What about a cease-fire's particularly pro-hamas? Cease-fire means both directions.
A ceasefire where Hamas gets to keep their hostages is a huge Hamas victory. Advocating for something which gives Hamas a huge victory will be interpreted by some as support for Hamas.
These demonstrations are full of Palestinian flags, without an Israeli one in sight. It's hard to argue against them being partisan
If the goal is not to harm your own hostages, you wouldn't be using bombs, which is real using very heavily right now. It makes a literally no sense.
I don't understand how your comment relates to mine. Do you believe that because I consider a cessation of hostilities where Hamas keeps their hostages a victory for Hamas, that I mean to say that rescuing hostages is the scope of Israel's campaign?
It clearly isn't. Israel intends to destroy Hamas and are appallingly callous about the collateral damage they cause in the process
What's the last cease fire that wasn't broken by regular rocket fire from Gaza?
The Hamas active members can have time to hide and reset for another attack if there is a cease fire. They'll refortify the hospitals and schools they use to hide, as well as gather civilans for shields. They can set up booby traps for a ground invasion into Gaza.
I’m sure they’ve already done all that considering they were the ones that initiated this conflict. They had to have known a ground invasion was likely after attacking Israel.
They’ve been mostly locked in place since 8th October. There’s no way for them to regroup and refortify with Israel dropping bombs on anything which looks like a terrorist. A ceasefire would let them regroup in civilian buildings, which I think we all want to avoid. They have to qualms with using children as human shields, so we need to keep the terrorists pinned down and get away from those children.
Well then, best just carpet bomb all of gaza then right?
How bad do you think Israel is at carpet bombing? Honestly, multiple weeks of carpet bombing, by any modern estimate, should dismantle all of Gaza. That very demonstrably has not happened.
So are they really, really bad at it or are they not attempting it?
Have you not seen the satellite images?
Yes, of course I have. I am aware of what wars do.
Then you would see the absurdity of your statement.
I think you may want to investigate what a modern "carpet bombing" campaign can do, because it's at least an order of magnitude more destructive.
Ok so the issue is semantics? Ok fine over 6000 bombs dropped in a tiny area. What gaza is 365 sqaure km, most of the bombs are in the north so over 6k bombs in an area of 180 Square km? Obviously ignoring the open spaces so what is the threshold of acceptability for you?
There were more than that many rockets launched into Israel in the same period. Should responses not be proportionate?
I've already stated multiple times that Israel is bungling the humanitarian aspect of this and should be held accountable for that.
That doesn't make it genocide, or even disproportionate, by any stretch of the imagination. It's most assuredly not "carpet bombing."
There is no country on the planet that would not respond similarly.
Is it a shitty situation? Hell yeah. Are the causes of this long and varied? Sure. Is this specific war uniquely bad? No. It's pretty run-of-the-mill. War is just a terrible thing. This is a tragedy, and there's no need to make it seem worse than it is because of politics.
So if hamas manages to get more powerful weapons, it's justifiable for them to hit back israel? What israel is doing will empower hamas, there will be more and deadlier attacks by them in the future. A saying comes to mind. Bombing for peace is like fucking for virginity.
So if hamas manages to get more powerful weapons, it’s justifiable for them to hit back israel?
This is essentially Israel's Cassus Belli for obliterating Hamas. Whether you agree with Israel here or not, Hamas as it stands will cease to exist. They have no chance of holding ground and Israel has made no bones about their willingness to engage in tunnel-fighting.
It's a mistake to think this isn't a 9/11 style realignment. Everyone's concerns here should be on the treatment of Gazans in a post-Hamas world.
From a pure realpolitik sort of reasoning, Israel's lack of simultaneous humanitarian commitment hurts them here. I disagree with some of their choices on moral lines, but even Kissinger would disagree with their moves (though for different reasons).
No one is above criticism, but reality is going to happen. At this point, only the future really matters.
