5 ms·

"small blip" isn't a political take, it's just wrong. October 7th was the deadliest per capita terrorist attack since the Global Terrorism Database started re

by dijit 8mo ago

"small blip" isn't a political take, it's just wrong. October 7th was the deadliest per capita terrorist attack since the Global Terrorism Database started recording in 1970 [1]. Globally, it's third on the all-time list (behind only 9/11 and one IS attack [1]. The confirmed death toll from Israeli social security data (not government press releases) is 1,139, which still makes it 31 times deadlier than the next worst attack in Israeli history [2][3]. You invoked scale. Those are the numbers. They don't say what you wanted them to say. And for the record: one atrocity not excusing another cuts both ways. Nobody here argued otherwise. What was actually said (by the person you're replying to) is that you cannot use scale as your framework whilst hand-waving away the single largest data point in the argument. If you mean the Nakba, Sabra and Shatila, or the current death toll in Gaza — those are serious. But "decades of far worse crimes" doing the work of making October 7th a "small blip" doesn't follow. You can have a long ledger of serious grievances and still recognise that one morning where 1,139 people were massacred (including at a music festival, in kibbutz bedrooms, in bomb shelters) was not a blip. It was the deadliest single terrorist attack per capita since records began. There is no moral argument for October 7th, and the reaction is disproportionate and unjustifiable - but inevitable. We should all be so unlucky to have neighbours like those, and nobody knows how we would all act if we did. [1] https://www.csis.org/analysis/hamass-october-7-attack-visualizing-data https://www.csis.org/analysis/hamass-october-7-attack-visual... [2] https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20231215-israel-social-security-data-reveals-true-picture-of-oct-7-deaths https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20231215-israel-social... [3] https://www.csis.org/analysis/hamass-october-7-attack-visualizing-data https://www.csis.org/analysis/hamass-october-7-attack-visual...

