Open to Judgement: UN complicity in 7th Oct. massacre

[rylah]

To accuse Israel of genocide takes less than a month,

to visit Israel, takes at least four...

And it's not a parody.

 

[rylah]

Suicide Bombing and UNRWA curriculum

 

[rylah]

Exhibit #10 -

The likely future leader of South Africa calls for genocide

 

[sparky]

Yup, kick out the world's eyes & ears, and it'll sugar off to whatever Israel wants us to see rylah

~S~

 

[rylah]

Yup, kick out the world's eyes & ears, and it'll sugar off to whatever Israel wants us to see rylah

~S~

Is that supposed to intimidate me?

Read about the alternative in my OP.

 

[rylah]

UN's "independent review" of UNRWA

 

[Coyote]

There is absolutely no question here wherein lies the good and wherein lies the evil. If you can't see the difference, your humanity is broken.

If you cannot see evil in what Israel is now doing to Gaza, then your humanity is gone.

 

[Shusha]

If you cannot see evil in what Israel is now doing to Gaza, then your humanity is gone.

I see Israel defending her people under nearly impossible conditions of war against an existential genocidal threat, while doing its absolute utmost to preserve innocent life, even against an enemy who values death and martyrdom.

There is no equivalency here between Israel's just actions and the atrocities committed on October 7.

Your very best argument can not be that Israel is committing comparable atrocities, because Israel is quite apparently NOT committing comparable atrocities. Your very best argument is that Israel is not doing enough to adhere to principles of international law in preserving the lives of protected persons under conditions of urban warfare with enemy intentional entanglement between combatants and civilians.

There is no equivalency here. None.

The way through this with minimal harm to everyone involved is not a ceasefire which gives an opportunity for Hamas to rebuild, and then commit massacres again, and again, and again with the same genocidal, existential threat to Israel and the Jewish people. With more atrocities committed against Israelis, then more war. The way through this is to disrupt, destroy, and end the threat for good. The main principle of self-defense is to fight until the perpetrator no longer has the capacity to hurt you.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

If you cannot see evil in what Israel is now doing to Gaza, then your humanity is gone.

If you can't see the evil Hamas did in Israel... well let's just say you have zero cred.

And don't give me that shit about "innocent" Gaza citizens

 

[Coyote]

I see Israel defending her people under nearly impossible conditions of war against an existential genocidal threat, while doing its absolute utmost to preserve innocent life, even against an enemy who values death and martyrdom.

There is no equivalency here between Israel's just actions and the atrocities committed on October 7.

Your very best argument can not be that Israel is committing comparable atrocities, because Israel is quite apparently NOT committing comparable atrocities. Your very best argument is that Israel is not doing enough to adhere to principles of international law in preserving the lives of protected persons under conditions of urban warfare with enemy intentional entanglement between combatants and civilians.

There is no equivalency here. None.

The way through this with minimal harm to everyone involved is not a ceasefire which gives an opportunity for Hamas to rebuild, and then commit massacres again, and again, and again with the same genocidal, existential threat to Israel and the Jewish people. With more atrocities committed against Israelis, then more war. The way through this is to disrupt, destroy, and end the threat for good. The main principle of self-defense is to fight until the perpetrator no longer has the capacity to hurt you.

I see Israel as going to far and turning valid self defense into vendetta, with a goal towards expelling Gazan’s in the guise of a calculated sales pitch that is nothing more than “humanitarian” self interest (per one of their own position papers) or turning it into uninhabitable rubble and getting rid of the residents that way. Talk about an existential threat.

While Hamas is a threat, Hamas is not an existential threat. It lacks the means and strength. Israel is in a position of far greater strength and international support than Hamas will ever had. Framing it as existential is dishonest and opens the door to the use any means. The existential threat is to the Palestinians, who lack strength and are facing the possible annihilating of national identity, culture and their history in their homeland. You can certainly blame Hamas for much of this, but can’t exonerate Israel any longer.

Multiple experts have said that you cannot get rid of Hamas via military ”victory” alone, a political solution needs to be found. Israel refuses and refuses to work with its Allie’s or even identify long term goals.

We should no longer support what has become a blood bath and the complete lack of criticism from the pro-Israel faction pretty much shows how entrenched the view is.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I see Israel as going to far and turning valid self defense into vendetta, with a goal towards expelling Gazan’s in the guise of a calculated sales pitch that is nothing more than “humanitarian” self interest (per one of their own position papers) or turning it into uninhabitable rubble and getting rid of the residents that way.