It's easy to paint me as callous here but I think taking the easy road out in this conversation ignores the reality of the situation, and valid discussions that could be had, over insipid political slogans.
Remeber how isis and alqueda were destroyed after the us bombed the shit out of them? Neither do I.
What you want to do is drive hamas out and destroy and fill all the tunnels they made. Then when you start letting people.back in you try and filter out any hamas or pro hamas people. It be kinda like of the usa had a working southern border... or like how the usa and Canada birder works
Oh, I'm sure the goddamn million Palestinians who have just been kicked out of their homes and seen it flattened to the ground will not have any particular ill will against Israel. All of them will be perfectly subservient saints who will offer the other cheek when Israel keeps pouring out settlements in their backyards.
As opposed to the Palestinians who just attacked them ?
What do you think the down side is for the Israelis? They can flatten Gaza and destroy hamas arsenals and under ground network and kill a bunch of them setting back any attacks by years or decades.
Or in your mind they can just not do anything and keep getting attacked. Then each time they do nothing , hamas will get bolder and create larger attacks and take more hostages.
Terrorists come kill your family. You call the police, and someone replies "there's been enough violence." Meanwhile the terrorists continue to advocate for killing your extended family as well as numerous other families, and you know these threats are credible because they continue trying
How sensible is that, to you?
So this is definitely justifying:
expelling 1.5Mln from their homes
carpet bombing residential neighbourhoods
restricting the access to clean drinking water, electricity, food and fuel for the general population
preventing people fleeing the war zone
Blocking humanitarian aid to enter
bombing areas that they told the civilian population is safe
preventing humanitarian aid to enter the enclave
Cutting the access to the internet and telephone, so people are not even able to call an ambulance or check how their loved ones are fairing.
While actively refusing to admit that with their actions they have caused a humanitarian catastrophe, despite what UN, Red Crescent and I don't know how many more international agencies are saying.
Refusing to even call for a humanitarian pause to let some needed aid enter the enclave
while killing 10 times more civilians, babies, kids and women and causing immensely more suffering for the innocents.
You can't be a genius to see that one evil doesn't give you the right or the moral high ground to commit even greater evil.
preventing humanitarian aid to enter the enclave
Demonstrably not happening, as there are aid convoys in south gaza right now.
preventing humanitarian aid to enter the enclave
I think this is really shitty of Egypt, Jordan, etc to do, yes. Israel and the US tried to get them to take refugees. Took forever to even get them to send aid.
The rest is pretty typical of urban combat, so no, not genocide. If you want civilians to not die in an urban warzone, you ask them to leave the warzone. Urban fighting is ludicrously dangerous.
They let a token number of trucks in to give them a talking point... just like you used it now.
70 trucks were let in since October 7th. The UNRWA had something like 200-500 trucks going in daily before the war...
So normally there would have been 11,000 truck deliveries for humanitarian aid in this window, now there are only 70.. 0.6% of need is satisfied, prewar need at that....
All to give you a talking point.
Are you kidding. How many trucks have been allowed. Do you think they are enough?!? We are talking about 2.5 Mln people.
You are writing all this from the comfort of your own house, people there don't have a roof over their heads. You can't even fathom what conditions they are living in. Are they all deserve to suffer?
How many more civilians need to die to condemn Israel? 10K, 20K, 50K, 1M?
How many trucks have been allowed.
It's weird you think Israel is the cause here
Are they all deserve to suffer?
I would prefer none of this happen, but Hamas does not value human life. It's truly tragic.
I find it very strange that your inference is that I don't care.
I would also leave this here:
Karim Khan said that impeding aid deliveries for Gaza could constitute a war crime and that there must be an effort by Israel to ensure vital supplies are allowed in.
Prior to this, some 500 trucks carrying aid and other goods had entered the territory every day.
So to put things into perspective, for 3 straight weeks only 117 trucks carrying humanitarian aid entered the enclave.
