- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
Look at all that self defense israel is doing.
Best defense is a good offense?
/s
Raise your hands if you’re shocked. Literally nobody should raise their hands
If the most recent death toll wasn’t enough, here’s something else showing that they don’t really care about keeping an appearance, as well as another U.N. school, i don’t know what to say or do, everyone knows that they won’t destroy “Hamas” :
If their goal was only to send a message, then there’s no point to be that extreme, the only reason left that i can see is that they want to keep the Gaza Strip, it’s always a bet but they considered that they’ll be allowed to(, in which case their security would indeed be increased by getting rid of all palestinians).
Their neighbours would have to be quite desperate to think that embracing Israel and the west is still their best option, but if they do it’d probably be for economic reasons, and/or perhaps fears of retaliations, i.d.k., we’ll see how it’ll evolve in the future, but i can’t believe that they would kill all of these people and destroy everything without a real goal, sending a pointless message isn’t one, nor is the unrealistic aim of destroying “Hamas”, i find it hard to imagine them simply going back to their side as if they accomplished something by pointlessly mass murdering thousands of childrens&humans on the other side of the wall, awful that this senseless option of a useless massacre is the most desirable.Their neighbours would have to be quite desperate to think that embracing Israel and the west is still their best option, but if they do it’d probably be for economic reasons, and/or perhaps fears of retaliation
Not quite. Israel managed to get the Arab states on their side, and the US is helping using aid (this is why Egypt is helping Israel in its blockade of Gaza, for instance). Arab leaders aren’t victims of an oppressive international order; they’re willing traitors.
When you look at the amount of suffering other countries in the region, all anti-zionists, had/have to go through, i won’t blame some of them to conclude that it’d be better for everyone to just draw a line on the past and accept Israel.
They may think that they’re entitled to something in exchange, but that they’re not united/strong enough to impose their will or ‘reject their alliance with’/‘put more&more pressure on’ the west. So be it then if it’s a sacrifice worth making.
Neither random tweets, nor Reutir seem like a good sources, take a look at Reutir’s “about us” page.
I wouldn’t be surprised if they annex Gaza, at least the north part. Bibi says he wants security control over it…
i can’t believe that they would kill all of these people and destroy everything without a real goal
They say they’re there to depose Hamas, I’m not sure why you say it’s unrealistic. Game theory could support a harsh response, imposing a high cost should anyone consider future attacks against Israel’s civilians. Netanyahu is very unpopular right now so it could also be a political move to appease voters who want some revenge/justice/catharsis.
imposing a high cost should anyone consider future attacks against Israel’s civilians.
Right now they’re giving gazans tens of thousands of reasons to want revenge against this bloodthirsty regime. They’re actually doing the opposite. Yes go devastate these people who have nothing left to lose, that’s definitely how you reduce extremism.
Worked in WW2 Germany and Japan pretty damned well.
Pretend you are in charge of Israel, how would you have responded to the attack against your civilians? This was predictable, inevitable, and arguably the least bad choice.
Predictable? Yes, par for the course for this insanely violent and fascist regime.
Inevitable? It’s well documented that the IOF ignored many warnings about the incoming Hamas resistance. Not only that, netanyahu funded Hamas to weaken the Palestinian cause weak and fractured.. Let’s start there.
Least bad choice… It’s sickening to me that you suggest there aren’t better ways to conduct war than to bomb hospitals, schools, and refugee camps. For a military that’s supposedly one of the best in the world to say 7000+ children needed to die is a joke. It’s incredibly obvious to any reasonable person.
Yes, par for the course for this insanely violent and fascist regime.
Which regime are you talking about here? Not clear at all.
Predictable? Yes, par for the course for this insanely violent and fascist regime.
It’s par for the course for any nation that is attacked to counter-attack.
Inevitable? It’s well documented that the IOF ignored many warnings about the incoming Hamas resistance. Not only that, netanyahu funded Hamas to weaken the Palestinian cause weak and fractured… Let’s start there.
I’m saying the response was inevitable, not the attack.
