3 ms·

As another Jewish Israeli I agree this is concerning. I do want you to consider the context here on Hacker News though. You and me have context, we understand

by YZF 1y ago

As another Jewish Israeli I agree this is concerning. I do want you to consider the context here on Hacker News though. You and me have context, we understand the history, we understand at least something about wars and how they are fought. Most people here do not. The problem isn't whether firing on civilians with no reason when they come to get food is wrong or right. We all know it's wrong. The soldiers in Gaza know it's wrong. We all know this is a war crime. Most cases of war crimes during war are not prosecuted at all and not visibly. This is true for US wars in the middle east. It's true for the war the West wages against ISIS. It's true for Ukraine and Russia. It's a sad but unfortunate reality of our world. The current political climate and government in Israel are also not the best for the kind of outcome you are describing. Iran and Hamas firing missiles and rockets into population centers is a war crime too. So is their embedding and use of civilians. The entire strategy of Israel's opponents in the middle east is to engage in war crimes. Where do we place Israel on that scale? Is there more attention on Israel vs. other similar world events? Why? Do we see similar public debate and discussion of the morality of those wars in other countries? Again, where is Israel on that scale (not of idealistic fantasy world of justice but in the real world)?

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
Hikikomori 1y ago
IDF HQ is next to a mall, so Israel is doing the same as Hamas?
- YZF 1y ago
  And where is the Pentagon? Attacking the Qirya, Israel's HQ, with some sort of accuracy is a legitimate military target. It's a pretty large target. Soldiers wear uniform. There are no civilians mixed into that camp. This is very different than lobbing rockets at Beer-Sheba, Ashdod, Ashkelon, Ramat Gan. The casualties from Iran's attacks, minus one off-duty soldier, were all civilians and the targets were nowhere near anything military. The intentionally aim at population centers.
  - Hikikomori 1y ago
    So you agree that your argument is nonsense.
  - ath3nd 1y ago
    [flagged]
  - ath3nd 1y ago
    [flagged]
  - 34y5t45y7u 1y ago
    Frankly, you need to understand some things - people, especially on this site are beyond conversations - they are guided by their beliefs. Those beliefs are not going to change - they will die with them. Humans are very violent in their minds. And pretty much the intensity of that insanity is the only signal that is a warning for imminent global conflict, that has been postponed for some time.
ath3nd 1y ago
[flagged]
Aeolun 1y ago
> The entire strategy of Israel's opponents in the middle east is to engage in war crimes. I think war crimes are a lot more acceptable/understandable if they’re the only way you even potentially have a chance to get back at your agressors. Nobody blames the resistance during the Nazi occupation for what they did. Israel is very much not in a position they need to perpetrate war crimes to win the war. They have already won. It’s like a cat playing with the mouse it killed.
- glandium 1y ago
  > Nobody blames the resistance during the Nazi occupation for what they did. Are you really sure about that? Maybe now, but while it was happening, I'm not so sure everyone was on board. Quite the opposite.
  - Aeolun 1y ago
    Fair point. Collective punishment has a way of making people feel like that, which is of course entirely the point. Of course, collective punishment isn’t any less of a crime.
- throwaway3060 1y ago
  This is probably what anti-Soviet groups in WWII thought when they allied with the Nazis and committed atrocities. Most people today don't seem to think they were justified in doing that.
- luckylion 1y ago
  > Nobody blames the resistance during the Nazi occupation for what they did. Because the Nazis lost. Had the Nazis won, alternative history and all that, the argument would probably be the other way around, how, faced with overwhelmingly strong enemies, they "had to" create death camps to "get back" at their aggressors. Not a great argument, I think.
acdha 1y ago
> Where do we place Israel on that scale? Is there more attention on Israel vs. other similar world events? I’d flip that around: why shouldn’t we expect Israel to be better than a terrorist group like Hamas or the deeply evil Iranian government? When some Americans complained that they were being held to a higher standard than Al-Qaeda or ISIL, they were rightly criticized for betraying our national aspiration to leading rather than trailing the world, and the same is happening here. Israel has rightly set its standards higher than its neighbors when it comes to democracy and civil rights, but that entails criticism where it fails to live up to that self-selected standard.
- YZF 1y ago
  My scale isn't ISIL or Al-Qaeda. My scale is the US, the UK, Australia, France etc. The scale of the western world.
  - acdha 1y ago
    Exactly. It’s fair to criticize Israel for civilian casualties just like all of those countries have been criticized for failing to live up to their stated standards. Countries like Russia or Iran are recognized as being worse but don’t get criticized for being hypocritical because nobody expected them to be good.
    - throwaway3060 1y ago
      Countries like Russia (and probably Iran) still claim to be paragons of human rights in diplomatic settings - just that most are used to ignoring them because of the immense scale and sheer audacity of their hypocrisy.
    - ath3nd 1y ago
      > Exactly. It’s fair to criticize Israel for civilian casualties just like all of those countries have been criticized for failing to live up to their stated standards. Russia doesn't target civilian population to the extent Israel does. There is a reason only Israel is charged with genocide, and not Russia. Don't get me wrong, both the countries' governments are run by bunch of homicidal dictators, but only Isreal systematically does enough war crimes and human rights violations to fit the criteria of genocide.
wfn 1y ago
> Where do we place Israel on that scale That is, I think, an excellent and pertinent question. For starters may I suggest applying straightforward quantification on a linear scale and observing the results? See the following two wiki articles / subsections: 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli%E2%80%93Palestinian_conflict#Fatalities https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli%E2%80%93Palestinian_co... (see chart preceding the Gaza war (follow anchor)) 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Gaza_war https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Gaza_war (Gaza war; see top table (and subsequent charts for more detailed breakdown if interested)) Based on this quantitative data where would you place Israel on that aforementioned scale?
- bGl2YW5j 1y ago
  Wikipedia on this topic is incredibly biased to one side or the other. It’s not a valid source in this case.
  - refulgentis 1y ago
    Nah, it's just #s, and "both sides", as it were, are presented
  - wfn 1y ago
    Do you mean the data sources it lists in those two articles are not valid? (I am referring to raw figures and not to actual textual content even). The charts themselves (and the proportions thereof) have been observed everywhere incl. in the mainstream media? Can you present one counterexample as regards quantities / proportions of figures please? One source. (More of course if you'd like) (My implicit point is that the proportions are so one-sided (orders of magnitude in difference; yes plural) that you will not find one; but please do find one (with actual quantities) and we can all check veracity of your source) P.S. edit here is one of the sources the first wiki article lists (of multiple): Lappin, Yaakov (2009). "IDF releases Cast Lead casualty numbers". The Jerusalem Post. Archived from the original on 26 March 2013. Retrieved 5 January 2024. => - https://www.jpost.com/israel/idf-releases-cast-lead-casualty-numbers https://www.jpost.com/israel/idf-releases-cast-lead-casualty... - https://web.archive.org/web/20130326192603/http://www.jpost.com/Israel//Article.aspx?id=137286 https://web.archive.org/web/20130326192603/http://www.jpost....
mahirsaid 1y ago
The fantasy of using civilians as a means to say this is a war crime is out the window. In order to stop one country from killing your population, most often the revers effect is the same. neither of which are justified. in order to stop the third Reich the majority of Germany was destroyed along with the mass civilian death. Attacking promptly and aggressively carries civilian death in most cases (U.S. attacking japan). This is a cycle that happens in humanity every so often, one can say we tend to take life for granted over-time. Then some big event or catastrophe happens and a group of nations put some international body in place to reduce big wars and conflicts, this usually hinders large scale conflicts for about 50-80 years until that generation forgets and or history is no longer connected to them some way and the same thing repeats again. Remember that The U.S. and some of the European nations carried the actions, in which there-after developed international body's to protect them from a similar attack like nuclear or mass genocide. The one's affected are the ones that repeat the cycle, if they were the victim last time in the cycle then they will be the perpetrator this tine around.

