2 ms·

Except for under the ceasefire there has been no point in the conflict where enough supplies and food has gotten in. There is an acronym, SWEAT-MSO, Sewage, Wat

by bjoli 1y ago

Except for under the ceasefire there has been no point in the conflict where enough supplies and food has gotten in. There is an acronym, SWEAT-MSO, Sewage, Water, electricity, academics, trash, medical, safety and other. It is a framework to assess the needs of the civilian population to, among other things, avoid having them join a resistance. Israel has bombed all those things. Your statement of Amalek is disingenuous. Netanyahu would not say anything that does not have plausible deniability. I think it is important to look at how his words were interpreted. Shortly afterwards there were at least two clips (one of which was use by south Africa in their ICJ deposition ) of Israeli soldiers (lots of them!) going to Gaza singing about destroying the seed of Amalek and "there are no uninvolved civilians". The thing about genocidal statements is that most people committing genocide are not at outspoken av Gallant and Ben-Gvir.

dlubarov 1y ago
Occam’s razor suggests that he probably just meant what he said: that Israelis should remember the atrocities committed by Hamas and other attackers. There was nothing in Netanyahu’s speech, or even the Torah’s passages about Amalek, about “no uninvolved civilians”, so it seems like a stretch to say that Netanyahu deliberately conveyed that message as a subtext. You say the chants occurred “shortly afterwards”, but wasn’t that in December? Whereas the speech you’re drawing a connection to was in October. If we’re going to accuse people of the most heinous crimes, we should have much more solid evidence.
- bjoli 1y ago
  It would not be the first time palestinians have been called amalek. Considering other ministers hang out with people voicing those ideas, I am not sure it can be as easily dismissed. Ben Gvir had a portrait of Baruch Goldstein in his office who had those views. There is about a month between the letter and the video clip being published, a little more from the speech. Someone even took the time to write a song. Smotrich also invoked amalek, but he continued with "what Rafah needs is complete destruction". It is very clear what he meant.

by bjoli 1y ago

dlubarov 1y ago

Occam’s razor suggests that he probably just meant what he said: that Israelis should remember the atrocities committed by Hamas and other attackers. There was nothing in Netanyahu’s speech, or even the Torah’s passages about Amalek, about “no uninvolved civilians”, so it seems like a stretch to say that Netanyahu deliberately conveyed that message as a subtext. You say the chants occurred “shortly afterwards”, but wasn’t that in December? Whereas the speech you’re drawing a connection to was in October. If we’re going to accuse people of the most heinous crimes, we should have much more solid evidence.

bjoli 1y ago
It would not be the first time palestinians have been called amalek. Considering other ministers hang out with people voicing those ideas, I am not sure it can be as easily dismissed. Ben Gvir had a portrait of Baruch Goldstein in his office who had those views. There is about a month between the letter and the video clip being published, a little more from the speech. Someone even took the time to write a song. Smotrich also invoked amalek, but he continued with "what Rafah needs is complete destruction". It is very clear what he meant.