Least bad choice… It’s sickening to me that you suggest there aren’t better ways to conduct war than to bomb hospitals, schools, and refugee camps. For a military that’s supposedly one of the best in the world to say 7000+ children needed to die is a joke. It’s incredibly obvious to any reasonable person.
The alternative to going in with air support is sending in troops without it into a well prepared terrorist den where they would suffer high casualties. Yes, air strikes are the least bad choice for them. Israel essentially had to choose between the lives of its own people and the lives of people who live in a belligerent nation. That they didn’t sacrifice their own for Palestinians, thereby making Israel less safe, should be unsurprising.
Game theory could support a harsh response,
You mean the brutality everybody was ignoring before Hamas’ attack that didn’t manage to prevent such an attack?
Well we don’t know what would have happened on the other timeline where gaza didn’t face consequences for electing Hamas.
Deterrence means there had to be reprisals even if you think things were brutal beforehand. They clearly got more brutal. Suggesting they should maintain the status quo after such an attack doesn’t make sense to me.
Well we don’t know what would have happened on the other timeline
Yes we do - Israel would have acted like the genocidal white supremacist settler-colonialism state it has been since it’s creation.
Israel would have acted like the genocidal white supremacist settler-colonialism state it has been since it’s creation.
Israel has never been genocidal, for obvious reasons. If wiping out Palestinians were their goal, they certainly could do it more effectively, IDF is often warning people about incoming attacks, and publishing justifications for attacks.
The reason Palestine lost land was because they declared war on Israel and lost, refused to concede, declared war again, lost, refused to concede, then continued terrorist attacks against them for the next 60 years.
But sure just call it colonialism or genocide or whatever fucking buzzwords you think will get public opinion to give a shit about this group that absolutely caused their misery by remaining uncompromising, violent, and poking the bear every chance they get.
Regarding the whiteness of Jews:
https://jpost.com/opinion/jews-are-not-white-race-and-identity-in-israel-and-the-us-opinion-685368
Significant percentages of Israelis are very non-white, but I know you’re just doing mental backflips trying to inappropriately conflate Israel with their old enemies, the Nazis.
Israel has never been genocidal, for obvious reasons.
Israel is a genocidal white supremacist settler-colonialist state. It’s only white supremacists that disagree.
trying to inappropriately conflate Israel with their
old enemiesideological cousins, the Nazis.FTFY.
I get you’re repeating propaganda pieces, but you really dropped the ball on this one. The blockade started before Hamas was elected.
Yeah, bombing people is notoriously good at deterring further political violence (/s obviously).
What do you call collective punishment again? A War Cream? No that’s not right …
It’s called war between nations, asymmetrical war but war nonetheless. They’re not starving out Gaza and demanding civilians bring them hamas, they’re going in there themselves.
If Gaza surrenders then terms like war crimes for collective punishment start making sense. Right now they have their own government which happens to be comprised of belligerent terrorists. Israel isn’t leaving until that’s no longer the case.
In my book bombing civilians is still called a war crime regardless of the supposed enemy you’re pretending to target. The excuse of collateral damage doesn’t even make sense, they shot artillery at the exact place they knew there would be civilians because they sent them there.
Also: Israel barely considers Palestine a country in the first place. How is this a “war between nations” and “actually not a warcrime at all” when one of the sides doing the warcrimes doesn’t even think their opponent has any sovereignty?
You’re accusing them of intentionally targeting civilians, and I’ve yet to see any evidence of that. It’s more accurate to say that Israel doesn’t care much about collateral damage.
The excuse of collateral damage doesn’t even make sense, they shot artillery at the exact place they knew there would be civilians because they sent them there.
If Hamas was there too, it makes sense and it is in fact collateral damage. Israel will attack potential targets even if there’s the slightest connection to Hamas. Evidently they built ai for this purpose, which gives them targets faster than they can bomb them.
Israel barely considers Palestine a country in the first place. How is this a “war between nations”
A nation is different than a country or a state. It just means a group of people with shared purpose. Israel disputes that Palestine is a state, not that it is a nation.