A division of the Israeli military responsible to overseeing civilian affairs in Gaza (COGAT) said this morning that it would allow increased supplies through the Rafah crossing in the coming days.
Not to mention that the same officials are constantly trying to downplay how grave the situation there is. And today's looting of humanitarian supplies only comes to prove that people there are really desperate!
The IDF killed its own citizens on October 7th. This is a statement of fact backed by survivors. So whoever deleted my comment stop censoring the truth please
What about a cease-fire's particularly pro-hamas? Cease-fire means both directions.
A ceasefire where Hamas gets to keep their hostages is a huge Hamas victory. Advocating for something which gives Hamas a huge victory will be interpreted by some as support for Hamas.
These demonstrations are full of Palestinian flags, without an Israeli one in sight. It's hard to argue against them being partisan
If the goal is not to harm your own hostages, you wouldn't be using bombs, which is real using very heavily right now. It makes a literally no sense.
I don't understand how your comment relates to mine. Do you believe that because I consider a cessation of hostilities where Hamas keeps their hostages a victory for Hamas, that I mean to say that rescuing hostages is the scope of Israel's campaign?
It clearly isn't. Israel intends to destroy Hamas and are appallingly callous about the collateral damage they cause in the process
What's the last cease fire that wasn't broken by regular rocket fire from Gaza?
The Hamas active members can have time to hide and reset for another attack if there is a cease fire. They'll refortify the hospitals and schools they use to hide, as well as gather civilans for shields. They can set up booby traps for a ground invasion into Gaza.
I’m sure they’ve already done all that considering they were the ones that initiated this conflict. They had to have known a ground invasion was likely after attacking Israel.
They’ve been mostly locked in place since 8th October. There’s no way for them to regroup and refortify with Israel dropping bombs on anything which looks like a terrorist. A ceasefire would let them regroup in civilian buildings, which I think we all want to avoid. They have to qualms with using children as human shields, so we need to keep the terrorists pinned down and get away from those children.
Well then, best just carpet bomb all of gaza then right?
How bad do you think Israel is at carpet bombing? Honestly, multiple weeks of carpet bombing, by any modern estimate, should dismantle all of Gaza. That very demonstrably has not happened.
So are they really, really bad at it or are they not attempting it?
Have you not seen the satellite images?
Yes, of course I have. I am aware of what wars do.
Then you would see the absurdity of your statement.
I think you may want to investigate what a modern "carpet bombing" campaign can do, because it's at least an order of magnitude more destructive.
Ok so the issue is semantics? Ok fine over 6000 bombs dropped in a tiny area. What gaza is 365 sqaure km, most of the bombs are in the north so over 6k bombs in an area of 180 Square km? Obviously ignoring the open spaces so what is the threshold of acceptability for you?
There were more than that many rockets launched into Israel in the same period. Should responses not be proportionate?
I've already stated multiple times that Israel is bungling the humanitarian aspect of this and should be held accountable for that.
That doesn't make it genocide, or even disproportionate, by any stretch of the imagination. It's most assuredly not "carpet bombing."
There is no country on the planet that would not respond similarly.
Is it a shitty situation? Hell yeah. Are the causes of this long and varied? Sure. Is this specific war uniquely bad? No. It's pretty run-of-the-mill. War is just a terrible thing. This is a tragedy, and there's no need to make it seem worse than it is because of politics.
So if hamas manages to get more powerful weapons, it's justifiable for them to hit back israel? What israel is doing will empower hamas, there will be more and deadlier attacks by them in the future. A saying comes to mind. Bombing for peace is like fucking for virginity.
This is essentially Israel's Cassus Belli for obliterating Hamas. Whether you agree with Israel here or not, Hamas as it stands will cease to exist. They have no chance of holding ground and Israel has made no bones about their willingness to engage in tunnel-fighting.
It's a mistake to think this isn't a 9/11 style realignment. Everyone's concerns here should be on the treatment of Gazans in a post-Hamas world.
