6 ms·

Egyptians men “standing tall” with the Palestinians probably feel proud for refusing to provide a temporal shelter for at least women and children. This situati

by gyudin 3y ago

Egyptians men “standing tall” with the Palestinians probably feel proud for refusing to provide a temporal shelter for at least women and children. This situation literally wouldn’t be possible if just 1 side out of 3 wouldn’t behave like an asshole.

amrocha 3y ago
Why is it ok to kill men but not women and children
- gyudin 3y ago
  Why Hamas built so many bomb shelters and tunnels but literally 0 of them were used to protect the citizens? It’s literally the opposite of what any other government in the world would do.
  - megous 3y ago
    Is this some bizarre rhetorical question or did you actually spent any time thinking about how this would work practically as a defense for 2.5mil people against a state with access to unlimited amount of precisely targeted bunker buster bombs? Want to know how well public air-raid bunkers work against advanced bombing technology? Check: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amiriyah_shelter_bombing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amiriyah_shelter_bombing and that's 30 year old tech.
    - YZF 3y ago
      Israel doesn't have an unlimited amount of bunker busters. I think a lot of the destruction is from more conventional precision munitions. The bunker busters are reserved for bunkers, deep tunnels, etc. This question is one of the talking points of the Pro-Israel side. It's not that bizarre. But yeah, as talking points go, it's shallow/simplistic. The idea is to demonstrate that Hamas couldn't care less about Palestinian lives. They don't invest in any shape or form in protecting the citizenry or making the lives of Palestinians better. It's also meant to contrast with how Israel invests in protecting its population- lots of shelters for a much larger population, Israel has been building shelters in various forms forever. During most of the cold war Israel has been facing enemies with fairly unlimited resources as well, rockets, ballistic missiles, large air forces, even artillery (the north of Israel used to be regularly shelled by Syria way back). So it is actually possible to use shelters as a layer of defense. Israel's more recent strategy of reinforced spaces in every house/apartment (started IIRC when Saddam Hussein decide to lob Scud missiles at Israel) has worked fairly well so that could be replicated in Gaza. Israeli buildings have taken direct hits by rockets from Lebanon and Gaza with pretty decent survival rates even when the building itself was practically demolished. Though that might require using the concrete for something else than tunnels. Oh no, another talking point. The better strategy though is not to get into a situation where you're being attacked with bunker busters or try to separate civilian infrastructure from military infrastructure. Other ideas is that when you're warned about an area becoming a subject to aerial bombardments you move away. Sorry, more talking points.
  - YZF 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - megous 3y ago
      What spokesperson? When was it said? What was the context? Given that Hamas is also a political and social organization, which at least once had broad support from Gazan citizens in free elections, I think stating that "Hamas cares nothing about "its" citizens." sounds suspect. Would citizens vote for organization that doesn't care about them at all?
      - YZF 3y ago
        Apparently: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mousa_Abu_Marzook#2023_Israel-Hamas_war https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mousa_Abu_Marzook#2023_Israel-... https://www.indiatoday.in/world/story/tunnels-built-to-protect-hamas-fighters-not-civilians-terrorist-official-2455812-2023-10-30 https://www.indiatoday.in/world/story/tunnels-built-to-prote... Honestly your question shows great naivety. Even in the west people continuously vote for politicians that couldn't care less about them. In less developed countries let's just say it's much worse.
    - euzi 3y ago
      Very few aids were allowed to enter Gaza until they negotiated for it as part of the truce deal. It is absurd that we are blaming Hamas for not digging tunnels to accomodate 2 million people instead of blaming those who flattened dozens of residential blocks, and bombed schools and hospitals.
      - meowtimemania 3y ago
        I think the point is that it shows that Hamas doesn't prioritize the life of its citizens. Israel is not right to bomb Gaza, just like Hamas wasn't right to massacre hundreds in Israel. Hamas likely did their actions knowing that Israel's response would be extreme.
      - YZF 3y ago