And they did have some limited sovereignty, they used it to attack Israeli civilians.
Oh, look… the Fascist Apologetics Association has decided to show up.
Forgive me for disagreeing.
You seem to get riled up when anyone doesn’t want to pick up a pitchfork and join your angry Hamas apologist mob.
Oh, look… the Fascist Apologetics Association is trying to blame Hamas for the actions of a genocidal white supremacist settler-colonialist state again.
What’s the matter? Have you run out of “human shields” to use as propaganda props?
Right now they have their own government which happens to be comprised of belligerent terrorists.
Hard to be belligerent when you’re under a blockade/military occupation (which is BTW an act of war).
Yeah, it almost sounds like they’ve lost and they refused to concede, doesn’t it? That’s why they’ve resorted to Guerrilla warfare hiding among civilians.
They’ve been at war since 1948 and Palestine has yet to surrender, preferring instead intafada. We are seeing the consequences of that today.
random tweets
He’s the director of the World Health Organization, and many articles are talking about many U.N. schools, the most recent one has been linked to this video, and when you look at one of these schools, here, it’s not hard to imagine it being bombed in regard to the surrounding desolation. It’s more symbolic of their unwillingness to create safe zones than anything else, they even bombed refugee camps, and are used to kill innocent civilians in order to settle on their lands anyway.
You can’t depose Hamas, even if they managed to kill all of their leaders(, who don’t reside in the Gaza strip anyway), they’ll just elect new ones, i thought that this was obvious to everyone else. Even if Hitler was killed the third reich would have continued existing, the same goes for Israel if you kill Netanyahu, or the u.s.s.r. if you killed Stalin, there are a few modifications but the state doesn’t suddenly disappear, sry but i shouldn’t have to explain such obvious things and i’m afraid that a lot of other people think like you even if it’s so obviously delusional.
Game theory ? They were attacked because they stole these (holy )lands, and were continuing to steal more and more of them, committing atrocities almost every day(, or at least week,) in a complete silence from “the free world”. What’s the point, would killing 100 persons in retaliation deter palestinians from fighting back ? 1000 ? 3000 ? 5000 ? When does it stop ? I wouldn’t think that someone really say that the more Israel kills and the safer they’ll be, how could it make any sense, they’ll only be hated even more, do you think that they’re acting guided by their emotions when they’re expressing themselves so calmly ? Are palestinians allowed to “deter” israelis from acting like they do by killing even more of them ? Westerners had even more attacks on their territories once they wanted to “avenge” the first attacks by killing so much more people, in truth it’s obvious to almost everyone that vengeance wasn’t our goal, but our objectives were geopolitical, and were attained by burning everything held by the islamists, and torturing&killing the prisoners. I hope that they’re not thinking that their only way to prevent such attacks is to mass murder thousands of innocents, especially considering that their walls were effective for decades.
Netanyahu is already at the end of his political career, your explanation is awful if true, but i’ve already talked about the blinded desire for revenge without any aim, i can’t think that they’re only guided by emotions when acting so rationally, they’re head of states not teenagers in a video game, if they’re doing something like that it’s in order to gain something that couldn’t be obtained otherwise.
I don’t agree with you because i can’t see the point : is it really a blind/stupid desire of revenge ? Just killing innocents everywhere without any other goal than that ?You can’t depose Hamas, even if they managed to kill all of their leaders(, who don’t reside in the Gaza strip anyway), they’ll just elect new ones
That has yet to be established, but it sounds like you’re making a case for annexation. If they are unwilling to pacify themselves, that seems like the most humane remaining option that keeps Israel safe.
They were attacked because they stole these (holy )lands, and were continuing to steal more and more of them,
Those lands were annexed because Palestinians declared war on Israel and lost, funny how the anti-Israel crowd always conveniently forgets this and portrays the Palestinians as victims when they were absolutely the aggressors.
What’s the point, would killing 100 persons in retaliation deter palestinians from fighting back ? 1000 ? 3000 ? 5000 ?
