There are two main ways in which people can try to further a political position they’ve taken - they can either argue for the position or they can attempt to discredit those who argue against it.
If the position they’re trying to further is so illogical or immoral that they can’t frame any arguments in its favor, then attempting to discredit its opponents is the only thing they have left.
Pretty disgusting. More people should be made aware of these tactics because it will leave a bad taste in anyone’s mouth in an age of privacy concerns and surveillance.
Biden has paused and threatened to stop weapons shipments, but those only ever included offensive weapons.
They have a defensive anti-rocket system that requires regular shipments from the US. Biden never threatened to cut those supplies off, nor has he threatened to cut off any of the other aid they receive.
Stopping all weapons shipments would change their behavior. Better thing to try instead.
I’m not so sure. The purpose of the defensive weaponry is, well, defensive. Stopping civilian deaths.
With how things are now, I think it would only make things worse. Netanyahu isn’t going to pull back if the US stops giving defensive aid. And when civilians inevitably die, he’ll either shrug, or use it as further justification to continue.
In essence, it won’t have any effect. I think the best thing to do would be supporting Netanyahu’s opposition to launch a coup, with our support conditional on them withdrawing completely from Gaza and letting Palestinians form their own state.
Either way, there won’t be any progress until Netanyahu is out.
The country exists because of us support. All of their neighbors hate them. Cutting off all military aid would be crippling, not something that could be ignored.
The us has a ton of leverage without a coup or invasion. Better to start with that.
Netanyahu would not care. And a lot of their neighbors are on much friendlier terms with them than before even. Jordan helped with stopping the Iranian counterattack, and I believe a few other nearby countries opened their airspaces to the US and company as well.
In terms of actual hate, it’s really just Iran and Iranian linked militias. If the Iranian people successfully overthrew their theocracy, most of the threats would end to Israel. There’s been considerable unrest and protest in Iran lately.
The way I see it, it’s a win win opportunity. Help the Iranians retake control of their country, help Netanyahu’s opposition take control and make it conditional on them behaving. It should make the region significantly calmer and allow us to stop sending defense to Israel and instead rebuild Gaza.
I drove past some asshole flying an Israeli flag outside their house. I’m in Indiana and I’m one of the only Jews in this town, so I doubt whoever did it was Jewish and I’m sorry they didn’t see me giving them the finger when I drove by.
Then she chanted, "When people are occupied, resistance is justified" which in context is clearly in defense of October 7th, despite her denial.
Let's remember that the purpose of this protest was to stop Israel from defending themselves against their explicitly genocidal attackers via political pressure. Stopping Israel before they depose Hamas keeps Hamas in power.
Although she absolutely has the right to take controversial positions and peacefully protest, freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequence. There is no right to anonymity when publicly protesting.
Sadly, there are no magical munitions that don't cause collateral damage, nor is Israel infallible. They still have a right to self-defense and to eliminate the threat against them.
Do Palestinians have a right to self defense or just Israelis? Because there’s a whole lot of settler attacks in the West Bank and mass graves full of kids in Gaza.
I’m not defending Hamas, who are just as shitty as the settler parties but you might logically expect violent resistance if you put a people under your boot for decades.
How exactly are they defending themselves by bombing areas full of children?
If your answer is “Hamas is there,” well they were somehow able to raid a hospital without killing everyone inside it and still get a whole bunch of Hamas people, so maybe they should do that instead of dropping bombs on children.
If your answer is “Hamas is there,” well they were somehow able to raid a hospital without killing everyone inside it and still get a whole bunch of Hamas people, so maybe they should do that instead of dropping bombs on children.
As you acknowledge, they are targeting Hamas, who often attacks them while hiding in areas full of children. Going in without air support into a well prepared guerilla fighter's den is likely to cause a lot of casualties. Even though that is acceptable every now and then like in the hospital that does not imply that's a viable strategy for all of Gaza.
Hamas counts on this "think of the children!" and the bad PR it causes, that's why they do this. They also want Israel's hands to be bound so they can do Oct 7 over and over again.
The right move is to minimize civilian casualties but not stop until the job is done, and that's exactly what I believe Israel is doing.
