This is all horrific and worthy of retaliation. Collective punishment is still inappropriate.

We can believe women's accounts of being raped and still condemn the indiscriminate killing of tens of thousands of women and children.

Picking a side is playing right into Bibi and Hamas' hands.

Bibi wants impunity and Hamas wants recruitment.

Condemn them all like a real moral agent.

tragedy but that seems not harsh enough

Words have meanings. And I think it is a mistake to be sloppy any misuse words like this. Maybe things are less discriminate than you would want, but clearly it isn't indiscriminate. Israel drops leaflets and send text mails for days before heavy bombing of an area. Hundreds of thousands of civilians have been allowed to evacuate Rafah during the current offensive. Everything goes through a chain of command to evaluate whether unacceptable civilians casualties could occur.

We of course will never know, but I suspect Hamas reported number of civilians killed is way over inflated, and includes thousands of civilians killed by Hamas themselves, either intentionally when they are using violence to keep everyone in line, or as collateral damage when they are attacking Israel troops.

when have they had unacceptable civilian losses in their missions? or are they self admittedly batting 1000

if you attack someone and they attack you back and kill your people, they are the killers still. It might be your fault it happened but they still did it. Words have meanings. And I think it is a mistake to be sloppy any misuse words like this

What did these two do that makes being killed in this manner "not harsh enough"?


"In another, a man writhes on the ground, bleeding from his stomach, as a terrorist tries repeatedly to decapitate him with farming equipment. The man appears to be southeast Asian, possibly one of Israel’s foreign agricultural workers.

In another clip, from after the assault, an Israeli woman is seen trying to work out if a partially burned woman’s corpse, with a mutilated head, is that of a family member. The dead woman’s dress is pulled up to her waist and her underpants have been removed."

Egypt blocking aid. Basically using Palestinian lives as pawns to punish Israel for destroying the smuggling tunnels. Yawns from the progressive left and Muslim world.

Just a reminder most of the outrage over the condition of Palestinian civilians are bad faith, and politics and ideology are guiding the concern for most protestors/activists much more than any humanitarian first principle.

Pretty sure PW meant that "tragedy" was a possible synonym but the word itself was not harsh enough.

Got it, thanks for translating. I hope you're right.

Possibly not harsh enough.

These are atrocities. But if they were carried out against members of the armed forces they would simply be called acts of war.

No surprise there. Gaza is supposed to be part of Egypt. After making peace with them, Israel tried to give it back to them, but they wouldn't take it. Egypt bears full responsibility for the current status of Gaza.

I can't imagine any war has ever been conducted while deliberately giving civilians a chance to get out than this one. The reason they have nowhere to go is 100% on Egypt. Who else announces where and when they will attack? Pretty bad strategy IMO, no idea why they do it. This thing probably would have been over by now if they hadn't.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/li...amin-netanyahu

I didn't think Palestine had recognized its own statehood. What are the boundaries they're claiming, from the river to the sea?

Anyway though, if they are a state, I guess there go the claims that Israel should be giving them aid. Israel owes them nothing; Norway, Ireland, and Spain should be taking care of them if they need help.

Yeah. It really isn't clear what the ramifications are for half the world deciding a group of stateless refugees that are choosing to be refugees (at least the political decision makers are) are now a state with no clear physical borders, economy, functional govt, or anything else that would make up an actual state. I assume it is mostly just performative, but I really do wonder if there are any practical ramifications from this.

Well that's just the issue. If it's what they have now, it's gonna be a problem for Hamas.

The Geneva Conventions aren't always convenient, but I think Israel is very quickly discovering why civilized nations follow them.

We let civilians escape during the Iraqi invasion. Well we were supposed to let them escape

We did same thing in Japan. Maybe Germany too.


You just don’t know how the world has worked

You guys gotta read the last paragraph

Some civilian infrastructure(rail tracks, roads, ports, airports, and telecommunications used by the military for communications OR transporting assets are all considered legitimate military target.


Kibbutzes are communication centers, so they are all legit targets.

IDF uses all of its civilian infrastructure to support its troops, and that’s why Hamas isn’t committing war crimes when they attack civilian assets that support the IDF

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_Conventions


Here’s the link, feel free to educate yourselves.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Did we announce exactly where we planned to attack a week in advance?

I know we didn't give notice to Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

You just don't know how to understand simple concepts.

Are you sure about this?

Anyways, Post WWII I think it is true that the US has generally followed the Geneva Conventions, which has worked fairly well in fighting outmatched conventional military, and much less well fighting guerrilla insurgencies.

Right or wrong, Israel feels all its neighbors attacking it are a much larger existential risk than the US has in any of its wars/invasions the last 80 years, so it is less willing to unilaterally follow strict rules of combat that just guarantee it is going to lose in the long run. And I think this is a very reasonable approach most first world nations in similar situations would follow.

Yes we drop leaflets and tell civilians where to leave and where not to stay

The dictators then tell their people to ignore the American propaganda and they die.

You know we didn’t give notice? Hey you could be right.

But in Iraq we def notified them so your argument isn’t valid past 30 years ago

Geneva convention doesn’t give a **** if you agree or not

This is actually what happened in Northern Gaza in the first few weeks of the war. Hamas told the Palestinian people to stay in the areas Israel announced they were going to attack, and a lot of them did and died. The Palestinian people found out the hard way not to trust Hamas at all, and as a result there has been a lot less civilian casualties in the last couple months, as the people have been better about evacuating.

Also, in some cases Hamas was physically restraining people from evacuating; and their ability to do this has degraded significantly.

I also suspect the civilian casualties are a lot lower now because Hamas was killing a lot of them, and this has gone down significantly as their war capabilities have degraded over the months.

And if/when **** really hits the fan, the Geneva convention wont be worth the paper it is printed on. Maybe there is some nihilistic European countries that would just roll over and die. But the vast majority of countries aren't going to risk their existence to follow the Geneva convention.