If they are reasonable, yes it would. It would encourage them to find a path to peace. Perhaps they are not reasonable, their history of poking the bear, popular support of intifada and a one-state solution where they deny rights to Jews certainly seems to indicate an unwillingness to compromise, which led to their present situation.
I have much to learn by talking with a pro-israeli, my sincere thanks for engaging.
[The claim that “if you kill their leaders they’ll just elect new ones”] has yet to be established
As i said with Benjamin Netanyahu : killing him won’t destroy Israel, just as killing their leaders wouldn’t destroy Hamas.
We have to solve the root of the problem, because “Hamas”(palestinians) have the moral high ground here, « If israelis are unwilling to pacify themselves, the destruction of Israel seems like the most humane remaining option that keeps Palestine safe. », wouldn’t you agree ?
« Palestine was annexed because israelis declared war on Palestine and won, funny how the Anti-Palestine crowd always conveniently forgets this and portrays the israelis as victims when they were absolutely the aggressors. »
« If israelis are reasonable, yes [killing them would be enough to deter them from killing more palestinians and occupying (more&more of )their land]. It would encourage them to find a path to peace. Perhaps they are not reasonable, their history of poking the bear, popular support of settlers and a one-state solution where they deny rights to palestinians certainly seems to indicate an unwillingness to compromise, which led to their present situation. »I can’t understand how you could paint the israelis as the victims here : they were the ones who stole the lands(, and are continuing to steal more of it), they’re killed way less than they’re killing, both before and after Oct.7, with less material destructions, yet i can’t wish for them to permanently excuse themselves for existing, even if they should. There’s a few solutions possible other than a two-state solution, i can only regret that public debates don’t turn around this research of solutions instead of simply supporting one side, the anger of palestinians is legitimate, but what’s the plan. Israel is asking for a lot and can’t offer much in exchange, if i was arab i could consider that such weird locations could have a weird civilization different from the rest there, after all the muslims have expanded so much that they could accept to ‘paint in another color’/~lose one of their heart, but not without consequences for israelis/westerners, it should result at the very least in a huge boost for the ummah, something deemed worthwhile by all of them, which won’t happen since we(sterners) won’t give any of our “hearts”.
A crazy idea would be to plan for all countries to ally together in order to colonize and terraform Mars(, with commitments to certain realizations), from 2070 to 2177 for instance(, or longer if necessary), and our collective effort will be entirely done in order to give the whole planet Mars to countries claiming to be islamic. It’s a good situation in the solar system, and despite many problems and uncertainties could be deemed a huge gain without being more than a financial loss for other countries. Other possibilities exist even if this one may seem/be far-fetched.
the aggressors … they’re killed way less than they’re killing, both before and after Oct.7,
Casualties inflicted is not necessarily indicative of aggression. I say that Palestine is the aggressor not because they have a higher body count, but because they literally started the conflict, both by instigating the earliest massacres against Jews in mandatory Palestine, making a one state solution impossible, by declaring war on Israel with their Arab allies in '48, and later trying it again unsuccessfully in the 6-day war. They also instigated this latest reprisal even though their attack wasn’t as effective as Israel’s response.
Just because Israel’s self-defense is way more effective than Palestine’s constant attacks against them does not mean they are the aggressors. They didn’t start this fight, but they consistently respond to attacks and threats quite effectively as they are on the winning side of asymmetrical combat.
they were the ones who stole the lands(, and are continuing to steal more of it),
Jews started out legally buying lands in Mandatory Palestine until they were massacred and had war waged on them on when they declared statehood. Any lands annexed is a result of this.
There’s a few solutions possible other than a two-state solution
Polling indicates Palestinians want intifada and a one-state solution where Jews are denied equal rights, and they outnumber Israelis. For obvious reasons letting those they are at war with choose their leadership is a non-starter.
the anger of palestinians is legitimate
No doubt, I wish their appreciation for realpolitik was as great as their anger, because that’s how one finds a path out of this situation; rationality and compromise and diplomacy and logic. Anger will not change their situation, it has led to things being this way.
