13 ms·

It also included offices for the Hamas and was a symbol of its power. That was the main motivation for removing it.

by invalidname 3y ago

bluish29 3y ago
Any solid evidence?
- invalidname 3y ago
  Only what Israeli press published at the time. I doubt they would pick that as their first major target if it didn't have some connection to the Hamas.
  - bluish29 3y ago
    So you don't have a solid evidence that you can share and instead relying on "They wouldn't pick that as first major target if it wasn't " as some sort of evidence that you felt is enough to repeat the claim without even mentioning that there is no evidence available? I don't think you are being honest here.
    - invalidname 3y ago
      I can probably find the Israeli paper article from the first day of the war but you said you won't believe it anyway. So what's the point? What evidence do you have that the Israeli intelligence was wrong in this case?
      - bluish29 3y ago
        When people are asking for evidence. They are asking about hard evidence that prove the claim. The claim here that it was bombed because it contains hamas offices used for military purposes and this is why isreal bombed. Well isreal by your say have some evidence that it was the case. Did they provide this evidence? The evidence here is not a press release of isreali government/military saying that they destroyed it because it was being used by hamas for military purposes. They can say whatever they want and you can do, but without providing evidence this becomes a lie. Note that I am here talking about very specific case and claim. If you want to say hamas lie too that's fine but completely irrelevant in our context here. We are talking about this specific claim and this specific claims because I don't want this to go in general direction. And the burden of proof is on you not you. You claimed something and you should provide the evidence. Don't try to tweak things by redirecting the question
        invalidname 3y ago
        Again. I don't have that but you don't have the counter evidence that it didn't exist. Show me evidence of any bombing from any western country in any campaign ever... I get that Israel should be held to a higher standard than the Hamas. But your specific attitude makes no sense. Intelligence information is internal, wartime bombings target decisions are privileged information.
        bluish29 3y ago
        > I don't have that but you don't have the counter evidence that it didn't exist This is not the problem, people who claim something have to provide the evidence if asked, you don't respond to them by re-directing the question and ask them for counter-proof. At least in the normal world. I don't know about you. > I get that Israel should be held to a higher standard than the Hamas Providing evidence to claims is now a higher standard? man you live in a wild world. > But your specific attitude makes no sense. Intelligence information is internal, wartime bombings target decisions are privileged information So they can attack and kill anyone and claim they were military targets, and when asked for evidence then they will not provide because it is internal? Do you know what claims without evidence can be considered, yes propaganda like the one you tried to spread in this comment which is our discussion context.
        invalidname 3y ago
        > This is not the problem, people who claim something have to provide the evidence if asked No we don't. However, I did provide evidence which you choose to ignore. You also claim that the army would bomb a place for no real reason which just doesn't make sense. Especially for the first target in a campaign. It's you who should provide evidence, not me. > > But your specific attitude makes no sense. Intelligence information is internal, wartime bombings target decisions are privileged information > > So they can attack and kill anyone and claim they were military targets, and when asked for evidence then they will not provide because it is internal? Nonsense. This is an attack on a building. Bombing is a coarse instrument and the IDF holds regular briefings where they provide evidence. All the papers spent a day claiming Israel bombed a hospital killing 500 people. Total lie and the Hamas knew it when they came out with it. The IDF gathers and provides evidence for relevant situations (e.g. the Hospital bombing). It is accountable unlike the Hamas which is not.
teleforce 3y ago
It seems that some people easily believe in Israel propaganda without digging the actual reasons, and how can the people know the actual reasons when the facts are all buried together with the rubbles of communication infrastructure and the main offices of reporting news agencies. It is part of international laws and basic human rights that during the war you cannot demolish communication infrastructure, churches, mosques, hospitals, news agency offices, schools, civilian homes, etc. As demonsrated in this war, the first casualty is the truth that paved the way to countless atrocities.
- invalidname 3y ago
  All of those things were bombed by other western democracies in past wars. Maybe Israel lied about this, I don't know. But I do know the Hamas lied about many things. Just now a Hamas representative was interviewed by the BBC claiming they didn't kidnap or target civilians... Wow. The audacity of the lie is staggering. The symbolic nature of the building doesn't appear to be a lie. Since there were many offices in the building it would make sense the Hamas has some offices there. I don't see that as a huge lie. > during the war you cannot demolish communication infrastructure, churches, mosques, hospitals, news agency offices, schools, civilian homes, etc. As demonsrated in this war, the first casualty is the truth that paved the way to countless atrocities. It's very evident that you didn't say synagogues... I'm guessing I know where you're coming from to this debate...
