak Shamir was a member, he planned the assassination of Lord Moyne, many members of Lehi joined the IDF, and the "oldest IDF reservist" Ezra Yachin who Israel was parading around for a while is accused of participating in this massacre.

Like this attack wasn't some unexpected thing from some totally rogue element, it was planned to cause fear in the Arab population by specifically attacking a friendly Arab village and approved by the Haganah who would go on to become the IDF.

Like I said last thread when I posted that video. A deeply and deliberately fucked up system.

50 minutes ago, Craving Peaches said:

Wasn't everyone technically a coloniser in their homeland at some point anyway? The Scots came from Ireland and killed most/all of the Picts.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0b/Europe_and_the_Near_East_at_476_AD.png

Yeah, hence why the important thing is to look at what's being done, not who's doing it. Like if the English had been native to North America that would change whether they were justified not at all.

48 minutes ago, Bael's Bastard said:

Jews are no less indigenous to Israel/Palestine than you are to your lands. Suggesting so IS antisemitic.

The fact that what is being done and the justifications being used has *not a goddamn thing* to do with the Indigeneity of the people doing them is apparently lost on you.

ETA: Like is anyone here gonna deny that what Russia is attempting in Ukraine is also a colonial project despite Russians living there too for a very long time?

Just now, Bael's Bastard said:

If you expect to be taken seriously don't suggest Jews are colonizers in their own indigenous homeland.

If you want to be taken seriously don't spew colonist claptrap in front of an indigenous man and expect him not to comment on it. But then, since you're response is to hide behind accusation of antisemitism rather than defend the point it's clear you don't want to be taken seriously.

2 minutes ago, Bael's Bastard said:

It's rich to portray Jews as colonists and Arabs as indigenous in Israel/Palestine.

If you don't want to be compared to colonists stop using their justifications and methods then.

11 minutes ago, Ran said:

 

They "dumped" the problem on about 8900 square kilometers of mostly-empty desert and 6000 square kilometers of malarial swamps, arable land, and settlements which was shared almost 50-50 with the Arabs. Against the Arabs getting complete control of the other 98% of the land.

And when the Arabs responded by expelling the Jews from MENA, I think we can say that they "dumped" the problem on Israel, too. Over 50% of Israeli Jews are Mizrahi, I read somewhere or other.

Speaking of reductive, pretending that you can reduce the middle east to "the Arabs" as a cohesive group is pretty reductive. Guess we could have made the Netherlands the Jewish homeland because "the Europeans" get control of the rest of Europe.

Just now, Bael's Bastard said:

60% of the Jewish portion was the Negev Desert, which was mostly uninhabited and envisioned to absorb Jewish refugees.

Ah the old colonist standby "they're not using the land *right*." Never gets old does it.

12 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

The indigenous people of North America would like to have a conversation with you.

I'm gonna need you to unpack what you're saying here immediately. At best it's nonsense, but given some of your other stated views I'm leaning more toward shameless exploitation.

Just a deeply, deliberately fucked up system.

25 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

I find the argument claiming that this conflict can be solved militarily b/c some terrorists have been killed, if you keep at tit you’ll eventually get them all very problematic. First, no, you won’t b/c they’re not all in Gaza, so unless Israel starts bombing other places like Qatar they won’t be able to eliminate Hamas this way. 
But also, let’s look at the maths here. As of yesterday, just over 9,000 killed in Gaza. Hamas was said to have, at the start, 30,000 militants. We know for a fact that not all 9K killed were terrorists, and that 3K+ were children.  But let’s be super generous and optimistic and say that, of the ~ 6K adults killed, half were terrorists. So now there are only 27K left to kill. So if it takes 27 days to kill 3K terrorists, then this war must go on for months on end to finish them militarily. And of course along with them all the civilians - the children, the elderly etc. 

Yeah, sounds like a great plan! /s

The fact that there is no goddamn way that this operation actually succeeds in the stated goals does seem to be rather conveniently ignored by many.

