14 ms·

Yes? Use your basic reasoning. Hamas fights in civilian clothing, they hide in civilian buildings, they hide in hospitals. They use regular civilians as shields

by brink 3y ago

Yes? Use your basic reasoning. Hamas fights in civilian clothing, they hide in civilian buildings, they hide in hospitals. They use regular civilians as shields. This is not your average fight; Hamas hates their enemy more than they love their own country.

pests 3y ago
Maybe another method is needed then? If you can't tell innocent people from legit targets... rethink the approach? Here is my reasoning: they hide in civilian clothes, okay let's not shoot civilians. They hide in hospitals, okay let's not bomb hospitals. They use civilian buildings, okay let's not bomb civilian buildings. They use civilians as shields... let's not shoot the shields. How is that unreasonable?
- samatman 3y ago
  [flagged]
- bawolff 3y ago
  Essentially that implies Israel will get shot at and not be allowed to shoot back. I suspect most Israelis would find that unreasonable. Israeli civilians don't like being killed anymore than Palestinian civilians do. The thing that usually prevents war is that both sides lose in the end. If only one side is allowed to shoot, why would the side being allowed to shoot ever stop? They would be getting all the benefits of war with none of the drawbacks.
  - shprd 3y ago
    > Israel will get shot at and not be allowed to shoot back. The logic doesn't really follow What shots exactly? the missiles? Attack the launch sites. They're pretty clear as they expose themselves. Israel has 24/7 surveillance it shouldn't be a challenge. Can you support your claim by showing evidence that a hospital was used to launch missiles? You likely don't have evidence that Israel is targeting anything. It seems every street in the city was indiscriminately bombed, every hospital was distroyed, and tens of thousands of civilians were murdered. That's a massacre not a "response".
    - bawolff 3y ago
      > What shots exactly? I would be referring to all forms of military violence, whether that be guns, rockets or something else. I also believe if the facility was being used to conduct the war in a significant capacity, e.g. as an ammunition store or as a command and control center then it becomes fair game. Just waiting around for someone to open fire, shoot back only when they are firing, and letting them escape back to their base of operations is not a way to prevent future attacks and puts the defender at an unreasonable disadvantage. This should still be subject to the doctrine of porportionality and discrimination of course. > Can you support your claim by showing evidence that a hospital was used to launch missiles? I never claimed that. It is especially impossible to show since hamas has not been using missiles in this conflict as far as i know. Perhaps you mean rockets? My main claim is that if the hospital is being used in any significant capacity to conduct military operations it is reasonable that it could be targeted. Whether any specific instance in this war is justified - i don't know, i don't have the full picture of what happened and i don't know what Israel knew at the time of targeting (intent matters). More to the point, i do not believe that allowing hamas impunity so long as they co-locate their activity near civilians is reasonable. > You likely don't have evidence that Israel is targeting anything. Only circumstantial based on the civilian death ratio being much lower in this conflict than in other wars where the military bombed indiscriminately. Generally crimes have an innocent until proven guiltly element. The onus is on evidence is the other way around. > That's a massacre not a "response". Whether or not it is ever justified to bomb a hospital is a very different conversation than whether the actions in this specific conflict are justified. For the latter the details matter a lot.
    - kaba0 3y ago
      [flagged]
    - Wolfenstein98k 3y ago
      The attack sites are in civilian areas.
    - nayaketo 3y ago
      > What shots exactly? the missiles? Attack the launch sites. What if those launch sites are top of hospitals or media buildings?
  - tsimionescu 3y ago
