Israel Goes To War with Hamas 2023

You do know that more than 11000 people including more than 4500 children have been killed in Gaza in 5 weeks, right?

 

Yes.

 

So what does that make Israel in your opinion?

 

If their commanders are delivering orders to kill or otherwise terrorize civilians, then that is terrorism.

With Hamas — the evidence that they are specifically targeting civilians (whether or not they recognize them as such) is quite clear.

With Israel the situation is more obscured, because they claim to be trying to minimize harm to civilians, send out leaflets, etc. Given what hard liners in Knesset and top of command chain of IDF have said, it is entirely fair to have doubt that they are actually trying to minimize civilian harm and their strategy instead entails use of overwhelming and disproportionately force (the “shock and awe” treatment) against the Gazan population to utterly demoralize them or drive them south. As I said — call things as they are. That would be terrorism.

 

How come with Hamas the evidence that they are specifically targeting civilians is quite clear but it's not clear with IDF?

Because typically, anyone above 40 IQ can tell that bombing refugee camps, hospitals, and schools will result in civilians', including children's, casualties.

So what more evidence do you need exactly to tell that IDF commanders are targeting civilians?

 

They literally admit it. That’s why.

Of course. A consequence being predictable is not equivalent to a consequence being a desired outcome.

I have no issue with you drawing the conclusion that they are doing so. I said this is fair, even if the evidence is less direct.

If there existed the same evidence we have that Hamas is doing so (outright admitting that civilians are targets), then I wouldn’t make the distinction.

 

Poof and just like that, Hamas is not a terrorist organization anymore, right?

 

No. Because Hamas leaders have also said they don’t consider Israelis in settlements (within and near the border) to be civilians. They are considered combatants by them. This is the sort of slippery rhetoric they use to claim on one hand they don’t target civilians while at the same time justifying doing just that as an act of defense. I’m not swayed one bit by their redefinition of words. This is clear-cut terrorism.

Anyone on the Israeli side who argues for killing Palestinian civilians by redefining who they are to be enemy combatants is similarly arguing for terrorism.

 

Informative thread:

 

Yeah because those "settlers" are armed invasion forces that is currently occupying Palestinian soils. And guess what? Palestine actually have right to fight against those invasion forces according to international laws.

 

https://www.hrw.org/reports/2001/is...ational humanitarian law, intentional attacks

 

I wish you'd bother reading the link you've posted.

"The protections accorded to civilians living in the settlements are compromised by the presence of many armed settlers among them, and the role some of these settlers play in confrontations around the settlements. When individual settlers take an active part in armed conflict, as opposed to acting in legitimate self-defense, they lose their civilian protections and become legitimate military targets."

 

I read it. Hamas doesn’t make this distinction. They consider all “occupiers” to be enemy combatants, whether they are armed or not.

 

So basically what you are telling is that Hamas is doing exactly what Israel has been doing for 75 years except you know, IDF being the invasion force?

I still don't understand how is Hamas a terrorist organization when Israel and IDF is not?

 

That’s not what I’m saying. You could make an argument that an indiscriminate act of war that predictably kills thousands of non-combatants is a terrorist act. The argument would be even stronger if you can show evidence that the war planners intentionally wanted to inflict pain in the population to further their war or political aims. It still wouldn’t be “exactly” what Hamas is doing. Not that it would necessarily be better.

I guess I don’t know how to make my argument any clearer than I have. You can accept or reject it.

 

Yeah, I'm sorry, but if launching airstrikes on hospitals, schools, refugee camps, mosques, churches, and UN bases and besieging a city where 2.5 million people live and preventing 2.5 million people from exercising their basic human rights are not good enough evidence for you, nothing is.

Good talk.

 

There was a ceasefire on October 6th.

DD