4 hours ago, Fragile Bird said:

No, I did not say that because the refugee camp is old it makes attacking it more defensible. Words have meaning. When you’ve lived there for literally 75 years and it’s a city calling it a refugee camp is really loaded, isn’t it? My post was about the fact it’s a Hamas stronghold and has been since Hamas was founded, and that’s why the IDF attacked it. 

And isn’t every person living in Gaza a refugee? Isn’t everyone a refugee or a descendent if the refugees from the 1947 war? The whole area is a refugee camp.

Ex-fucking-actly. But that means something different to you than it does to me.

1 hour ago, Altherion said:

Supply is not the issue. The US is a very large country with a population of over 330 million people and a professional army (i.e. an army composed entirely of people whose job it is to be soldiers). Israel is tiny and and while it has some professional soldiers, the bulk of its army is composed of people who have other jobs and are called up as needed. It cannot possibly maintain a multi-decade war the way the US can because most of its army needs to go back to work.

Israel, population 9.8 million, has a military composing of 169,000 regular duty personnel. That makes it 30th in terms of size. More importantly, Gaza has a population of 2.3 million and according to Israel's own numbers Hamas numbers about 30000. Kind of want people to stop pretending the IDF is some scrappy underdog rather than one of the largest most technologically advanced military's on earth.

Really can't believe people are claiming that because the refugee camp is really old that makes Israel's actions more defensible and not that it makes the situation all the fucking worse. Like what the actual fuck?

"It's not a refugee camp! It's successful ethnic cleansing!"

26 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

And no, Israel does not need to do it this way. There are less bad options. Those options take more time. Those options may make the war longer or require more risk to soldiers or cost more money, but let's not pretend they do not exist. 

 

Yeah but people are gonna pretend that soldier's lives are more important even though the entire fucking point of a soldier is to put your life at risk.

I do hope this expanded definition of acceptable military targets, and of acceptable military operations, and of "human shield" now meaning the complete suspension of protection for civilians, gets consistently applied in the future even if say, someone were to blow up a bar the military frequents since that would seem to check all the same boxes as this strike on a refugee camp eg Military commander, military fighters, and nearby infrastructure that the military uses. But I've a feeling it won't be. Indeed I suspect many of you will object to the very idea even though at this point at a minimum you've made any city that hosts a military base an acceptable military target in totality.

6 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Apples and oranges mate. And intent does matter, not being able to carry out your goal is why there are crimes like attempted murder and various conspiracy charges.

FFS I didn't say intent didn't matter Tywin. You're smarter than this, don't bother responding until you remember that.

11 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

I was just making the point that no country would ever lend it's own resources to a group that actively said they want them dead. 

I care about a group's goals as much as their capabilities and that's been one of the truly strange things about these threads. Hamas wants to destroy Israel and kill every Jew, but they can't. Israel doesn't make the same claims about Palestinians, but could do it in a few hours. And yet somehow they're the ones that want to commit a genocide? That makes no sense.

IDK man, maybe we could look at their actions instead of just what they're saying? Or do you think North Korea is democratic and a republic? Like yes, they are also trying to commit genocide, the speed at which they are doing so is irrelevant. I'm Canadian, you're American, we both know that a country can be slowly committing genocide all the while pretending they're not and indeed are claiming thy are trying to help the people they are slowly wiping out.

9 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

The US absolutely would not have helped rebuild Germany if they didn't surrender and kept fighting. Idk what you're smoking, but pass it this way.

Okay, to be clear I was focusing on your "took ownership of what Nazis party did" part, kind of mentally glossed over that the fighting meant literally, because of course you're not going to rebuild when someone is actively fighting. Regardless, and to make my point clear. Germany wasn't rebuilt because the German's owned up to what the Nazis party did, making the German's own up to what the Nazis party did was part of rebuilding. To variable success and distinct differences between East and West Germany.

