UN: Israel committed "Complete Massacre" and "the worst ever" in Gaza

Using this reasoning one could argue for the Holocaust, the ends justifies the means argument.

Liar.
No, it's true, here: What was Hitler’s rationale for the Holocaust?

So Hitler’s plan was for Germany to emulate the United States, first by seizing large tracts of productive land by pushing the indigenous populations out. If those natives could not be pushed out, they were to be killed. And then slave labor was to be employed to produce the food necessary to support industrialization and militarization, just as the United States had done.
Hitler and the Nazi regime didn't mass murder Jews for no reason, they had their reasons.
Answer this hypothetical question for me please, if Hamas did get eliminated from Gaza but every man woman and child in Gaza was killed, would you approve of the operation?

No.
But with 38,000 dead you do approve, so what is the limit for you to stop approval? 100,000? 500,000?
Answer this hypothetical question for me please, if Israel intended to kill every Gazan, why are so few dead?
Well as the Nazis found, such an undertaking takes time.
 
Yes I know it's not a law abiding government, that's not being contested. It was my answer as to what is a better alternative that weapons.
Exactly. A better alternative for all the people of Gaza and all the people of Israel would have been for Gaza to refrain from violence since 2005 and instead build a viable independent state.
Other than complete capitulation and acceptance of their plight I don't think there are any left. They've tried pretty much everything else, even the UN has tried but the US makes that approach fruitless.
If by capitulation and acceptance of their plight, you mean they have to accept Israel as a state neighboring theirs, yes! Hell, yes! they have to accept that.
 
Wait, are you trying to argue that these weapons were deliberately designed for use against babies and children?
I never said that. They were designed to generate huge numbers of tiny pieces of shrapnel and they are being chosen and used to kill babies and children and adults. That's relatively new, use of that concept so far as I'm aware.
 
We could ask you to condemn an Arab terrorist attack from the 1970s. Would that be ok?
No, I won't condemn any terrorist event at your request unless you explain the criteria you are using to select a particular event, for example what' so special about Arab terrorist attacks that makes them more relevant than Israeli terrorist attacks?
 
I never said that. They were designed to generate huge numbers of tiny pieces of shrapnel and they are being chosen and used to kill babies and children and adults. That's relatively new, use of that concept so far as I'm aware.
They are not used to kill babies and children. They are designed to have an extremely small and extremely accurate blast radius which increases the success of taking out the combatant and drastically reduces the chances of incidental harm to non-combatants.
 
Exactly. A better alternative for all the people of Gaza and all the people of Israel would have been for Gaza to refrain from violence since 2005 and instead build a viable independent state.
No, that's not what I was agreeing to. I agreed that Hamas was not a law abiding government. I did not agree to the rest of that statement.
If by capitulation and acceptance of their plight, you mean they have to accept Israel as a state neighboring theirs, yes! Hell, yes! they have to accept that.
Well they don't accept that nor do they accept many other factors that impact their quality of life. They also don't "have to accept that" that's why Hamas attacked, they don't accept the situation as it stands today, there are far more things they refuse to accept besides whether Israel should or should not exist.
 
No, it's true, here: What was Hitler’s rationale for the Holocaust?


Hitler and the Nazi regime didn't mass murder Jews for no reason, they had their reasons.

But with 38,000 dead you do approve, so what is the limit for you to stop approval? 100,000? 500,000?

Well as the Nazis found, such an undertaking takes time.

What reasoning in post #698 made you say this......

Using this reasoning one could argue for the Holocaust,

But with 38,000 dead you do approve,


Approve what?

Well as the Nazis found, such an undertaking takes time.

Right. I could have killed 100,000 Gazans in the first hour, 500,000 in the first week
if I intended to kill all the Gazans.

So, why so few?
 
They are not used to kill babies and children.
So how are these babies and children getting shrapnel blast injuries? self inflicted gunshot wounds?
They are designed to have an extremely small and extremely accurate blast radius which increases the success of taking out the combatant and drastically reduces the chances of incidental harm to non-combatants.
Right, how does that show they are not being used to kill and maim children?
 
No, I won't condemn any terrorist event at your request unless you explain the criteria you are using to select a particular event, for example what' so special about Arab terrorist attacks that makes them more relevant than Israeli terrorist attacks?

the criteria you are using to select a particular event,

Because it's the most recent one you moron. And the most violent one you idiot.

And instead of killing and wounding a couple of civilians,
your Hamas buddies managed to kill hundreds.
 
No, that's not what I was agreeing to. I agreed that Hamas was not a law abiding government. I did not agree to the rest of that statement.

Well they don't accept that nor do they accept many other factors that impact their quality of life. They also don't "have to accept that" that's why Hamas attacked, they don't accept the situation as it stands today, there are far more things they refuse to accept besides whether Israel should or should not exist.
I'll ask again: What legal conflict resolution strategies SHOULD Gaza be using instead?
 
What reasoning in post #698 made you say this......