        We're blaming Hamas for everything and we're blaming Palestinians for electing and supporting Hamas. The story of the tunnels and the shelters is just one anecdote in the tragic events. I'm pretty sure Israel did not bomb hospitals. Maybe schools. Flattened residential blocks certainly, after warning civilians to evacuate. Mosques were bombed. Both schools and hospitals lose any protection they might enjoy under the Geneva convention if they're used for military purposes. Israel doesn't really benefit from bombing a school that isn't used in a fight against it, quite the opposite, Israel is losing support by doing that. At the same time Hamas gains an advantage by using these facilities because it grants him immunity. It's really not that complicated to understand. Israel does benefit from flattening residential areas because it's taking out cover for Hamas. The rubble blocks tunnel entrances. Booby traps and mines will detonate. It's tactically removing an advantage from Hamas who would prefer to fight in the built up areas at close quarters. In war you don't want to get into symmetric fights, you want to use your overwhelming strengths to neutralize any advantage of the enemy. It's not like he's got a knife I'll bring a knife, it's more like he's got a knife, I'm gonna drop a bomb on the building he's in from an F-16 and then shell it with artillery and then have some tanks fire at him for good measure and then run him over with the tanks. There's also an element of deterrence (to the Palestinians but also to other actors) by inflicting a lot of damage. In terms of the Hamas, martyrdom is a core value, so number of martyrs isn't a factor, especially if it's not the billionaire in Qatar being the martyr. "Jihad is its path and death for the sake of Allah is the loftiest of its wishes,”. Hamas wins when more Palestinians are dead. The things "we" value in the "west" like well being, prosperity, peace, empathy, whatnot are not factors. We're talking about the same Hamas that recruited and sent hundreds of people into Israel to blow themselves up with random strangers in the early 2000's. They won't only not protect people, they'll get them to blow themselves up or engage in suicidal missions (which was one possible outcome of the Oct 7th attack, that a much larger portion of the attacking force would get killed and the damage inflicted would be much smaller).
- dyno12345 3y ago
  it's not but there's an argument that it would reduce total suffering if you allow those who are obviously not potential combatants to leave the area, even though that's not fair to non-combatant men.
asylteltine 3y ago
Interesting how the Arab countries surrounding Israel will do ANYTHING except accept Palestinian refugees. They have literally never accepted them in history, only expelled them like Jordan did in the 70s as a recent example. It’s almost like these Arab countries just hate Israel and don’t care about Palestine at all
- megous 3y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_diaspora https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_diaspora Jordan 3,240,000 Syria 630,000 Lebanon 402,582 Saudi Arabia 280,245 Egypt 270,245 Qatar 100,000 Kuwait 80,000 Iraq 57,000 Yemen 55,000
  - YZF 3y ago
    I think most of these go way back to 1948 though. Do you have any statistics about how many Palestinians from the west bank and/or Gaza these countries have taken in over the last 10 years? Also do those countries give the Palestinians citizenship? I think other than Jordan the answer is no?
    - asylteltine 3y ago
      The answer is no, they don’t at all. They can’t even come in as refugees. All of this “pro palestine” stuff is a facade to openly hate Jews
- eYrKEC2 3y ago
  Why can't they live in Palestine?
  - will4274 3y ago
    Assuming you're genuinely asking for the perspective behind this argument. I think these folks* mostly believe that cleansing is a "least bad" alternative because Palestine is a failed state with broad anti-Semitism and a Jewish neighboring state. No group in Palestine (even Hamas) is capable of enforcing a peace treaty, and Israel is not willing to abide by a peace treaty that Palestine groups do not abide by. Thus, the status quo of attacks from Palestine to Israel by various armed gangs will continue indefinitely, and the counter-cycle of Israeli retaliation, a counter-cycle which inevitable undermines Palestinian groups that deal with Israel. The most likely possible disruptions of this cycle are tragic - either the rise of a right wing group in Israel that cleanses Palestine or the regional hegemony of a current group in Iran that cleanses Israel - and even assuming one of these tragic disruptions doesn't occur, the status quo cycle is already pretty bad. * I say "these folks" because I don't know that I agree.
megous 3y ago
Lots of surrounding countries have experience with "temporary" shelters for people driven out by Israel from the lands Zionists invaded and purged. Why should they not be concerned now as ever?

