Israel/Palestine

[Sparko]

I think there is no easy way to clear Hamas. They are hostage taking bastards. This is one of the reason I and others here are so adamant to not let authoritarians take power here. Once the boot is on your neck, hospitals become terror planning cells and safety has been traded for nothing. The enemy is inside the house.

[jfish26]

I don't think anyone is justified in doing anything that endangers non-combatants, then or now.

let's not pick and choose which civilian cannon fodder is condemnable and should be met with retaliation, and which civilian cannon fodder is like nbd and the victims should just learn to live with it cuz it advances our own imperial interests, or whatever.

Who do you think I am, you?!

Ok. So as long as terrorists have a human shield nearby, you can’t go after terrorists.

I wouldn’t agree with that, but at least it is a bright line.

[jfish26]

I think there is no easy way to clear Hamas. They are hostage taking bastards. This is one of the reason I and others here are so adamant to not let authoritarians take power here. Once the boot is on your neck, hospitals become terror planning cells and safety has been traded for nothing. The enemy is inside the house.

Which brings up something else - forcing non-combatants to leave will have disastrous humanitarian consequences. Hamas will likely attack non-combatants on their way out to make Israel look like bad guys. People will die. Families will be broken apart. More radicals will be created.

And on and on.

But staying in Gaza City has disastrous humanitarian consequences as well. And very much not limited to those resulting from Israel’s siege and attacks.

It’s simply a horrible situation all around, and unfortunately demands (in my opinion) a fairly cold, clear-eyed view that gives medium- and long-term, broad-scale considerations more weight than short-term, specific considerations.

[ousdahl]

I don't think anyone is justified in doing anything that endangers non-combatants, then or now.

let's not pick and choose which civilian cannon fodder is condemnable and should be met with retaliation, and which civilian cannon fodder is like nbd and the victims should just learn to live with it cuz it advances our own imperial interests, or whatever.

Who do you think I am, you?!

Ok. So as long as terrorists have a human shield nearby, you can’t go after terrorists.

I wouldn’t agree with that, but at least it is a bright line.

of course you wouldn't. Once again you're being as hawkish as ever, and willing to condone the slaughter of who knows how many innocent civilians, as long as it's perped by the side you're cheering for.

Israel has some of the most sophisticated weapons and surveillance and intel in the world, right?

With that, could they maybe be more calculated and precise with their strikes, perhaps?

(Still waiting on DC's sources to indicate they are, and every single civilian target hit by Israel was, and is, a confirmed Hamas operational headquarters, and not just state-sponsored terrorism that may even outweigh the terrorism it's meant to counter)

[ousdahl]

Which brings up something else - forcing non-combatants to leave will have disastrous humanitarian consequences. Hamas will likely attack non-combatants on their way out to make Israel look like bad guys. People will die. Families will be broken apart. More radicals will be created.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/live ... rcna120252


Israel: bombs evacuation routes

Fish: "Why would Hamas do this?"

[jfish26]

I don't think anyone is justified in doing anything that endangers non-combatants, then or now.

let's not pick and choose which civilian cannon fodder is condemnable and should be met with retaliation, and which civilian cannon fodder is like nbd and the victims should just learn to live with it cuz it advances our own imperial interests, or whatever.

Who do you think I am, you?!

Ok. So as long as terrorists have a human shield nearby, you can’t go after terrorists.

I wouldn’t agree with that, but at least it is a bright line.

of course you wouldn't. Once again you're being as hawkish as ever, and willing to condone the slaughter of who knows how many innocent civilians, as long as it's perped by the side you're cheering for.

Israel has some of the most sophisticated weapons and surveillance and intel in the world, right?

With that, could they maybe be more calculated and precise with their strikes, perhaps?

(Still waiting on DC's sources to indicate they are, and every single civilian target hit by Israel was, and is, a confirmed Hamas operational headquarters, and not just state-sponsored terrorism that may even outweigh the terrorism it's meant to counter)

Would you please stop straw-manning the shit out of anyone who doesn’t agree with you?

It’s a start, at least, that you have now unequivocally said that neither side is justified in doing anything that endangers any non-combatants. I find that, ah, unrealistic. But at least it’s something one can stick to with consistency.