According to a New York Times report, "Hamas has long been accused of using civilians as human shields and positioning underground bunkers, weapon depots and rocket launchers under or near schools, mosques and hospitals."[63]
DW military analyst Frank Ledwidge has said that "it's been described... as 'common knowledge' that many of the headquarters [of Hamas] are located under hospitals... [with] entries and exits in places like mosques or schools... [or even] UN facilities... that's why we've seen... so many non-combatant casualties so far".[64]
John Spencer has said that "[Hamas has] built many of their tunnel entrances and exits and passageway underneath protected sites like hospitals, schools, mosques, because it restricts the use of force that the IDF can take without going through the... laws of war calculation.[65]
According to Daphne Richemond-Barak, associate professor of counter-terrorism at Reichman University and author of the 2017 book Underground Warfare, Hamas militants operate under Al-Shifa Hospital gain "the highest level of protection available under the laws of war", as well as a "unique opportunity to operate far from surveillance drones, GPS, and other intelligence-gathering technology". She added that "in Gaza, tunnels are dug in civilian homes, pass under entire neighbourhoods, and lead into populated areas inside Israel... [which] enables Hamas to conceal entry and exit points, and facilitates undetected movement and activity."[66]
Avi Issacharoff has said that Hamas militants are "under the houses and neighborhoods of Gaza City, hoping that Israel won't attack them because they're hiding underneath human shields, and that if Israel will attack those neighborhoods, it'll kill many civilians, and the whole world is going to accuse Israel for war crimes". "The sad thing about all this", Issacharoff said, "is [that] Hamas doesn't care about their own people" and aims "not only to kill Israelis but for as many Palestinian civilians [casualties as well]".[67]
It's almost like starting a war when most of your population is children, then hiding among civilians and under schools endangers them. But I guess that's Israel's fault. Why can't they just send in soldiers without air support? They make easier targets that way.
If you’re going to claim that Israel is killing children because Hamas is hiding in schools and there aren’t schools, that’s a really silly claim.
And if there were schools, you’re claiming that Israel needs to bomb schools filled with children in self-defense. I don’t know that you’re going to find too many people sympathetic to that argument.
I sincerely hope you aren’t a parent if you feel children are so disposable.
Also, if you have to kill children in the name of self-defense, maybe you don’t have anything worth defending.
I'm saying using such despicable tactics is not a free genocide without reprisal card, nor should it confer a tactical advantage as that just means more of this in the future.
Collateral damage is not murder. I feel like a parrot having to refute all these same inaccurate characterizations over and over again. Calling it murder doesn't make it so.
Good thing you're not in charge of any defense forces. If your opponents strapped their own children to tanks I suppose you'd just let them roll in and take over.
If your opponents strapped their own children to tanks I suppose you’d just let them roll in and take over.
You know, I was going to answer the rest substantively, but this is the most ludicrous thing I’ve heard in quite some time. You are not here in good faith.
It’s not a genocide because of collateral damage. It’s a genocide because they used wholly inappropriate 2000 lbs bombs on civilian targets, used starvation as a tactic, refused to let meaningful amounts of humanitarian aid in, bombed schools and hospitals, and used genocidal language that demonstrates intent.
Go ahead and defend Itamar Ben-Gvir if you want but he’s a Kahanist. Go ahead and defend Netanyahu but he’s the one who is a disgrace to Judaism and arguably the worst leader of a major power in my lifetime. War crimes have happened. Mass graves exist and torture prisons exist. Genocide requires intent and I’d argue there’s been dozens of statements by members of Israel’s cabinet that constitute a very strong case.
I am neither defending Ben-Gvir nor Netanyahu, they are both assholes and should be removed from power. What I'm defending is Israel's right to self-defense. (I'm not your strawman, stick to things I actually wrote, please.)
The alternative to using bombs is sending in troops without air support to a well-prepared guerilla den, suggesting Israel should sacrifice its own to protect civilians of a hostile nation, 72% of whom support the genocidal regime who attacked them.
The pro-pali crowd certainly likes to make this sound like they are starving out Gaza in a medieval siege but that isn't reality.
Said schools and hospitals were used as military assets by Hamas, making them into legal targets.
