7 ms·

I'm not quite sure what your objection is? Are you generally against companies providing services related to warfare? Or are you specifically against providing

I'm not quite sure what your objection is? Are you generally against companies providing services related to warfare? Or are you specifically against providing services for the Israel/Gaza conflict? If the former - if you are generally protesting commercial services for the military - then there are a lot of companies you need to boycott, before you get around to Amazon. Amazon is a small fish in the sea. If the latter, then cancelling your Amazon account is pretty small potatos to protest the Israeli attack on Hamas. And I would have to ask: have you also protested the Hamas attack on Israel? While the whole situation is a mess, Hamas definitely started this particular fist-fight.

rightbyte 3y ago
> to protest the Israeli attack on Hamas Usually the critique is that civilians are targeted.
- rmbyrro 3y ago
  But the Hamas attack against Israel ONLY targeted civilians and OP isn't protesting.
  - spencerflem 3y ago
    The US does not provide billions in aid to Hamas. What would protesting do?
  - saiya-jin 3y ago
    This is not true, they targeted what they could, including any military equipment they met. The fact is, they didn't met much military resistance since army didn't consider such attack possible (there are alternative theories here but I'll ignore them) and the limited one they met they often overcame. Many male and female IDF soldiers died in the 7.10. ambush and some were kidnapped back to Gaza, some of them were killed due to very poor / lacking equipment provided by military (overconfidence in intelligence and border protection/monitoring).
  - jessepasley 3y ago
    That's not true. Also, there are no companies supporting Hamas.
  - zakki 3y ago
    Is there any company that provide support for Hamas? Inform OP so he can protest like he did to Amazon-Israel.
    - warbeforepeace 3y ago
      This thread is probably generating more profit for amazon than a dozen of her purchases. This is hosted on aws.
  - tttp 3y ago
    OP is protesting against Amazon providing infrastructure for selecting targets for the IDF to bomb. I'm not aware of Amazon providing services to Hamas, so that the OP is not protesting there isn't that surprising, nor does it imply that OP isn't protesting against Hamas attack.
    - rmbyrro 3y ago
      Speaking about pro-palestinian activism in general, not particularly OP, who I don't know: If one is an activist, a group commits atrocities and there's no private business related to them, then one sits and do nothing? The people I see protesting against Israeli invasion of Gaza I failed to see protesting Hamas brutal and inhumane attacks weeks earlier. It seems to me they were silent. I'm having a really hard time understanding the logic of this kind of activism. It seems to me ideology driven, not humanitarian.
      - spencerflem 3y ago
        There's nothing to protest against - the government does not support or aid Hamas, and corporations do not support or aid Hamas. What change would the protests do?
        rmbyrro 3y ago
        So if it's not possible to boycott an American or Israeli business, there's nothing an activist could do to manifest his support to humanity when innocent people are slaughtered inside their houses by savages?
        spencerflem 3y ago
        What support, specifically, would you like to see? Directly after the attacks the government was overwhelmingly in support of Israel. People do not protest when what they want is already happening.
  - rightbyte 3y ago
    Is "only" going to share the fate of "literally"? Adding a disclaimer like "I don't support the 9/11 attacks on WTC but the invasion of Iraq is bad" is akin to subduing to a "have you stopped beating your wife" question.
  - secondcoming 3y ago
    Right, I don't want to get drawn into an internet argument, but it's demonstrably false to say that Hamas targeted ONLY civilians. Military bases were run over too.
  - mattigames 3y ago
    I don't thinks is a surprise that is exponentially harder to target the military when they have billions of dollars backing them up (yeah I know what some of you gonna say, they should target nobody at all and just suffer in silence, yeah that's not how humans think)
- kossTKR 3y ago
  More than 6000 thousand kids have died in the span of 2 months or so. The most powerful militaries in the world, and more than 12.000 civilians already dead, packed together tightly as in a prison with nowhere to flee bombs raining down on them. I don't get why anyone can support that. No matter the pretext. History going back over 75 years with so much suffering on both sides, but death tolls magnitudes larger on the palestinian side. A side that was just mostly regular farmers before the first Nakba but slowly became radicalised. This conflict will surely radicalise the rest. Is that an active strategy? According to leaks in the Intercept it actually is: https://theintercept.com/2018/02/19/hamas-israel-palestine-conflict/ https://theintercept.com/2018/02/19/hamas-israel-palestine-c... Hamas was created as an active divide and conquer strategy.
