Netanyahu tells Israel ‘We are at war’ after Hamas launches an unprecedented attack, killing at leas

This aged well.

 

World class jackass.

 

This needs to be published broadly. Far and wide, across the globe, especially on our university campuses.

...mass flyer drops, with summary and the inet address to the article...

 

Read the linkd article in city's post above (where I replied to his).

Get back to us.

 

I agree that Hamas' unsuccessful attacks also count against Hamas.

I didn't say that Israel killed as many Palestinians, or that they are both equally bad.

 

That would be a part of why I used the word atrocities to describe the Hamas attacks on October 7th. I am in no way excusing the actions of Hamas.

 

Impressive

 

They don’t show it to protect the families.

 

I get that--I was just referring to the article we got to read--if we can read it, anybody can...and everybody should.

No pics necessary. The verbal descriptions get the job done well enough.

 

Uh huh.. seems like an awful lot of equivocation is needed to get to that part.

Let me help you out here: evil is bad.
Therefore extinguishing evil is good.

Ain't no gray area there.

Your problem, imo, is that you are literally taking the added step of conflating IDF with the Jews--when it was Jews and not IDF that were targeted...while also conflating Hamas with the greater universe of Palestinians...because they @$%%# hide behind them.

IOW, you're toting Hamas' water by pretending there's any gray area here.

NB: the IDF--is taking pains to distinguish bt Hamas, and the Palestinians who are not Hamas--though both want to exterminate all *JEWS*.

 

Two things. First, the IDF has a spokesperson, as almost all modern military do, including the US. That's not a function of being the subject of special criticism; it's a function of existing in a democracy where the military is a function of the state and the state is publicly accountable, not only to its own citizenry but to the world.

Second it is absolutely true and undeniable that Hamas, like almost all asymmetrical fighting forces, hides among the populace. They deliberately place military targets very close to very sensitive civilian targets. Like many asymmetrical fighting forces throughout history, although not all of them by far, they use them not only to hide but to hopefully draw opposing fire that becomes an atrocity, as part of their fight for world public opinion. Hamas leadership would celebrate a very public mass death of children from an Israeli strike.

However, while it is a generalized proposition of international law that a civilian site being used militarily loses its per se immunity from strike under international law, that is not the same as saying that all strikes against that civilian facility are licit under the rules of war. Any combatant force, but especially the stronger one, still has to abide by the principles of discrimination and proportionality, and take measures to try to avoid disproportionate non-combatant death. So an attacking force is not automatically excused under international law for taking out a civilian facility and causing mass avoidable death because of the existence of some military target within the facility. There are no hard and fast mathematical rules but it's a matter of proportion.

Israel appears to recognize this principle, not only for legal obligation but also likely for world public opinion, in their approach towards the Al-Shifa hospital. They've repeatedly declared it a legitimate target, and it is absolutely true that a Hamas command center is located there. But it is also still very much an active hospital. To date, Israel has not sought to strike it with a significant aerial strike. I do worry that could change.

But ground forces have moved within two kilometers of the hospital, last I read. It appears they are going to attack that command center with ground forces. I think that's appropriate, though it will likely cause more death of IDF infantry which could otherwise be avoided. I wouldn't want to explain that to their families. But I think it is absolutely the right thing to do morally and under international law. In that case, they are taking measures to try to avoid loss of civilian life.

It's very hard to measure how any individual strike meets those principles. In theory, each target should be pre-vetted legally, measuring the value of the military target against the anticipated civilian death. It is almost certainly true, despite the intelligence failure that gave rise to this, that Israel knows the location of every major facility in Gaza and their intended purpose, including schools, hospitals, etc. It is also usually true that JDAMs munitions are precise, but there's not always perfect precision. That has to be acknowledged.

All that is to say, though you can't know with certainty what the intended target is for any single strike and the anticipated civilian losses, it does seem very difficult to justify the destruction of so many whole city blocks under those principles. Those principles seem to be violated with some of the images we've seen of widespread destruction of whole areas.

The highest estimate I've seen of Hamas fighters in Gaza consistently is 30,000 among the population of 2 million. And most are in tunnels. Thus, it seems hard to believe that the wholesale destruction of so much infrastructure is justifiable.

Just some thoughts, acknowledging that the ability to make precise judgments is limited.

 

The tunnel network under Gaza is extensive. There was a report yesterday that there are tunnels under 80% of Beit Hounan. Then you add in the sheer number of rocket launchers and where they are located. How much damage do you think a 2000 pound bunker bomb does to legitimate targets and the surrounding area because of the concussion and effect in the foundation? But that is what is necessary to take out the bunker. Images of Hamas shooting from hospital windows. It is misguided to Argue that international law requires a country to assume more deaths to protect a civilian population used as human shields by its government— the latter is the war crime. It so was not. But the outrage is not directed at Hamas for that by the international community. That is why Hamas adopts this tactic and the international community— particularly in the pro-Hamas countries couldn’t care less about the civilians. It is how they fight their own wars. Turkey against Kurds. Saudis against the Houthis. The Houthis. Iran. Jordan against the Palestinians in the 1970s. Etc. Their outrage is directed at supporting Hamas politically. And if you don’t think that Israel is making great efforts to minimize civilian casualties than consider what the number of dead wound be if they were not. They just knocked a ballistic missile out in space— which should indicate their capabilities. There is little doubt that there Will be war crimes investigations and perhaps trials for years to come as every action by Israel is microscrutinized. Just like always. And like it never is for almost all countries (including those screaming genocide). That’s what happens when Jews protect themselves. Jews have been a hated people since they were attacked leaving Egypt.

 

Hilarious that you gloss right over Okeechobee's posts saying the exact same thing but in a much more inflammatory manner. No doubt because "muh team!"

 

Of course there is a gray area (or whatever you want to call it), because if you are going to become evil to extinguish evil, you havent extinguished evil, you have simply become evil yourself.

 

You’re ending each post with “there’s no good side”. That statement reads that you can’t pick a side, if you they aren’t equally bad it shouldn’t be that much of a challenge to pick.

 

This woman breaks down where this hatred comes from. From birth, kids are taught to hate Israel.
Anti-Semitism and the Quran

 

Phil can speak for himself, but you're reading more into his statements than he states. His word choices seem pretty deliberate.

And it's a bit harder to easily pick a side if you know all the relevant facts. I still tend to choose Israel on balance because they're a US ally, a democracy in part (though not over all the humans under its jurisdiction), and the relatively unique history of horrors towards the Jews and the indifference of the rest of the world. But tilting to one side does not make moral judgments easy, or justify willful ignorance of complicating facts

 

Not really. I side with Israel but they are hardly blameless.