Israel is asking for a lot and can’t offer much in exchange
They are asking for security and a return of hostages, and they have a lot of freedoms and land they can offer if Palestine is willing and able to deliver it. Because they are bargaining from a position of strength Israel probably won’t have to make as many diplomatic concessions for a viable peace. The alternative, of course, is that they remain belligerent, continue intafada, settlements continue and Palestine is eventually annexed entirely. Palestine should really be trying to make a viable peace lest they end up with nothing.
it should result at the very least in a huge boost for the ummah, something deemed worthwhile by all of them
If ummah were a factor here I suspect Egypt wouldn’t be keeping Rafah closed, they clearly care more about using them as pawns with claims to land than they do the lives of Gazans stuck there. While there is only one Jewish state there are many Arab/Islamic ones in the area and none of them seem willing to help Palestine, probably because those who did historically suffered for it with military losses, coups, and terrorist organizations operating within their borders.
our collective effort will be entirely done in order to give the whole planet Mars to countries claiming to be islamic.
This is the first time I’ve heard, “send Muslims to Mars,” pitched as a solution. Somehow I don’t think they’ll go for it.
Jews started out legally buying lands in Mandatory Palestine until they were massacred and had war waged on them on when they declared statehood. Any lands annexed was a result of this.
The Ottoman Empire forbade them to buy these lands during the XIXth century, and would never have accepted the british decisions, were the arabs just supposed to let them declare statehood ?
Polling indicates Palestinians want intifada and a one-state solution where Jews are denied equal rights, and they outnumber Israelis.
And what do israelis want ? A two-states solution ? Why won’t they put an end to the settlements then, and why is it anything else than a net gain for them and a loss for palestinians ?
What are the compromises that we(sterners) are making ?Anger will not change their situation, it has led to it being this way.
The anger of israelis led to them killing thousands of people, no ?
But yeah, you’re probably right, i don’t really know what they expected, some kind of victory perhaps, they’re at war as well, and seized an occasion.If ummah were a factor here I suspect Egypt wouldn’t be keeping Rafah closed, they clearly care more about using them as pawns with claims to land than they do the lives of Gazans stuck there.
If Egypt cared about palestinians they would help Israel in deporting them ?
While there is only one Jewish state there are many Arab/Islamic ones in the area and none of them seem willing to help Palestine, probably because those who did suffered for it with coups and terrorist organizations within their borders.
Most of them are still suffering because of their support/principles. Every single one of them is willing to help Palestine, but the more you’re trying to put pressure and the more you’re exposing your citizens for reprisals, so the extent of their actions may vary, i still think that they could win but what do i know really.
(And realpolitik don’t look at morals, it is machiavelism, looking for what’s fair/right/virtuous and then the realist ways to do this seems a better practice)
ah yes, game theory, the every man’s justification for the flavor of foreign policy made popular by the literal Nazis, yes Realpolitik (in this context) was heavily pushed by Nazis and war criminals the world over, after all it thrives on homogenizing any groups, justifies collateral punishments, along with expansionist empires, and oppressing minority populations.
Game theory & realpolitik = Nazis? Also absurd. You don’t seem to have a good understanding of what defined the Nazis, because you keep invoking them for ridiculous comparisons. Hitler liked puppies, liking puppies does not make one meaningfully Hitler-like.
I’m talking about acknowledging the reality of their situation and the likely behaviors and reactions of each actor. Game theory & realpolitik. Something every nation should do.
game theory in the realm of international relations is just an attempt to quantify realpolitik, and should have little if no place in advising the actions of moral society.
And other than of course the fact that Realpolitik is heavily influenced by and influenced the works of prominent Nazi thinkers such as Rosenberg, it justifies the imperialistic conquest and even genocide of one’s neighbor should they not align with your political will, it is a failed ideology that spawns only evil, literally.