Gud 8mo ago
The reaction by the Israelis against the Palestinians is even worse
- dijit 8mo ago
  The reaction is worse in what sense, exactly? Raw numbers? Then you're back to the same argument as above, where October 7th (again, the third deadliest terrorist attack since records began in 1970) somehow doesn't count. Nobody serious disputes that Gazan civilians are suffering enormously. The argument isn't about that. It's about whether Hamas represents them, and the answer is: less and less, given that Hamas hasn't held an election since 2006, has siphoned aid money into tunnels and rockets for two decades [1], and on October 7th sent men with garden tools to decapitate Thai agricultural workers [2] and film themselves doing it. You can condemn Israel's conduct (and there's plenty to condemn) without pretending the people who started this particular escalation were freedom fighters having a bad day. [1] https://www.csis.org/analysis/hamass-october-7-attack-visualizing-data https://www.csis.org/analysis/hamass-october-7-attack-visual... [2] https://www.nationthailand.com/world/middle-east-africa/40032287 https://www.nationthailand.com/world/middle-east-africa/4003...
  - mattlondon 8mo ago
    I think wholesale genocide of an entire population by the Israeli state is worse. The plan is obviously drive the Palestinians onto the sea (metaphorically) and make the place uninhabitable. Israel (and I want to be clear, I am referring to Israel the state) has blood on their hands. This went way beyond a "self defense" thing - flattening the entire country, indiscriminate killing of civilians and children, murdering paramedics and bombing ambulances, destroying schools hospitals apartment buildings etc. By a modern democratic state with the most accurate smart weapons available. It's simply unbelievable to me that they are getting away with it.
    - dijit 8mo ago
      Most of what you say I don't disagree with. Israel's conduct since October 8th (the civilian death toll, the aid blockade, the flattening of hospitals) is legitimate to call out. The ICJ found the genocide claim plausible enough to issue binding provisional measures, which Israel then ignored [1]. That's not nothing. But "wholesale genocide" and "the plan is obviously to drive them into the sea" are stronger claims than the evidence supports right now, and that matters a lot because the moment you overreach, everyone who wants to dismiss Palestinian suffering has a rhetorical exit. The ICJ's own careful language exists for a reason. None of that touches the original argument anyway: that October 7th was not a "small blip." Israel's conduct after October 8th doesn't retroactively change what happened on October 7th. Both things are true simultaneously. That's the whole point I'm making. [1] https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/02/26/israel-not-complying-world-court-order-genocide-case https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/02/26/israel-not-complying-wor...
      - mattlondon 8mo ago
        No, I think I have to respectfully disagree: in the continuum of the Palestine-Israel conflict, this was a small blip. Israel has been killing civilians indiscriminately for years/decades, annexing territory, bulldozing homes etc. What was different this time was that it was Israel who was the victim, not the Palestinians. And the only way that Israel knows how to respond to these kinds of things is to kill and to destroy.
Supermancho 8mo ago
> October 7th was the deadliest per capita terrorist attack since the Global Terrorism Database started recording in 1970 > You invoked scale. Those are the numbers. They don't say what you wanted them to say. 1200 Oct7 vs tens of thousands in annexation and retaliation. The numbers speak for themselves. No need to cherry pick.
- dijit 8mo ago
  Nobody cherry-picked anything. Per capita, single-event, it's the number that answers the claim that was actually made — that October 7th was a "blip." What you're doing now is a different argument entirely: aggregate conflict deaths over 77 years vs. one morning. That's not context, it's a category error dressed up as one. For what it's worth, the full Palestinian death toll since 1948 is ~136,000 [1] — a Palestinian source, so spare me the bias complaint. That's across eight decades, multiple Arab-Israeli wars, three intifadas, and several state actors. October 7th still isn't a blip. It's a massacre inside a war. Which is exactly what everyone's been saying. [1] https://english.wafa.ps/Pages/Details/145161 https://english.wafa.ps/Pages/Details/145161
  - Supermancho 8mo ago
    > What you're doing now is a different argument entirely: I've not made an argument. I've provided the proper context that supports the original point. >> Considering the scale of suffering caused by this conflict, - Jasonadrury your response: > That's not context, it's a category error dressed up as one. You have shifted goalposts in every post. The context was the conflict in aggregate. Continue arguing with yourself. It's not compelling.
    - dijit 8mo ago
      "I've not made an argument" is a fascinating claim immediately after quoting someone who used aggregate scale to call October 7th a "blip"- and agreeing with them. Providing context in support of a conclusion is making an argument. That's what arguments are. The goalposts that moved: "blip" (single event framing) -> "scale of the conflict" (aggregate framing) -> "I wasn't arguing anything." Three posts, three different claims, now apparently none of them count. Noted.
tovej 8mo ago
How can you claim this with a straight face, when Israel has slaughtered Palestinians like cattle every chance they have. And when they're not killing them with direct violence, they are robbing them of basic necessities and human dignity. And how can you claim October 7th wasn't an act if war? The main thrust of the attacks were targeting military installations. Much more than Israeli actions in Gaza before or since, which have clearly been done in service of genocide since Israel was created. The Palestinian genocide has not been a regular war, it has been an absolute extermination campaign that is still ongoing.
- dijit 8mo ago
  "The main thrust targeted military installations"— of 1,139 confirmed dead, 828 were civilians. That's 72%. They also massacred 364 people at a music festival, which Hamas later described as a "coincidence" because they "may have thought" ravers were soldiers "resting". That's the defence you're endorsing. Nobody serious disputes that Gaza's suffering is real or that Israel's conduct warrants scrutiny. But "genocide since Israel was created" is doing a lot of work for you; the ICJ found Palestinian rights were "plausibly" at risk, not that 1948 was a genocide. Words mean things. Overreaching doesn't help the people you're claiming to defend, it just makes it easier for the other side to dismiss everything else you say.
  - Cyph0n 8mo ago
    So the best you can say about Israel’s conduct over the course of the past 2.5 years is that it “warrants scrutiny”? And if you want to play the number of victims game, even pre Oct 7 one side has always had it significantly worse than the other. After all, one side is a sovereign state that has a technologically advanced military, an air force, a navy, and air defense systems.
    - dijit 8mo ago
      Remarkable. You've managed to read a comment that cited the ICJ, called out Israel's non-compliance with binding provisional measures, and explicitly said there's "plenty to condemn"; and concluded the position is that Israeli conduct merely "warrants scrutiny." This isn't a conversation, it's not even engagement: that's just not reading. On asymmetry: you've accidentally made the case for holding Israel to a higher standard. A nuclear-capable state with F-35s, Iron Dome and a $3.8bn annual US military subsidy [1] bears more responsibility for its choices than a militia in a blockaded strip of land; not less. That's what asymmetry actually means. What it doesn't mean is that a music festival full of civilians somehow doesn't count. But nice try. [1] https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/IF12587 https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/IF12587
JasonADrury 8mo ago
I notice that your database does not for whatever reason contain any of the actions taken by the Israeli government, why is that? How are we supposed to get an understanding of the scale of these events while totally disregarding Israeli actions?
- dijit 8mo ago
  Because the Global Terrorism Database records non-state terrorist attacks. State military action is categorised separately: that's not an omission, it's a definition, but you know that- you're playing stupid. The same database doesn't record US drone strikes or Russian artillery either, weird, right? Must be suppression!!! If you want Israeli state violence, OCHA tracks it. That data has been cited in this thread already.
  - JasonADrury 8mo ago
    I know that, but why are you referring to this database then? It's just not really relevant in this particular context. You're saying that the numbers don't say what I want them to say, but then you choose a rather weird set of numbers to demonstrate this with. It's weird!