- bawolff 3y ago
  > It is part of international laws and basic human rights that during the war you cannot demolish communication infrastructure, churches, mosques, hospitals, news agency offices, schools, civilian homes, etc. Umm you can if they are being used for military purposes.
  - archagon 3y ago
    If an entire city is held hostage by a terrorist ruling party, does that mean that you have carte blanche to raze the city and displace or eliminate its civilian population?
kingofpandora 3y ago
Remember that an advisor to Natanyahu tweeted that the Al-Arabi Hospital was bombed by Israel because it was being used by Hamas. No, I'm not saying that the hospital was actually bombed by Israel; I'm saying that everything that Israel bombs is labelled with the "used by Hamas" tag as justification for what this really is. No one actually believes that all or even most of the buildings destroyed in this campaign was "used by Hamas" if you are being honest with yourself. It's obviously collective punishment and revenge with a little bit of show ("we dropped leaflets" or "we sent warnings by SMS") for those who need it in order to go to bed at night.
- invalidname 3y ago
  I wouldn't count on anything coming from the circle of Netanyahu. He is the absolute worse. But Israeli mainstream press is generally better sourced. Notice that Israel also used phone tracking to check that civilian population moved away from the target. No county that ran a campaign of this type in the past used such an approach to avoid civilian casualties. I think the bombings are very problematic. But from current reports it seems the ground invasion will be worse in terms of casualties (on all fronts). So it seems like a lesser evil when a building goes down.
  - kingofpandora 3y ago
    > I wouldn't count on anything coming from the circle of Netanyahu. It's not about whether I trust them or not (I don't!). It's that everyone is following the same playbook. Israel can do whatever it wants and blame Palestinians with impunity. Every teenager shot on the street is a militant. Every house that is flattened was used by terrorists. Every journalist that was dies while working was actually killed by the Palestinians themselves. The power imbalance is not just military in nature. Israel has command of the message as well and the is frighteningly effective because it's just plausible enough. >Notice that Israel also used phone tracking to check that civilian population moved away from the target. No county that ran a campaign of this type in the past used such an approach to avoid civilian casualties. What about all the people who can't charge their phones because Israel only allowed 4 hours of electricity per day before the most recent campaign? Or whose phones were lost when their homes were destroyed? This is a great example. The IDF can make claims about how they "avoid civilian casualties" but why do you believe that it's anything more than for show?
justnotworthit 3y ago
We can now say cutting off the internet is their goal: The minister of communications has said Israel will “use all means at its disposal to fight” the use of Elon Musk’s Starlink to support connectivity for aid groups in Gaza.
justnotworthit 3y ago
We can now say cutting off the internet is their goal: Israeli official says will fight Starlink’s deployment in Gaza The minister of communications has said Israel will “use all means at its disposal to fight” the use of Elon Musk’s Starlink to support connectivity for aid groups in Gaza. Posting on X, Shlomo Khari said if the Starlink satellite internet is deployed “Hamas will use it for terrorist activities”. “There is no doubt about it, we know it, and Musk knows it,” he wrote. “Perhaps Musk would be willing to condition it with the release of our abducted babies, sons, daughters, elderly people,” he wrote. Musk had made the offer to use Starlink in Gaza earlier today, although further details have yet to emerge.
- invalidname 3y ago
  Notice that it's the goal only on the moment of the armed invasion which happened only yesterday. The line goes through Israel and it could have cut that on day one. Cutting communications before an invasion is pretty basic military strategy. Unfortunately, it also cuts civilian population off but as we asserted... The Hamas is embedded in civilian population and uses them as human shields. It steals fuel destined for hospitals and has made itself rich over the backs of the Palestinian people.
stjohnswarts 3y ago
I mean their main objective is to decimate Hamas as an entity in Gaza, they know they'll never get all of them but destroying all their infrastructure and weapons (and other) caches along with their leadership is critical. I'm sure they know they'll never end the movement,but they can destroy nearly all their large scale capabilities.
- invalidname 3y ago
  There is a way to end the movement and that was what Rabin tried to do in 1992. The Oslo accord was about making peace with the more moderate PLO. The idea was that the Palestinian people themselves would reject the doctrine of the Hamas and get rid of it. Personally I think it could have worked given time and more intelligence work but now it will be much harder. The Hamas controlled the school system in Gaza. I just watched a video of a bunch of kids, no older than mine. Cute as pie, telling the camera how horrible the Jews are and that they want to drive a car into them when they grow up. That nothing is more holy than to be a martyr for god. Pretty fucked up stuff.
  - lobocinza 3y ago
    Generations entirely brainwashed into Jihad. Have you seen "Tomorrow's Pioneers"?
    - invalidname 3y ago
      It's on my Netflix queue :-( It's pretty tragic. Reference for people reading this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomorrow%27s_Pioneers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomorrow%27s_Pioneers