by YZF 1y ago

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

Hikikomori 1y ago

IDF HQ is next to a mall, so Israel is doing the same as Hamas?

YZF 1y ago
And where is the Pentagon? Attacking the Qirya, Israel's HQ, with some sort of accuracy is a legitimate military target. It's a pretty large target. Soldiers wear uniform. There are no civilians mixed into that camp. This is very different than lobbing rockets at Beer-Sheba, Ashdod, Ashkelon, Ramat Gan. The casualties from Iran's attacks, minus one off-duty soldier, were all civilians and the targets were nowhere near anything military. The intentionally aim at population centers.
- Hikikomori 1y ago
  So you agree that your argument is nonsense.
- ath3nd 1y ago
  [flagged]
- ath3nd 1y ago
  [flagged]
- 34y5t45y7u 1y ago
  Frankly, you need to understand some things - people, especially on this site are beyond conversations - they are guided by their beliefs. Those beliefs are not going to change - they will die with them. Humans are very violent in their minds. And pretty much the intensity of that insanity is the only signal that is a warning for imminent global conflict, that has been postponed for some time.

ath3nd 1y ago

[flagged]

Aeolun 1y ago

> The entire strategy of Israel's opponents in the middle east is to engage in war crimes. I think war crimes are a lot more acceptable/understandable if they’re the only way you even potentially have a chance to get back at your agressors. Nobody blames the resistance during the Nazi occupation for what they did. Israel is very much not in a position they need to perpetrate war crimes to win the war. They have already won. It’s like a cat playing with the mouse it killed.