    When the IRA was periodically attacking UK institutions and killing civilians, did the UK feel entitled to level Belfast and say that the IRA is to blame? This war in Palestine is much closer to a civil war than to any country-to-country combat, especially since Palestine is simply not an independent country. Since Israel is in control of the Gaza strip for 50+ years (explicit military control till the 2005, still in full control of their borders today), it is on them to treat this as authorities in any country are expected to treat insurgencies on territory they control, not as if they were attacked by a foreign country.
    - bawolff 3y ago
      The british controlled the police in northern ireland, Israel does not control the police or other government functions insude Gaza. (As an aside it should be noted that that conflict is orders of magnitude less violent. If the IRA did what Hamas did, i suspect belfast would be leveled) At most israel control their border with gaza (but not egypt's border with gaza) the sea access and air access. A blockade no doubt, but not donestic government functions. Whether or not gaza is independent is complicated, since they have some features of independence but not others and don't quite squarely fit in either camp. Nonetheless if your suggestion is that israel should have called in whatever their equivalent of a police swat team is - that's impossible because hamas controlled all domestic government functions in gaza. You can't use domestic police techniques on land where you only control the border but not the land itself.
    - shiroiushi 3y ago
      Northern Ireland/UK was not similar to Gaza/Israel at all. The UK was always Northern Ireland's government and controlled all state functions. A better comparison is Mainland China/Taiwan: according to various outsiders, the two are the same country supposedly, but in reality they function as two different states, with entirely separate governments. The main difference between these situations (aside from Taiwan being an island) is that China actually wants Taiwan, whereas Israel really doesn't want Gaza.
      - disgruntledphd2 3y ago
  - prmoustache 3y ago
    > Essentially that implies Israel will get shot at and not be allowed to shoot back. I suspect most Israelis would find that unreasonable. Israeli civilians don't like being killed anymore than Palestinian civilians do. We are talking about Gaza. The only Israelis being shot there are Israeli militari attacking the Gaza strip. If you are talking missiles, well Israel should abandon the colonies and create a no man's land where no civilian, be it Israeli or Palestinian, can go, and only shoot those that trespass. If you are talking missiles, Israel has air defense systems.
    - bawolff 3y ago
      > We are talking about Gaza. The only Israelis being shot there are Israeli militari attacking the Gaza strip. What exactly do you think happened on oct 7? > If you are talking missiles, well Israel should abandon the colonies and create a no man's land where no civilian, be it Israeli or Palestinian, can go, and only shoot those that trespass. They did do that to Gaza in 2005. That is how we arrived at the current situation.
      - GordonS 3y ago
        > They did do that to Gaza in 2005. That is how we arrived at the current situation. No, they didn't "do that to Gaza" - Israel has kept Gaza under a brutal blockade, by air, land and sea. Israel kept the place like an open air prison, and had it surrounded by military outposts and remotely operated guns. Hundreds of civilians were shot in 2023 prior to Oct 7th, including peaceful protesters.
        bawolff 3y ago
        The person i was responding to didn't say israel should stop the blockade. They said israel should dismantle their colonies. Which they did in Gaza in 2005. There are no colonies currently in gaza. It should also be noted that the blockade happened in 2007, so there was a 2 year period there. In any case, the israeli withdrawl is one of the key historical facts that lead to the current geopolitical context.
- davidf18 3y ago