Realpolitik is the approach of conducting diplomatic or political policies based primarily on considerations of given circumstances and factors, rather than strictly following ideological, moral, or ethical premises. In this respect, it shares aspects of its philosophical approach with those of realism and pragmatism. It is often simply referred to as pragmatism in politics, e.g. “pursuing pragmatic policies” or “realistic policies”.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RealpolitikAcknowledging political realities isn’t owned by nor generally associated with Nazism. In fact their downfall can be attributed to not acknowledging political realities due to batshit racial theories. Even in Germany, realpolitik predates them and is generally associated with Otto Von Bismarck. You’re reaching, obviously incorrect, and unwilling to admit it. Maybe next time don’t be so quick to invoke Godwin’s law.
sure, in theory EVERYTHING is a good thing, if you go by the idealized version of everything.
and while I don’t agree with everything many Liberals say, Kraut has a very good critique of the ideology
I’ll repeat a comment I made a while ago:
“Please move over there to that big X on the ground, and we will definitely not bomb it.
-Sincerely the IOF”
And yet they’re going to be so pissed off when Schindler’s List is remade one day with someone who’s shielding Palestinians.
Yeah, Jews aren’t doing anything like extermination programs, 20% of Israeli citizens are Arab Muslims. This is war, not genocide.
Removed by mod
Sorry to interrupt your circle jerk with disagreement that leads to actual discussion and debate
Removed by mod
Going ad hominem makes you seem like a petulant child
Removed by mod
You’re making things up. DarkGamer has said nothing even remotely “white supremacist”.
Bringing in accusation out of nowhere doesn’t help your position at all.
This is literally an extermination program being done with missiles instead of gas chambers, there’s no other reason to lie about safe areas to civilians and use it to collect them in the same place to kill as many as possible. This is literally how the germans used the death showers in concentration camps.
Israel has been very clear that they will attack Hamas targets no matter where they are, inside or outside the evacuation area. If they wanted to just kill all the Palestinians they could have by now but they haven’t. They built sophisticated AI to select their targets so that they can claim their targets are valid military ones.
I mean there’s a real legitimate case to be made that they need to select their military targets more carefully or that the amount of civilian collateral damages too high, and I feel like that all gets overlooked when instead It gets replaced with the ridiculous claim that israel is trying to genocide all the civilians, which is obviously wrong.(Israel is comprised of many of the same ethnic groups you claim they are genociding.)
Look if they were actually trying to avoid civilian casualties the amount of kids killed would not be nearly so high. There wouldn’t be bombed ambulances.
This isnt war this is slaughter of civilians. Just because they’re using different technology to do it doesn’t mean its a sparkling war instead of a genocide.
Palestine is mostly kids, Gazans have a high fertility rate, they decided to have lots of kids in a war zone. Although tragic, it should be unsurprising that they end up being many/most collateral damage casualties. This terrible consequence for slaughtering Israeli civilians should have been totally predictable, yet only Israel seems to be blamed for the violence these children experience, not the ones murdering Israeli civilians while hiding among them.
I believe the idf claimed that the ambulance was in use by Hamas.
Israel was attacked by the government of Gaza, and they are counter attacking their infrastructure and their leadership, who hides among civilians. This is war. Civilians almost always suffer and die in war.
They don’t have a high fertility rate. They have a high death rate. If you look at the demographic breakdown, the number of people over the age of 30 or so drops off precipitously.
I mean you might be right that it’s currently quite a lot worse, but in the recent past, their fertility rate has been way above death rate, every year since 1970:
https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/state-of-palestine-population/
This is the reason why their median age is so low.
And their life expectancy has been around 73 years, which puts them at #104/201.
https://www.worldometers.info/demographics/life-expectancy/#countries-ranked-by-life-expectancy
high fertility rate bullshit? does supporting Israel make you just turn straight up Nazi? any more race realism takes? maybe you also share the view of the Israeli government that Palestinians are below animals as well?
Pointing out a group has high fertility rates = Nazi? Absurd.
70% of casualties are women and children, this doesn’t mean that 30% are Hamas, after all most men also aren’t part of Hamas, just that they are actively targeting civilians
they are actively targeting civilians
They claim it’s collateral damage, and you haven’t shared anything that disproves this.
