That’s because apparently someone decided, without discussion, that setting military headquarters in a hospital - where babies are born - is absolutely fine and moral move.
Killing a building full of women and children to go after a group of people who may or may not be in said building after they killed women and children…
Two unscrupulous groups are willing to murder innocent civilians. Sounds like two groups of terrorists.
Fuck Hammas, fuck the IDF. I’m absolutely fine with them killing each other. I’m not okay with the fact that they’re both using innocent civilians as pawns.
The difference being the IDF has consistently gone to pretty significant lengths to warn civilians and give them time to evacuate. Hamas has not and in fact specifically targets civilians. These groups are not the same.
The difference being the IDF has consistently gone to pretty significant lengths to warn civilians and give them time to evacuate.
True, but then to bombard from the air destroying whole buildings and killing many civilians to get to a few combatants under the building is not an ethical or moral move either. You don’t get a get out of jail free card for notifying up front, you have to follow through.
Telling someone to evacuate is not enough, you have to verify they have evacuated. If they have not, you should be instead sending in ground troops, and yes with a larger cost in lives and political turmoil, but that is the ethical way.
Non-combatants are not supposed to be involved in combat.
Bullshit. There’s evidence of some warnings but with literally thousands of air strikes a week there literally isn’t the resources to warn everyone like they did during the “cease fire”. And you don’t get 10,000 civilians dead in a month by warning them.
What would convince you? Based on what I can glean from various sources, it seems at least likely that the claim is true. I also don’t see what incentive the Israelis have to lie about it.
Well think about it for a moment. What I mean is that they already know that they will be accused of lying regardless, so why bother “fabricating” an ambiguous account when they could just as easily lie and claim that they found a giant Hamas command center?
In other words, they have no incentive to lie about the attack having achieved ambiguous results unless they are actually telling the truth. If you are going to lie, and if you know you won’t be believed regardless, why not go whole hog?
Again, they have no incentive to half-ass it unless they’re simply stating the truth.
If they don’t have something believable then the Boycott, Divest, and Sanction movement will cut off their Western support and see them on trial in the Hague.
Getting the lie right or persuading the world they really really did believe this has literal existential consequences for the politicians and generals.
Yea there’s no consensus that the ‘evidence’ produced is reliable. At first IDF showed the hatch to a water cistern and said it was the hatch to the network of tunnels. This new photo could just be a hole in the ground. The tour through the MRI room and truck loaded with weapons could be easily planted. Independent investigations like Forensic Architecture have found discrepancies and raised questions over the legitimacy of IDFs claims. Al Jazeera has reported that IDF had misreported facts to build a narrative.
US intelligence agrees that Hamas was operating out of the hospital, but there not much else backing up these claims right now.
"Cobb-Smith has joined with the most politicized anti-Israel NGOs in pushing false or unsubstantiated accusations of Israeli violations of the laws of war […] In particular, he circulated false claims (“there was no tactical reason; there was no reasonable use of that weapon system”) as well as claims (later discredited) that the IDF used white phosphorous “in an illegal manner.” Similarly, he has been involved with the campaigns of the anti-Israel NGO known as Forensic Architecture.
Oh okey, I understand better what you mean by “not much to back those claims”
I did some quick searches on him and saw he was with amnesty international. This didn’t come up for me. I’ll remove him as a reference. Appreciate the insight to him.
They pulled that from a site called NGO-Monitor. It’s a right wing Israeli outlet that exists specifically to dismiss claims from international NGOs. It’s about as credible as the government itself denying it committed crimes.
Except there’s very credible evidence Israel uses WP illegally. There’s literally photos of it available online. Is that the IDF calling him biased or what?
Maybe we should wait until there’s been a more neutral investigation before deciding it’s one hundred percent true.
What I never understand about major news stories is that so many people take everything they see at face value and then consider it indisputable fact. When there’s an international war going on, no one thinks that just maybe we’re only getting a fraction of reality communicated to us? That it must be the worst game of telephone in terms of accuracy? But then if someone even suggests that maybe there’s more to the story, they’re conspiracy theorists or they get told what “side” they’re on.
We should all be at least somewhat discerning. There’s so many different actors with interests in this war. We have no idea what else could be going on that we will never, ever hear about, nor how much spin is being put on the stuff we do hear about.
Do you really think only you had this thought? Don’t you think this is exactly what I think about your opinions? And telling this in my face literally does nothing because I am just as convinced that you gobble up Al-Jazeera/Hamas propaganda as, supposedly, I am gobbling up Israeli propaganda?
We need a hell of a lot more evidence to support that than we’ve seen, it would still run into major problems with proportionality/distinction standards regarding all the civilians they killed in and around the hospital, and it wouldn’t make a scratch with regard to the other civilian infrastructure they’ve targeted.
So then when terrorists use human shields, which in this case include literal babies, it’s okay to ignore the human shields and just indiscriminately attack?
I didn’t say “it was okey”. I said i do understand why that happens. I am also saying Israel takes some steps to limit the number of civil victims, while Hamas takes none
Hamas has a different agenda. It’s an asymmetrical conflict. The intention of Hamas and Hezbollah is to provoke Israel into a genocide. Hiding among the trees to incite Netanyahu to burn down the forest.