  - free652 3y ago
    According to Hamas, right? When someone throws numbers directly from Hamas, that someone lost all credibility.
    - andrepd 3y ago
      No, according to the IDF, which disgustingly lumps together civilian and military casualties.
    - zmgsabst 3y ago
      According to statistics, too: 2:1 civilian:Hamas ratio according to the IDF, with 5000 from Hamas dead and 10,000 civilians dead [0]; Gaza’s population is about half under 18 [1]. So if you figure deaths among civilians are random, then about 5,000 Gazans under 18 are dead. [0] - https://edition.cnn.com/2023/12/05/middleeast/israel-hamas-military-civilian-ratio-killed-intl-hnk/index.html https://edition.cnn.com/2023/12/05/middleeast/israel-hamas-m... [1] - https://www.npr.org/2023/10/18/1206897328/half-of-gazas-population-is-under-18-heres-what-that-means-for-the-conflict https://www.npr.org/2023/10/18/1206897328/half-of-gazas-popu...
      - free652 3y ago
        I can read and suggest for you to do the same when providing sources: From [0]: >The Israeli military has not officially published any estimates of those killed.
jstanley 3y ago
> then there are a lot of companies you need to boycott, before you get around to Amazon Help us out?
guiriduro 3y ago
Whataboutery. And your statement of Hamas "starting" this fight ignores both the historical Israeli agression, oppression, landtheft, and apartheid suffered by Palestinians, or in the particular, the "administrative detention" used by Israel to incarcerate many without trial (or certainly, fair trial), which can be seen as a form of hostage taking for which Hamas' action would be tit-for-tat, directly antecedent to this Likudnik war.
submeta 3y ago
I have family in Israel, people who protested against the judicial overhaul every week for weeks. Some of them are also in the military, saying after the Hamas attacks "now is the time to kill arabs". - The way Israel is reacting to the hamas atrocities [1] will not make Israel a safer place. We haven't eradicated Taliban in 20 years, but sat with them at the table after 20 years and negotiated. - Hamas was built in 1988 after the first intifada. Hezbollah after Israeli invasion in Lebanon 1982. The more military force Israel uses, the more orphans it creates who will run into the arms of another group. There is only one way to solve this, and that's by giving Palestinians a life that's worth living. Not by denying them basic rights. In the West Bank there are 40 checkpoins, nightly raids, 500-700 children who are detained every year. Military rule for Pals, civilian rule for settlers. So if a palestinian child throws a stone, he can get 10-20 years in prison, a settler? Nothing usually. We have 700,000 settlements built in West Bank in the past years. All of this injustice will create the next group, even if the last hamas person is killed. [1] In the current Gaza war, Israel is withholding water, food, medicines, and electricity for 2.1 mil. civilians, 1.1 mil children is against Geneva Conventions. It punishes civilians. And destroying the complete infrastructure of Gaza (hospitals, schools, universities, etc) will make Gaza uninhabitable, and that plus the genocidal language of Netanyahu and his cabinet (Netanyahu comparing palestinians to "Amalek", which the old testament says to destroy--their women, children, the babies; Gallant comparing them to human animals; Herzog saying there are no innocent people in Gaza, blaming the civilians as well)
- ycdxvjp 3y ago
  It keeps the MIL complex revenues up. Things only make sense after you add how the cash flows. It corrupts everthing in multiple ways at mutiple levels. Mil complex pays no price for bad outcomes. They benefit from them.
- rf15 3y ago
  The sad truth is that all of this was very predictable. It is also very convenient for Netanyahu, whose family[0] and government coalition has some interesting views about the area as a whole[1], including who Jordan belongs to. One could argue a lasting peace is utterly impossible due to ideological reasons/religious extremism on both sides. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benzion_Netanyahu https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benzion_Netanyahu [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revisionist_Zionism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revisionist_Zionism
lots2learn 3y ago
Hamas started this last flare up only if history begins on Oct 7. In fact, Hamas's action on that day is an inevitable reaction to decades of systemic oppression, unprovoked aggression and ethnic cleansing.
- bawolff 3y ago
  This entire region is a clusterfuck of, no that side did this first, no the other side did that. No matter what point you are starting at you can go further back in history to say the other side did X. That said, oct 7 was a clear escalation by hamas and was much more violent than what came before. Unsurprisingly that garnered a response.
  - lots2learn 3y ago
