7 ms·

I know this is a controversial issue. But honest question: what is a ceasefire going to do? Hamas refuses to surrender, so it’s only a few years until another

by stogot 2y ago

I know this is a controversial issue. But honest question: what is a ceasefire going to do? Hamas refuses to surrender, so it’s only a few years until another Oct 7, and then it starts again. What other option does Israel have? They’ve been fighting these wars for years and they’ve now decided to continue this one vs waiting for a new one in three years

clydethefrog 2y ago
[flagged]
- SauciestGNU 2y ago
  Mass suicide
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
bdjsiqoocwk 2y ago
[dead]
jfwuasdfs 2y ago
A cease-fire may buy us time to figure out a long-term solution.
- kojdels 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - selcuka 2y ago
    It's interesting that we don't count Israel as a religious lunatic state.
    - shepherdjerred 2y ago
      Israel's stated goal is not to kill unlike Hamas
      - defrost 2y ago
        Best to watch what people do rather than what they say. Which one consistantly has the greater body count, which one has been steadily illegally encroaching on territory, etc.
      - selcuka 2y ago
        Sure, not their "stated goal", but remember that Hamas is a reactive organisation. There would be no Hamas without Israel. I don't think there is a solution other than diplomacy as long as there are people who gain material benefit from war. Even nuking all Palestinians would not finish Hamas or its derivatives.
      - text0404 2y ago
        https://apnews.com/article/israel-palestinians-south-africa-genocide-hate-speech-97a9e4a84a3a6bebeddfb80f8a030724 https://apnews.com/article/israel-palestinians-south-africa-... Israel would disagree with you.
      - throw310822 2y ago
        Hamas' stated goal is not "to kill"- remember that everything you know about Hamas you know from Israel's perspective and according to Israel's interests. Hamas' stated goal is "to free Palestine"- it means gaining its political control, not murdering people.
    - randomcarbloke 2y ago
      it's a liberal democracy that welcomes even gazans as citizens rather than a genocidal theocratic ethnostate like all its neighbours.
  - lr0 2y ago
    Almost all regimes in the Middle East (and even other Arab regimes) are having a very well relationship with Israel, even those who do not publicly do normalization of relations. Historically Israel (as well as the US.) supported these regimes to ensure its interest. Not many books written about that so far, but I recommend people to check William Blum's "Killing Hope", it studies a very similar case of supporting dictatorships by Israel's key sponsor (the United States).
insane_dreamer 2y ago
> What other option does Israel have? seriously? yeah, so lets just reduce Gaza to rubble, ruin the lives of 1.5M people and kill 45,000 men, women and children in order to root out remaining fighters who refuse to lay down their arms. In fact why don't we just go ahead and nuke the whole place -- that should get rid of Hamas once and for all. -- except that it won't actually get rid of Hamas--or whatever comes out of the ashes of Hamas. When a population has been oppressed as long as the Palestinians in Gaza have, it gives rise to people who don't care anymore, people who have seen their families and loved ones killed. Even if Israel kills every Hamas fighter today, how many 10 year old boys do you think there are today who are going to take up weapons to avenge their fathers and older brothers as soon as they are able? Just like today's fighters want to avenge their fathers from the last intifada? So yeah, Israel will be fighting this again in 5 year's time (unless of course they just kill most everyone or make Gaza unlivable, which seems to be the case now that this has gone on for over a year, thus ... genocide). The only way to stop it is for Israel to stop oppressing Gaza to begin with, but that it is unwilling to do. So the cycle will continue.
- stogot 2y ago
  Your answer is unrealistic, but I didn’t provide a long enough question. I’m not justifying genocide obviously. The initial response to Oct7 was justified but not complete destruction of Gaza. Im asking why “not continuing to fight” (a ceasefire) is even a viable option for Israel’s politicians per the article’s demands. I am a realist not an optimist. Give a viable alternative. The cycle continues
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - insane_dreamer 2y ago
    > initial response to Oct7 was justified but not complete destruction of Gaza agreed but it's pretty clear now that the complete destruction of Gaza was the plan all along
  - afiori 2y ago
_yb2s 2y ago
They could stop persecuting and murdering Palestinians, stop occupying Palestine, and agree to either a one state or two state solution that recognizes Palestinians as human beings with a right to live.
- AnimalMuppet 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - text0404 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - anal_reactor 2y ago