You are coping hard lol
IDF terrorists just claim every civilian male they kill is Hamas.
Ironically Hamas’s civilian casualty rate on Oct 7 is actually close to 2/3 which indicates their attacks were actually very targeted towards military targets.
Unlike Israel which has an actual estimated 99/100 civilian casualty rate.
That doesn’t prove they target civilians, it just proves they are okay with collateral damage. The above is a claim about intent.
IDF terrorists just claim every civilian male they kill is Hamas.
Meanwhile Hamas just murders men, women, and children and doesn’t even pretend they are trying to hit military targets, blindly firing rockets or sending out violent hordes.
We don’t need to disprove IDF lies when they’ve already proven it’s their preferred form of communication
“I don’t need to cite facts, I have a strongly held opinion!”
“If they wanted to just kill all the Palestinians they could have by now but they haven’t.”
If this Israeli government wanted to kill all the Palestinians without looking like that was their plan they would bomb them slowly over an extended period of time while making a human shield argument.
Israel has been very clear that they will attack Hamas targets no matter where they are, inside or outside the evacuation area
So…unless Israel is lying then Hamas is everywhere. If Hamas is in every place the IDF dropped bombs they are, by far, the biggest army in the world. No wonder Israel is so trigger happy.
Unless…
When Gaza is dead and Hamas is still around, Israel will finally understand how thoroughly they fucked up.
Shit, it must be true since DarkGamer says so on lemmy.
We can safely ignore the whole Palestine topic guys
Either you’re drinking the cool-aid or forgot the “/s”. Can’t really tell.
They’re not. This guy is a bona-fide Zionist.
You know why only 20% are Palestinians? Because everyone else was expelled in 1949.
Hmm, reminds me of several middle eastern countries where the Jewish population now sits at 0% because literally every single one was either murdered or expelled.
Yeah that’s also really bad and one of the dumbest and most morally abhorrent things the Arab states did the last century.
Yeah that’s also really bad and one of the dumbest and most morally abhorrent things the Arab states did the last century.
You’re saying that as if it was a one time event. This was over decades, and it’s still ongoing.
Ongoing? AFAIK there are almost no Jews living in Arab states anymore, and the ones that are aren’t really at risk of being expelled.
After they lost a war they started. Whose main goal was to kill or deport all jews from the area.
edit This is not my opinion. This is a historical fact. Your downvotes don’t change historical facts.
Probably had something to do with them declaring war on Israel. Some were driven out, some left voluntarily. Those who stayed and were not belligerent seem to be fairing much better than those who keep trying to kill Israelis.
Jordan did the same shit in the West Bank when they won, funny how they have different rules I guess.
Lmao no.
That 20% gets treated like dirt and members of the governing coalition are calling for deporting them into Gaza for “disloyalty”
It’s a genocide.
It’s ok because they didn’t condemn HAMAS
the IDF has probable intel that there may or may not be a member of Hamas in that crowd, thus they are human shields and the IDF is clean of all wrong doing
Has anyone ever seen Bibi and Hamas in the same room?
Can you stand in a line please, we’re running short on bullets.
“We do a little bit of trolling” - IDF probably
Israel clearly meant that ‘south’ means Egypt.
Or anywhere that isn’t Gaza or Isreal
deleted by creator
I don’t get what happens in this comment section. Do we now support terrorists that was bombing Israel for years? If yes, do we also support nazi cause they also genocide jews? I’m so confuse :c
Don’t bomb civilians. Don’t bomb Palestinians. Don’t bomb Israelis. Don’t kill children. Don’t kill. Don’t kidnap people.
Is that hard? I mean sure the world might be more complicated but regardless of that the above seems like a very consistent and simple starting point of an opinion? It seems easier to start with “don’t bomb people” as a starting point than “don’t bomb some people” as a starting point.