From a pure realpolitik sort of reasoning, Israel's lack of simultaneous humanitarian commitment hurts them here. I disagree with some of their choices on moral lines, but even Kissinger would disagree with their moves (though for different reasons).
No one is above criticism, but reality is going to happen. At this point, only the future really matters.
It's easy to paint me as callous here but I think taking the easy road out in this conversation ignores the reality of the situation, and valid discussions that could be had, over insipid political slogans.
Remeber how isis and alqueda were destroyed after the us bombed the shit out of them? Neither do I.
Please re-read my comment lmao. :p
What you want to do is drive hamas out and destroy and fill all the tunnels they made. Then when you start letting people.back in you try and filter out any hamas or pro hamas people. It be kinda like of the usa had a working southern border... or like how the usa and Canada birder works
Oh, I'm sure the goddamn million Palestinians who have just been kicked out of their homes and seen it flattened to the ground will not have any particular ill will against Israel. All of them will be perfectly subservient saints who will offer the other cheek when Israel keeps pouring out settlements in their backyards.
As opposed to the Palestinians who just attacked them ?
What do you think the down side is for the Israelis? They can flatten Gaza and destroy hamas arsenals and under ground network and kill a bunch of them setting back any attacks by years or decades.
Or in your mind they can just not do anything and keep getting attacked. Then each time they do nothing , hamas will get bolder and create larger attacks and take more hostages.
Terrorists come kill your family. You call the police, and someone replies "there's been enough violence." Meanwhile the terrorists continue to advocate for killing your extended family as well as numerous other families, and you know these threats are credible because they continue trying
How sensible is that, to you?
So this is definitely justifying:
while killing 10 times more civilians, babies, kids and women and causing immensely more suffering for the innocents.
You can't be a genius to see that one evil doesn't give you the right or the moral high ground to commit even greater evil.
Demonstrably not happening, as there are aid convoys in south gaza right now.
I think this is really shitty of Egypt, Jordan, etc to do, yes. Israel and the US tried to get them to take refugees. Took forever to even get them to send aid.
The rest is pretty typical of urban combat, so no, not genocide. If you want civilians to not die in an urban warzone, you ask them to leave the warzone. Urban fighting is ludicrously dangerous.
They let a token number of trucks in to give them a talking point... just like you used it now.
70 trucks were let in since October 7th. The UNRWA had something like 200-500 trucks going in daily before the war...
So normally there would have been 11,000 truck deliveries for humanitarian aid in this window, now there are only 70.. 0.6% of need is satisfied, prewar need at that....
All to give you a talking point.
Are you kidding. How many trucks have been allowed. Do you think they are enough?!? We are talking about 2.5 Mln people.
You are writing all this from the comfort of your own house, people there don't have a roof over their heads. You can't even fathom what conditions they are living in. Are they all deserve to suffer?
How many more civilians need to die to condemn Israel? 10K, 20K, 50K, 1M?
It's weird you think Israel is the cause here
I would prefer none of this happen, but Hamas does not value human life. It's truly tragic.
I find it very strange that your inference is that I don't care.
I would also leave this here:
So to put things into perspective, for 3 straight weeks only 117 trucks carrying humanitarian aid entered the enclave.
Not to mention that the same officials are constantly trying to downplay how grave the situation there is. And today's looting of humanitarian supplies only comes to prove that people there are really desperate!
Yeah, they let the aid trucks in, the bombed the aid after it had been delivered.
That is a gross misrepresentation.
The IDF killed its own citizens on October 7th. This is a statement of fact backed by survivors. So whoever deleted my comment stop censoring the truth please
https://thegrayzone.com/2023/10/27/israels-military-shelled-burning-tanks-helicopters/
It's less the factual nature and more the presentation and what is implied.
What do you mean presentation?
Trying to diminish multiple massacres with a story about friendly fire, as if those things are at all the same.
You're a bad person and I'm glad I'll never see you again