[jfish26]

Which brings up something else - forcing non-combatants to leave will have disastrous humanitarian consequences. Hamas will likely attack non-combatants on their way out to make Israel look like bad guys. People will die. Families will be broken apart. More radicals will be created.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/live ... rcna120252


Israel: bombs evacuation routes

Fish: "Why would Hamas do this?"

I, personally, would be very slow to assume the accuracy of ANY specific reports right now. As to who did exactly what, and exactly why.

[jfish26]

Which brings up something else - forcing non-combatants to leave will have disastrous humanitarian consequences. Hamas will likely attack non-combatants on their way out to make Israel look like bad guys. People will die. Families will be broken apart. More radicals will be created.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/live ... rcna120252


Israel: bombs evacuation routes

Fish: "Why would Hamas do this?"

I, personally, would be very slow to assume the accuracy of ANY specific reports right now. As to who did exactly what, and exactly why.

Here’s an example of why.

I’m not taking either side here.

This is just an illustration of how either side could, and does and will, plausibly say the other did something bad in this specific instance. And accordingly, this is why using specific things as justification for other things is so fraught.

https://x.com/osinttechnical/status/171 ... q_-8Yt1KMA

[Shirley]

Some

[Sparko]

Terror is a bad choice.

[DCHawk1]

(Still waiting on DC's sources to indicate they are, and every single civilian target hit by Israel was, and is, a confirmed Hamas operational headquarters, and not just state-sponsored terrorism that may even outweigh the terrorism it's meant to counter)

You really are a dishonest, disingenuous dipshit.

Your google machine doesn't have results for Al Shifa Hospital?

It's been a Hamas HQ for at least a quarter century -- largely an "open secret."

Haaretz: https://www.haaretz.com/2009-01-12/ty-a ... ffb4dd0000

The Tablet: https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news ... a-revealed

WaPo: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/mi ... story.html

PBS: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NeymPZifhsk

NYT: https://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/11/worl ... &ref=world&

WSJ Reporter Nick Casey:

French-Palestinian journalist Radjaa Abu Dagg: http://actualite-israel.com/les-menaces ... -p-410595/

Oh, and here's a fun source you might like:

https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/ ... -conflict/

As well as carrying out unlawful killings, others abducted by Hamas were subjected to torture, including severe beatings with truncheons, gun butts, hoses and wire or held in stress positions. Some were interrogated and tortured or otherwise ill-treated in a disused outpatient’s clinic within the grounds of Gaza City’s main al-Shifa hospital. At least three people arrested during the conflict accused of “collaboration” died in custody.

Now again, either act like a serious person or kindly fuck off.

[ousdahl]

damn dude.

first of all, thanks for the sources, DC.

next, forgive me if I come across as not serious, or dishonest, or disingenuous, or a dipshit. but maybe all that is more so just you being condescending.

perhaps the issue is how the news is so overwhelmed with Israel/Palestine/Hamas current events, and I looked for news about current events, and didn't think to back date my search results. Even the most recent sources you share are at least 8 years old.

I'd ask if you have any sources to indicate any attempts by Israel to distinguish Hamas headquarters from civilian targets right now, during this current conflict, but I don't wanna be called any more names.

[Overlander]

DC drops the mic

[ousdahl]

Ok. So as long as terrorists have a human shield nearby, you can’t go after terrorists.

I wouldn’t agree with that, but at least it is a bright line.

of course you wouldn't. Once again you're being as hawkish as ever, and willing to condone the slaughter of who knows how many innocent civilians, as long as it's perped by the side you're cheering for.

Israel has some of the most sophisticated weapons and surveillance and intel in the world, right?

With that, could they maybe be more calculated and precise with their strikes, perhaps?

(Still waiting on DC's sources to indicate they are, and every single civilian target hit by Israel was, and is, a confirmed Hamas operational headquarters, and not just state-sponsored terrorism that may even outweigh the terrorism it's meant to counter)

Would you please stop straw-manning the shit out of anyone who doesn’t agree with you?

It’s a start, at least, that you have now unequivocally said that neither side is justified in doing anything that endangers any non-combatants. I find that, ah, unrealistic. But at least it’s something one can stick to with consistency.

Forgive me if I straw manned.

And honestly, I don't even know if I'd say that much unequivocally either, cuz, like you said, maybe it IS unrealistic.