    It's not complicated at all. The party of this conflict which is the settler-colonizer would like everyone to believe it's complicated but it's quite simple: A people were ethnically cleansed from the lands they lived on for centuries and those people continue to be oppressed and subjugated till this day, not only denied to return back to the lands they were expelled from, but continue until now to be forcibly expelled from the small amounts they remain on.
    - bawolff 3y ago
      I mean, that kind of demonstrates my point though - your narrative could be applied to whichever side you prefer. "A people were ethnically cleansed from the lands" - From context you are probably referring to the Nakba, but you could just as equally be referring to the Jews being kicked out of Arab countries in the 40's and 50's. Or any number of other events for whichever side you prefer. There's plenty of blood to go around in this conflict.
      - lots2learn 3y ago
        What are the "other number of events"? Please be specific. Regarding what happened in various Arab countries in the 40s and 50s (which by the way is after the nakba so the tit-for-tat theory doesn't hold up) what does this have to do with Palestinians being ethnically cleansed? Are you justifying one for the other? It's no different than saying because of the European Holocaust or European antisemitism, the Palestinians deserve to be ethnically cleansed.
MyFirstSass 3y ago
Thousands and thousands of kids have died in the span of a few months. More than 8000 is the latest number! More than in any other recent war. It's a grotesque display of war actual war crimes now excused by a torrent of fake stories that keeps getting debunked later like the one with "40 dead babies! Absolutely vile and inexcusable! Don't spread misinformation that it's "just Hamas" that's targeted. It's everyone because they wan't to annex the whole region Risk style, it's bloody classic geopolitics backed by the worlds most powerful military. Let that sink in, the worlds most powerful militaries have murdered over 8000 kids in the span of 2 months. The west is the moral low ground. We'll do anything for power, resources and money like so many wars before, like so many coups, death squads, and dictators propped up by us. Hardliner Israeli settlers have been stealing private property for decades before oktober 7. while murdering youth on the borders of Palestine while cheering from luxurious well kept gardens. I feel bad for all jews getting spearheaded in this very geopolitical conflict. Many if not most do no stand with the military regime currently at war with their neighbours.
- bawolff 3y ago
  > It's a grotesque display of war actual war crimes Even if we assume that number is accurate. Dead children dont neccesarily equal a war crime, it depends on context. E.g. if the children are combatants, not a war crime. If it was collateral damage, not a war crime (assuming that it wasnt reckless, there was a porportional military advantage, etc. lots of details here). To be a war crime requires a bunch of stuff beyond just children dying. To be clear, its still a tragedy. > More than in any other recent war https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yemeni_civil_war_(2014%E2%80%93present) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yemeni_civil_war_(2014%E2%80%9... says more than 85,000 children have died in the yemen civil war, so that's obviously untrue that its more than any other recent war. And that was the first war i checked.
  - kossTKR 3y ago
    The Yemen civil war is 9 years. So on average 1300 kids a month? If the Israeli military has killed 8000 kids, that's in two months, so way more than even the dirtiest of other wars, and really the west should be held to higher standards. I tried to check and multiple NGO's have confirmed that 6000-8000 dead kids is the real number and the death tolls have usually been correct from the palestinian side even if it sounds weird. Talking about this makes me sick though.
concordDance 3y ago
> While the whole situation is a mess, Hamas definitely started this particular fist-fight. It's an insanely complicated mess going back a hundred years. Trying to figure out "who started it?" is impossible because at this point we're so far from the domain of applicability of "who started it?" that it isn't a coherent or well defined question any more.
- marginallen 3y ago
  [dead]
- bawolff 3y ago
  That said, i think we can answer the question of who escalated the situation from a mostly cold conflict to the current hot war.
  - isilofi 3y ago
    We can also answer (in the same way) about the escalations in the last few decades since 1948. Almost everything Israel did was reactive, they rarely shot first.
    - wizerdrobe 3y ago