      What the fuck you talking about, democratically elected Hamas has "the complete destruction of Israel" as their official policy, and polls show that only after being bombed to oblivion most Palestinians started to think that Oct 7 might've been a bad move. It's clear to me that Palestinians do not accept peace as a practical solution. https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/palestinian-poll-finds-big-drop-support-oct-7-attack-2024-09-17/ https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/palestinian-poll-f...
      - throw310822 2y ago
        The platform of the democratically elected Likud states the same: "between the Jordan and the sea there will be only israeli sovereignty". https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/original-party-platform-of-the-likud-party https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/original-party-platform... Does this authorise Hamas to go there and raze the entire country to the ground? Please let me know.
        weatherlite 2y ago
        > Does this authorise Hamas to go there and raze the entire country to the ground? Please let me know. Pretty much yes according to too many liberal professors in ivy league universities. I think human lives on both sides are quite cheap to them.
jhanschoo 2y ago
The enlightened option from a felicific calculus method it seems to me would require putting the destiny of Israel democratically in the hands of the Levantine majority; scaling back its territory occupied and settled illegally. But of course, this is not an option. This risks the genocide of the Israelis by putting power in its neighbors, when they have the wealth and US support to ensure that it is their more numerous enemies that risks genocide instead
- invalidname 2y ago
  You do know Israel offered Palestinians a state and unilaterally left Gaza giving them an option to build a state... We tried that and it didn't work.
  - 486sx33 2y ago
    Not only that, Hamas stole the world’s money meant to feed and help and instead oppressed and killed. Palestine people would do well to join Egypt
  - FireBeyond 2y ago
    IDF tanks were still making incursions. Offered them a state. Let's see... one airport... runways bombed and Palestine told in no uncertain terms that any attempt to repair, rebuild, or build an airport would be met with military response. The Israeli Navy's blockade of Gaza's ports is in its seventeenth year. The generally closed land borders? Hmmm. "Here's an option to build a state, a very generous offer, we must say." It's the state equivalent of "Yes, you can live in the basement. We're going to lock it when you're down there so you can't leave, and you can't have anybody to visit. But it's a home, so quit complaining."
    - invalidname 2y ago
      Not now. In 2000 and in 2008. You clearly don't know the history. > The Israeli Navy's blockade of Gaza's ports is in its seventeenth year. If that blockade didn't exist Oct 7th would have been fought with tanks on both sides. Hamas were given plenty of chances to show they don't want war, they kept building rockets and digging tunnels while firing constantly for the past 17 years at civilian population. Let me ask you this, your neighbor keeps firing and throwing grenades at your home... Do you tare down the wall to his property? That's an insane argument. > The generally closed land borders? Hmmm. Again. Same thing. They smuggled literal slaves through the tunnels they built into Egypt. On the eve of Oct 7th there were over 10k Palestinians from Gaza working in Israel. There was an active border pass which is how countries are separated. With borders. Especially if the neighboring country doesn't believe you have the right to exist and keeps firing at you. > "Here's an option to build a state, a very generous offer, we must say." Yes. It was a very generous offer. They were offered part of Jerusalem and 94% of the territories. It was spectacularly generous and probably won't come back. > It's the state equivalent of "Yes, you can live in the basement. We're going to lock it when you're down there so you can't leave, and you can't have anybody to visit. But it's a home, so quit complaining." Well... To carry that stupid analogy... It's the equivalent of parents whose son is a mass murderer offering him a way to prove that he's changed his ways. I think this post is a bit extreme in its takes, but it isn't fundamentally wrong: https://www.news18.com/opinion/opinion-why-muslim-world-should-stop-holding-a-grudge-against-israel-and-move-on-9085179.html https://www.news18.com/opinion/opinion-why-muslim-world-shou... The problem is that you're ignoring the agency Palestinians had in the matter. Hamas made conscious choices every step of the way, but so did the more moderate Palestinian authority and unfortunately a lot of the populace. Right now the current terrible state of affairs is a result of two sides being terrible. The difference is that the Israeli side is far more powerful and has nothing to lose other than its soul. The Palestinian side has everything to lose and yet their leaders and populace made the wrong choices along the way.
catlikesshrimp 2y ago
No offence, yours is an effective altruist take on any problem: <If there is no final solution that can be achieved fast and with minimal effort, it is not worth doing anything.> There is NO FINAL SOLUTION to any human problem: not hunger, not disease, not poverty, not racism. All effort counts and smart effort contributes more, but it is not a once and done deal. We must eat everyday, we must not shit plastic in our air, all children must get polio vaccine, and taxes have to be paid one way or the other. It's ugly, it's hard, it's long, it's life!