  Israel uses AI to detect targets with all of their intelligence gathering. It uses precision weaponry. It drops pamphlets (which the US did in Iraq), calls apartments before bombing, has 4 hours of quiet the same time each day for civilian evacuations -- these are Israeli innovations. Meanwhile Hamas hides in tunnels that are under hospitals, schools, mosques, residences making them military targets. They don't wear uniforms. They captured hostages. Rooting terrorists out of tunnels is a very complicated task. Most cases of Urban combat such as Mosul don't involve tunnels, yet have much greater civilian to combatant ratio of casualties (3:1 in the case of Mosul). Hamas never built bomb shelters for its civilians, unlike Israel. They had plenty of concrete to build tunnels for themselves. The war would have been over by now except other nations have been slowing Israel down. These nations claim that they want the conflict to end but it won't unless Hamas surrenders or Israel finishes the job.
- screye 3y ago
  > Maybe another method is needed then? What would be useful is a historic example where another approach has worked. I don't approve of Israel's methods. I'd prefer an egalitarian solution. But, I'm all out of ideas. Find me an instance of 2 co-habiting or neighboring groups that hate each other, have huge disputes and ended up in relative peace. I can give you my recent examples of previous instances that are now mostly peaceful, and all of them violate the geneva convention or UN human rights declaration. Xinjiang = permament open air prison and extreme brain washing Srilanka LTTE = violent genocide of all suspected participants and their innocent family. 100k civilians killed Bosnia - Sijekovac killings = violent genocide of thousands of innocent Bosnians in the Bosnian war Kosovo - thousands of killings, massive population displacement (1+ million) & US military intervention So what is it ? Do we want the US to intervene and guarantee safety to Israel ? Do we want real open air prisons and complete cultural eradication ? Do we want population displacement of every Gazan to a 3rd location ? Hopefully we are not in support of genocide ? Well, so what is 'another method' ? Every single instance of haphazardly drawn post-WW2 line, has led to some kind of insurgency, war, genocide or forced population displacement. Peaceful borders are drawn in the blood of ancestors. The west is simply fortunate enough to have concluded it's killing mid-way through the 20th century. Israel is currently going through one such process. It is especially rich to see the criticism come from western nations who first created the problem. They encouraged the conditions that led to Oct 2023: 2005 withdrawl of Israel and rise of Hamas, and its unilateral control on aid. They refuse to propose any middle ground solution. It's ridiculous.
  - YeGoblynQueenne 3y ago
    >> Well, so what is 'another method' ? Another method would be the IDF accepting their responsibility for failing to protect the kibbutzim on 7 October, and making damn sure that this doesn't happen again on their watch. Stop killing the Arabs and start defending the jews. And I don't mean that they should make sure there's no more Palestinians left to attack them, because that is a horror that the world must never see again (but still sees all too often).
    - Auracle 3y ago
      So basically let them attack Israel as much as they want, and Israel is only allowed to defend? That's like having a sibling that's allowed to punch, prod, and poke you as much as they want. If you don't hit back your life will be hell.
- tivert 3y ago
  > How is that unreasonable? Because then you let people committing literal war crimes murder you while doing little to nothing to stop it (IIRC, using human shields is a war crime).
hmcq6 3y ago
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/jan/30/israel-forces-disguised-women-medics-storm-hospital-jenin-west-bank https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/jan/30/israel-forces-... What can be done when Israel is willing to break the rules of engagement?
coopierez 3y ago
Here is a Palestinian being used as a human shield by an Israeli solider: https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/palestinian-says-israeli-soldiers-used-him-human-shield-west-bank-2024-01-16/ https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/palestinian-says-i...