My concern is more the lack of regard for non-combatant casualties, and potentially even targeting non-combatants.

Now, it's one thing if Hamas does it, cuz they're terrorists, and we're still wondering what the appropriate response is to their aggression.

But, if Israel does it? That's doing it with weapons paid for by you and me, and our own nation standing alongside, and pulling up warships in support.

I just think they, and we, should be bigger and better than that. Put another way, let's not out-terrorist the terrorists.

I'm legit concerned the Israeli end game here is ethnic cleansing. And it bothers me that your and my tax dollars, and elected leaders, are at the very least complicit, if not deliberately enabling it.

[ousdahl]

DC drops the mic

are you kidding me?!

dude just posted a bunch of old ass articles from years ago to rationalize bombing civilians today!

[ousdahl]

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/live ... rcna120252


Israel: bombs evacuation routes

Fish: "Why would Hamas do this?"

I, personally, would be very slow to assume the accuracy of ANY specific reports right now. As to who did exactly what, and exactly why.

Here’s an example of why.

I’m not taking either side here.

This is just an illustration of how either side could, and does and will, plausibly say the other did something bad in this specific instance. And accordingly, this is why using specific things as justification for other things is so fraught.

https://x.com/osinttechnical/status/171 ... q_-8Yt1KMA

yea, agreed. there's a lot of misinformation out there, from both sides.

But, imperial allies and wartime narratives being what they are, I think it's likely there's a lot more pro-Israel, anti-Palestine sort of stuff going on right now, at least among western media and nations.

Heck, France banned pro-Palestine protests. So much for freedom, I guess.

And heck, we've got none other than Shirley, otherwise one of the brightest and most open-minded and progressive posters ever, is posting propaganda shamelessly boogeymanning an entire religion.

That's like almost 2 billion (with a B) people we're talking!

wait...excuse me...some of almost 2 billion people.

[ousdahl]

Some

respectfully, that shit seems awful Islamophobic

[Shirley]

Considering Israel, one of our closest allies, was attacked by a proxy for one of our, and their, fiercest enemies, it would be criminally negligent not to "pull up warships".

[mjl2]

Considering Israel, one of our closest allies, was attacked by a proxy for one of our, and their, fiercest enemies, it would be criminally negligent not to "pull up warships".

The warships aren't even about Hamas.
It's to keep others out - it's to save lives.

[jfish26]

of course you wouldn't. Once again you're being as hawkish as ever, and willing to condone the slaughter of who knows how many innocent civilians, as long as it's perped by the side you're cheering for.

Israel has some of the most sophisticated weapons and surveillance and intel in the world, right?

With that, could they maybe be more calculated and precise with their strikes, perhaps?

(Still waiting on DC's sources to indicate they are, and every single civilian target hit by Israel was, and is, a confirmed Hamas operational headquarters, and not just state-sponsored terrorism that may even outweigh the terrorism it's meant to counter)

Would you please stop straw-manning the shit out of anyone who doesn’t agree with you?

It’s a start, at least, that you have now unequivocally said that neither side is justified in doing anything that endangers any non-combatants. I find that, ah, unrealistic. But at least it’s something one can stick to with consistency.

Forgive me if I straw manned.

And honestly, I don't even know if I'd say that much unequivocally either, cuz, like you said, maybe it IS unrealistic.

My concern is more the lack of regard for non-combatant casualties, and potentially even targeting non-combatants.

Now, it's one thing if Hamas does it, cuz they're terrorists, and we're still wondering what the appropriate response is to their aggression.

But, if Israel does it? That's doing it with weapons paid for by you and me, and our own nation standing alongside, and pulling up warships in support.

I just think they, and we, should be bigger and better than that. Put another way, let's not out-terrorist the terrorists.

I'm legit concerned the Israeli end game here is ethnic cleansing. And it bothers me that your and my tax dollars, and elected leaders, are at the very least complicit, if not deliberately enabling it.

I’m sorry, you’re now suggesting Israel may be “targeting non-combatants?” And that you are “legit concerned the Israeli end game here is ethnic cleansing?”

I really hope all that’s happening is that you are so committed to the bit here that you’re now reflexively bothsidesing everything. Just hunting, for some reason, for things to blame on Israel, which got attacked.