At what point do you think Hamas should take responsibility for hiding behind civilian infrastructure, including digging tunnels under a freaking hospital?
Obviously they should take responsibility. Should Israel take responsibility for it's crimes too?
So why blame Israel for something Hamas is doing? Why aren't you ranting about them?
Answer the question
They did. Israel is firing at Hamas, not hospitals. Full stop.
To take out Hamas any other way would be worse for civilians because it would involve a longer operation including a cordon. Look at 2017 in Mosul if you don't believe me.
They did. Israel is firing at Hamas, not hospitals. Full stop.
They bombed the (water) tanks, they bombed the water wells, they bombed the oxygen pump as well. They bombed everything in the hospital. So we are hardly surviving. We tell everyone, the hospital is no more a safe place for treating patients. We are harming patients by keeping them here
[...]
Gaza health ministry spokesperson Qidra said an Israel tank was now stationed at the hospital gate. Israeli snipers and drones were firing into the hospital, making it impossible for medics and patients to move around.
"We are besieged and are inside a circle of death," he said.
And there are 32 patients dead in the past three days because of Israel's blockade of supplies alone. Not to mention the constant bombing.
I find it really weird that people come into the comments to demand people denounce Hamas, but then refuse to acknowledge Israel's crimes under any circumstances. Is it so hard to call out crimes in both sides?
Honestly if someone can't acknowledge the problems with what Israel is doing here I don't think there's anything to be gained from debating this with them
Edit: I thought you were the original commenter before, sorry, but the point still stands
To take out Hamas using any other approach than the way Israel is currently doing it would be much worse for civilians. I'm not the original commentator but don't get me wrong, you do not understand war. You do not understand war crimes. You do not understand the difference between them.
Honestly you have not been helpful with that. If I don't understand something you could explain it. What is the difference between them that I'm missing?
If Israel did their job right there would be no Hamas. If the police did their job right there would arguably be no such thing as crime, yet the police can accept when they're imperfect, nobody is above criticism here and neither should Israel be, don't let your ego blind you from the reality of the circumstances and the actual events at hand.
For most people, I think that the problem isn’t with Hamas being held responsible. The problem is that people bearing the brunt of Hamas’ and Israeli actions aren’t members of Hamas - they’remedical personnel and patients and civilians in general.
Yeah, because they're being used as human shields.
Of course they are. Why else would you set up in a hospital? Doing so (turning hospital into a command post or using a marked ambulance to transport fighters or weapons) is against international law. If it is true that Hamas is doing that in these exact examples and not merely as a general practice), those buildings and vehicles are legal military targets. I was in the business and I’m familiar with all of the arguments and justifications.
What it comes down to, legally, is whether the response was proportional to the threat and whether every attempt was made to restrict damage to civilian infrastructure and persons. Just as a hypothetical example, using an F-16 to drop two bombs on a populated hospital because there’s a couple of snipers on the 6th floor would be a disproportionate response. Using a rocket propelled grenade against that window/room is more proportional, even if there were patients in the same room. Killing them with counter-sniper fire so as to save those patients but still eliminate the threat is the most proportional.
The other dimension, though, is the moral culpability (if you believe in free will) or at least the functional responsibility (if you do not) of designing and launching an operation in which massive amounts of civilian casualties and misery will be caused. I don’t see that enough.
I think it was Aquinas who laid out one of the early versions of just war theory. One of the main points is that the intended outcome must be proportional to the harms caused.
What people are questioning is whether a particular encounter or the operation in general were necessary and proportional.
I appreciate the well reasoned response. Whether this is an appropriate or balanced response from Israel, I don't really know, but I'm tired of everyone demanding they be the bigger people, and completely ignoring the actions of Hamas.
You're ignoring the massive power imbalance. You expect people to cast out blame to 2 equal sides, when that really isn't the case. Isreal as a so-called democratic nationstate should be held to a higher standard than a band of extremists.
At what point do you think Hamas should take responsibility for hiding behind civilian infrastructure, including digging tunnels under a freaking hospital?
Obviously they should take responsibility. Should Israel take responsibility for it's crimes too?
So why blame Israel for something Hamas is doing? Why aren't you ranting about them?
Answer the question
They did. Israel is firing at Hamas, not hospitals. Full stop.
To take out Hamas any other way would be worse for civilians because it would involve a longer operation including a cordon. Look at 2017 in Mosul if you don't believe me.
Weird thing to say. How do you explain this?
[...]
And there are 32 patients dead in the past three days because of Israel's blockade of supplies alone. Not to mention the constant bombing.
I find it really weird that people come into the comments to demand people denounce Hamas, but then refuse to acknowledge Israel's crimes under any circumstances. Is it so hard to call out crimes in both sides?
Honestly if someone can't acknowledge the problems with what Israel is doing here I don't think there's anything to be gained from debating this with them
Edit: I thought you were the original commenter before, sorry, but the point still stands
To take out Hamas using any other approach than the way Israel is currently doing it would be much worse for civilians. I'm not the original commentator but don't get me wrong, you do not understand war. You do not understand war crimes. You do not understand the difference between them.
Honestly you have not been helpful with that. If I don't understand something you could explain it. What is the difference between them that I'm missing?
If Israel did their job right there would be no Hamas. If the police did their job right there would arguably be no such thing as crime, yet the police can accept when they're imperfect, nobody is above criticism here and neither should Israel be, don't let your ego blind you from the reality of the circumstances and the actual events at hand.
For most people, I think that the problem isn’t with Hamas being held responsible. The problem is that people bearing the brunt of Hamas’ and Israeli actions aren’t members of Hamas - they’remedical personnel and patients and civilians in general.
Yeah, because they're being used as human shields.
Of course they are. Why else would you set up in a hospital? Doing so (turning hospital into a command post or using a marked ambulance to transport fighters or weapons) is against international law. If it is true that Hamas is doing that in these exact examples and not merely as a general practice), those buildings and vehicles are legal military targets. I was in the business and I’m familiar with all of the arguments and justifications.
What it comes down to, legally, is whether the response was proportional to the threat and whether every attempt was made to restrict damage to civilian infrastructure and persons. Just as a hypothetical example, using an F-16 to drop two bombs on a populated hospital because there’s a couple of snipers on the 6th floor would be a disproportionate response. Using a rocket propelled grenade against that window/room is more proportional, even if there were patients in the same room. Killing them with counter-sniper fire so as to save those patients but still eliminate the threat is the most proportional.
The other dimension, though, is the moral culpability (if you believe in free will) or at least the functional responsibility (if you do not) of designing and launching an operation in which massive amounts of civilian casualties and misery will be caused. I don’t see that enough.
I think it was Aquinas who laid out one of the early versions of just war theory. One of the main points is that the intended outcome must be proportional to the harms caused.
What people are questioning is whether a particular encounter or the operation in general were necessary and proportional.
I appreciate the well reasoned response. Whether this is an appropriate or balanced response from Israel, I don't really know, but I'm tired of everyone demanding they be the bigger people, and completely ignoring the actions of Hamas.
You're ignoring the massive power imbalance. You expect people to cast out blame to 2 equal sides, when that really isn't the case. Isreal as a so-called democratic nationstate should be held to a higher standard than a band of extremists.