      I don’t think you can justify ethnically cleansing the Palestinians in 1948, and I hardly think the (Jewish) Israeli government gets to play the “it was 80 years ago, it’s old news” since playing on the historical misfortunes of the Jewish community is their justification for existing. After Ariel Sharon went full false-flag terrorist in Lebanon, again it’s hard to describe these actions as “reactive”. They were very proactive in their assassination campaigns up to and including their attempts to kill an American ambassador. The sniper killings of civilians throwing rocks in recent years really precipitated the current (can you call it a third Intifada?) It’s no easy task saying who started what, nor can we really consider it a cold conflict. It’s constantly simmering, knife attack here, sniper shots there. It’s just going on to keep going.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
saiya-jin 3y ago
This is potentially a dangerous comment spreading quite a few potential lies stated as mere facts without any backing, can we get this flagged? Dang et al try hard to keep this forum as apolitical as possible and comments as such are definitely not helping.
- submeta 3y ago
  Which one?
subulaz 3y ago
[dead]
globalnode 3y ago
its delusions of this sort that remind me why as a species we just cant have nice things.
andrepd 3y ago
Appalling take on almost every front. 1. "Are you protesting X, why not Y and Z" boring rethoric, I will not even elaborate 2. "Cancelling your amazon account has no impact" well for crying out loud, what are they as an individual supposed to do, lobby the US State Department? Apart from direct action and writing on the Internet about it, not much you can do about a trillion dollar company. 3. "But what about hamas" You don't have to be pro-terrorist to recognise that Israel has attacked civilian targets indiscriminately, repeatedly bombed areas that it had declared safe for refugees, tallies civilian casualties together with military as "enemies killed", etc. It's frankly disgusting to think this can be in any way excused. This is not even to mention how hardliners like Bibi have themselves strengthened Hamas to sabotage the two-state solution.
- warbeforepeace 3y ago
  Cancelling your amazon account then posting on a site run on aws (where amazon makes its real money) wont do anything.
  - hyperdimension 3y ago
    I don't think HN is hosted on AWS.
zzzcsgo 3y ago
[dead]
zmix 3y ago
> Hamas definitely started this particular fist-fight. A few months before the Hamas attack, the Israeli minister of finances, Bezalel Smotrich (who also is tasked with the responsibility for administrating the occupied West Bank) said: "There is no such thing as the Palestinian people": https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/israeli-minister-says-no-such-thing-palestinian-people-2023-03-20/ https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/israeli-minister-s... I am horrified by the Hamas attack, shocked and sad, but not surprised. https://twitter.com/mabintou/status/1717987416252817891 https://twitter.com/mabintou/status/1717987416252817891 Did you know, that the British, during WWII, bombarded German settlements, holding mostly women, children and elderly, on purpose ("Area bombing directive")? In Germany they still call it: "Bombenterror gegen die Zivilbevölkerung", or, "Bombing terror against the civilian population". Here is the Wikipedia article on it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Area_bombing_directive https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Area_bombing_directive I do not take any side in this conflict. I think, both sides are monsters. But feeling this way, I can not tolerate one sided commenting, that paints one side as "reasonable" while not accepting what the other side has to endure.
throw4847285 3y ago
> Hamas definitely started this particular fist-fight. Do you often punch more than 6000 children to death when you have a fist-fight? I'm being glib, but only in response to your glibness. You're using the classic argument: "It's complicated, and nobody is totally ethical, so I would suggest not taking any action. Ultimately, this benefits my side, but I'm trying to obscure the fact that I'm taking sides so I have the illusion of objectivity." If you actually cared about human life over choosing sides, you would not be talking about "who started it." You would be talking about how we can end it.
- s1artibartfast 3y ago
  Do you have any ideas on how to end it? Neither party has been willing to make an agreement to move on in the last 80 years.
  - throw4847285 3y ago
    Nope! I think a lot more innocent people are going to die (both Israelis and Palestinians) and I can't see an end in sight. When the violence does flair up, however, America could use it's massive global influence to try and stop it rather than give more weapons to the Israel without the standard preconditions that weapons sales usually entail. This time, in fact, it's clearer than ever that American citizens have the capacity to make a change. Biden started out as rah rah for Israel and has faced a revolt within his administration from people who have had enough, as well as sustained protests from the outside.
    - s1artibartfast 3y ago
      yeah, Im pretty isolationist on the topic. There is no good guy so the best we can do is advocate for an unlikely peace and not get dragged down in the mud. I dont think Israel needs more money and weapons - they already have overwhelming superiority.