Using this reasoning one could argue for the Holocaust,

But with 38,000 dead you do approve,


Approve what?
Approve of the number killed in Gaza, you said if all were killed you'd not approve, I asked what is the maximum number you would approve of? You said that 2.5 million (the population of Gaza) would elicit your disapproval, yet 38,000 does not, so how high can the number killed go before you say "No, I don't approve of this"?
Well as the Nazis found, such an undertaking takes time.

Right. I could have killed 100,000 Gazans in the first hour, 500,000 in the first week
if I intended to kill all the Gazans.

So, why so few?
International reaction, there would be a point at which even the US would remove support. Jews all around the world would likely become overnight targets of revenge attacks and so on. Also there is disease running rampant now throughout Gaza and malnutrition, even suicides and other potentially fatal morbidities so there's no need to rely on bombs and bullets alone.
This is just speculation, I have no idea how many Palestinians they wany kill or even if they have a limit, I don't know.
 
the criteria you are using to select a particular event,

Because it's the most recent one you moron. And the most violent one you idiot.
Well actually the attack on Gaza is the most recent one and the most violent, so if these are your criteria why aren't you condemning Israel's attack?
And instead of killing and wounding a couple of civilians,
your Hamas buddies managed to kill hundreds.
Yes, we know the numbers about 1,200 or so, I don't doubt the numbers.
 
So how are these babies and children getting shrapnel blast injuries?

Right, how does that show they are not being used to kill and maim children?
They are not being "used to kill children". They are being used to kill combatants. Injury to non-combatants is incidental harm. Incidental harm is a result of military objectives, such as combatants, being in close proximity to non-combatants (a strategy deliberately employed by Hamas). A clean, accurate, tightly-controlled blast radius is less likely to involve non-combatants, even when they are in close proximity, thus reducing incidental harm. It is a way of combating the disgusting and barbaric practice of using children as cover.
 
They are not being "used to kill children". They are being used to kill combatants.
They are being used and they are killing children, I don't see any relevance to the "reason" the Israelis might give to the public. Just be honest, the ends justify the means - that's all this is, and that's what Hamas thought on Oct 7th.
Injury to non-combatants is incidental harm. Incidental harm is a result of military objectives, such as combatants, being in close proximity to non-combatants (a strategy deliberately employed by Hamas). A clean, accurate, tightly-controlled blast radius is less likely to involve non-combatants, even when they are in close proximity, thus reducing incidental harm. It is a way of combating the disgusting and barbaric practice of using children as cover.
Well injuries to Israelis on Oct 7th was incidental harm, taking hostages was incidental harm, one mans incidental harm is another man's tragedy.
 
I already answered you, I said "I don't think there are any left".
I have a couple of ideas. How about a peace treaty. Economic development. Trade agreements. Partnerships with Arab nations. Revitalized education system. University exchanges. Independence and statehood. Seems reasonable. Why don't the people of Gaza employ these legal methods of conflict resolution?
 
Approve of the number killed in Gaza, you said if all were killed you'd not approve, I asked what is the maximum number you would approve of? You said that 2.5 million (the population of Gaza) would elicit your disapproval, yet 38,000 does not, so how high can the number killed go before you say "No, I don't approve of this"?

International reaction, there would be a point at which even the US would remove support. Jews all around the world would likely become overnight targets of revenge attacks and so on. Also there is disease running rampant now throughout Gaza and malnutrition, even suicides and other potentially fatal morbidities so there's no need to rely on bombs and bullets alone.
This is just speculation, I have no idea how many Palestinians they wany kill or even if they have a limit, I don't know.

You said that 2.5 million (the population of Gaza) would elicit your disapproval, yet 38,000 does not,

I said 38,000 does not? Where? Link?

How many have been killed in Gaza?

International reaction,

You said Israel is committing genocide, but only something like one dead per bomb.
Why are you lying?
 
The recent developments in the Gaza Strip have provoked a stern response from the United Nations Coordinator for Humanitarian Affairs, who has labeled the situation as a ā€œcomplete massacre,ā€ making it the worst of its kind to date. This sharp escalation of violence in the historically volatile region implies a substantial number of casualties and a dire humanitarian condition, potentially signaling a crisis of grave implications for the local populace as well as international relations.


Unprecedented Violence Unfolds​


The executive director of the United Nations Children’s Fund has dubbed Gaza as the most perilous place for children worldwide. Stunning reports reveal the death of over 5,300 Palestinian children within a mere 46-day span, marking children as 40% of the total casualties in Gaza. The situation has deteriorated to such an extent that around 1,200 children are still to be accounted for, trapped under the rubble of demolished buildings.


Attempted Ceasefire Amidst the Chaos​


The cease-fire talks between the Hamas militant group and Israel are underway, with confirmations from both sides. The deal, brokered by Washington and Qatar, aims to bring a temporary halt to the escalating war, which is currently in its seventh week. The truce, due to commence on Thursday morning, could potentially offer a respite to the nearly 1,037,000 internally displaced Palestinians seeking shelter in UNRWA facilities across the Gaza Strip.


