There's a reason that "don't negotiate with terrorists" is a good rule to follow
indeed it is, makes me wonder why any country still has any dealings with Israel at this point
Which side is taking hostages? Which side slaughtered, raped, and kidnapped civilians without even claiming they were going after military targets? Hint: not Israel. If you have the stomach, watch this uncensored Oct 7 footage (warning: blood, gore, and death,) and tell me the ones responding to this are the real terorists, and who has the moral high ground. Note how they shoot people trying to surrender and any civilians they happen to come across.
How does one get such a twisted worldview?
Israel actually have thousands of "prisoners", many of which are being held indefinitely without charges or trial. Usually when someone is being held against their will, without reason we call them a hostage. Israel has abducted more Palestinians during the "truce" than they have released. Israel is also seemingly responsible for many of the deaths of Israeli civilians on the 7th of October, including shooting people exiting homes in kibbutzim at the orders of the army.If you want to start sharing graphic, gory, NSFL videos, I have countless videos of Palestinian children without limbs, intact skulls, you name it. No one here is defending Hamas killing civilians. But they difference is that unlike you, we are not defending Israel killing thousands of civilians. The IOF is a terrorist army.
Israel actually have thousands of “prisoners”, many of which are being held indefinitely without charges or trial.
That's war; stay belligerent after defeat, be subjected to your enemy's military courts. They still get more due process than the hostages did.
Israel is also seemingly responsible for many of the deaths of Israeli civilians on the 7th of October, including shooting people exiting homes in kibbutzim at the orders of the army
Friendly fire exists therefore terrorism? Please.
No one here is defending Hamas killing civilians.
You are attempting to justify Hamas when you imply Israel is the greater evil, calling them the terrorists.
unlike you, we are not defending Israel killing thousands of civilians. The IOF is a terrorist army.
That's what happens when you start a war, civilians die as collateral damage. Responding to an organized attack by a hostile government is not terrorism. Not responding is foolish.
No, that's a war crime. Military courts are only allowed to do the minimal required to maintain order against things like looting. And they must return the justice system to local hands as soon as possible.
54 years is a war crime when that measurement is supposed to be in months at the most.
No, that’s a war crime. Military courts are only allowed to do the minimal required to maintain order against things like looting.
Citation?
And they must return the justice system to local hands as soon as possible. ... 54 years is a war crime when that measurement is supposed to be in months at the most.
While the enemy remains belligerent? It's clearly not yet possible. Palestine has been trying to kill the Jews for at least 70 years and have yet to pacify themselves. That's what needs to happen for them to have autonomy for such things.
You're either in control or you're not. You don't get to have so much control that you can arrest people but then throw your hands up and say it's a war zone.
And don't act like Israel's hands are clean. They used terrorism to get rid of the British troops and pursue the original Nakba. White washing that with some "they just hate us" propaganda is bullshit.
So you have a choice. It's either a war crime or Apartheid. You're either in control or you're not.
Edit- I'm sorry I forgot the citation for you. It's called the Geneva Convention.
You’re either in control or you’re not. You don’t get to have so much control that you can arrest people but then throw your hands up and say it’s a war zone.
The world isn't as binary as you seem to think it is. Clearly they are doing both, so they can. Control ebbs and flows and can be gained and lost, and can be at values other than 100% or 0%.
And don’t act like Israel’s hands are clean.
I'm not. There's plenty of blood on everyone's hands in a conflict that has gone on this long. Google irgun to see the worst of it. Still, I find Israel to be by far the more sympathetic party. They haven't behaved that way since the Jews became a nation and Israel's civil rights record is far better than those who oppose them today.
They used terrorism to get rid of the British troops
White washing that with some “they just hate us” propaganda is bullshit.
They are literally murdering Israeli civlians en masse. If it were peaceful hate there would be no war.
So you have a choice. It’s either a war crime ...
Still waiting on citations that Israel's military courts count as a war crime.
or Apartheid.