I read the statements SA submitted to the IJC, the most egregious quotes were from people who are not involved with running the IDF and waging this war (like Judeofascist Ben-Gvir and Amichai Eliyahu) and I do not believe they represent Israel as a whole, and as such they do not meet the standards for genocide. In fact Amichai got reprimanded for his statements. Many of the other quotes were taken out of context. (I did a deep dive on every quote cited a while back, which I would be happy to post here if you're interested.)
If torture prisons exist that's a good reason to prosecute Ben-Gvir of war crimes if such orders came from on high, and also any guards who break the law without CO approval. If war crimes have happened I approve of prosecuting everyone responsible. However, I see a lot of people accusing Israel of war crimes inappropriately.
At the very least, we can agree that this is not a normal war and both Hamas and Israeli actions require an investigation. Hamas, being a terrorist group and not a state actor, should be treated as a terrorist group. They don’t represent Palestine at the UN and no one in their right mind recognizes them as anything other than a stain upon the world.
Israel (and Fatah) have a different level of responsibility. I understand that October 7th was despicable. I hope Hamas disappears. But Israel, if it wants to be in the community of nations, has to conduct war in accordance with the laws of war. And I don’t think they have.
I would obviously say the same about the Rohingya genocide and the unfolding one in Darfur. Never again means never again. I’ve been to the genocide museum in DC and concentration camps in Europe but also the Rwandan genocide memorial and others. I think what we’re seeing is a genocide. Nothing is clear in the fog of war so it won’t be clear today or tomorrow but the UN is not wrong for investigating.
Israel crossed the line from self defense into genocide when they started ruthlessly executing innocent civilians and aid workers. You cannot justify their bullshit.
Do you want to discuss the over 500 incitements of genocide? When it comes to intent, Israel’s intent has been documented more than most
Since the commencement of our investigative efforts on October 7th, 2023, Law for Palestine has meticulously amassed a compelling body of evidence exposing the proliferation of incitement to violence and genocidal intent perpetrated by Israeli officials and public figures, against Palestinians. Our documentation encompasses over 500 incitements of violence and genocidal incitement, appearing in the forms of social media posts, television interviews, and official statements from Israeli politicians, army personnel, journalists, and other influential personalities.
Hi and apologies for the late reply - /c/world@lemmy.world moderator @jordanlund removed my comment and gave me a temporary ban for the comment you replied to citing that it was “Pro-Israel propaganda”.
First off, thank you for posting this link - and no, I’m not interested in discussing them. My point was that users should be held to a higher standard when posting as moderators than the rest of us.
I will however give a comment on the contents of the cited webpage. I read through the statements from decision makers (These seemed most relevant), and they did (in my personal view) not amount to intent. However, as law4palestine highlights:
The ultimate adjudication of this matter is contingent upon the determination of a competent court.
Personally, I want to see a full investigation by the ICJ conducted, and if they do end up with an indictment, those responsible brought to justice.
I don’t understand how someone can read 22 incitements to genocide by the Minister of Defense, Prime Minister, and President of Israel on top of the hundreds of other incitements by public officials, Knesset members, military personnel, and law enforcement; only to conclude that it does not amount to intent. That doesn’t make sense to me. That’s on top of the ongoing military operations that fit the description of genocide and go against the ICJs orders to prevent a plausible genocide.
Intent is a critical part of the ICJ case, the court case would not be ongoing if the evidence was not plentiful and credible. The people of Gaza cannot wait years for a verdict.
I agree with your last paragraph, for the war crimes Hamas has committed too, after an end to the apartheid.
Let’s remember that the purpose of this protest was to stop Israel from defending themselves against their explicitly genocidal attackers via political pressure.
Israel is well past the stage where it defends itself against the attack. They could very well stop their operations right this moment and no further harm would come to them for the foreseeable future. What they are doing now is a deliberate attack to cleanse Gaza of everything and everyone they consider anti-Israeli.
Stopping Israel before they depose Hamas keeps Hamas in power.
How long ago has the West pulled out of Afghanistan? Apparently it’s long enough that people have forgotten what an utter failure the whole thing was and why. One doesn’t create a lasting peace by steamrolling a place and shoot a bunch of people. Instead Israel is breeding the next generation of Hamas terrorist right now.