rightbyte 3y ago

> to protest the Israeli attack on Hamas Usually the critique is that civilians are targeted.

rmbyrro 3y ago
But the Hamas attack against Israel ONLY targeted civilians and OP isn't protesting.
- spencerflem 3y ago
  The US does not provide billions in aid to Hamas. What would protesting do?
- saiya-jin 3y ago
  This is not true, they targeted what they could, including any military equipment they met. The fact is, they didn't met much military resistance since army didn't consider such attack possible (there are alternative theories here but I'll ignore them) and the limited one they met they often overcame. Many male and female IDF soldiers died in the 7.10. ambush and some were kidnapped back to Gaza, some of them were killed due to very poor / lacking equipment provided by military (overconfidence in intelligence and border protection/monitoring).
- jessepasley 3y ago
  That's not true. Also, there are no companies supporting Hamas.
- zakki 3y ago
  Is there any company that provide support for Hamas? Inform OP so he can protest like he did to Amazon-Israel.
  - warbeforepeace 3y ago
    This thread is probably generating more profit for amazon than a dozen of her purchases. This is hosted on aws.
- tttp 3y ago
  OP is protesting against Amazon providing infrastructure for selecting targets for the IDF to bomb. I'm not aware of Amazon providing services to Hamas, so that the OP is not protesting there isn't that surprising, nor does it imply that OP isn't protesting against Hamas attack.
  - rmbyrro 3y ago
    Speaking about pro-palestinian activism in general, not particularly OP, who I don't know: If one is an activist, a group commits atrocities and there's no private business related to them, then one sits and do nothing? The people I see protesting against Israeli invasion of Gaza I failed to see protesting Hamas brutal and inhumane attacks weeks earlier. It seems to me they were silent. I'm having a really hard time understanding the logic of this kind of activism. It seems to me ideology driven, not humanitarian.
    - spencerflem 3y ago
      There's nothing to protest against - the government does not support or aid Hamas, and corporations do not support or aid Hamas. What change would the protests do?
      - rmbyrro 3y ago
        So if it's not possible to boycott an American or Israeli business, there's nothing an activist could do to manifest his support to humanity when innocent people are slaughtered inside their houses by savages?
        spencerflem 3y ago
        What support, specifically, would you like to see? Directly after the attacks the government was overwhelmingly in support of Israel. People do not protest when what they want is already happening.
- rightbyte 3y ago
  Is "only" going to share the fate of "literally"? Adding a disclaimer like "I don't support the 9/11 attacks on WTC but the invasion of Iraq is bad" is akin to subduing to a "have you stopped beating your wife" question.
- secondcoming 3y ago
  Right, I don't want to get drawn into an internet argument, but it's demonstrably false to say that Hamas targeted ONLY civilians. Military bases were run over too.
- mattigames 3y ago
  I don't thinks is a surprise that is exponentially harder to target the military when they have billions of dollars backing them up (yeah I know what some of you gonna say, they should target nobody at all and just suffer in silence, yeah that's not how humans think)
kossTKR 3y ago
More than 6000 thousand kids have died in the span of 2 months or so. The most powerful militaries in the world, and more than 12.000 civilians already dead, packed together tightly as in a prison with nowhere to flee bombs raining down on them. I don't get why anyone can support that. No matter the pretext. History going back over 75 years with so much suffering on both sides, but death tolls magnitudes larger on the palestinian side. A side that was just mostly regular farmers before the first Nakba but slowly became radicalised. This conflict will surely radicalise the rest. Is that an active strategy? According to leaks in the Intercept it actually is: https://theintercept.com/2018/02/19/hamas-israel-palestine-conflict/ https://theintercept.com/2018/02/19/hamas-israel-palestine-c... Hamas was created as an active divide and conquer strategy.
- free652 3y ago
  According to Hamas, right? When someone throws numbers directly from Hamas, that someone lost all credibility.
  - andrepd 3y ago
    No, according to the IDF, which disgustingly lumps together civilian and military casualties.
  - zmgsabst 3y ago
    According to statistics, too: 2:1 civilian:Hamas ratio according to the IDF, with 5000 from Hamas dead and 10,000 civilians dead [0]; Gaza’s population is about half under 18 [1]. So if you figure deaths among civilians are random, then about 5,000 Gazans under 18 are dead. [0] - https://edition.cnn.com/2023/12/05/middleeast/israel-hamas-military-civilian-ratio-killed-intl-hnk/index.html https://edition.cnn.com/2023/12/05/middleeast/israel-hamas-m... [1] - https://www.npr.org/2023/10/18/1206897328/half-of-gazas-population-is-under-18-heres-what-that-means-for-the-conflict https://www.npr.org/2023/10/18/1206897328/half-of-gazas-popu...
    - free652 3y ago
      I can read and suggest for you to do the same when providing sources: From [0]: >The Israeli military has not officially published any estimates of those killed.