by dijit 8mo ago

Gud 8mo ago

The reaction by the Israelis against the Palestinians is even worse

dijit 8mo ago
The reaction is worse in what sense, exactly? Raw numbers? Then you're back to the same argument as above, where October 7th (again, the third deadliest terrorist attack since records began in 1970) somehow doesn't count. Nobody serious disputes that Gazan civilians are suffering enormously. The argument isn't about that. It's about whether Hamas represents them, and the answer is: less and less, given that Hamas hasn't held an election since 2006, has siphoned aid money into tunnels and rockets for two decades [1], and on October 7th sent men with garden tools to decapitate Thai agricultural workers [2] and film themselves doing it. You can condemn Israel's conduct (and there's plenty to condemn) without pretending the people who started this particular escalation were freedom fighters having a bad day. [1] https://www.csis.org/analysis/hamass-october-7-attack-visualizing-data https://www.csis.org/analysis/hamass-october-7-attack-visual... [2] https://www.nationthailand.com/world/middle-east-africa/40032287 https://www.nationthailand.com/world/middle-east-africa/4003...
- mattlondon 8mo ago
  I think wholesale genocide of an entire population by the Israeli state is worse. The plan is obviously drive the Palestinians onto the sea (metaphorically) and make the place uninhabitable. Israel (and I want to be clear, I am referring to Israel the state) has blood on their hands. This went way beyond a "self defense" thing - flattening the entire country, indiscriminate killing of civilians and children, murdering paramedics and bombing ambulances, destroying schools hospitals apartment buildings etc. By a modern democratic state with the most accurate smart weapons available. It's simply unbelievable to me that they are getting away with it.
  - dijit 8mo ago
    Most of what you say I don't disagree with. Israel's conduct since October 8th (the civilian death toll, the aid blockade, the flattening of hospitals) is legitimate to call out. The ICJ found the genocide claim plausible enough to issue binding provisional measures, which Israel then ignored [1]. That's not nothing. But "wholesale genocide" and "the plan is obviously to drive them into the sea" are stronger claims than the evidence supports right now, and that matters a lot because the moment you overreach, everyone who wants to dismiss Palestinian suffering has a rhetorical exit. The ICJ's own careful language exists for a reason. None of that touches the original argument anyway: that October 7th was not a "small blip." Israel's conduct after October 8th doesn't retroactively change what happened on October 7th. Both things are true simultaneously. That's the whole point I'm making. [1] https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/02/26/israel-not-complying-world-court-order-genocide-case https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/02/26/israel-not-complying-wor...
    - mattlondon 8mo ago
      No, I think I have to respectfully disagree: in the continuum of the Palestine-Israel conflict, this was a small blip. Israel has been killing civilians indiscriminately for years/decades, annexing territory, bulldozing homes etc. What was different this time was that it was Israel who was the victim, not the Palestinians. And the only way that Israel knows how to respond to these kinds of things is to kill and to destroy.