- thruway516 2y ago
  I literally cannot believe the phrase FINAL SOLUTION is being used here without any irony
  - nyantaro1 2y ago
    I would like to believe that he/she/they knows no other context for that phrase
    - kbelder 2y ago
      Words do not have magic attached to them. They do not inherit sins. 'Solution' and 'final' have definitions, use those... don't gasp in shock and insist on synonyms when someone happens to use a combination of words happened to be used somewhere else and some other time by an evil man.
      - deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
nitwit005 2y ago
What are any of the options available going to do? They don't have any fundamental fixes for the situation available. Fundamental to Isreal's problems is that all security issues seem to only have temporary fixes available.
- vr46 2y ago
  All they seem to offer the world has been revenge since the 1980s.
- throw310822 2y ago
  Fundamental to Israel's problem is that they want "security" while they keep oppressing Palestinians and grabbing more land. They do not want peace- quite the opposite, peace means establishing fixed borders, possibly evacuating illegal settlements, not having an excuse for further expansion, etc. They want a permanent state of attrition that allows them to keep doing what is convenient to them while being safe from all reprisals. This was said clearly by one of Sharon's advisors explaining the motives for Israel removing settlements from Gaza: "The significance of the disengagement plan [from Gaza] is the freezing of the peace process, and when you freeze that process, you prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state, and you prevent a discussion on the refugees, the borders and Jerusalem."
  - FireBeyond 2y ago
    And not to mention Hamas got so big because of Israel actually funding them. Why fund them? Because for whatever reasons, in his later years, Arafat and the PLO were becoming tired of endless conflict and far more diplomatic and open to negotiation. This lead to increasing criticism of Israel because now they were being seen as the stubborn party, refusing to compromise, and increased sympathies for the plight of Palestine. Israel's hard-right plan for responding to that? Fund Hamas to "beat" the PLO and provide a better target/focus of attention for disdain.
    - edanm 2y ago
      > Why fund them? Because for whatever reasons, in his later years, Arafat and the PLO were becoming tired of endless conflict and far more diplomatic and open to negotiation. Whatever else you think, let's be clear-eyed about the history of Arafat here. Arafat walked away from his negotiations with Israel, despite what many think were fairly good offers for peace and a two-state solution. (It's common nowadays to think the offers weren't very good, but I disagree, and in any case walking away from negotiations is the opposite of pursuing peace.) There is very little reason to think that the Palestinians wouldn't have a state today, if Arafat was willing to compromise more with Israel (even after potentially more negotiation).
hmcq6 2y ago
[flagged]
- fakedang 2y ago
  There's nothing about sodomizing children in your JPost article. There is however mention of sodomizing a Hamas member, which going by your assertion would mean that Hamas is recruiting and using children? The raw fact is that were the sides turned, you wouldn't be reading that news article in the first place. You wouldn't seriously think that Hamas would launch an investigation against their own members for sodomy now, would you? Hamas has no plans to recognize Israel whatsoever, unless you're so naive to take their word for it. Their call for 1967 borders is basically a sorry excuse for establishing a violent attack front on both sides of Israel so that they can fight more efficiently.
  - hmcq6 2y ago
    >There's nothing about sodomizing children in your JPost article. There is however mention of sodomizing a Hamas member, which going by your assertion would mean that Hamas is recruiting and using children? Perhaps I misremembered, because you're right that the article doesn't support my claim. Either way, sodomizing adults is not really justice, is it? Either way the population of Palestine was 43+% children before Oct 7th so Israel has surely killed multiple thousands of children. Death must surely be as bad as rape? https://www.pcbs.gov.ps/post.aspx?lang=en&ItemID=4732#:~:text=Children%20constitute%20approximately%2043%25%20of,of%20five%20(341%2C790%20children) https://www.pcbs.gov.ps/post.aspx?lang=en&ItemID=4732#:~:tex....
    - cabbagepatch01 2y ago
      [dead]
- 486sx33 2y ago
  First release the hostages.
okokhacker 2y ago
You’re implying that the genocide is, somehow, beneficial to carry out? Besides, the war isn’t even against Hamas. It’s against civilians, with an intent to kill as many as they can manufacture consent for.
- stogot 2y ago
  I never said that and that’s an unreasonable interpretation of what was written