jstanley 3y ago

> then there are a lot of companies you need to boycott, before you get around to Amazon Help us out?

guiriduro 3y ago

Whataboutery. And your statement of Hamas "starting" this fight ignores both the historical Israeli agression, oppression, landtheft, and apartheid suffered by Palestinians, or in the particular, the "administrative detention" used by Israel to incarcerate many without trial (or certainly, fair trial), which can be seen as a form of hostage taking for which Hamas' action would be tit-for-tat, directly antecedent to this Likudnik war.

submeta 3y ago

I have family in Israel, people who protested against the judicial overhaul every week for weeks. Some of them are also in the military, saying after the Hamas attacks "now is the time to kill arabs". - The way Israel is reacting to the hamas atrocities [1] will not make Israel a safer place. We haven't eradicated Taliban in 20 years, but sat with them at the table after 20 years and negotiated. - Hamas was built in 1988 after the first intifada. Hezbollah after Israeli invasion in Lebanon 1982. The more military force Israel uses, the more orphans it creates who will run into the arms of another group. There is only one way to solve this, and that's by giving Palestinians a life that's worth living. Not by denying them basic rights. In the West Bank there are 40 checkpoins, nightly raids, 500-700 children who are detained every year. Military rule for Pals, civilian rule for settlers. So if a palestinian child throws a stone, he can get 10-20 years in prison, a settler? Nothing usually. We have 700,000 settlements built in West Bank in the past years. All of this injustice will create the next group, even if the last hamas person is killed. [1] In the current Gaza war, Israel is withholding water, food, medicines, and electricity for 2.1 mil. civilians, 1.1 mil children is against Geneva Conventions. It punishes civilians. And destroying the complete infrastructure of Gaza (hospitals, schools, universities, etc) will make Gaza uninhabitable, and that plus the genocidal language of Netanyahu and his cabinet (Netanyahu comparing palestinians to "Amalek", which the old testament says to destroy--their women, children, the babies; Gallant comparing them to human animals; Herzog saying there are no innocent people in Gaza, blaming the civilians as well)

ycdxvjp 3y ago
It keeps the MIL complex revenues up. Things only make sense after you add how the cash flows. It corrupts everthing in multiple ways at mutiple levels. Mil complex pays no price for bad outcomes. They benefit from them.
rf15 3y ago
The sad truth is that all of this was very predictable. It is also very convenient for Netanyahu, whose family[0] and government coalition has some interesting views about the area as a whole[1], including who Jordan belongs to. One could argue a lasting peace is utterly impossible due to ideological reasons/religious extremism on both sides. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benzion_Netanyahu https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benzion_Netanyahu [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revisionist_Zionism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revisionist_Zionism

lots2learn 3y ago

Hamas started this last flare up only if history begins on Oct 7. In fact, Hamas's action on that day is an inevitable reaction to decades of systemic oppression, unprovoked aggression and ethnic cleansing.