Quote

I'm not defending anything he says, but to compare a recent comment to decades worth of calling for all Jews to die is not exactly the same. 

You choose very odd areas to decide nuance is important. Though I guess you're consistent in not taking a given groups actually capability to carry out the threat into consideration. So Hamas and the Nazis are comparable because they have the same goal, even though Hamas has no actual hope of carrying that goal out and a fraction of a fraction of the powers, Israel however isn't like that because it's calls for genocide are "recent" (lolno) even though it absolutely has the power to carry out its threats (and has been, Israel has had a campaign of ethnic cleansing going on for decades, kind of irrelevant to me if they're not explicitly talking about the thing they're doing)

Just now, Bael's Bastard said:

Absolutely, and tokenizing a fringe of Holocaust survivors to justify comparing Jews to Nazis is fucking despicable.

Right, so you're opinion is worthless, noted.

30 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

No, they think the Nazis didn't go far enough. 

Can you go farther than extermination?

Quote

Yeah, because the German people took ownership for what the Nazi party did. I doubt the Allies would have rebuilt Germany if they kept fighting.

Since one of the biggest reasons Germany was rebuilt was to help fight the USSR, you're doubts are likely wrong. But like, yeah they did. At gunpoint. If you don't think the same couldn't be done in Gaza, then I don't know what to say because like, there's only a handful of reasons one could think that and none of them are good.

Quote

No, you are. Again, Hamas wants every Jew dead. Israeli has never said they want to kill every Palestinian in anyway that's remotely comparable. But you still feel the need to say up is down and black is white. 

PM Netanyahu has invoked the Palestinians as being like the Amalekites, for those who don't know according to scripture god order the Amalekites wiped our, man, woman, and child.

17 minutes ago, Bael's Bastard said:

You are engaging in literal antisemitic Holocaust inversion.

What about the holocaust survivor's comparing Israel to Nazi Germany, are they engaging antisemitic Holocaust inversion?

1 hour ago, kissdbyfire said:

The question then is, is what is happening in Gaza now an “appropriate use of military force according to the laws of armed conflict”? I don’t think it is, I think it’s excessive use of force (disproportionate). Also, it feels to me that if this is within the “laws of armed conflict”, then perhaps it shouldn’t be. And while I’m no expert, I have read/listened to several people who are and who have very different opinions on this. 

While the laws of war are pretty complex and endlessly debatable, in this case it's pretty clear cut. Want to get into the weeds? It's actually debatable whether Israel had the right to self defence in this case at all, because that right is typically afforded when talking about defending against another nation state, rules are different when it's occupier and occupee.

33 minutes ago, Bael's Bastard said:

Substitute Hamas with Nazis and you might begin to understand how absolute full of shit it is to say this to Jews.

Okay, but Hamas isn't the Nazis. They're not a fully independent nation with a powerful army, navy, and air force. They're a terrorist group operating in one of the worlds largest open air prisons that has no alternatives because Israel has worked very hard to prevent other alternatives.

ETA: Also like, once the Nazis where beaten Billions of dollars were poured into rebuilding Germany and making sure it could become a successful independent state once again, which seems pretty peace and reconciliation to me, but idk.

So apparently Israel destroyed the memorial to Shirin Abu Akleh, I was gonna say that jounralist they killed, but that wouldn't really narrow it down would it? If Israel wants the coverage about it to be nicer, maybe they should stop acting like the authoritarian villains in a dystopian video game?

https://www.tellerreport.com/news/2023-10-27-to-watch---israeli-occupation-forces-bulldoze-shirin-abu-akleh-street-and-its-monument-in-jenin.SJeP1BZKfa.html

Weird that we're treating Israel's action as the best course of action when we have 20 years of evidence in Afghanistan that this kind of thing doesn't work. Hamas has leadership and personnel outside of Gaza, there is no possible way this actually leads to the destruction of Hamas. It may in fact increase their power as desperate angry people join in the hopes of revenge. Unless you kill every possible recruit I guess.