by brink 3y ago

pests 3y ago

Maybe another method is needed then? If you can't tell innocent people from legit targets... rethink the approach? Here is my reasoning: they hide in civilian clothes, okay let's not shoot civilians. They hide in hospitals, okay let's not bomb hospitals. They use civilian buildings, okay let's not bomb civilian buildings. They use civilians as shields... let's not shoot the shields. How is that unreasonable?

samatman 3y ago
[flagged]
bawolff 3y ago
Essentially that implies Israel will get shot at and not be allowed to shoot back. I suspect most Israelis would find that unreasonable. Israeli civilians don't like being killed anymore than Palestinian civilians do. The thing that usually prevents war is that both sides lose in the end. If only one side is allowed to shoot, why would the side being allowed to shoot ever stop? They would be getting all the benefits of war with none of the drawbacks.
- shprd 3y ago
  > Israel will get shot at and not be allowed to shoot back. The logic doesn't really follow What shots exactly? the missiles? Attack the launch sites. They're pretty clear as they expose themselves. Israel has 24/7 surveillance it shouldn't be a challenge. Can you support your claim by showing evidence that a hospital was used to launch missiles? You likely don't have evidence that Israel is targeting anything. It seems every street in the city was indiscriminately bombed, every hospital was distroyed, and tens of thousands of civilians were murdered. That's a massacre not a "response".
  - bawolff 3y ago
    > What shots exactly? I would be referring to all forms of military violence, whether that be guns, rockets or something else. I also believe if the facility was being used to conduct the war in a significant capacity, e.g. as an ammunition store or as a command and control center then it becomes fair game. Just waiting around for someone to open fire, shoot back only when they are firing, and letting them escape back to their base of operations is not a way to prevent future attacks and puts the defender at an unreasonable disadvantage. This should still be subject to the doctrine of porportionality and discrimination of course. > Can you support your claim by showing evidence that a hospital was used to launch missiles? I never claimed that. It is especially impossible to show since hamas has not been using missiles in this conflict as far as i know. Perhaps you mean rockets? My main claim is that if the hospital is being used in any significant capacity to conduct military operations it is reasonable that it could be targeted. Whether any specific instance in this war is justified - i don't know, i don't have the full picture of what happened and i don't know what Israel knew at the time of targeting (intent matters). More to the point, i do not believe that allowing hamas impunity so long as they co-locate their activity near civilians is reasonable. > You likely don't have evidence that Israel is targeting anything. Only circumstantial based on the civilian death ratio being much lower in this conflict than in other wars where the military bombed indiscriminately. Generally crimes have an innocent until proven guiltly element. The onus is on evidence is the other way around. > That's a massacre not a "response". Whether or not it is ever justified to bomb a hospital is a very different conversation than whether the actions in this specific conflict are justified. For the latter the details matter a lot.
  - kaba0 3y ago
    [flagged]
  - Wolfenstein98k 3y ago
    The attack sites are in civilian areas.
  - nayaketo 3y ago
    > What shots exactly? the missiles? Attack the launch sites. What if those launch sites are top of hospitals or media buildings?
- tsimionescu 3y ago
  When the IRA was periodically attacking UK institutions and killing civilians, did the UK feel entitled to level Belfast and say that the IRA is to blame? This war in Palestine is much closer to a civil war than to any country-to-country combat, especially since Palestine is simply not an independent country. Since Israel is in control of the Gaza strip for 50+ years (explicit military control till the 2005, still in full control of their borders today), it is on them to treat this as authorities in any country are expected to treat insurgencies on territory they control, not as if they were attacked by a foreign country.
  - bawolff 3y ago
    The british controlled the police in northern ireland, Israel does not control the police or other government functions insude Gaza. (As an aside it should be noted that that conflict is orders of magnitude less violent. If the IRA did what Hamas did, i suspect belfast would be leveled) At most israel control their border with gaza (but not egypt's border with gaza) the sea access and air access. A blockade no doubt, but not donestic government functions. Whether or not gaza is independent is complicated, since they have some features of independence but not others and don't quite squarely fit in either camp. Nonetheless if your suggestion is that israel should have called in whatever their equivalent of a police swat team is - that's impossible because hamas controlled all domestic government functions in gaza. You can't use domestic police techniques on land where you only control the border but not the land itself.
  - shiroiushi 3y ago
    Northern Ireland/UK was not similar to Gaza/Israel at all. The UK was always Northern Ireland's government and controlled all state functions. A better comparison is Mainland China/Taiwan: according to various outsiders, the two are the same country supposedly, but in reality they function as two different states, with entirely separate governments. The main difference between these situations (aside from Taiwan being an island) is that China actually wants Taiwan, whereas Israel really doesn't want Gaza.
    - disgruntledphd2 3y ago
- prmoustache 3y ago