Supermancho 8mo ago

> October 7th was the deadliest per capita terrorist attack since the Global Terrorism Database started recording in 1970 > You invoked scale. Those are the numbers. They don't say what you wanted them to say. 1200 Oct7 vs tens of thousands in annexation and retaliation. The numbers speak for themselves. No need to cherry pick.

dijit 8mo ago
Nobody cherry-picked anything. Per capita, single-event, it's the number that answers the claim that was actually made — that October 7th was a "blip." What you're doing now is a different argument entirely: aggregate conflict deaths over 77 years vs. one morning. That's not context, it's a category error dressed up as one. For what it's worth, the full Palestinian death toll since 1948 is ~136,000 [1] — a Palestinian source, so spare me the bias complaint. That's across eight decades, multiple Arab-Israeli wars, three intifadas, and several state actors. October 7th still isn't a blip. It's a massacre inside a war. Which is exactly what everyone's been saying. [1] https://english.wafa.ps/Pages/Details/145161 https://english.wafa.ps/Pages/Details/145161
- Supermancho 8mo ago
  > What you're doing now is a different argument entirely: I've not made an argument. I've provided the proper context that supports the original point. >> Considering the scale of suffering caused by this conflict, - Jasonadrury your response: > That's not context, it's a category error dressed up as one. You have shifted goalposts in every post. The context was the conflict in aggregate. Continue arguing with yourself. It's not compelling.
  - dijit 8mo ago
    "I've not made an argument" is a fascinating claim immediately after quoting someone who used aggregate scale to call October 7th a "blip"- and agreeing with them. Providing context in support of a conclusion is making an argument. That's what arguments are. The goalposts that moved: "blip" (single event framing) -> "scale of the conflict" (aggregate framing) -> "I wasn't arguing anything." Three posts, three different claims, now apparently none of them count. Noted.

tovej 8mo ago

How can you claim this with a straight face, when Israel has slaughtered Palestinians like cattle every chance they have. And when they're not killing them with direct violence, they are robbing them of basic necessities and human dignity. And how can you claim October 7th wasn't an act if war? The main thrust of the attacks were targeting military installations. Much more than Israeli actions in Gaza before or since, which have clearly been done in service of genocide since Israel was created. The Palestinian genocide has not been a regular war, it has been an absolute extermination campaign that is still ongoing.

dijit 8mo ago
"The main thrust targeted military installations"— of 1,139 confirmed dead, 828 were civilians. That's 72%. They also massacred 364 people at a music festival, which Hamas later described as a "coincidence" because they "may have thought" ravers were soldiers "resting". That's the defence you're endorsing. Nobody serious disputes that Gaza's suffering is real or that Israel's conduct warrants scrutiny. But "genocide since Israel was created" is doing a lot of work for you; the ICJ found Palestinian rights were "plausibly" at risk, not that 1948 was a genocide. Words mean things. Overreaching doesn't help the people you're claiming to defend, it just makes it easier for the other side to dismiss everything else you say.
- Cyph0n 8mo ago
  So the best you can say about Israel’s conduct over the course of the past 2.5 years is that it “warrants scrutiny”? And if you want to play the number of victims game, even pre Oct 7 one side has always had it significantly worse than the other. After all, one side is a sovereign state that has a technologically advanced military, an air force, a navy, and air defense systems.
  - dijit 8mo ago
    Remarkable. You've managed to read a comment that cited the ICJ, called out Israel's non-compliance with binding provisional measures, and explicitly said there's "plenty to condemn"; and concluded the position is that Israeli conduct merely "warrants scrutiny." This isn't a conversation, it's not even engagement: that's just not reading. On asymmetry: you've accidentally made the case for holding Israel to a higher standard. A nuclear-capable state with F-35s, Iron Dome and a $3.8bn annual US military subsidy [1] bears more responsibility for its choices than a militia in a blockaded strip of land; not less. That's what asymmetry actually means. What it doesn't mean is that a music festival full of civilians somehow doesn't count. But nice try. [1] https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/IF12587 https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/IF12587

JasonADrury 8mo ago

I notice that your database does not for whatever reason contain any of the actions taken by the Israeli government, why is that? How are we supposed to get an understanding of the scale of these events while totally disregarding Israeli actions?

dijit 8mo ago
Because the Global Terrorism Database records non-state terrorist attacks. State military action is categorised separately: that's not an omission, it's a definition, but you know that- you're playing stupid. The same database doesn't record US drone strikes or Russian artillery either, weird, right? Must be suppression!!! If you want Israeli state violence, OCHA tracks it. That data has been cited in this thread already.
- JasonADrury 8mo ago
  I know that, but why are you referring to this database then? It's just not really relevant in this particular context. You're saying that the numbers don't say what I want them to say, but then you choose a rather weird set of numbers to demonstrate this with. It's weird!