by gyudin 3y ago

amrocha 3y ago

Why is it ok to kill men but not women and children

gyudin 3y ago
Why Hamas built so many bomb shelters and tunnels but literally 0 of them were used to protect the citizens? It’s literally the opposite of what any other government in the world would do.
- megous 3y ago
  Is this some bizarre rhetorical question or did you actually spent any time thinking about how this would work practically as a defense for 2.5mil people against a state with access to unlimited amount of precisely targeted bunker buster bombs? Want to know how well public air-raid bunkers work against advanced bombing technology? Check: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amiriyah_shelter_bombing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amiriyah_shelter_bombing and that's 30 year old tech.
  - YZF 3y ago
    Israel doesn't have an unlimited amount of bunker busters. I think a lot of the destruction is from more conventional precision munitions. The bunker busters are reserved for bunkers, deep tunnels, etc. This question is one of the talking points of the Pro-Israel side. It's not that bizarre. But yeah, as talking points go, it's shallow/simplistic. The idea is to demonstrate that Hamas couldn't care less about Palestinian lives. They don't invest in any shape or form in protecting the citizenry or making the lives of Palestinians better. It's also meant to contrast with how Israel invests in protecting its population- lots of shelters for a much larger population, Israel has been building shelters in various forms forever. During most of the cold war Israel has been facing enemies with fairly unlimited resources as well, rockets, ballistic missiles, large air forces, even artillery (the north of Israel used to be regularly shelled by Syria way back). So it is actually possible to use shelters as a layer of defense. Israel's more recent strategy of reinforced spaces in every house/apartment (started IIRC when Saddam Hussein decide to lob Scud missiles at Israel) has worked fairly well so that could be replicated in Gaza. Israeli buildings have taken direct hits by rockets from Lebanon and Gaza with pretty decent survival rates even when the building itself was practically demolished. Though that might require using the concrete for something else than tunnels. Oh no, another talking point. The better strategy though is not to get into a situation where you're being attacked with bunker busters or try to separate civilian infrastructure from military infrastructure. Other ideas is that when you're warned about an area becoming a subject to aerial bombardments you move away. Sorry, more talking points.
- YZF 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - megous 3y ago
    What spokesperson? When was it said? What was the context? Given that Hamas is also a political and social organization, which at least once had broad support from Gazan citizens in free elections, I think stating that "Hamas cares nothing about "its" citizens." sounds suspect. Would citizens vote for organization that doesn't care about them at all?
    - YZF 3y ago
      Apparently: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mousa_Abu_Marzook#2023_Israel-Hamas_war https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mousa_Abu_Marzook#2023_Israel-... https://www.indiatoday.in/world/story/tunnels-built-to-protect-hamas-fighters-not-civilians-terrorist-official-2455812-2023-10-30 https://www.indiatoday.in/world/story/tunnels-built-to-prote... Honestly your question shows great naivety. Even in the west people continuously vote for politicians that couldn't care less about them. In less developed countries let's just say it's much worse.
  - euzi 3y ago
    Very few aids were allowed to enter Gaza until they negotiated for it as part of the truce deal. It is absurd that we are blaming Hamas for not digging tunnels to accomodate 2 million people instead of blaming those who flattened dozens of residential blocks, and bombed schools and hospitals.
    - meowtimemania 3y ago
      I think the point is that it shows that Hamas doesn't prioritize the life of its citizens. Israel is not right to bomb Gaza, just like Hamas wasn't right to massacre hundreds in Israel. Hamas likely did their actions knowing that Israel's response would be extreme.
    - YZF 3y ago
      We're blaming Hamas for everything and we're blaming Palestinians for electing and supporting Hamas. The story of the tunnels and the shelters is just one anecdote in the tragic events. I'm pretty sure Israel did not bomb hospitals. Maybe schools. Flattened residential blocks certainly, after warning civilians to evacuate. Mosques were bombed. Both schools and hospitals lose any protection they might enjoy under the Geneva convention if they're used for military purposes. Israel doesn't really benefit from bombing a school that isn't used in a fight against it, quite the opposite, Israel is losing support by doing that. At the same time Hamas gains an advantage by using these facilities because it grants him immunity. It's really not that complicated to understand. Israel does benefit from flattening residential areas because it's taking out cover for Hamas. The rubble blocks tunnel entrances. Booby traps and mines will detonate. It's tactically removing an advantage from Hamas who would prefer to fight in the built up areas at close quarters. In war you don't want to get into symmetric fights, you want to use your overwhelming strengths to neutralize any advantage of the enemy. It's not like he's got a knife I'll bring a knife, it's more like he's got a knife, I'm gonna drop a bomb on the building he's in from an F-16 and then shell it with artillery and then have some tanks fire at him for good measure and then run him over with the tanks. There's also an element of deterrence (to the Palestinians but also to other actors) by inflicting a lot of damage. In terms of the Hamas, martyrdom is a core value, so number of martyrs isn't a factor, especially if it's not the billionaire in Qatar being the martyr. "Jihad is its path and death for the sake of Allah is the loftiest of its wishes,”. Hamas wins when more Palestinians are dead. The things "we" value in the "west" like well being, prosperity, peace, empathy, whatnot are not factors. We're talking about the same Hamas that recruited and sent hundreds of people into Israel to blow themselves up with random strangers in the early 2000's. They won't only not protect people, they'll get them to blow themselves up or engage in suicidal missions (which was one possible outcome of the Oct 7th attack, that a much larger portion of the attacking force would get killed and the damage inflicted would be much smaller).
dyno12345 3y ago
it's not but there's an argument that it would reduce total suffering if you allow those who are obviously not potential combatants to leave the area, even though that's not fair to non-combatant men.