Such definitions pervert the meaning of Apartheid, and depend on treating a belligerent national group like an ethnic group. This is nothing like South Africa; Arabs are 20% of Israeli citizens and are not subject to the same restrictions as the hostile Arab nations trying to kill them.
You might be interested in this video regarding how the UN declaring Israel an Apartheid state went down.
Ah yes 1948. Wasn't there another war, just a few years earlier where we all determined that war wasn't a reason to clear ethic populations off of land? Where we all decided that ethno states were bad?
Or was it only when the Germans did it? And I don't care that there Palestinians also attacked the British. I'm only refuting the idea that Israelis are purely victims.
And in international law there is no 50%. Especially not for Fifty Four Years.
And you really, really don't want to get into the meeting civilians en masse argument. Far more Palestinian civilians have been murdered by a supposedly professional military and Israeli settlers.
You also don't get to conflate citizenship with rule. You don't have to be a citizen to under their rule. Israel rules over 7 million Palestinians. That's 50%.
Wasn’t there another war, just a few years earlier where we all determined that war wasn’t a reason to clear ethic populations off of land? Where we all decided that ethno states were bad?
Can't attack an ethnostate that's trying to kill you, that makes you as bad as Nazis!
Why can't they just let those nice Palestinians murder them and drive them into the sea without consequence?
I’m only refuting the idea that Israelis are purely victims.
Never made that claim, Hoss. I'm pointing out who the terrorists are and what caused this chapter of the conflict.
And in international law there is no 50%. Especially not for Fifty Four Years.
CITATION?
Far more Palestinian civilians have been murdered by a supposedly professional military and Israeli settlers.
Killed, yes. Murdered, no. Collateral damage in warfare/retaliation for violent attacks by a belligerent nation.
You also don’t get to conflate citizenship with rule. You don’t have to be a citizen to under their rule. Israel rules over 7 million Palestinians. That’s 50%.
Yes, they have administrative control over a hostile belligerent nation that is still trying to kill them after being overwhelmingly defeated time and time again. They refuse to concede and portray themselves as the victims, for some reason people like yourself find it compelling.
Lmao Lemmy deleted my response so this is going to be shorter. (Apparently hitting the vote arrows reloads the page)
The source is the Geneva Convention. It makes statements like, "administrative control over a hostile belligerent" and "Collateral damage in warfare/retaliation" admissions of war crimes, not arguments. We literally hung Nazis for killing civilians as retaliation.
And the entire supposition of having to genocide them first is both Nazis propaganda (since you want to directly reference them) and bullshit. Palestinians have been very clear that they want the 1969 borders and Israel to stop their occupation.
That's just code for supporting genocide and totalitarianism. The only way to stop a terrorist movement is in fact to engage with it and deal with their grievances in good faith. You only fight them where it is necessary because every fight makes more recruits for their cause.
Too bad the grievances of these specific terrorists is that if you don't become muslim they'll kill you.
This isn't some fucking oppressed minority group just trying to be a good lil' bean and live their lives. They're radicals that want to genocide people and convert the world to islam by force and threat of death of you don't.
Do you think you should engage with domestic right wing US terrorism? To ask the christo-fascists why they are doing what they're doing and to please stop it? No, they're insidious because they will die believing they're 100% in the right and that you trying to prevent them from a full takeover is being "intolerant."
Fucking insane you people sit here defending the middle east's version of conservative Christian nationalism. Fuck all religious nutter butters, they're the crabs in a bucket trying to revert us to the middle ages so they can have their way with society.
That's funny. They sure seem to leave the Christians in Gaza alone for having forcible conversion as a policy.
Oh right, I forgot. You're full of shit. These guys aren't Al Qaida. In fact they've consistently shut down any attempt at AQ coming into Gaza.
They aren't even saying they want Israel to be a Muslim sharia government. They just want Israel to leave Palestine alone.
The Christian population in Gaza has declined by 2/3 since 2009, when there were about 3,000 total. Today there are fewer than 1000.
