Israel - Hamas War V

[Relic]

2 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

On day one people celebrated the attack in numerous major cities around the world and for days after.

And those people are fucking assholes, and never were on "your side" anyway. I'm not sure why you are bringing this up, since that didnt happen here and i was replying to a comment you made about "these threads". 

[SeanF]

3 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

I'd like to believe in the best of people so let's say lack of understanding/empathy.

On day one people celebrated the attack in numerous major cities around the world and for days after.

 

True.  My son in law is from Morocco, and was invited by friends and acquaintances to go on a demonstration in support of Hamas, as soon as the news of the attack came through.  He refused.

[polishgenius]

9 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

There needs to be some semblance of balance. 

 

 

I'm not really sure what it is you want people to do here tbh. People are debating and criticising Israel because Israel are the ones who are actively advancing the situation most of the last week and a bit. Hamas committed an atrocity but since then it's just been them maintaining their usual status quo. Which is still atrocities but... what is there to say? Apart from that debate in the middle about exactly how much can they be considered a legitimate government of a legitimate state, pretty much no-one thinks anything Hamas does is in any way justifiable. 

Whereas what Israel are and aren't justified in doing is an active debate around an active situation. 

 

I think it's also relevant that what Israel do or don't is perceived as something happening on our watch. Most people here (and on the Western internet in general) are from countries allied with, and often funding, Israel. Those governments are given the mandate to do so by, well, us. So if Israel commits war crimes it's seen as something being allowed to happen by governments representing us, and that gives an additional reason to react. I don't think many people here are from anywhere that might feel some guilt for funding or supporting Hamas. 

 

I do think in that respect a lot of the reaction online has been unreasonable and naive. Like I've seen Biden's wording and visit called everything from soft to 'genocide Joe' because he didn't tear into Israel, but it would be absolutely stupid for multiple reasons for him to do that. Making Netanyahu feel even more insecure wouldn't help this current situation at all, but beyond that, the president of the US in particular has to be really careful of saying things that might stoke further antisemitism. Like the protests that are going on around the world- yes, a lot of it comes from exactly the above feeling, but there is a huge risk of them being hijacked, or blended with, antisemitic ones. Waving the Palestinian flag isn't antisemitic but doing so while chanting 'from the river to the sea' is and I think there's a lot of people who don't necessarily understand the difference. 

 

In this situation admittedly there's no good answer, anything he says is going to have someone feeling hateful, but anything that makes anyone think that Israel isn't fully protected by the US would risk antisemites feeling justified and risk certain actors taking more radical steps. Yes, 'fully protected' and 'unconditionally supported in all actions' aren't the same thing, but there are times when trying to introduce that kind of nuance would just see it get flattened and 'public commentary by the US president on a visit to Israel during a war' has about as high a chance of that happening as anything. Now, do I hope/wish that behind the scenes Biden is making certain lines clear to Netanyahu? Sure. But I don't think anything good comes from him doing so publicly right now. 

[Liffguard]

38 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

There needs to be some semblance of balance. 

The scale of harm being inflicted isn't balanced, nor is the ability to weather and recover from that harm.

[Rippounet]

8 minutes ago, Bironic said:

Yes it's bad what Israel does but it's not as bad or worse than what hamas does... they do not intentionally target civilians, they merely don't care much about civilians... It's a false equivalency...

I think such subtelties might be lost on the civilians.

[JGP]

Just now, Liffguard said:

The scale of harm being inflicted isn't balanced, nor is the ability to weather and recover from that harm.

BuT tHaT's WaR 

 

[Pelosi shrugging and smiling on MSNBC a few nights ago]

[Craving Peaches]

7 minutes ago, JGP said:

BuT tHaT's WaR 

 

[Pelosi shrugging and smiling on MSNBC a few nights ago]

Every time civilians die:

• That's the reality of war
• It was Hamas' fault
• It was an accident
• It was anyone but us
• It was just these individuals, there is no institutional problem

Edited October 20, 2023 by Craving Peaches

[Bironic]

7 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

I think such subtelties might be lost on the civilians.

Yes they will be.. which is why i don't support israels actions, but i do not say they are the same as Hamas, because that's just false...

13 minutes ago, Craving Peaches said:

They do. They intentionally targeted Shireen Abu Akleh, for one.

