9 ms·

Well the solution certainly isn’t letting an entire People starve to death? By the way, I don’t see criticism of Israel, but Israel’s current extremist governm

by 9dev 1y ago

Well the solution certainly isn’t letting an entire People starve to death? By the way, I don’t see criticism of Israel, but Israel’s current extremist government. I’d even argue that supporting Israel means opposing that administration.

dismalaf 1y ago
> Well the solution certainly isn’t letting an entire People starve to death? So answer the question with your solution.
- 9dev 1y ago
  No, that's a logical fallacy. I can be against something obviously wrong without offering an alternative action. In fact, this is a case of "something needs to be done, this is something, so this must be done". Wrong. Doing nothing—not starving Gaza—was also an option; one that the Israeli government decided against. They are responsible for the current situation.
  - exodust 1y ago
    > "They are responsible for the current situation." Pretty sure the people responsible are the ones hijacking aid trucks and causing security problems in distribution areas. Hamas has a long history of misdirecting aid from the Gazan population; stealing, oppressing, punishing, exploiting, and that's from before the war as commonly reported by UN sources and humanitarian groups over the years.
    - 9dev 1y ago
      I want to see the Hamas agents diverting food from a starving mass of civilians. They'd get ripped to shreds in the attempt.
      - gryzzly 1y ago
        they rip the civilians carrying the aid to shreds. it is easy if you have ak47 and the civilian doesn’t.
rendall 1y ago
"The solution is certainty not x" is not a solution. Saying "it's not x" is easy. If you really believe that Gazans are being starved, then save them by coming up with a great solution for Israel. Let's hear what you think Israel should do.
- Ericson2314 1y ago
  That is not how "don't do war crimes" works. It's incumbent upon Israel to find an alternative.
  - dmix 1y ago
    That would probably require some serious infrastructure to set up secure food distribution points, which I'm assuming isn't easy because the locations have to change as the evacuation areas also constantly changimg. From the video it looks like they only have some berms and small fences so I'd imagine it's a dangerous security situation. Although having way more food/distribution points might help reduce the violent mobs.
    - 9dev 1y ago
      Do you realise how incredibly cynical you sound? We're not discussing the finer details of a logistical challenge here, but the fate of people starving to death. People that by and large are innocent. Also: It'd require infrastructure that did exist before the IDF destroyed it. To feed people that weren't hungry before Israel blocked humanitarian aid. Don't reverse the guilt.
      - rendall 1y ago
        Coming up with a solution sounds cynical to you? It's a solution. What do you suggest?
  - rendall 1y ago
    Let's assume for the sake of argument that Israel has decided to starve out Gazans in order to end the war. You have the choice to save them by offering a better solution. What is it? "Not X!" is a copout. Unfortunately for that perspective, finding a good solution means diving in and understanding the conflict from the Israeli perspective.
givemeethekeys 1y ago
Maybe they are not starving: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQx1Qy5Z5fA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQx1Qy5Z5fA
- 9dev 1y ago
  Maybe you place your trust in reliable media all over the world instead of random YouTube videos. Journalists are in Gaza right now, putting their life on the line to show you the ground truth—and you dismiss all that due to a channel called "travelingisrael"?
  - exodust 1y ago
    > "to show you the ground truth" Sounds like "traveling gaza" is your preferred source over "traveling israel". No difference. Well, there's some differences... There aren't any foreign journalists in Gaza and the "truth" is certainly not a strong point in reporting lines from Islamist controlled war zones.
    - 9dev 1y ago
      https://www.instagram.com/p/DMfBbO6Mb3I/?img_index=2 https://www.instagram.com/p/DMfBbO6Mb3I/?img_index=2 I certainly trust Reuters and AFP over a YouTuber, yes. Their local journalists have a track record of professionalism, they aren't activists under control of the Hamas. Besides, are you honestly proposing there's any kind of regime in control of Gaza right now..?
      - exodust 1y ago
        The Gaza Health Ministry is the main source of data you read about in Reuters and AFP. Hamas also runs a media office that provides official statements on airstrikes, casualties and other events. They have a history of suppressing and intimidating journalists, and they have a history of propaganda. There are no foreign journalists in Gaza. The journalists you're referring to are Palestinian freelance journalists. Those journalists are working in a media landscape controlled by terrorists. For example they wouldn't be permitted to report back to Reuters about Hamas policing or regrouping.

by 9dev 1y ago

dismalaf 1y ago

> Well the solution certainly isn’t letting an entire People starve to death? So answer the question with your solution.