Hamas has made a huge push to either get them to convert or leave, and have killed dozens.
And why compare them to al Qaeda? Why not the Taliban?
They have a formal alliance with the Taliban, and both are the governments of their state. Both have pretty much the same platform as well, and both are officially opposed to AQ because AQ competes with them for power.
You just can't stop can you? Two seconds of googling reveals the Christians that left after the blockade blame the Israelis, not Hamas.
Both sides got things they wanted. Seems like a successful negotiation to me.
There's a reason that "don't negotiate with terrorists" is a good rule to follow
indeed it is, makes me wonder why any country still has any dealings with Israel at this point
Which side is taking hostages? Which side slaughtered, raped, and kidnapped civilians without even claiming they were going after military targets? Hint: not Israel. If you have the stomach, watch this uncensored Oct 7 footage (warning: blood, gore, and death,) and tell me the ones responding to this are the real terorists, and who has the moral high ground. Note how they shoot people trying to surrender and any civilians they happen to come across.
How does one get such a twisted worldview?
Israel actually have thousands of "prisoners", many of which are being held indefinitely without charges or trial. Usually when someone is being held against their will, without reason we call them a hostage. Israel has abducted more Palestinians during the "truce" than they have released. Israel is also seemingly responsible for many of the deaths of Israeli civilians on the 7th of October, including shooting people exiting homes in kibbutzim at the orders of the army.If you want to start sharing graphic, gory, NSFL videos, I have countless videos of Palestinian children without limbs, intact skulls, you name it. No one here is defending Hamas killing civilians. But they difference is that unlike you, we are not defending Israel killing thousands of civilians. The IOF is a terrorist army.
That's war; stay belligerent after defeat, be subjected to your enemy's military courts. They still get more due process than the hostages did.
Friendly fire exists therefore terrorism? Please.
You are attempting to justify Hamas when you imply Israel is the greater evil, calling them the terrorists.
That's what happens when you start a war, civilians die as collateral damage. Responding to an organized attack by a hostile government is not terrorism. Not responding is foolish.
No, that's a war crime. Military courts are only allowed to do the minimal required to maintain order against things like looting. And they must return the justice system to local hands as soon as possible.
54 years is a war crime when that measurement is supposed to be in months at the most.
Citation?
While the enemy remains belligerent? It's clearly not yet possible. Palestine has been trying to kill the Jews for at least 70 years and have yet to pacify themselves. That's what needs to happen for them to have autonomy for such things.
You're either in control or you're not. You don't get to have so much control that you can arrest people but then throw your hands up and say it's a war zone.
And don't act like Israel's hands are clean. They used terrorism to get rid of the British troops and pursue the original Nakba. White washing that with some "they just hate us" propaganda is bullshit.
So you have a choice. It's either a war crime or Apartheid. You're either in control or you're not.
Edit- I'm sorry I forgot the citation for you. It's called the Geneva Convention.
The world isn't as binary as you seem to think it is. Clearly they are doing both, so they can. Control ebbs and flows and can be gained and lost, and can be at values other than 100% or 0%.
I'm not. There's plenty of blood on everyone's hands in a conflict that has gone on this long. Google irgun to see the worst of it. Still, I find Israel to be by far the more sympathetic party. They haven't behaved that way since the Jews became a nation and Israel's civil rights record is far better than those who oppose them today.
Arabs also used unlawful violence against the British.
...said land losses were the result of declaring war on Israel in '48 and losing.
They are literally murdering Israeli civlians en masse. If it were peaceful hate there would be no war.
Still waiting on citations that Israel's military courts count as a war crime.
Such definitions pervert the meaning of Apartheid, and depend on treating a belligerent national group like an ethnic group. This is nothing like South Africa; Arabs are 20% of Israeli citizens and are not subject to the same restrictions as the hostile Arab nations trying to kill them.
You might be interested in this video regarding how the UN declaring Israel an Apartheid state went down.