I had to google her first, I stand corrected: in this case they have targeted a civilian! That is troubling and has to be condemned in the harshest manner.. I hope sincerely that her family gets justice even though I don't think they will...

Here comes the but: It's still not an official policy by Israel to kill civilians, which again is very different from Hamas...

Edited October 20, 2023 by Bironic

[Kalbear]

18 minutes ago, Bironic said:

 

Here comes the but: It's still not an official policy by Israel to kill civilians, which again is very different from Hamas...

Do you know that? 

Israel officials first denied Israel soldiers did it, then said the reporter was in the wrong place, then said it was an accident, then said and did nothing. If it is not the official policy why was no one found responsible?

[fionwe1987]

46 minutes ago, Bironic said:

I could totally agree with you if you would acknowledge that there is a difference between what Israel does (which is bad and counterproductive) and what Hamas does... Yes it's bad what Israel does but it's not as bad or worse than what hamas does... they do not intentionally target civilians, they merely don't care much about civilians... It's a false equivalency...

Ok, can we talk actual numbers? Or is this just "intentions count, results don't"?

Are you making the argument that stated intentions shouldn't be measured against effect achieved? To flip this around, if Hamas sprouted none of its antisemitism and genocidal language, would its actions in October 7th become somehow *better*?

46 minutes ago, Bironic said:

Don't know much about the indian government (but from what I heard about Modis past in regional government) maybe they are as bad as Terrorists...

Uh huh, and that's the exact way the Israeli government is as bad as terrorists. The two governments even collaborate closely on anti-terror strategy and training, and Israel sells weapons and technology to this government. 

If you do not see the similarities between the Indian right wing that wants a purely Hindu state and the Israeli right wing that wants a purely Jewish state, I don't know what to say to you. 

46 minutes ago, Bironic said:

That's exactly the kind of language that is not helping anyway... Yes Hamas might be horrible, it doesn't make them animals...(and as a side note animals should also be treated with respect)

And yet, apparently, this conversation is unbalanced. You realize why arguments that this thread is imbalanced against the Israelis sounds ridiculous, now?

[Bironic]

3 minutes ago, Kalnak the Magnificent said:

Do you know that? 

Israel officials first denied Israel soldiers did it, then said the reporter was in the wrong place, then said it was an accident, then said and did nothing. If it is not the official policy why was no one found responsible?

Well there are Kahanists and similiar groups in Israel that want some sort of theocratic greater Judea and would be perfectly fine with going full on genocide on the Palestinian civilians, but so far they are politically marginalized. But yes the extreme right (both religious and secular) has been on the rise in Israel for the past 30 years (as it has in many other countries). So there might be a point in the future where Hamas=Israel will be true. I do hope it doesn't come to that, even though I agree that the trend doesn't look good...

Now why have they not brought whoever ordered the kill and whoever shot her to justice? I see multiple explanations, that are not mutually exclusive to one another:

• Defending your in group
• Maybe the ones responsible have some leverage higher up the food chain
• not sufficent pressure from the West (and the rest of the world) onto the Israeli government
• Maybe the one ordering the kill was very high up the food chain
• Fear it might trigger antiisraeli outrage if they admit they did it
• Not being a member of the ICC
• Being pro military

Just the ones at the top of my head...

 

[Ran]

I can tell where people get their views on this all, because Shireen Abu Akeh's name cropped up all around the same time on the Internet.

It's clear bad training and discipline led to that particular crime,  and Israel should have held its soldiers to account for failing their rules of engagement instead of trying to cover it up in an attempt to save face. Lots of bad faith criticism of the IDF leads to the times when the criticism is warranted to be lumped in with the same by the leadership and they play CYA. It's a deeply unhealthy situation, it does Israel no favors, and the US at least has pressed Israel to review and tighten its rules of engagement because of things like this.

But as Bironic says, this stuff isn't policy. What benefit is there to Israel, policy-wise, to do this sort of thing? It just draws condemnation, and rightly so. So, there are in fact rules of engagement for IDF soldiers, and prosecution of soldiers who have violated them does and has happened... but not as often as they should, or, frankly, as harshly as they should (Elor Azaria, a blatant murderer given 14 months and a demotion for 'manslaughter').

The press is present around the IDF and Palestinian conflict all the time, and it's remarkable to think that despite war reporters covering one of the hottest long-running conflicts in modern history that more haven't been killed. But even so, too many have been killed by accidental fire, poor discipline, and/or failure to uphold rules of engagement.