glandium 1y ago
> Nobody blames the resistance during the Nazi occupation for what they did. Are you really sure about that? Maybe now, but while it was happening, I'm not so sure everyone was on board. Quite the opposite.
- Aeolun 1y ago
  Fair point. Collective punishment has a way of making people feel like that, which is of course entirely the point. Of course, collective punishment isn’t any less of a crime.
throwaway3060 1y ago
This is probably what anti-Soviet groups in WWII thought when they allied with the Nazis and committed atrocities. Most people today don't seem to think they were justified in doing that.
luckylion 1y ago
> Nobody blames the resistance during the Nazi occupation for what they did. Because the Nazis lost. Had the Nazis won, alternative history and all that, the argument would probably be the other way around, how, faced with overwhelmingly strong enemies, they "had to" create death camps to "get back" at their aggressors. Not a great argument, I think.

acdha 1y ago

> Where do we place Israel on that scale? Is there more attention on Israel vs. other similar world events? I’d flip that around: why shouldn’t we expect Israel to be better than a terrorist group like Hamas or the deeply evil Iranian government? When some Americans complained that they were being held to a higher standard than Al-Qaeda or ISIL, they were rightly criticized for betraying our national aspiration to leading rather than trailing the world, and the same is happening here. Israel has rightly set its standards higher than its neighbors when it comes to democracy and civil rights, but that entails criticism where it fails to live up to that self-selected standard.

YZF 1y ago
My scale isn't ISIL or Al-Qaeda. My scale is the US, the UK, Australia, France etc. The scale of the western world.
- acdha 1y ago
  Exactly. It’s fair to criticize Israel for civilian casualties just like all of those countries have been criticized for failing to live up to their stated standards. Countries like Russia or Iran are recognized as being worse but don’t get criticized for being hypocritical because nobody expected them to be good.
  - throwaway3060 1y ago
    Countries like Russia (and probably Iran) still claim to be paragons of human rights in diplomatic settings - just that most are used to ignoring them because of the immense scale and sheer audacity of their hypocrisy.
  - ath3nd 1y ago
    > Exactly. It’s fair to criticize Israel for civilian casualties just like all of those countries have been criticized for failing to live up to their stated standards. Russia doesn't target civilian population to the extent Israel does. There is a reason only Israel is charged with genocide, and not Russia. Don't get me wrong, both the countries' governments are run by bunch of homicidal dictators, but only Isreal systematically does enough war crimes and human rights violations to fit the criteria of genocide.

wfn 1y ago

> Where do we place Israel on that scale That is, I think, an excellent and pertinent question. For starters may I suggest applying straightforward quantification on a linear scale and observing the results? See the following two wiki articles / subsections: 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli%E2%80%93Palestinian_conflict#Fatalities https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli%E2%80%93Palestinian_co... (see chart preceding the Gaza war (follow anchor)) 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Gaza_war https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Gaza_war (Gaza war; see top table (and subsequent charts for more detailed breakdown if interested)) Based on this quantitative data where would you place Israel on that aforementioned scale?

bGl2YW5j 1y ago
Wikipedia on this topic is incredibly biased to one side or the other. It’s not a valid source in this case.
- refulgentis 1y ago
  Nah, it's just #s, and "both sides", as it were, are presented
- wfn 1y ago
  Do you mean the data sources it lists in those two articles are not valid? (I am referring to raw figures and not to actual textual content even). The charts themselves (and the proportions thereof) have been observed everywhere incl. in the mainstream media? Can you present one counterexample as regards quantities / proportions of figures please? One source. (More of course if you'd like) (My implicit point is that the proportions are so one-sided (orders of magnitude in difference; yes plural) that you will not find one; but please do find one (with actual quantities) and we can all check veracity of your source) P.S. edit here is one of the sources the first wiki article lists (of multiple): Lappin, Yaakov (2009). "IDF releases Cast Lead casualty numbers". The Jerusalem Post. Archived from the original on 26 March 2013. Retrieved 5 January 2024. => - https://www.jpost.com/israel/idf-releases-cast-lead-casualty-numbers https://www.jpost.com/israel/idf-releases-cast-lead-casualty... - https://web.archive.org/web/20130326192603/http://www.jpost.com/Israel//Article.aspx?id=137286 https://web.archive.org/web/20130326192603/http://www.jpost....

mahirsaid 1y ago

The fantasy of using civilians as a means to say this is a war crime is out the window. In order to stop one country from killing your population, most often the revers effect is the same. neither of which are justified. in order to stop the third Reich the majority of Germany was destroyed along with the mass civilian death. Attacking promptly and aggressively carries civilian death in most cases (U.S. attacking japan). This is a cycle that happens in humanity every so often, one can say we tend to take life for granted over-time. Then some big event or catastrophe happens and a group of nations put some international body in place to reduce big wars and conflicts, this usually hinders large scale conflicts for about 50-80 years until that generation forgets and or history is no longer connected to them some way and the same thing repeats again. Remember that The U.S. and some of the European nations carried the actions, in which there-after developed international body's to protect them from a similar attack like nuclear or mass genocide. The one's affected are the ones that repeat the cycle, if they were the victim last time in the cycle then they will be the perpetrator this tine around.