  > Essentially that implies Israel will get shot at and not be allowed to shoot back. I suspect most Israelis would find that unreasonable. Israeli civilians don't like being killed anymore than Palestinian civilians do. We are talking about Gaza. The only Israelis being shot there are Israeli militari attacking the Gaza strip. If you are talking missiles, well Israel should abandon the colonies and create a no man's land where no civilian, be it Israeli or Palestinian, can go, and only shoot those that trespass. If you are talking missiles, Israel has air defense systems.
  - bawolff 3y ago
    > We are talking about Gaza. The only Israelis being shot there are Israeli militari attacking the Gaza strip. What exactly do you think happened on oct 7? > If you are talking missiles, well Israel should abandon the colonies and create a no man's land where no civilian, be it Israeli or Palestinian, can go, and only shoot those that trespass. They did do that to Gaza in 2005. That is how we arrived at the current situation.
    - GordonS 3y ago
      > They did do that to Gaza in 2005. That is how we arrived at the current situation. No, they didn't "do that to Gaza" - Israel has kept Gaza under a brutal blockade, by air, land and sea. Israel kept the place like an open air prison, and had it surrounded by military outposts and remotely operated guns. Hundreds of civilians were shot in 2023 prior to Oct 7th, including peaceful protesters.
      - bawolff 3y ago
        The person i was responding to didn't say israel should stop the blockade. They said israel should dismantle their colonies. Which they did in Gaza in 2005. There are no colonies currently in gaza. It should also be noted that the blockade happened in 2007, so there was a 2 year period there. In any case, the israeli withdrawl is one of the key historical facts that lead to the current geopolitical context.
davidf18 3y ago
Israel uses AI to detect targets with all of their intelligence gathering. It uses precision weaponry. It drops pamphlets (which the US did in Iraq), calls apartments before bombing, has 4 hours of quiet the same time each day for civilian evacuations -- these are Israeli innovations. Meanwhile Hamas hides in tunnels that are under hospitals, schools, mosques, residences making them military targets. They don't wear uniforms. They captured hostages. Rooting terrorists out of tunnels is a very complicated task. Most cases of Urban combat such as Mosul don't involve tunnels, yet have much greater civilian to combatant ratio of casualties (3:1 in the case of Mosul). Hamas never built bomb shelters for its civilians, unlike Israel. They had plenty of concrete to build tunnels for themselves. The war would have been over by now except other nations have been slowing Israel down. These nations claim that they want the conflict to end but it won't unless Hamas surrenders or Israel finishes the job.
screye 3y ago
> Maybe another method is needed then? What would be useful is a historic example where another approach has worked. I don't approve of Israel's methods. I'd prefer an egalitarian solution. But, I'm all out of ideas. Find me an instance of 2 co-habiting or neighboring groups that hate each other, have huge disputes and ended up in relative peace. I can give you my recent examples of previous instances that are now mostly peaceful, and all of them violate the geneva convention or UN human rights declaration. Xinjiang = permament open air prison and extreme brain washing Srilanka LTTE = violent genocide of all suspected participants and their innocent family. 100k civilians killed Bosnia - Sijekovac killings = violent genocide of thousands of innocent Bosnians in the Bosnian war Kosovo - thousands of killings, massive population displacement (1+ million) & US military intervention So what is it ? Do we want the US to intervene and guarantee safety to Israel ? Do we want real open air prisons and complete cultural eradication ? Do we want population displacement of every Gazan to a 3rd location ? Hopefully we are not in support of genocide ? Well, so what is 'another method' ? Every single instance of haphazardly drawn post-WW2 line, has led to some kind of insurgency, war, genocide or forced population displacement. Peaceful borders are drawn in the blood of ancestors. The west is simply fortunate enough to have concluded it's killing mid-way through the 20th century. Israel is currently going through one such process. It is especially rich to see the criticism come from western nations who first created the problem. They encouraged the conditions that led to Oct 2023: 2005 withdrawl of Israel and rise of Hamas, and its unilateral control on aid. They refuse to propose any middle ground solution. It's ridiculous.
- YeGoblynQueenne 3y ago
  >> Well, so what is 'another method' ? Another method would be the IDF accepting their responsibility for failing to protect the kibbutzim on 7 October, and making damn sure that this doesn't happen again on their watch. Stop killing the Arabs and start defending the jews. And I don't mean that they should make sure there's no more Palestinians left to attack them, because that is a horror that the world must never see again (but still sees all too often).
  - Auracle 3y ago
    So basically let them attack Israel as much as they want, and Israel is only allowed to defend? That's like having a sibling that's allowed to punch, prod, and poke you as much as they want. If you don't hit back your life will be hell.
tivert 3y ago
> How is that unreasonable? Because then you let people committing literal war crimes murder you while doing little to nothing to stop it (IIRC, using human shields is a war crime).

hmcq6 3y ago

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/jan/30/israel-forces-disguised-women-medics-storm-hospital-jenin-west-bank https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/jan/30/israel-forces-... What can be done when Israel is willing to break the rules of engagement?

coopierez 3y ago

Here is a Palestinian being used as a human shield by an Israeli solider: https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/palestinian-says-israeli-soldiers-used-him-human-shield-west-bank-2024-01-16/ https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/palestinian-says-i...