It also included offices for the Hamas and was a symbol of its power. That was the main motivation for removing it.

bluish29 3y ago

Any solid evidence?

invalidname 3y ago
Only what Israeli press published at the time. I doubt they would pick that as their first major target if it didn't have some connection to the Hamas.
- bluish29 3y ago
  So you don't have a solid evidence that you can share and instead relying on "They wouldn't pick that as first major target if it wasn't " as some sort of evidence that you felt is enough to repeat the claim without even mentioning that there is no evidence available? I don't think you are being honest here.
  - invalidname 3y ago
    I can probably find the Israeli paper article from the first day of the war but you said you won't believe it anyway. So what's the point? What evidence do you have that the Israeli intelligence was wrong in this case?
    - bluish29 3y ago
      When people are asking for evidence. They are asking about hard evidence that prove the claim. The claim here that it was bombed because it contains hamas offices used for military purposes and this is why isreal bombed. Well isreal by your say have some evidence that it was the case. Did they provide this evidence? The evidence here is not a press release of isreali government/military saying that they destroyed it because it was being used by hamas for military purposes. They can say whatever they want and you can do, but without providing evidence this becomes a lie. Note that I am here talking about very specific case and claim. If you want to say hamas lie too that's fine but completely irrelevant in our context here. We are talking about this specific claim and this specific claims because I don't want this to go in general direction. And the burden of proof is on you not you. You claimed something and you should provide the evidence. Don't try to tweak things by redirecting the question
      - invalidname 3y ago
        Again. I don't have that but you don't have the counter evidence that it didn't exist. Show me evidence of any bombing from any western country in any campaign ever... I get that Israel should be held to a higher standard than the Hamas. But your specific attitude makes no sense. Intelligence information is internal, wartime bombings target decisions are privileged information.
        bluish29 3y ago
        > I don't have that but you don't have the counter evidence that it didn't exist This is not the problem, people who claim something have to provide the evidence if asked, you don't respond to them by re-directing the question and ask them for counter-proof. At least in the normal world. I don't know about you. > I get that Israel should be held to a higher standard than the Hamas Providing evidence to claims is now a higher standard? man you live in a wild world. > But your specific attitude makes no sense. Intelligence information is internal, wartime bombings target decisions are privileged information So they can attack and kill anyone and claim they were military targets, and when asked for evidence then they will not provide because it is internal? Do you know what claims without evidence can be considered, yes propaganda like the one you tried to spread in this comment which is our discussion context.
        invalidname 3y ago
        > This is not the problem, people who claim something have to provide the evidence if asked No we don't. However, I did provide evidence which you choose to ignore. You also claim that the army would bomb a place for no real reason which just doesn't make sense. Especially for the first target in a campaign. It's you who should provide evidence, not me. > > But your specific attitude makes no sense. Intelligence information is internal, wartime bombings target decisions are privileged information > > So they can attack and kill anyone and claim they were military targets, and when asked for evidence then they will not provide because it is internal? Nonsense. This is an attack on a building. Bombing is a coarse instrument and the IDF holds regular briefings where they provide evidence. All the papers spent a day claiming Israel bombed a hospital killing 500 people. Total lie and the Hamas knew it when they came out with it. The IDF gathers and provides evidence for relevant situations (e.g. the Hospital bombing). It is accountable unlike the Hamas which is not.

teleforce 3y ago

It seems that some people easily believe in Israel propaganda without digging the actual reasons, and how can the people know the actual reasons when the facts are all buried together with the rubbles of communication infrastructure and the main offices of reporting news agencies. It is part of international laws and basic human rights that during the war you cannot demolish communication infrastructure, churches, mosques, hospitals, news agency offices, schools, civilian homes, etc. As demonsrated in this war, the first casualty is the truth that paved the way to countless atrocities.

invalidname 3y ago
All of those things were bombed by other western democracies in past wars. Maybe Israel lied about this, I don't know. But I do know the Hamas lied about many things. Just now a Hamas representative was interviewed by the BBC claiming they didn't kidnap or target civilians... Wow. The audacity of the lie is staggering. The symbolic nature of the building doesn't appear to be a lie. Since there were many offices in the building it would make sense the Hamas has some offices there. I don't see that as a huge lie. > during the war you cannot demolish communication infrastructure, churches, mosques, hospitals, news agency offices, schools, civilian homes, etc. As demonsrated in this war, the first casualty is the truth that paved the way to countless atrocities. It's very evident that you didn't say synagogues... I'm guessing I know where you're coming from to this debate...
bawolff 3y ago
> It is part of international laws and basic human rights that during the war you cannot demolish communication infrastructure, churches, mosques, hospitals, news agency offices, schools, civilian homes, etc. Umm you can if they are being used for military purposes.
- archagon 3y ago
  If an entire city is held hostage by a terrorist ruling party, does that mean that you have carte blanche to raze the city and displace or eliminate its civilian population?