Ah yes 1948. Wasn't there another war, just a few years earlier where we all determined that war wasn't a reason to clear ethic populations off of land? Where we all decided that ethno states were bad?
Or was it only when the Germans did it? And I don't care that there Palestinians also attacked the British. I'm only refuting the idea that Israelis are purely victims.
And in international law there is no 50%. Especially not for Fifty Four Years.
And you really, really don't want to get into the meeting civilians en masse argument. Far more Palestinian civilians have been murdered by a supposedly professional military and Israeli settlers.
You also don't get to conflate citizenship with rule. You don't have to be a citizen to under their rule. Israel rules over 7 million Palestinians. That's 50%.
Can't attack an ethnostate that's trying to kill you, that makes you as bad as Nazis!
Why can't they just let those nice Palestinians murder them and drive them into the sea without consequence?
Never made that claim, Hoss. I'm pointing out who the terrorists are and what caused this chapter of the conflict.
CITATION?
Killed, yes. Murdered, no. Collateral damage in warfare/retaliation for violent attacks by a belligerent nation.
Yes, they have administrative control over a hostile belligerent nation that is still trying to kill them after being overwhelmingly defeated time and time again. They refuse to concede and portray themselves as the victims, for some reason people like yourself find it compelling.
Lmao Lemmy deleted my response so this is going to be shorter. (Apparently hitting the vote arrows reloads the page)
The source is the Geneva Convention. It makes statements like, "administrative control over a hostile belligerent" and "Collateral damage in warfare/retaliation" admissions of war crimes, not arguments. We literally hung Nazis for killing civilians as retaliation.
And the entire supposition of having to genocide them first is both Nazis propaganda (since you want to directly reference them) and bullshit. Palestinians have been very clear that they want the 1969 borders and Israel to stop their occupation.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
this video
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.
Wow, it's crazy youtube allows that video to stay up.
I guess some videos of killing people are okay but others aren't.
Your phrasing suggests that Hamas resumed the hostilities. Have you actually read the article?
Here's some information you may find helpful about how Hamas broke the truce yesterday with yet another genocidal terrorist attack: https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/shooting-attack-jerusalem-wounds-least-6-ambulance-service-2023-11-30/
That's just code for supporting genocide and totalitarianism. The only way to stop a terrorist movement is in fact to engage with it and deal with their grievances in good faith. You only fight them where it is necessary because every fight makes more recruits for their cause.
Too bad the grievances of these specific terrorists is that if you don't become muslim they'll kill you.
This isn't some fucking oppressed minority group just trying to be a good lil' bean and live their lives. They're radicals that want to genocide people and convert the world to islam by force and threat of death of you don't.
Do you think you should engage with domestic right wing US terrorism? To ask the christo-fascists why they are doing what they're doing and to please stop it? No, they're insidious because they will die believing they're 100% in the right and that you trying to prevent them from a full takeover is being "intolerant."
Fucking insane you people sit here defending the middle east's version of conservative Christian nationalism. Fuck all religious nutter butters, they're the crabs in a bucket trying to revert us to the middle ages so they can have their way with society.
That's funny. They sure seem to leave the Christians in Gaza alone for having forcible conversion as a policy.
Oh right, I forgot. You're full of shit. These guys aren't Al Qaida. In fact they've consistently shut down any attempt at AQ coming into Gaza.
They aren't even saying they want Israel to be a Muslim sharia government. They just want Israel to leave Palestine alone.
The Christian population in Gaza has declined by 2/3 since 2009, when there were about 3,000 total. Today there are fewer than 1000.
Hamas has made a huge push to either get them to convert or leave, and have killed dozens.
And why compare them to al Qaeda? Why not the Taliban?
They have a formal alliance with the Taliban, and both are the governments of their state. Both have pretty much the same platform as well, and both are officially opposed to AQ because AQ competes with them for power.
You just can't stop can you? Two seconds of googling reveals the Christians that left after the blockade blame the Israelis, not Hamas.
Both sides got things they wanted. Seems like a successful negotiation to me.