Don’t bomb civilians. Don’t bomb Palestinians
That basically one thing. You can’t just “stop”, cause Palestinian civilians = Hamas. There a cult of people that supports killing jews, called islam, and most “civilians” into it. The one who was disagree - flee to nearby countries or died from hands of Hamas. How simple is that? You can’t just leave Hamas “as is”, cause they will simply start over again, by bombing jews, so, what your proposal? Kill all jews instead or help Hamas by gatekeeping Israel? There is no simple solution. Also, when russia started genocide in Ukraine, everyone was against that, but when Hamas attacked Israel and did genocide of jews, everyone supports that. Fuck is that trickery?
Things that should be relatively non controversial:
-
There’s no simple solution.
-
Palestinian civilians is not equal to Hamas.
-
Hamas is a terror organisation
-
Israel army is currently exercising too much violence on Palestinians
-
Israel clearly has the military advantage.
More vague points:
That puts most of the responsibility of how the situation develops in Israel hands. They can’t change the minds of the Palestinians. But they have the power to minimise total harm. They should be able to keep a lower rate of casualties on the Palestinian side without significantly increasing casualties on the Israeli side? No?
Palestinian civilians is not equal to Hamas.
So, okay, now there a video how Palestinians “civilians” gave up on resistance and hand over their weapons. Now what?
-
Nothing to be confused about.
Supporting Palestine and Palestinians is not the same as supporting Hamas. I can’t believe we have to keep repeating that.
The one and only party here that is ethnically cleansing the land and committing genocide is Israel, not Palestine.
It’s pretty simple really.
Supporting Palestine and Palestinians is not the same as supporting Hamas. I can’t believe we have to keep repeating that.
You don’t need to repeat that, this statement will not be true cause of that anyway. Yes, supporting Palestinians same thing as supporting Hamas. Why? Cause when your wife was decapitated and under your house someone digging a tunnel to shot rockets in near country, you have a choice: alert foreigner government about future attack with profs that basically seen from your window or at least leave with you family, or do nothing and keep working and doing “business as usual” thing. Why regular russians was so easily blamed for war in ukraine, but people literally involved in genocide of jews in Israel = no? This double standarts is confusing. You can’t just say, that “palestinians civilians did nothing wrong” and then proceed with blaming russians about war in ukraine. Be consecutive! Palestinians murders is bad! Killing russians in Ukraine is bad! Genocide is good! Horay!
What you described there is a war crime: International humanitarian law posits that no person may be punished for acts that he or she did not commit.
Article 33 - Individual responsibility, collective penalties, pillage, reprisals No protected person may be punished for an offence he or she has not personally committed. Collective penalties and likewise all measures of intimidation or of terrorism are prohibited. Pillage is prohibited. Reprisals against protected persons and their property are prohibited.
Source: Geneva Conventions (GCIV Art. 33).
Okay, let’s pretend we living in the world of Equestria with pinky ponies all around and Geneva Convention really works and stopping russians from torture civilians and cut their dicks in Bakhmut. Also, we need to pretend that Hamas joined as Geneva Convention member. So, how Geneva Conventions threat a man that claimed to be civilian but actively participates in combat?
An exception to this rule is the levée en masse, whereby the inhabitants of a country which has not yet been occupied, on the approach of the enemy, spontaneously take up arms to resist the invading troops without having time to form themselves into an armed force. Such persons are considered combatants if they carry arms openly and respect the laws and customs of war (see commentary to Rule 106).
Also, let’s see what Hamas should do about hostages:
The taking of hostages is prohibited.
Oh boy.
Jokes aside, again, as I said: everyone who wanted to leave is already flee. Not like you see how your neighborhood stoking up weapons and rockets to strike nearby country and be like “I’m sure that just to made fireworks!”. Do you think after russia invaded Ukraine, everyone just stayed at home and just ignored massacre on the streets? Nope sir, the one who was against that invasion just flee from occupied land, only one who couldn’t find strength to leave own home and the people, who praised invasion stayed that day. Well, both groups was tortured anyway, but that beside the point. My point is, there almost no “civilians” left. There combatans and some that described by Geneva Conventions as “non combatants”. But no civilians. Prove me wrong tho.