kingofpandora 3y ago

Remember that an advisor to Natanyahu tweeted that the Al-Arabi Hospital was bombed by Israel because it was being used by Hamas. No, I'm not saying that the hospital was actually bombed by Israel; I'm saying that everything that Israel bombs is labelled with the "used by Hamas" tag as justification for what this really is. No one actually believes that all or even most of the buildings destroyed in this campaign was "used by Hamas" if you are being honest with yourself. It's obviously collective punishment and revenge with a little bit of show ("we dropped leaflets" or "we sent warnings by SMS") for those who need it in order to go to bed at night.

invalidname 3y ago
I wouldn't count on anything coming from the circle of Netanyahu. He is the absolute worse. But Israeli mainstream press is generally better sourced. Notice that Israel also used phone tracking to check that civilian population moved away from the target. No county that ran a campaign of this type in the past used such an approach to avoid civilian casualties. I think the bombings are very problematic. But from current reports it seems the ground invasion will be worse in terms of casualties (on all fronts). So it seems like a lesser evil when a building goes down.
- kingofpandora 3y ago
  > I wouldn't count on anything coming from the circle of Netanyahu. It's not about whether I trust them or not (I don't!). It's that everyone is following the same playbook. Israel can do whatever it wants and blame Palestinians with impunity. Every teenager shot on the street is a militant. Every house that is flattened was used by terrorists. Every journalist that was dies while working was actually killed by the Palestinians themselves. The power imbalance is not just military in nature. Israel has command of the message as well and the is frighteningly effective because it's just plausible enough. >Notice that Israel also used phone tracking to check that civilian population moved away from the target. No county that ran a campaign of this type in the past used such an approach to avoid civilian casualties. What about all the people who can't charge their phones because Israel only allowed 4 hours of electricity per day before the most recent campaign? Or whose phones were lost when their homes were destroyed? This is a great example. The IDF can make claims about how they "avoid civilian casualties" but why do you believe that it's anything more than for show?

justnotworthit 3y ago

We can now say cutting off the internet is their goal: The minister of communications has said Israel will “use all means at its disposal to fight” the use of Elon Musk’s Starlink to support connectivity for aid groups in Gaza.

justnotworthit 3y ago

We can now say cutting off the internet is their goal: Israeli official says will fight Starlink’s deployment in Gaza The minister of communications has said Israel will “use all means at its disposal to fight” the use of Elon Musk’s Starlink to support connectivity for aid groups in Gaza. Posting on X, Shlomo Khari said if the Starlink satellite internet is deployed “Hamas will use it for terrorist activities”. “There is no doubt about it, we know it, and Musk knows it,” he wrote. “Perhaps Musk would be willing to condition it with the release of our abducted babies, sons, daughters, elderly people,” he wrote. Musk had made the offer to use Starlink in Gaza earlier today, although further details have yet to emerge.

invalidname 3y ago
Notice that it's the goal only on the moment of the armed invasion which happened only yesterday. The line goes through Israel and it could have cut that on day one. Cutting communications before an invasion is pretty basic military strategy. Unfortunately, it also cuts civilian population off but as we asserted... The Hamas is embedded in civilian population and uses them as human shields. It steals fuel destined for hospitals and has made itself rich over the backs of the Palestinian people.

stjohnswarts 3y ago

I mean their main objective is to decimate Hamas as an entity in Gaza, they know they'll never get all of them but destroying all their infrastructure and weapons (and other) caches along with their leadership is critical. I'm sure they know they'll never end the movement,but they can destroy nearly all their large scale capabilities.

invalidname 3y ago
There is a way to end the movement and that was what Rabin tried to do in 1992. The Oslo accord was about making peace with the more moderate PLO. The idea was that the Palestinian people themselves would reject the doctrine of the Hamas and get rid of it. Personally I think it could have worked given time and more intelligence work but now it will be much harder. The Hamas controlled the school system in Gaza. I just watched a video of a bunch of kids, no older than mine. Cute as pie, telling the camera how horrible the Jews are and that they want to drive a car into them when they grow up. That nothing is more holy than to be a martyr for god. Pretty fucked up stuff.
- lobocinza 3y ago
  Generations entirely brainwashed into Jihad. Have you seen "Tomorrow's Pioneers"?
  - invalidname 3y ago
    It's on my Netflix queue :-( It's pretty tragic. Reference for people reading this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomorrow%27s_Pioneers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomorrow%27s_Pioneers