[Kalbear]

8 minutes ago, Ran said:

But as Bironic says, this stuff isn't policy. What benefit is there to Israel, policy-wise, to do this sort of thing? It just draws condemnation, and rightly so. So, there are in fact rules of engagement for IDF soldiers, and prosecution of soldiers who have violated them does and has happened... but not as often as they should, or, frankly, as harshly as they should (Elor Azaria, a blatant murderer given 14 months and a demotion for 'manslaughter').

I think this is really splitting hairs. It is not official policy of Saudi Arabia to dissolve journalists in acid - you won't find that in thr bylaws anywhere - but it was clearly done at the command of officials and the perpetrators got nothing of note as a punishment. 

And if that sort of thing happens enough - where the laws get ignored and justice is almost never done - then that is the policy, official or otherwise. 

As to what is the benefit - thanks for that lede. You brought up before that Israel has no legal requirement to provide electricity to Gaza and have used that repeatedly as a shield, and to be clear I have no interest relitigating it. Instead I'll ask the other way: Israel has cut off electricity to all of Gaza. What is the benefit of it? What is the goal? 

And are they meeting that goal? 

Most of us seem to agree that Israel has a right to prosecute a war, and that includes using capabilities far in power over their opponents. But prosecuting war also means having goals for the war - tactical and strategic - as well as political and diplomatic components. 

So what benefit do they get from cutting off electricity? Have the rocket attacks stopped? Have the hostages been freed? Has Hamas been degraded to any degree? 

My point of this is to point out that some actions are not done for military benefit alone. The killing of a journalist was because they were pissed off; the lack of any accountability is because they do not value Palestinian lives, especially journalists. The value of cutting off electricity is almost nil militarily and has not stopped rockets firing (and why would it?) But it has value in showing Israelis that they can be brutal towards their enemies and are showing they're doing something. 

I said this repeatedly in the Ukraine threads about the supposed rationality of putin and how he would clearly not attack - not everyone uses the same measurements of success that you do. 

Sometimes the cruelty is the point. 

 

[Bironic]

52 minutes ago, fionwe1987 said:

Ok, can we talk actual numbers? Or is this just "intentions count, results don't"?

Are you making the argument that stated intentions shouldn't be measured against effect achieved? To flip this around, if Hamas sprouted none of its antisemitism and genocidal language, would its actions in October 7th become somehow *better*?

Uh huh, and that's the exact way the Israeli government is as bad as terrorists. The two governments even collaborate closely on anti-terror strategy and training, and Israel sells weapons and technology to this government. 

If you do not see the similarities between the Indian right wing that wants a purely Hindu state and the Israeli right wing that wants a purely Jewish state, I don't know what to say to you. 

And yet, apparently, this conversation is unbalanced. You realize why arguments that this thread is imbalanced against the Israelis sounds ridiculous, now?

You will not here from me that Israeli casualties are generally higher than palestinian casualties, because that's factually untrue... But I don't think it's a very helpful statistic to add the amount of people killed on a certain side (or the percentage or whatever) to say this is the side who you support...And it certainly doesn't help if we start some sort of race of who has killed more than the other...

For example in the Gulf war 1990-1991 the amount of people killed on the side of USA and its allies was far fewer than on the Iraqi side, but that doesn't make the US in regards to that particular situation as bad as Saddam Hussein(I am not saying US didn't do some horrible shit in the past or even during that war, they certainly did and still do). But having less casualties is just the nature of a war where one side has the latest military technology and the other doesn't...

No it wouldn't be better, because intentions count, so if your intentionally targeting civilians (and do that over and over again) your worse than the one who just doesn't care about "collateral damage"...

As I said before I don't know much about the Indian government aside from the fact that Modi and his bunch are clearly authoritarian Hindu Nationalists that will not shy away from intentionally conducting Pogroms against Muslims & Christians which makes them really bad but they do that on their own, Israel has no say in that(yes they sell weapons but so does Russia, France, USA etc)... And yes I do agree that the BJP and certain Right wing Israelis have a lot in common, but so far the Israeli have shied away from things such as pogroms etc. That might change in the future though, who knows... And I would be interested in a topic about India & South Asia and your opinions about it, since it seems that you know a lot about it, but maybe that's for a different topic?