Israel is well past the stage where it defends itself against the attack. They could very well stop their operations right this moment and no further harm would come to them for the foreseeable future. What they are doing now is a deliberate attack to cleanse Gaza of everything and everyone they consider anti-Israeli.
On what basis do you make this claim? I read credible citations.
Hamas has stated that they intend to do Oct 7 attacks over and over again. Stopping now while they are still in power and still have significant military assets just gives them a chance to rebuild, regroup, and carry out their stated genocidal intentions. Perhaps not tomorrow, but eventually.
Israel has cleared most of the surface of Gaza, once they clear Rafah, the last place that has not been purged of Hamas, I suspect that will be the end of this campaign. Stopping them before they completely excise this tumor ensures metastasis.
How long ago has the West pulled out of Afghanistan? Apparently it’s long enough that people have forgotten what an utter failure the whole thing was and why. One doesn’t create a lasting peace by steamrolling a place and shoot a bunch of people. Instead Israel is breeding the next generation of Hamas terrorist right now.
Afghanistan isn't really comparable nor are other western military adventurism defeats. Israel can't leave and go somewhere else, this is a battle for safety in their home country. It is existential. As such, I highly doubt Israel will completely withdraw like they did in 2005, which arguably directly led to Oct 7. Gaza will probably be occupied until it stops choosing violence.
I'm sure animosity will remain, but letting Hamas take over again and indoctrinate children to make another generation of intifada supporters will breed the next generation of Hamas fighters far more surely than Israel successfully defending itself will. For them, this is about safety, and safety is non-negotiable.
Cool, cool. Blocked. Looking at your comment history, nothing of value was lost.
Guess I'm a Zionist because I think Israel shouldn't be destroyed and has a right to defend itself. Keep on simping for a regime that would throw us off buildings or in prison, brilliant one. You betray every LGBT person; I'm sure Hamas appreciates your tacit support.
“In international law, the right to resist is closely related to the principle of self-determination. It is widely recognized that a right to self-determination arises in situations of colonial domination, foreign occupation, and racist regimes that deny a segment of the population political participation.”
I really hate how many people on this site really push to equate what amounts to ethnic cleansing as dEFeNdIng ThEmSeLvEs. Like the thousands upon thousands of women and children they murdered were all fucking Hamas.
Israel has murdered at least 33,000 Palestinians, over 2/3 being civilians by their own count.
Collateral damage is not murder, nor are successful attacks against Hamas militants.
It's interesting you cite that figure as evidence of Israel's recklessness when it's actually an astonishing accomplishment that they got the civilian casualty ratio so low, especially considering Hamas hides among civilians in densely populated areas. The commonly cited average in modern war is ~90% civilian casualties. This seems to be evidence that the great lengths they go to to reduce civilian casualties are paying off, not evidence they are being reckless when it comes to civilians. You'd never know it from the protesters, or comments like yours though.
Hamas has not surrendered nor have they been deposed. That's when attacks would stop being self-defense.
Given my own experience and information, I find it a lot more appropriate to fight back against Hamas, the oppressive regime that instigated this war, hides among civilians to maximize casualties, and has refused to surrender to end the war, which they could do at any time. I believe they are the primary cause of all of this death and destruction and suffering, not Israel defending itself.
Would I feel the same way were I in their shoes? Hard to say.
You dodged the question. When the IDF is attacking and murdering Palestinians, do those Palestinians have a right to take up arms and fight back? It’s a simple yes or no question.
Some questions cannot be fairly answered with a simple yes or no, like, "Have you stopped beating your wife?"
There's a lot of bias packed into your question. If the IDF is in fact MURDERING, as in, illegally killing people, yes they do. However, if the IDF is acting within the law they absolutely do not. Either way, I'd say it's probably a bad move to do so and likely to get one shot.
I'm talking about right now. For example, for the people in Rafah. Do the Palestinians in Rafah have the right to fight back against the IDF that is shelling them and attacking their homes with tanks?
Then they are lying. I encourage you to watch the Oct 7 attack footage, (Content warning: violence, cruelty, death,) if you have the stomach for it, which clearly disproves any such claims. This is not collateral damage. They target civilians. Full stop.