International Reactions and Responses​


The sudden surge in violence has drawn a mixed response from the global community. The United Nations General Assembly passed a resolution calling for an immediate and sustained humanitarian truce and cessation of hostilities. This resolution was adopted by a vote of 121 states to 14, with 44 abstentions. Israel’s Western allies, such as the United States and several European countries, condemned the attacks by Hamas, expressing solidarity for Israel and affirming its right to self-defense.

And Hamas committed the worst massacre in Israel. See how it works?
 
No, I've not heard much of this at all, thanks for posting about it. On a similar note I did read about Israel's secret support for importing illicit drugs into Gaza, creating an addiction problem with the obvious intent of destroying the social fabric there, this was before Oct 7th of course.



In addition to illegal use of phosphorous, Bio / Chem, D.U. (Depleted Uranium), I.D.U. and genotoxic weaponry that Israel is developing in ways to exterminate future generations of Palestinians, Zionist land thieves (aka "Settlers") have even weaponized their raw sewage to poison wells, kill crops, sicken livestock. (1), (2)

I fully realize that there are very many rational, compassionate, bright and ethical Israelis that already oppose Israel's genocidal, right wing expansionists.
Regrettably, the Netanyahu government abhors even the thought of a just and durable peace which would prohibit further land theft, gratuitous murder and destruction of even West Bank Palestinians with IDF's complicity.(3), (4)

By now there is no question that Israel's right wing is committing genocide.
Not only is Israel's right wing attempting to destroy any evidence of the previous existence of Palestine's native residents, its genocidal intent is further demonstrated by its destruction of human graves in old Palestinian cemeteries. (5)

Thanks,


(1). "The devastating environmental effects of Israeli settler-colonialism in the West Bank"

"Israeli settlement expansion is not only illegal, it is also destroying Palestine's environment through the urbanization of the West Bank."


EXCERPT "Israel dumps 80% of the waste products generated from Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank. This in turn, ā€œ[pollutes] the Palestinian earth and water supply, while Israeli settlers in the West Bank – who produce similar amounts of wastewater to the Palestinian population, despite being outnumbered more than six to one – deliberately poison the water, land and livestock of nearby Palestinian villagesā€. This means that every year over ā€œ2 million cubic metres of raw [untreated] sewage flow into the valleys of streams of the [Palestinian] West Bank…[causing] severe damage through the West Bank… " CONTINUED


(2). ā€œDEMONSTRATING THE HARMFUL EFFECTS CAUSED THROUGH THE ILLEGAL ISRAELI SETTLEMENT PRACTICE OF DUMPING WASTEWATER ONTO PALESTINIAN AGRICULTURAL LANDSā€
http://www.arij.org/latest-news/479-...ral-lands.html

EXCERPT ā€œ(*)Israeli settlements are illegally dumping wastewater onto Palestinian villages, farmlands and agricultural lands. This practice has devastating effects on the Palestinian lands, both reducing and preventing any agricultural production, livestock farming and infecting previously safe drinking water. The accumulative effect of these issues has resulted in an economic downturn, increases in disease and health problems, an increase in poverty and often the slow migration of Palestinians to other areas where they have more potential for earning and farming which only further compounds the issue of internal displacement.ā€CONTINUED


(3). "Israel Must Loudly Arrest the Murderous West Bank Settlers"

3, November 2023

EXCERPT "Since Hamas’ Oct. 7 attack, settlers there have killed more than 120 Palestinians and injured at least 2,000. They have forcibly expelled more than 800 Palestinians from their homes, blown up their generators and solar panels, and burned down tents of Bedouin herders.

Again: This has been going on not in Gaza but in the West Bank—which is governed by the Palestinian Authority, not by Hamas." CONTINUED


(4). "Lines Increasingly Blurred Between Soldiers and Settlers in the West Bank

Israeli attacks on Palestinians there have surged since the Israel-Hamas war began."



EXCERPT "The violence itself is not new, but two things are worth watching. As the attacks spread, there’s growing evidence that soldiers and settlers are working hand in hand. And there are signs that settlers are increasingly worried about a political shift after the war in Gaza—and trying to change the West Bank landscape while they can."
CONTINUED


(5). ā€œIsrael-Hamas war: Even Gaza's graveyards have suffered destructionā€

EXCERPT ā€œNearly half the burial sites in the Palestinian enclave have suffered damage by armored vehicles, air strikes and artillery fire from the Israeli army.

The situation at the Jabaliya cemetery was not isolated. Scores of videos and photos, shot and taken by Gazan residents and journalists, have documented the destruction of at least eight major cemeteries in the Palestinian territory since the start of the Israeli army's ground operations. They show destroyed tombstones and human remains dispersed from their graves and scattered over the upturned earth.ā€ CONTINUED
 
Well actually the attack on Gaza is the most recent one and the most violent, so if these are your criteria why aren't you condemning Israel's attack?

Yes, we know the numbers about 1,200 or so, I don't doubt the numbers.

Well actually the attack on Gaza is the most recent one and the most violent

Massive terrorist attacks tend to trigger retaliation. Just like Hamas wanted.

so if these are your criteria why aren't you condemning Israel's attack?

Because Hamas wanted it, they caused it.
 
Back
Top Bottom