9dev 1y ago
No, that's a logical fallacy. I can be against something obviously wrong without offering an alternative action. In fact, this is a case of "something needs to be done, this is something, so this must be done". Wrong. Doing nothing—not starving Gaza—was also an option; one that the Israeli government decided against. They are responsible for the current situation.
- exodust 1y ago
  > "They are responsible for the current situation." Pretty sure the people responsible are the ones hijacking aid trucks and causing security problems in distribution areas. Hamas has a long history of misdirecting aid from the Gazan population; stealing, oppressing, punishing, exploiting, and that's from before the war as commonly reported by UN sources and humanitarian groups over the years.
  - 9dev 1y ago
    I want to see the Hamas agents diverting food from a starving mass of civilians. They'd get ripped to shreds in the attempt.
    - gryzzly 1y ago
      they rip the civilians carrying the aid to shreds. it is easy if you have ak47 and the civilian doesn’t.

rendall 1y ago

"The solution is certainty not x" is not a solution. Saying "it's not x" is easy. If you really believe that Gazans are being starved, then save them by coming up with a great solution for Israel. Let's hear what you think Israel should do.

Ericson2314 1y ago
That is not how "don't do war crimes" works. It's incumbent upon Israel to find an alternative.
- dmix 1y ago
  That would probably require some serious infrastructure to set up secure food distribution points, which I'm assuming isn't easy because the locations have to change as the evacuation areas also constantly changimg. From the video it looks like they only have some berms and small fences so I'd imagine it's a dangerous security situation. Although having way more food/distribution points might help reduce the violent mobs.
  - 9dev 1y ago
    Do you realise how incredibly cynical you sound? We're not discussing the finer details of a logistical challenge here, but the fate of people starving to death. People that by and large are innocent. Also: It'd require infrastructure that did exist before the IDF destroyed it. To feed people that weren't hungry before Israel blocked humanitarian aid. Don't reverse the guilt.
    - rendall 1y ago
      Coming up with a solution sounds cynical to you? It's a solution. What do you suggest?
- rendall 1y ago
  Let's assume for the sake of argument that Israel has decided to starve out Gazans in order to end the war. You have the choice to save them by offering a better solution. What is it? "Not X!" is a copout. Unfortunately for that perspective, finding a good solution means diving in and understanding the conflict from the Israeli perspective.

givemeethekeys 1y ago

Maybe they are not starving: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQx1Qy5Z5fA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQx1Qy5Z5fA

9dev 1y ago
Maybe you place your trust in reliable media all over the world instead of random YouTube videos. Journalists are in Gaza right now, putting their life on the line to show you the ground truth—and you dismiss all that due to a channel called "travelingisrael"?
- exodust 1y ago
  > "to show you the ground truth" Sounds like "traveling gaza" is your preferred source over "traveling israel". No difference. Well, there's some differences... There aren't any foreign journalists in Gaza and the "truth" is certainly not a strong point in reporting lines from Islamist controlled war zones.
  - 9dev 1y ago
    https://www.instagram.com/p/DMfBbO6Mb3I/?img_index=2 https://www.instagram.com/p/DMfBbO6Mb3I/?img_index=2 I certainly trust Reuters and AFP over a YouTuber, yes. Their local journalists have a track record of professionalism, they aren't activists under control of the Hamas. Besides, are you honestly proposing there's any kind of regime in control of Gaza right now..?
    - exodust 1y ago
      The Gaza Health Ministry is the main source of data you read about in Reuters and AFP. Hamas also runs a media office that provides official statements on airstrikes, casualties and other events. They have a history of suppressing and intimidating journalists, and they have a history of propaganda. There are no foreign journalists in Gaza. The journalists you're referring to are Palestinian freelance journalists. Those journalists are working in a media landscape controlled by terrorists. For example they wouldn't be permitted to report back to Reuters about Hamas policing or regrouping.