I never said there isn't hyperbole on both sides, this topic seems to hit alot of people emotionally: maybe because they have friends or relatives in Israel/palestine maybe because they have a similar faith or language, or another reason which then seems to trigger certain comments that should not be posted and if it happens it should be told to the mods...

 

Edited October 20, 2023 by Bironic

[baxus]

2 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

Some criticisms are certainly warranted. The frustrating part is they're overwhelming against Israel with a casual Hamas is also bad when Hamas was the attacker knowingly using their own people as shields when the inevitable response came. The disproportionality of blame in these threads is chilling. 

I've said it before - Israel is a country with military, police, elected officials, courts of law etc. and need to be held to higher standards than what has in past repeatedly proven to be a terrorist organisation. If the bar for Israel drops to the level where we have it for Hamas, then we shouldn't consider Israel to be any better than Hamas. And there's no two ways about it, the bar has been dropping with all the atrocities Israel have been committing lately (stopping humanitarian aid, hitting churches that refugees were in etc.).

[Zorral]

Good. God (intentional usage).  Everything evil is still here.  Back to  'conversos'.

Four arrested in an anti-jihadist operation in Madrid, Barcelona and Granada
The operation, against “young Spanish converts”, occurs within the framework of the anti-terrorist alert reinforced by the war between Israel and Gaza and after the attacks in France and Belgium

https://elpais.com/espana/2023-10-20/la-policia-lanza-una-operacion-antiyihadista-con-cuatro-detenidos-en-distintos-puntos-de-espana.html

Quote

Agents from the General Information Commissariat of the National Police have launched this week an anti-jihadist operation in different parts of Spain that has resulted, for the moment, in four detainees in the towns of Huetor-Tajar (Granada), Cubelles (Barcelona) and Madrid, as confirmed by the Ministry of the Interior in a note. The operation against these young people, of whom two are Spanish converts and two of Maghreb origin, occurs days after the terrorist alert level 4 (out of five) has been reinforced, due to the war between Israel and Gaza and after the attacks in Belgium and France. The detainees are accused of self-indoctrination with terrorist purposes, indoctrination of third parties and glorification of terrorism. The operation remains open and is under summary secrecy. The judge of the National Court Santiago Pedraz has sent three of the detainees to prison and has released the fourth. ....

 

Edited October 20, 2023 by Zorral

[Craving Peaches]

Damning evidence of war crimes as Israeli attacks wipe out entire families in Gaza - Amnesty International

Edited October 20, 2023 by Craving Peaches
Removal of 'X' link

[Werthead]

The Washington Post has been tracking Israeli attacks. The majority are in the northern half of the Strip, particularly north of the wetlands which mark the evacuation zone. There have been attacks in the south (obviously), but the focus has been on the north, I assume on areas the Israelis will be moving into during their initial ground incursions. There's a heavy focus on the university in Gaza City, which Israel has said Hamas has been using as a staging ground for missile attacks and storage.

 

[Ran]

A possibly positive development: two American hostages have possibly been released "for humanitarian reasons", via Egypt. This, as there are reports that the US and others are asking Israel to put off the invasion until high-level talks conclude that are trying to get the rest of the hostages out. The IDF says they think most of the hostages are still alive, although bodies of some have been found around the borders of Gaza.

[Padraig]

 

  

On 10/19/2023 at 12:56 PM, Ran said:

1 million aren't. Of those, some 500,000 are adult men. Of those, 4-50,000 are Hamas militants. That leaves the other 450,000.

Look, I'm from a country that threw out the greatest power the world had ever seen, and am descended of people who resisted a revolutionary government and were brutalized and imprisoned, in one case for decades, because of that resistance. History is filled with revolution and rebellion, even in wartime.

I know this is ages ago now.  But wow.  Attacking Gazans for not dying in large numbers trying to remove Hamas?

Quote

I don't know, how do rebellions ever start? Someone stands up and says, "No more."

This is obviously not the first time this has ever been mentioned on the internet.  It is nearly always used as a way to condemn the civilians of Gaza and to implicitly endorse any suffering they experience.  "They deserve it".

Maybe that is not meant but there is no attempt in putting what is stated in any sort of defensible context.  I'm aghast.  The fact that something that happened 250 years ago is used to justify this position is hilariously bad.

This is wrong in many other ways as well but I wouldn't belabour things.