4 ms·

these aren’t solders on either end. If a Palestinian non combatant resident kills an Israeli child. The Palestinian or their surviving family will get a payment

these aren’t solders on either end. If a Palestinian non combatant resident kills an Israeli child. The Palestinian or their surviving family will get a payment. And yes, many Israeli children have been killed through such programs.

willcipriano 3y ago
If a Israeli kills a Palestinian child (like this [0]) and is later killed himself, would his family receive survivorship benefits? If Palestinian fighting men aren't soldiers does that mean Israel is killing non combatants? [0]https://www.unicef.org/press-releases/eight-palestinian-children-killed-gaza-strip-last-night https://www.unicef.org/press-releases/eight-palestinian-chil...
- kodah 3y ago
  Survivorship benefits are paid to survivors of a dead loved one. It sounds like OP is alleging that Palestinians can get paid for killing Israeli children. Those are very different ideas, I'm curious why you think that's a survivorship program. The UN and Geneva Convention define "combatant" and "non-combatant". Being uniformed is merely the ethical thing to do. Combatants also don't necessarily need to be armed, like in the case of spotters who have killed or mamed far more people than most folks realize, including civilians.
- fnovd 3y ago
  I don't understand the confusion on this topic. One side will pay the family of a suicide bomber that murders innocent civilians, the other won't. It's not complicated. War is ugly, but as a global society we do have some idea about the difference between combat and terrorism. Firing rockets indiscriminately into a civilian area is not combat. Hiding your guns, bombs, and bases inside of civilian buildings is not some idle decision. The biggest losers of the Palestinian propaganda machine are the Palestinians themselves, and they are not the ones funding it. They are victims of this proxy war. It's a terrible situation, and it will continue to be terrible so long as it being a terrible situation is a precondition of the funding the terrorist governments receive. Hence, PayPal's ban.
  - hutzlibu 3y ago
    "I don't understand the confusion on this topic. One side will pay the family of a suicide bomber that murders innocent civilians, the other won't. It's not complicated" Not complicated? Just compare the civilian casualties on both sides. Afaik they are way higher on the palestine side. When the IDF bombs a refugee camp, to take out one terrorist, they still consistently hit bystanders. And before the IDF was military dominant, plain terrorism from the israeli side happened as well: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deir_Yassin_massacre https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deir_Yassin_massacre And still happens: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/feb/27/israeli-settlers-rampage-after-palestinian-gunman-kills-two-west-bank https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/feb/27/israeli-settle... With every death, there is more demand for revenge. And the Hamas stand for revenge, which is why they are formally in power. I honestly don't know of a more complicated conflict.
    - vxNsr 3y ago
      There are many more Israeli civilian casualties as a result of terrorist action. Though there are Palestinians who have been killed by Palestinian terrorists as well. But I would add them to the tally of civilians casualties of palestinian terror. Not clear where you’re getting that more palestinians have died from terrorism. The IDF doesn’t regularly bomb refugee camps to take out one terrorist. They often have precision strikes that take out a single person. The IDF has very often canceled a strike due to civilians/children getting too close. The first link appears to be an actual battle that was rebranded a massacre for optics. In an active battle during a war non-combatants will die. Calling that terrorism is simply dishonest. The 2nd link was blown wildly out of proportion, a group of Israelis rioted and burnt down… a junk yard. The before and after don’t look that different. This was again a large effort by anti-semetic western media to paint the Jews as in the wrong and totally ignore the multiple murders/terrorist attacks committed by the local Arab population in the very recent past (as in same day). This was an angry mob response to an unjustified killing…hmmm does that sound familiar, are you calling the 2020 protests terrorism? This is as simple as it gets: the Arabs take every chance they get to murder Jews. The Jews take great pains to defend themselves and protect all life in the vicinity. Do they fail sometimes and kill someone unintentionally? Sure but they also hold themselves to account, and take every (even unreasonable) effort to only target those who are actively threatening other people’s lives. I don’t think you’re being honest in your argument.

willcipriano 3y ago

If a Israeli kills a Palestinian child (like this [0]) and is later killed himself, would his family receive survivorship benefits? If Palestinian fighting men aren't soldiers does that mean Israel is killing non combatants? [0]https://www.unicef.org/press-releases/eight-palestinian-children-killed-gaza-strip-last-night https://www.unicef.org/press-releases/eight-palestinian-chil...

kodah 3y ago
Survivorship benefits are paid to survivors of a dead loved one. It sounds like OP is alleging that Palestinians can get paid for killing Israeli children. Those are very different ideas, I'm curious why you think that's a survivorship program. The UN and Geneva Convention define "combatant" and "non-combatant". Being uniformed is merely the ethical thing to do. Combatants also don't necessarily need to be armed, like in the case of spotters who have killed or mamed far more people than most folks realize, including civilians.
fnovd 3y ago
I don't understand the confusion on this topic. One side will pay the family of a suicide bomber that murders innocent civilians, the other won't. It's not complicated. War is ugly, but as a global society we do have some idea about the difference between combat and terrorism. Firing rockets indiscriminately into a civilian area is not combat. Hiding your guns, bombs, and bases inside of civilian buildings is not some idle decision. The biggest losers of the Palestinian propaganda machine are the Palestinians themselves, and they are not the ones funding it. They are victims of this proxy war. It's a terrible situation, and it will continue to be terrible so long as it being a terrible situation is a precondition of the funding the terrorist governments receive. Hence, PayPal's ban.
- hutzlibu 3y ago
  "I don't understand the confusion on this topic. One side will pay the family of a suicide bomber that murders innocent civilians, the other won't. It's not complicated" Not complicated? Just compare the civilian casualties on both sides. Afaik they are way higher on the palestine side. When the IDF bombs a refugee camp, to take out one terrorist, they still consistently hit bystanders. And before the IDF was military dominant, plain terrorism from the israeli side happened as well: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deir_Yassin_massacre https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deir_Yassin_massacre And still happens: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/feb/27/israeli-settlers-rampage-after-palestinian-gunman-kills-two-west-bank https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/feb/27/israeli-settle... With every death, there is more demand for revenge. And the Hamas stand for revenge, which is why they are formally in power. I honestly don't know of a more complicated conflict.
  - vxNsr 3y ago
    There are many more Israeli civilian casualties as a result of terrorist action. Though there are Palestinians who have been killed by Palestinian terrorists as well. But I would add them to the tally of civilians casualties of palestinian terror. Not clear where you’re getting that more palestinians have died from terrorism. The IDF doesn’t regularly bomb refugee camps to take out one terrorist. They often have precision strikes that take out a single person. The IDF has very often canceled a strike due to civilians/children getting too close. The first link appears to be an actual battle that was rebranded a massacre for optics. In an active battle during a war non-combatants will die. Calling that terrorism is simply dishonest. The 2nd link was blown wildly out of proportion, a group of Israelis rioted and burnt down… a junk yard. The before and after don’t look that different. This was again a large effort by anti-semetic western media to paint the Jews as in the wrong and totally ignore the multiple murders/terrorist attacks committed by the local Arab population in the very recent past (as in same day). This was an angry mob response to an unjustified killing…hmmm does that sound familiar, are you calling the 2020 protests terrorism? This is as simple as it gets: the Arabs take every chance they get to murder Jews. The Jews take great pains to defend themselves and protect all life in the vicinity. Do they fail sometimes and kill someone unintentionally? Sure but they also hold themselves to account, and take every (even unreasonable) effort to only target those who are actively threatening other people’s lives. I don’t think you’re being honest in your argument.