by stogot 2y ago

clydethefrog 2y ago

[flagged]

SauciestGNU 2y ago
Mass suicide
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

bdjsiqoocwk 2y ago

[dead]

jfwuasdfs 2y ago

A cease-fire may buy us time to figure out a long-term solution.

kojdels 2y ago
[flagged]
- selcuka 2y ago
  It's interesting that we don't count Israel as a religious lunatic state.
  - shepherdjerred 2y ago
    Israel's stated goal is not to kill unlike Hamas
    - defrost 2y ago
      Best to watch what people do rather than what they say. Which one consistantly has the greater body count, which one has been steadily illegally encroaching on territory, etc.
    - selcuka 2y ago
      Sure, not their "stated goal", but remember that Hamas is a reactive organisation. There would be no Hamas without Israel. I don't think there is a solution other than diplomacy as long as there are people who gain material benefit from war. Even nuking all Palestinians would not finish Hamas or its derivatives.
    - text0404 2y ago
      https://apnews.com/article/israel-palestinians-south-africa-genocide-hate-speech-97a9e4a84a3a6bebeddfb80f8a030724 https://apnews.com/article/israel-palestinians-south-africa-... Israel would disagree with you.
    - throw310822 2y ago
      Hamas' stated goal is not "to kill"- remember that everything you know about Hamas you know from Israel's perspective and according to Israel's interests. Hamas' stated goal is "to free Palestine"- it means gaining its political control, not murdering people.
  - randomcarbloke 2y ago
    it's a liberal democracy that welcomes even gazans as citizens rather than a genocidal theocratic ethnostate like all its neighbours.
- lr0 2y ago
  Almost all regimes in the Middle East (and even other Arab regimes) are having a very well relationship with Israel, even those who do not publicly do normalization of relations. Historically Israel (as well as the US.) supported these regimes to ensure its interest. Not many books written about that so far, but I recommend people to check William Blum's "Killing Hope", it studies a very similar case of supporting dictatorships by Israel's key sponsor (the United States).

insane_dreamer 2y ago

> What other option does Israel have? seriously? yeah, so lets just reduce Gaza to rubble, ruin the lives of 1.5M people and kill 45,000 men, women and children in order to root out remaining fighters who refuse to lay down their arms. In fact why don't we just go ahead and nuke the whole place -- that should get rid of Hamas once and for all. -- except that it won't actually get rid of Hamas--or whatever comes out of the ashes of Hamas. When a population has been oppressed as long as the Palestinians in Gaza have, it gives rise to people who don't care anymore, people who have seen their families and loved ones killed. Even if Israel kills every Hamas fighter today, how many 10 year old boys do you think there are today who are going to take up weapons to avenge their fathers and older brothers as soon as they are able? Just like today's fighters want to avenge their fathers from the last intifada? So yeah, Israel will be fighting this again in 5 year's time (unless of course they just kill most everyone or make Gaza unlivable, which seems to be the case now that this has gone on for over a year, thus ... genocide). The only way to stop it is for Israel to stop oppressing Gaza to begin with, but that it is unwilling to do. So the cycle will continue.

stogot 2y ago
Your answer is unrealistic, but I didn’t provide a long enough question. I’m not justifying genocide obviously. The initial response to Oct7 was justified but not complete destruction of Gaza. Im asking why “not continuing to fight” (a ceasefire) is even a viable option for Israel’s politicians per the article’s demands. I am a realist not an optimist. Give a viable alternative. The cycle continues
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- insane_dreamer 2y ago
  > initial response to Oct7 was justified but not complete destruction of Gaza agreed but it's pretty clear now that the complete destruction of Gaza was the plan all along
- afiori 2y ago

_yb2s 2y ago

They could stop persecuting and murdering Palestinians, stop occupying Palestine, and agree to either a one state or two state solution that recognizes Palestinians as human beings with a right to live.