They want nothing more then to get on video Israeli forces massacring thousands of Palestinian civilians.
I’m not an expert. So I’d defer to Lt. General James Glynn, survivor of Fallujah on how to approach the situation in Gaza.
I’d also refer to centuries of counter-insurgency that notes that massacring civilians only drives more recruits to the enemy cause, often recruits who are willing to engage in suicide missions.
Even leaving the hospital intact and doing nothing was a better option, and in fact, Israel is not fighting a war of desperation, and can actually afford to approach violence with deliberation and consideration.
The reason Netanyahu is behaving like Trump or George W. Bush is because he likes the idea of rushing in with stormtroopers and crushing the enemy, not because it’s actually a good idea. And that’s why Hezbollah provoked him in the first place.
First of all, you’re either ignorant or an idiot if you think what Israel is doing is “indiscriminate”.
More importantly, what’s your superior moral alternative when a force breaches borders, murders hundreds, and takes and holds hundreds more as hostages, and then retreats to the cover of hospitals and schools in a dense city?
More importantly, what’s your superior moral alternative when a force breaches borders, murders hundreds, and takes and holds hundreds more as hostages, and then retreats to the cover of hospitals and schools in a dense city?
Let’s do a little thought experiment here. Say that everything happened exactly as before except this time they retreated and hid inside Israeli hospitals and schools, on the Israeli side of the border, full of Israeli citizens. Do you think Israel would attack those terrorists in the same way?
Probably not, because those would be THEIR hospitals. There would be no tunnel system, no munitions stores, etc etc.
Your “gotcha” thought experiment is asking whether or not a country should treat the enemy country with equal caution to their own. Did you even consider it before asking it?
Does that force come from a people who’ve been deprived of everything, forced into a system of apartheid, robbed of their freedom and routinely bullied, tortured and killed for half a century?
That seems to be an important factor to just leave out of the equation.
That’s because apparently someone decided, without discussion, that setting military headquarters in a hospital - where babies are born - is absolutely fine and moral move.
Killing a building full of women and children to go after a group of people who may or may not be in said building after they killed women and children…
Two unscrupulous groups are willing to murder innocent civilians. Sounds like two groups of terrorists.
Fuck Hammas, fuck the IDF. I’m absolutely fine with them killing each other. I’m not okay with the fact that they’re both using innocent civilians as pawns.
That’s a point of view I am willing to accept
The difference being the IDF has consistently gone to pretty significant lengths to warn civilians and give them time to evacuate. Hamas has not and in fact specifically targets civilians. These groups are not the same.
True, but then to bombard from the air destroying whole buildings and killing many civilians to get to a few combatants under the building is not an ethical or moral move either. You don’t get a get out of jail free card for notifying up front, you have to follow through.
Telling someone to evacuate is not enough, you have to verify they have evacuated. If they have not, you should be instead sending in ground troops, and yes with a larger cost in lives and political turmoil, but that is the ethical way.
Non-combatants are not supposed to be involved in combat.
Bullshit. There’s evidence of some warnings but with literally thousands of air strikes a week there literally isn’t the resources to warn everyone like they did during the “cease fire”. And you don’t get 10,000 civilians dead in a month by warning them.
Last I saw Hamas wasn’t troubling themselves with giving ANY warnings. I’d say some>none. Where is the moral equivalence you so desperately want?
It doesn’t matter how much you warn them if there’s no military presence. The warnings they do give are nothing but a fig leaf to cover up war crimes
He said, believing the IOF, who has killed Palestinians with absolute impunity, and lying through the teeth about it
What would convince you? Based on what I can glean from various sources, it seems at least likely that the claim is true. I also don’t see what incentive the Israelis have to lie about it.
While it does seem plausible. You don’t see what incentive the Israelis have to lie about it? Really?
Well think about it for a moment. What I mean is that they already know that they will be accused of lying regardless, so why bother “fabricating” an ambiguous account when they could just as easily lie and claim that they found a giant Hamas command center?
In other words, they have no incentive to lie about the attack having achieved ambiguous results unless they are actually telling the truth. If you are going to lie, and if you know you won’t be believed regardless, why not go whole hog?
Again, they have no incentive to half-ass it unless they’re simply stating the truth.
If they don’t have something believable then the Boycott, Divest, and Sanction movement will cut off their Western support and see them on trial in the Hague.
Getting the lie right or persuading the world they really really did believe this has literal existential consequences for the politicians and generals.
Historians call that the Criterion of Embarrassment.
Sure where is the evidence of all those tunnels? Get outta here IDF shill.
It’s under all the rubble, just like the Intel on where the hostages are. 🙄
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/nov/19/idf-israel-army-footage-claims-hamas-tunnel-al-shifa-hospital-gaza
OMG Guys a large hospital has maintenance tunnels!
Until they release the drone footage of a command center down there it’s just infrastructure they’re making shit up about.
Huh?
Don’t forget the hasbara bots upvoting him!