bawolff 3y ago
This entire region is a clusterfuck of, no that side did this first, no the other side did that. No matter what point you are starting at you can go further back in history to say the other side did X. That said, oct 7 was a clear escalation by hamas and was much more violent than what came before. Unsurprisingly that garnered a response.
- lots2learn 3y ago
  It's not complicated at all. The party of this conflict which is the settler-colonizer would like everyone to believe it's complicated but it's quite simple: A people were ethnically cleansed from the lands they lived on for centuries and those people continue to be oppressed and subjugated till this day, not only denied to return back to the lands they were expelled from, but continue until now to be forcibly expelled from the small amounts they remain on.
  - bawolff 3y ago
    I mean, that kind of demonstrates my point though - your narrative could be applied to whichever side you prefer. "A people were ethnically cleansed from the lands" - From context you are probably referring to the Nakba, but you could just as equally be referring to the Jews being kicked out of Arab countries in the 40's and 50's. Or any number of other events for whichever side you prefer. There's plenty of blood to go around in this conflict.
    - lots2learn 3y ago
      What are the "other number of events"? Please be specific. Regarding what happened in various Arab countries in the 40s and 50s (which by the way is after the nakba so the tit-for-tat theory doesn't hold up) what does this have to do with Palestinians being ethnically cleansed? Are you justifying one for the other? It's no different than saying because of the European Holocaust or European antisemitism, the Palestinians deserve to be ethnically cleansed.

MyFirstSass 3y ago

Thousands and thousands of kids have died in the span of a few months. More than 8000 is the latest number! More than in any other recent war. It's a grotesque display of war actual war crimes now excused by a torrent of fake stories that keeps getting debunked later like the one with "40 dead babies! Absolutely vile and inexcusable! Don't spread misinformation that it's "just Hamas" that's targeted. It's everyone because they wan't to annex the whole region Risk style, it's bloody classic geopolitics backed by the worlds most powerful military. Let that sink in, the worlds most powerful militaries have murdered over 8000 kids in the span of 2 months. The west is the moral low ground. We'll do anything for power, resources and money like so many wars before, like so many coups, death squads, and dictators propped up by us. Hardliner Israeli settlers have been stealing private property for decades before oktober 7. while murdering youth on the borders of Palestine while cheering from luxurious well kept gardens. I feel bad for all jews getting spearheaded in this very geopolitical conflict. Many if not most do no stand with the military regime currently at war with their neighbours.

bawolff 3y ago
> It's a grotesque display of war actual war crimes Even if we assume that number is accurate. Dead children dont neccesarily equal a war crime, it depends on context. E.g. if the children are combatants, not a war crime. If it was collateral damage, not a war crime (assuming that it wasnt reckless, there was a porportional military advantage, etc. lots of details here). To be a war crime requires a bunch of stuff beyond just children dying. To be clear, its still a tragedy. > More than in any other recent war https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yemeni_civil_war_(2014%E2%80%93present) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yemeni_civil_war_(2014%E2%80%9... says more than 85,000 children have died in the yemen civil war, so that's obviously untrue that its more than any other recent war. And that was the first war i checked.
- kossTKR 3y ago
  The Yemen civil war is 9 years. So on average 1300 kids a month? If the Israeli military has killed 8000 kids, that's in two months, so way more than even the dirtiest of other wars, and really the west should be held to higher standards. I tried to check and multiple NGO's have confirmed that 6000-8000 dead kids is the real number and the death tolls have usually been correct from the palestinian side even if it sounds weird. Talking about this makes me sick though.

concordDance 3y ago

> While the whole situation is a mess, Hamas definitely started this particular fist-fight. It's an insanely complicated mess going back a hundred years. Trying to figure out "who started it?" is impossible because at this point we're so far from the domain of applicability of "who started it?" that it isn't a coherent or well defined question any more.

marginallen 3y ago
[dead]
bawolff 3y ago
That said, i think we can answer the question of who escalated the situation from a mostly cold conflict to the current hot war.
- isilofi 3y ago
  We can also answer (in the same way) about the escalations in the last few decades since 1948. Almost everything Israel did was reactive, they rarely shot first.
  - wizerdrobe 3y ago
    I don’t think you can justify ethnically cleansing the Palestinians in 1948, and I hardly think the (Jewish) Israeli government gets to play the “it was 80 years ago, it’s old news” since playing on the historical misfortunes of the Jewish community is their justification for existing. After Ariel Sharon went full false-flag terrorist in Lebanon, again it’s hard to describe these actions as “reactive”. They were very proactive in their assassination campaigns up to and including their attempts to kill an American ambassador. The sniper killings of civilians throwing rocks in recent years really precipitated the current (can you call it a third Intifada?) It’s no easy task saying who started what, nor can we really consider it a cold conflict. It’s constantly simmering, knife attack here, sniper shots there. It’s just going on to keep going.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

saiya-jin 3y ago

This is potentially a dangerous comment spreading quite a few potential lies stated as mere facts without any backing, can we get this flagged? Dang et al try hard to keep this forum as apolitical as possible and comments as such are definitely not helping.