AnimalMuppet 2y ago
[flagged]
- text0404 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - anal_reactor 2y ago
    What the fuck you talking about, democratically elected Hamas has "the complete destruction of Israel" as their official policy, and polls show that only after being bombed to oblivion most Palestinians started to think that Oct 7 might've been a bad move. It's clear to me that Palestinians do not accept peace as a practical solution. https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/palestinian-poll-finds-big-drop-support-oct-7-attack-2024-09-17/ https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/palestinian-poll-f...
    - throw310822 2y ago
      The platform of the democratically elected Likud states the same: "between the Jordan and the sea there will be only israeli sovereignty". https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/original-party-platform-of-the-likud-party https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/original-party-platform... Does this authorise Hamas to go there and raze the entire country to the ground? Please let me know.
      - weatherlite 2y ago
        > Does this authorise Hamas to go there and raze the entire country to the ground? Please let me know. Pretty much yes according to too many liberal professors in ivy league universities. I think human lives on both sides are quite cheap to them.

jhanschoo 2y ago

The enlightened option from a felicific calculus method it seems to me would require putting the destiny of Israel democratically in the hands of the Levantine majority; scaling back its territory occupied and settled illegally. But of course, this is not an option. This risks the genocide of the Israelis by putting power in its neighbors, when they have the wealth and US support to ensure that it is their more numerous enemies that risks genocide instead

invalidname 2y ago
You do know Israel offered Palestinians a state and unilaterally left Gaza giving them an option to build a state... We tried that and it didn't work.
- 486sx33 2y ago
  Not only that, Hamas stole the world’s money meant to feed and help and instead oppressed and killed. Palestine people would do well to join Egypt
- FireBeyond 2y ago
  IDF tanks were still making incursions. Offered them a state. Let's see... one airport... runways bombed and Palestine told in no uncertain terms that any attempt to repair, rebuild, or build an airport would be met with military response. The Israeli Navy's blockade of Gaza's ports is in its seventeenth year. The generally closed land borders? Hmmm. "Here's an option to build a state, a very generous offer, we must say." It's the state equivalent of "Yes, you can live in the basement. We're going to lock it when you're down there so you can't leave, and you can't have anybody to visit. But it's a home, so quit complaining."
  - invalidname 2y ago
    Not now. In 2000 and in 2008. You clearly don't know the history. > The Israeli Navy's blockade of Gaza's ports is in its seventeenth year. If that blockade didn't exist Oct 7th would have been fought with tanks on both sides. Hamas were given plenty of chances to show they don't want war, they kept building rockets and digging tunnels while firing constantly for the past 17 years at civilian population. Let me ask you this, your neighbor keeps firing and throwing grenades at your home... Do you tare down the wall to his property? That's an insane argument. > The generally closed land borders? Hmmm. Again. Same thing. They smuggled literal slaves through the tunnels they built into Egypt. On the eve of Oct 7th there were over 10k Palestinians from Gaza working in Israel. There was an active border pass which is how countries are separated. With borders. Especially if the neighboring country doesn't believe you have the right to exist and keeps firing at you. > "Here's an option to build a state, a very generous offer, we must say." Yes. It was a very generous offer. They were offered part of Jerusalem and 94% of the territories. It was spectacularly generous and probably won't come back. > It's the state equivalent of "Yes, you can live in the basement. We're going to lock it when you're down there so you can't leave, and you can't have anybody to visit. But it's a home, so quit complaining." Well... To carry that stupid analogy... It's the equivalent of parents whose son is a mass murderer offering him a way to prove that he's changed his ways. I think this post is a bit extreme in its takes, but it isn't fundamentally wrong: https://www.news18.com/opinion/opinion-why-muslim-world-should-stop-holding-a-grudge-against-israel-and-move-on-9085179.html https://www.news18.com/opinion/opinion-why-muslim-world-shou... The problem is that you're ignoring the agency Palestinians had in the matter. Hamas made conscious choices every step of the way, but so did the more moderate Palestinian authority and unfortunately a lot of the populace. Right now the current terrible state of affairs is a result of two sides being terrible. The difference is that the Israeli side is far more powerful and has nothing to lose other than its soul. The Palestinian side has everything to lose and yet their leaders and populace made the wrong choices along the way.

catlikesshrimp 2y ago

No offence, yours is an effective altruist take on any problem: <If there is no final solution that can be achieved fast and with minimal effort, it is not worth doing anything.> There is NO FINAL SOLUTION to any human problem: not hunger, not disease, not poverty, not racism. All effort counts and smart effort contributes more, but it is not a once and done deal. We must eat everyday, we must not shit plastic in our air, all children must get polio vaccine, and taxes have to be paid one way or the other. It's ugly, it's hard, it's long, it's life!