Please do explain how murdering thousands of children is self-defense against Hamas. Were they strapping suicide vests to the babies and letting them crawl over to IDF troops?
Are you honestly ignoring the statistical evidence I provided that clearly shows it is? Were this war being waged by any other nation in the world you could expect the civilian casualties to be much higher.
A google search for this 20-1 claim yields no results. Credible citation?
If they did far better than their maximum acceptable casualties, and better than the average casualties under such conditions, isn't that a good thing that should be celebrated?
Genocide, the crime, is a claim of intent and not casualty numbers. Israel says they intend to destroy Hamas, which is not a protected group under genocide statutes. Hamas says they intend to destroy Jews/Israel/Israelis, which are protected groups under genocide statutes. There is only one explicitly genocidal party in this conflict, and it's not Israel. I support them because I oppose the genocidal.
Fuck you.
Childish insults? It's sad you can't respectfully disagree and support your position like an adult.
I'm here in good faith, and I would appreciate the same without such jabs. And I will also block you because you clearly aren't.
Thanks. It's almost as if google doesn't show the same results to everyone, especially in different countries. I have read about their AI but did not recall its code name, nor do I recall that specific ratio. I'll read up.
It certainly doesn’t. Google (and most other search engines) modifies your search results based on account history (if you are logged in), fingerprinting of your browser, cookies (including 3rd party) as well as the general location of your IP address. The last part you can try out for yourself with a VPN -you’ll get different results for the same search query from different countries.
This is usually why I prefer direct links to source my statements.
Can only be described as psychopathic response disguised as intellectual arguments. There aren’t enough dead babies, women and children that will move this person so long as they’re Palestinian.
People often bring this up without noting that such a ratio would not be unusual in urban warfare against a well-prepared enemy even when the attacking army is doing what it reasonably can to reduce civilian casualties. Compare it to Mariupol, an example of what happens of the attacking army is unconcerned about civilian casualties: 25/26 of Ukrainians killed were civilians according to Ukrainian estimates. (8/9 were civilians if we use the Ukrainian numbers for how many of their soldiers were killed but the more conservative Human Rights Watch numbers for civilian deaths.)
If you trust the casualty numbers that the UN Is using, then they imply approximately 3.7 civilians killed for every combatant (with the assumptions that children make up half the population and that children are never combatants). I don’t trust those numbers but I admit that if I did, I would think they didn’t look good for Israel. I suppose we’ll have a better idea of what the truth is years from now when historians reach a consensus, but until then I’m going to reluctantly trust Biden’s judgement because the US government probably has secret information unavailable to the public. (Biden is biased by his need to be re-elected, but I don’t get reports from the CIA so that’s the best I can do.)
As for justification: Israel should make reasonable efforts to minimize civilian casualties while accomplishing its legitimate military objectives, but Israel should not sacrifice its ability to accomplish those objectives in order to protect civilians. In other words, Hamas doesn’t get to hold Palestinian civilians as hostages against Israel. If they try, then they are to blame for the resulting civilian casualties. The alternative is simply unworkable in practice, because the ability of Hamas to put Palestinian civilians at risk is almost total.
What is the maximum number of children that it acceptable for Israel to kill in order to accomplish its objectives? Is there no ceiling? Any number of children is acceptable as long as Hamas is wiped out?
If you present me with a trolley problem in which the only way to destroy Hamas also kills a million children, I won’t know what the right answer is. I suppose it would depend on what would happen to Israel if Hamas wasn’t destroyed.
However, the moral calculus for nations is not the same as it is for individuals. The standard established the last time the Western world fought a war it took seriously does seem to be “as many as it takes” and I suspect that this would still be the standard if such a war happened again. (All those nuclear missiles we have ready aren’t precise weapons…) In that context, demanding that Israel should show restraint that other countries haven’t and wouldn’t seems like hypocrisy.
It’s easy to act self-righteous when that has no consequences, but in practice most people on this planet live in countries (including democratic countries) that probably would actually kill the children in an analogous scenario.
Okay? But this was about you, not the governments that run those countries. You said you wouldn’t know what the right answer is.
The right answer is obviously don’t kill a million children and the fact that you don’t realize that it’s obvious is highly disturbing to say the least.
Add comment