asylteltine 3y ago

Interesting how the Arab countries surrounding Israel will do ANYTHING except accept Palestinian refugees. They have literally never accepted them in history, only expelled them like Jordan did in the 70s as a recent example. It’s almost like these Arab countries just hate Israel and don’t care about Palestine at all

megous 3y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_diaspora https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_diaspora Jordan 3,240,000 Syria 630,000 Lebanon 402,582 Saudi Arabia 280,245 Egypt 270,245 Qatar 100,000 Kuwait 80,000 Iraq 57,000 Yemen 55,000
- YZF 3y ago
  I think most of these go way back to 1948 though. Do you have any statistics about how many Palestinians from the west bank and/or Gaza these countries have taken in over the last 10 years? Also do those countries give the Palestinians citizenship? I think other than Jordan the answer is no?
  - asylteltine 3y ago
    The answer is no, they don’t at all. They can’t even come in as refugees. All of this “pro palestine” stuff is a facade to openly hate Jews
eYrKEC2 3y ago
Why can't they live in Palestine?
- will4274 3y ago
  Assuming you're genuinely asking for the perspective behind this argument. I think these folks* mostly believe that cleansing is a "least bad" alternative because Palestine is a failed state with broad anti-Semitism and a Jewish neighboring state. No group in Palestine (even Hamas) is capable of enforcing a peace treaty, and Israel is not willing to abide by a peace treaty that Palestine groups do not abide by. Thus, the status quo of attacks from Palestine to Israel by various armed gangs will continue indefinitely, and the counter-cycle of Israeli retaliation, a counter-cycle which inevitable undermines Palestinian groups that deal with Israel. The most likely possible disruptions of this cycle are tragic - either the rise of a right wing group in Israel that cleanses Palestine or the regional hegemony of a current group in Iran that cleanses Israel - and even assuming one of these tragic disruptions doesn't occur, the status quo cycle is already pretty bad. * I say "these folks" because I don't know that I agree.

megous 3y ago

Lots of surrounding countries have experience with "temporary" shelters for people driven out by Israel from the lands Zionists invaded and purged. Why should they not be concerned now as ever?