Multiple experts have said that you cannot get rid of Hamas via military ”victory” alone, a political solution needs to be found. Israel refuses and refuses to work with its Allie’s or even identify long term goals.

We should no longer support what has become a blood bath and the complete lack of criticism from the pro-Israel faction pretty much shows how entrenched the view is.

Multiple experts have said that you cannot get rid of Hamas via military ”victory” alone, a political solution needs to be found. Israel refuses and refuses to work with its Allie’s or even identify long term goals.

You're right, the Palestinians need to remove Hamas and elect a government that wants peace.

 

[Coyote]

Multiple experts have said that you cannot get rid of Hamas via military ”victory” alone, a political solution needs to be found. Israel refuses and refuses to work with its Allie’s or even identify long term goals.

You're right, the Palestinians need to remove Hamas and elect a government that wants peace.

Remind me…when did Hamas hold elections?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Remind me…when did Hamas hold elections?

You're right, they're like commies.
Another reason to get rid of Hamas.

 

[Coyote]

You're right, they're like commies.
Another reason to get rid of Hamas.

No one is saying they should not be gotten rid of.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

No one is saying they should not be gotten rid of.

They can surrender, the civilians can push them out or Israel can keep attacking them.

Do you see a fourth path?

 

[toomuchtime_]

No one is saying they should not be gotten rid of.

That's exactly what you are saying. While you will agree in principle that Hamas should "be gotten rid of" you object to any action Israel takes to get rid of them and are unable to offer any specific alternatives to how Israel is trying to "get rid of" Hamas.

 

[Shusha]

I see Israel as going to far and turning valid self defense into vendetta,

I believe you are objectively wrong about this and here is why:

1. There are 136 hostages remaining in Gaza. There is evidence that at least some of them may be alive. They need to be found and they need to be brought home. This is demonstrably and objectively a reason for a war of self-defense to continue.
2. 18 of the 24 battalions of Hamas militia are no longer functional. 6 more to go. The goal has always been to destroy the military function of Hamas. That is a valid goal of self-defense, and we are not done yet.
3. The leader of Hamas in Gaza remains free. He is a rallying point, around which a new militia might emerge. He needs to be captured or killed. Also a valid goal of self-defense. Also still to be accomplished.
4. The infrastructure which allowed for the importation, movement, and deployment of weapons must be destroyed completely and rendered impossible to rebuild. Rafah is crucial in achieving this goal.

The reasons for Israel setting the military objectives they set are still valid, and the military objectives have not yet been achieved. Until they are, Israel is conducting a just war of self-defense.

with a goal towards expelling Gazan’s in the guise of a calculated sales pitch that is nothing more than “humanitarian” self interest (per one of their own position papers)

The people of Gaza must be given the choice. (You can't complain about "open air prison" all these years, and yet now insist they remain imprisoned.)

or turning it into uninhabitable rubble and getting rid of the residents that way. Talk about an existential threat.

Rubble can be rebuilt. Infrastructure can be restored. Farms can be replanted. Nothing existential at all about this.

While Hamas is a threat, Hamas is not an existential threat. It lacks the means and strength. Israel is in a position of far greater strength and international support than Hamas will ever had. Framing it as existential is dishonest and opens the door to the use any means.

I very strongly disagree. Hamas is the mushroom which sticks its head above ground, but there is an entire network underneath. The Islamist extremist threat is real and existential for Israel and for the Jewish people.

The existential threat is to the Palestinians, who lack strength and are facing the possible annihilating of national identity, culture and their history in their homeland. You can certainly blame Hamas for much of this, but can’t exonerate Israel any longer.

The only threat to the Palestinian national identity, culture, and history is their own stubborn insistence on building a war society, instead of a society of national identity, culture, and history.

Multiple experts have said that you cannot get rid of Hamas via military ”victory” alone, a political solution needs to be found. Israel refuses and refuses to work with its Allie’s or even identify long term goals.

There is no political solution to extremist Islamist ideology. You can not get rid of the extremist Islamist ideology of Hamas via military victory, but you sure can dismantle all the means it has to conduct atrocities against innocents. The long term goals are pretty simple: de-radicalization under supervision, prevention of rebuilding the war society in ideology and practice, education, creation of economic prosperity, co-operation with Israel.

We should no longer support what has become a blood bath and the complete lack of criticism from the pro-Israel faction pretty much shows how entrenched the view is.

"Blood bath" is unnecessarily emotive, but I assume you mean that the death toll is "too high". What would be the "right" number of deaths for a military operation of this size with the stated goals of self-defense?