Has there even been any evidence of that?
https://www.timesofisrael.com/idf-says-it-has-clear-information-linking-shifa-hospital-to-hamas-held-hostages/
Yea there’s no consensus that the ‘evidence’ produced is reliable. At first IDF showed the hatch to a water cistern and said it was the hatch to the network of tunnels. This new photo could just be a hole in the ground. The tour through the MRI room and truck loaded with weapons could be easily planted. Independent investigations like Forensic Architecture have found discrepancies and raised questions over the legitimacy of IDFs claims. Al Jazeera has reported that IDF had misreported facts to build a narrative.
US intelligence agrees that Hamas was operating out of the hospital, but there not much else backing up these claims right now.
**edited to remove a bad source
Oh okey, I understand better what you mean by “not much to back those claims”
I did some quick searches on him and saw he was with amnesty international. This didn’t come up for me. I’ll remove him as a reference. Appreciate the insight to him.
They pulled that from a site called NGO-Monitor. It’s a right wing Israeli outlet that exists specifically to dismiss claims from international NGOs. It’s about as credible as the government itself denying it committed crimes.
Eh, either way, discrediting him doesn’t discredit my argument.
Except there’s very credible evidence Israel uses WP illegally. There’s literally photos of it available online. Is that the IDF calling him biased or what?
“IDF says…”
Of course. What reason would they have to lie? /s
Maybe we should wait until there’s been a more neutral investigation before deciding it’s one hundred percent true.
What I never understand about major news stories is that so many people take everything they see at face value and then consider it indisputable fact. When there’s an international war going on, no one thinks that just maybe we’re only getting a fraction of reality communicated to us? That it must be the worst game of telephone in terms of accuracy? But then if someone even suggests that maybe there’s more to the story, they’re conspiracy theorists or they get told what “side” they’re on.
We should all be at least somewhat discerning. There’s so many different actors with interests in this war. We have no idea what else could be going on that we will never, ever hear about, nor how much spin is being put on the stuff we do hear about.
Do you really think only you had this thought? Don’t you think this is exactly what I think about your opinions? And telling this in my face literally does nothing because I am just as convinced that you gobble up Al-Jazeera/Hamas propaganda as, supposedly, I am gobbling up Israeli propaganda?
Come down to Earth buddy
You are wildly bad faith all over the comments, wow.
You went too “down to earth” and need to pull your head outta sand or whatever dark hole you have it shoved into.
If you consider logical implications “a bad faith” we have nothing to talk about
We need a hell of a lot more evidence to support that than we’ve seen, it would still run into major problems with proportionality/distinction standards regarding all the civilians they killed in and around the hospital, and it wouldn’t make a scratch with regard to the other civilian infrastructure they’ve targeted.
Tactical placement and all haha
So then when terrorists use human shields, which in this case include literal babies, it’s okay to ignore the human shields and just indiscriminately attack?
I didn’t say “it was okey”. I said i do understand why that happens. I am also saying Israel takes some steps to limit the number of civil victims, while Hamas takes none
Hamas has a different agenda. It’s an asymmetrical conflict. The intention of Hamas and Hezbollah is to provoke Israel into a genocide. Hiding among the trees to incite Netanyahu to burn down the forest.
They want nothing more then to get on video Israeli forces massacring thousands of Palestinian civilians.
So for Hamas, it’s Christmas.
What was the correct response, according to you?
Not bombing a hospital.
I’m not an expert. So I’d defer to Lt. General James Glynn, survivor of Fallujah on how to approach the situation in Gaza.
I’d also refer to centuries of counter-insurgency that notes that massacring civilians only drives more recruits to the enemy cause, often recruits who are willing to engage in suicide missions.
Even leaving the hospital intact and doing nothing was a better option, and in fact, Israel is not fighting a war of desperation, and can actually afford to approach violence with deliberation and consideration.
The reason Netanyahu is behaving like Trump or George W. Bush is because he likes the idea of rushing in with stormtroopers and crushing the enemy, not because it’s actually a good idea. And that’s why Hezbollah provoked him in the first place.
First of all, you’re either ignorant or an idiot if you think what Israel is doing is “indiscriminate”.
More importantly, what’s your superior moral alternative when a force breaches borders, murders hundreds, and takes and holds hundreds more as hostages, and then retreats to the cover of hospitals and schools in a dense city?
Let’s do a little thought experiment here. Say that everything happened exactly as before except this time they retreated and hid inside Israeli hospitals and schools, on the Israeli side of the border, full of Israeli citizens. Do you think Israel would attack those terrorists in the same way?
Probably not, because those would be THEIR hospitals. There would be no tunnel system, no munitions stores, etc etc.
Your “gotcha” thought experiment is asking whether or not a country should treat the enemy country with equal caution to their own. Did you even consider it before asking it?
Does that force come from a people who’ve been deprived of everything, forced into a system of apartheid, robbed of their freedom and routinely bullied, tortured and killed for half a century?
That seems to be an important factor to just leave out of the equation.
“Pick up the gun…” - Bill Hicks
No. Obviously? And it’s irrelevant. There’s no symmetry here.
If Hamas puts down their guns there would be peace.
If Israel puts down there guns there would be no Israel.
Only a Hasbara clown or a complete idiot would utter such stupidity, congrats.