submeta 3y ago
Which one?

subulaz 3y ago

[dead]

globalnode 3y ago

its delusions of this sort that remind me why as a species we just cant have nice things.

andrepd 3y ago

Appalling take on almost every front. 1. "Are you protesting X, why not Y and Z" boring rethoric, I will not even elaborate 2. "Cancelling your amazon account has no impact" well for crying out loud, what are they as an individual supposed to do, lobby the US State Department? Apart from direct action and writing on the Internet about it, not much you can do about a trillion dollar company. 3. "But what about hamas" You don't have to be pro-terrorist to recognise that Israel has attacked civilian targets indiscriminately, repeatedly bombed areas that it had declared safe for refugees, tallies civilian casualties together with military as "enemies killed", etc. It's frankly disgusting to think this can be in any way excused. This is not even to mention how hardliners like Bibi have themselves strengthened Hamas to sabotage the two-state solution.

warbeforepeace 3y ago
Cancelling your amazon account then posting on a site run on aws (where amazon makes its real money) wont do anything.
- hyperdimension 3y ago
  I don't think HN is hosted on AWS.

zzzcsgo 3y ago

[dead]

zmix 3y ago

> Hamas definitely started this particular fist-fight. A few months before the Hamas attack, the Israeli minister of finances, Bezalel Smotrich (who also is tasked with the responsibility for administrating the occupied West Bank) said: "There is no such thing as the Palestinian people": https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/israeli-minister-says-no-such-thing-palestinian-people-2023-03-20/ https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/israeli-minister-s... I am horrified by the Hamas attack, shocked and sad, but not surprised. https://twitter.com/mabintou/status/1717987416252817891 https://twitter.com/mabintou/status/1717987416252817891 Did you know, that the British, during WWII, bombarded German settlements, holding mostly women, children and elderly, on purpose ("Area bombing directive")? In Germany they still call it: "Bombenterror gegen die Zivilbevölkerung", or, "Bombing terror against the civilian population". Here is the Wikipedia article on it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Area_bombing_directive https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Area_bombing_directive I do not take any side in this conflict. I think, both sides are monsters. But feeling this way, I can not tolerate one sided commenting, that paints one side as "reasonable" while not accepting what the other side has to endure.

throw4847285 3y ago

> Hamas definitely started this particular fist-fight. Do you often punch more than 6000 children to death when you have a fist-fight? I'm being glib, but only in response to your glibness. You're using the classic argument: "It's complicated, and nobody is totally ethical, so I would suggest not taking any action. Ultimately, this benefits my side, but I'm trying to obscure the fact that I'm taking sides so I have the illusion of objectivity." If you actually cared about human life over choosing sides, you would not be talking about "who started it." You would be talking about how we can end it.

s1artibartfast 3y ago
Do you have any ideas on how to end it? Neither party has been willing to make an agreement to move on in the last 80 years.
- throw4847285 3y ago
  Nope! I think a lot more innocent people are going to die (both Israelis and Palestinians) and I can't see an end in sight. When the violence does flair up, however, America could use it's massive global influence to try and stop it rather than give more weapons to the Israel without the standard preconditions that weapons sales usually entail. This time, in fact, it's clearer than ever that American citizens have the capacity to make a change. Biden started out as rah rah for Israel and has faced a revolt within his administration from people who have had enough, as well as sustained protests from the outside.
  - s1artibartfast 3y ago
    yeah, Im pretty isolationist on the topic. There is no good guy so the best we can do is advocate for an unlikely peace and not get dragged down in the mud. I dont think Israel needs more money and weapons - they already have overwhelming superiority.