thruway516 2y ago
I literally cannot believe the phrase FINAL SOLUTION is being used here without any irony
- nyantaro1 2y ago
  I would like to believe that he/she/they knows no other context for that phrase
  - kbelder 2y ago
    Words do not have magic attached to them. They do not inherit sins. 'Solution' and 'final' have definitions, use those... don't gasp in shock and insist on synonyms when someone happens to use a combination of words happened to be used somewhere else and some other time by an evil man.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]

nitwit005 2y ago

What are any of the options available going to do? They don't have any fundamental fixes for the situation available. Fundamental to Isreal's problems is that all security issues seem to only have temporary fixes available.

vr46 2y ago
All they seem to offer the world has been revenge since the 1980s.
throw310822 2y ago
Fundamental to Israel's problem is that they want "security" while they keep oppressing Palestinians and grabbing more land. They do not want peace- quite the opposite, peace means establishing fixed borders, possibly evacuating illegal settlements, not having an excuse for further expansion, etc. They want a permanent state of attrition that allows them to keep doing what is convenient to them while being safe from all reprisals. This was said clearly by one of Sharon's advisors explaining the motives for Israel removing settlements from Gaza: "The significance of the disengagement plan [from Gaza] is the freezing of the peace process, and when you freeze that process, you prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state, and you prevent a discussion on the refugees, the borders and Jerusalem."
- FireBeyond 2y ago
  And not to mention Hamas got so big because of Israel actually funding them. Why fund them? Because for whatever reasons, in his later years, Arafat and the PLO were becoming tired of endless conflict and far more diplomatic and open to negotiation. This lead to increasing criticism of Israel because now they were being seen as the stubborn party, refusing to compromise, and increased sympathies for the plight of Palestine. Israel's hard-right plan for responding to that? Fund Hamas to "beat" the PLO and provide a better target/focus of attention for disdain.
  - edanm 2y ago
    > Why fund them? Because for whatever reasons, in his later years, Arafat and the PLO were becoming tired of endless conflict and far more diplomatic and open to negotiation. Whatever else you think, let's be clear-eyed about the history of Arafat here. Arafat walked away from his negotiations with Israel, despite what many think were fairly good offers for peace and a two-state solution. (It's common nowadays to think the offers weren't very good, but I disagree, and in any case walking away from negotiations is the opposite of pursuing peace.) There is very little reason to think that the Palestinians wouldn't have a state today, if Arafat was willing to compromise more with Israel (even after potentially more negotiation).

hmcq6 2y ago

[flagged]

fakedang 2y ago
There's nothing about sodomizing children in your JPost article. There is however mention of sodomizing a Hamas member, which going by your assertion would mean that Hamas is recruiting and using children? The raw fact is that were the sides turned, you wouldn't be reading that news article in the first place. You wouldn't seriously think that Hamas would launch an investigation against their own members for sodomy now, would you? Hamas has no plans to recognize Israel whatsoever, unless you're so naive to take their word for it. Their call for 1967 borders is basically a sorry excuse for establishing a violent attack front on both sides of Israel so that they can fight more efficiently.
- hmcq6 2y ago
  >There's nothing about sodomizing children in your JPost article. There is however mention of sodomizing a Hamas member, which going by your assertion would mean that Hamas is recruiting and using children? Perhaps I misremembered, because you're right that the article doesn't support my claim. Either way, sodomizing adults is not really justice, is it? Either way the population of Palestine was 43+% children before Oct 7th so Israel has surely killed multiple thousands of children. Death must surely be as bad as rape? https://www.pcbs.gov.ps/post.aspx?lang=en&ItemID=4732#:~:text=Children%20constitute%20approximately%2043%25%20of,of%20five%20(341%2C790%20children) https://www.pcbs.gov.ps/post.aspx?lang=en&ItemID=4732#:~:tex....
  - cabbagepatch01 2y ago
    [dead]
486sx33 2y ago
First release the hostages.

okokhacker 2y ago

You’re implying that the genocide is, somehow, beneficial to carry out? Besides, the war isn’t even against Hamas. It’s against civilians, with an intent to kill as many as they can manufacture consent for.

stogot 2y ago
I never said that and that’s an unreasonable interpretation of what was written