 

[Shusha]

No one is saying they should not be gotten rid of.

You are certainly suggesting that Israel stop pursuit of that goal prior to achieving that objective.

 

[Coyote]

You are certainly suggesting that Israel stop pursuit of that goal prior to achieving that objective.

That is problem with your argument. It’s inherently dishonest.

You are attempting to claim that disagreeing with Israel’s TACTICS means one doesn’t want Hamas gone and that is completely false.

 

[Coyote]

I believe you are objectively wrong about this and here is why:

1. There are 136 hostages remaining in Gaza. There is evidence that at least some of them may be alive. They need to be found and they need to be brought home. This is demonstrably and objectively a reason for a war of self-defense to continue.

This is where Israel’s military solution is failing. How many hostages have they gotten out from it? Almost none. In fact they have ended up killing some of them, possibly many. The majority have been released through negotiation.

2. 18 of the 24 battalions of Hamas militia are no longer functional. 6 more to go. The goal has always been to destroy the military function of Hamas. That is a valid goal of self-defense, and we are not done yet.

Agree, that is a valid goal.

3. The leader of Hamas in Gaza remains free. He is a rallying point, around which a new militia might emerge. He needs to be captured or killed. Also a valid goal of self-defense. Also still to be accomplished.

Agree. However targeted approach could accomplish that with far fewer civilian casualties.

4. The infrastructure which allowed for the importation, movement, and deployment of weapons must be destroyed completely and rendered impossible to rebuild. Rafah is crucial in achieving this goal.

They have forced more than half of Gaza’s population into Rafah. Why?

The reasons for Israel setting the military objectives they set are still valid, and the military objectives have not yet been achieved. Until they are, Israel is conducting a just war of self-defense.

The problem with that argument is you can use it to justify anything under “military objectives”.

The people of Gaza must be given the choice. (You can't complain about "open air prison" all these years, and yet now insist they remain imprisoned.)

I agree. It must also be a real choice, not one forced on them because their homeland has been rendered unlivable and the occupying power wants them gone.

Rubble can be rebuilt. Infrastructure can be restored. Farms can be replanted. Nothing existential at all about this.

Rubble can be “rebuilt”, but lives can’t be replaced. Entire clans have been wiped out. Historical sites, universities, religious sites are damaged or destroyed. Hundreds of pounds of unexploded ordinance remain in Gaza creating a very dangerous situation for building or farming. If you destroy a people’s culture, history and national identity through war and/or a forced expulsion that too can be existential.

I very strongly disagree. Hamas is the mushroom which sticks its head above ground, but there is an entire network underneath. The Islamist extremist threat is real and existential for Israel and for the Jewish people.

I disagree. To be an existential threat, they must have the means and the will to destroy the Jewish people or Israel. Nations have that power. Israel has that power. Not Hamas or any of these other jihadi groups. Not the Palestinians. Framing a conflict as existential is too often used to justify extreme solutions.

The only threat to the Palestinian national identity, culture, and history is their own stubborn insistence on building a war society, instead of a society of national identity, culture, and history.

I disagree. There has long been a concerted effort to deny them a national identity and marginalize or erase the validity of key events such as Nakhba. I do agree with you though on this: Palestinians need to change the trajectory of their society from one based in violent conflict to one based on nation building.

There is no political solution to extremist Islamist ideology. You can not get rid of the extremist Islamist ideology of Hamas via military victory, but you sure can dismantle all the means it has to conduct atrocities against innocents. The long term goals are pretty simple: de-radicalization under supervision, prevention of rebuilding the war society in ideology and practice, education, creation of economic prosperity, co-operation with Israel.

WHAT long term goals. None have really been articulated by the Israeli government, just by you.

None of this happened in a vacuum and the seeds of this conflict were sown during the creation of Israel and the Arab states. A military solution isn’t going to fix all that. In fact, the horrendous destruction and civilian death toll is having the opposite effect, putting at risk international support against Hamas, as well as important alliances and Israel’s own long term efforts at normalizing relations with it’s Arab neighbors. Israel’s stubborn refusal to consider more targeted attacks over wholesale destruction isn’t a good look.

"Blood bath" is unnecessarily emotive, but I assume you mean that the death toll is "too high". What would be the "right" number of deaths for a military operation of this size with the stated goals of self-defense?

Is it really? Because when you describe what Hamas did its Israeli victims, you use emotive language….but you object when it is used in regards to Palestinian victims? Come on. You can’t have it both ways here.

I am not a military expert, none of us are. But Israel has moved well beyond “self defense”.