Hamas attacks southern Israel

[Vanoi]

lmao

Nat Turner's slave rebellion.
Haitian Revolution

Kennedy said something about peaceful and violent revolutions.

I wonder why Palestinians support Hamas so readily? Must have something to do with them being ethnically cleansed, and then occupied.

Slave rebellions against their masters or colonial governments is not the same as forming a terrorist group that frequently targets civilians. Do try again though.

I'll remind you Love like POVG that the Palestinians situation is not unique.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rohingya_people

Rohingya have been facing very similar circumstances to the Palestinians. How many Rohingya terror groups are there?

Why is it so hard to understand that civilians aren't legitimate targets? Hamas can kill Israeli soldiers all they want. The problem begins when you target those who again have absolutely nothing to do with your oppression.

[Sir Adrian]

So basically your argument is that in harming civilians the IDF is a carrying out terrorist attacks and/or behaving like a terrorist organization.

[Vanoi]

So basically your argument is that in harming civilians the IDF is a carrying out terrorist attacks and/or behaving like a terrorist organization.

Are Israelis intentional targeting civilians like terror groups do? I love how people gloss over that little part. Intent does matter.

[Sir Adrian]

Are Israelis intentional targeting civilians like terror groups do? I love how people gloss over that little part. Intent does matter.

Did you or did you not say that civilians are not legitimate targets? Do you really want to go down on the "rules for thee but not for me" path?

But maybe you'd like to explain how those 120 children killed by IDF soldiers were actually terrorists and not civilians.

[PointOfViewGun]

This garble of words is nothing but you avoiding answering any of my post or anything I said really. Your lat sentence is a giant excuse. The Palestinians are not the only people in the world or history for that matter to face oppression or discrimination. African-Americans faced hundreds of years of slavery and Jim Crow. They didn't resort to massacring innocent people. That's just one easy example.
And they'd still be wrong. Two wrongs don't make a right. You can't write away a wrong with another one.
You are still avoiding my question. Was the PKK provoked to attack civilian targets because of the oppressive policies of the Turkish government?

It's not a good tactic to cover up your own failure to address points raised against you with accusations of others doing that. Nice to see you make a claim and then contradict it in the same post. The argument of uniqueness of Hamas' situation is as dumb as it gets. You know that which is why you're trying to alter the focus. No one tried to write away a wrong with an other one. You yourself claimed that no one other than Hamas target civilians because of oppression in the world. Now you acknowledge that they do. We're done I guess.

Then you would acknowledge that Hamas' strategy would even in the best of cases have ended up with Gaza depopulated and in ruins with thousands dead. The only way that would not have happened was if Israel had chosen not to go to war. And we know Hamas would have considered that a failure. If you accept this as the benchmark, then I am perfectly ok with criticizing Israel for any civilian loss of life that is not attributable to Hamas building its military infrastructure under hospitals, schools, mosques and appartment blocks and staging its little war there. After all I am not here to defend either side and in fact I will consider anyone who does defend one side over the other as an opponent, because the only reasonable conclusion is that both sides are deranged. And then I am talking about governments, of course. There is nothing else worth discussing in war and diplomacy. "The innocent civilians" are no player on that stage.

Do you accept the benchmark that if Israel didn't turn Gaza into one big refugee camp and treat it like a Soviet gulag Hamas wouldn't be lashing out like it did on October 7? Because you seem to be applying your principles only one way. You have been defending Israeli actions quite clearly so far. No need to claim impartiality when the best criticism you direct towards Israel is off-handed passive aggressive passing remarks despite all the brutality it unleashed. But, no. Hamas' actions on October 7 does not excuse Israel's brutal campaign of leveling down Gaza and killing thousands of people. It's ridiculous to suggest that so openly. Yikes.

Are Israelis intentional targeting civilians like terror groups do? I love how people gloss over that little part. Intent does matter.

Of course they are. If anything Israel's current episode in Gaza established its that they target civilians. Israeli authorities aren't even shy about it. The number one chant of the Israeli soldiers in Gaza is even "no uninvolved" which refers to anyone in Gaza, including civilians, are legitimate targets for them. They sing about killing civilians. You're here defending them.

[mishkin]

Most of the apologists don't really understand Hamas. Many delude themselves into thinking that Hamas will spare those that have loyally repeated their propaganda and made excuses for them. This is ludicrous. Hamas excludes no one outside of their narrow interpretation of Islam in their desire for the total annihilation of all infidels.

You who defend and rally around Hamas may feel safe in demanding the world force Israel to capitulate to Hamas, seeing it as a problem that won't affect you. But I guarantee it will one day. Long before Hamas has put the last Jew to the sword they will begin attacks on other western nations, in the style of Oct 7 and the Mumbai and Paris attacks, while feeding you (usually fabricated) sob stories so you will continue to support them against whatever group they have labeled "oppressors" this week, and do what you can to block any meaningful opposition.

Then one day they will show up at your home, and drop the facade. They will show you what they have always been and you refused to see.

Hamas are happy to take advantage of your misguided pity for them, but in the end you and your families are still just dirty infidels worthy only of torture, rape, and murder.

From minute one, everyone here has condemned the murders of civilians on October 7. Nobody here supports the expansion or "victory" of Hamas. Some of us see terrorism as something more complex than "some people suddenly decided to attack other people because of their politics, ethnicity, citizenship or religion." I personally think I understand (try to understand) both a Hamas militant and an Israeli citizen terrorized by its neighbors.

Your speech really seems like just a small variation of the "let's close the doors of the West to the Muslims"speech.

[Vanoi]

Did you or did you not say that civilians are not legitimate targets? Do you really want to go down on the "rules for thee but not for me" path?

But maybe you'd like to explain how those 120 children killed by IDF soldiers were actually terrorists and not civilians.

Did the IDF target and kill those children or were they caught in the crossfire? Intent matters. Collateral damage is in no way the ing same as going out and purposely targeting civilians in war time.

It's not a good tactic to cover up your own failure to address points raised against you with accusations of others doing that. Nice to see you make a claim and then contradict it in the same post. The argument of uniqueness of Hamas' situation is as dumb as it gets. You know that which is why you're trying to alter the focus. No one tried to write away a wrong with an other one. You yourself claimed that no one other than Hamas target civilians because of oppression in the world. Now you acknowledge that they do. We're done I guess.

My failure? You don't even believe in your own pathetic argument. It's why you keep avoiding my question about the PKK. It would expose the hypocrisy of your argument and show not even you believe in that. Honestly you'd probably just give excuses for the Turkish government no doubt.

Of course they are. If anything Israel's current episode in Gaza established its that they target civilians. Israeli authorities aren't even shy about it. The number one chant of the Israeli soldiers in Gaza is even "no uninvolved" which refers to anyone in Gaza, including civilians, are legitimate targets for them. They sing about killing civilians. You're here defending them.

No they are certainly not. If Israel was targeting civilians there would be much more than the current amount of dead. You backed yourself into a corner.

I await that citation for your claim that Israel is targeting civilians to be killed purposely.

[mishkin]

Did the IDF target and kill those children or were they caught in the crossfire? Intent matters. Collateral damage is in no way the ing same as going out and purposely targeting civilians in war time.

There are videos of children being shot, there has been bombing without mercy (literally, cemeteries have been bombed and razed without any military justification), and it is difficult to distinguish between collateral casualties and "we don't give a ### about the collateral casualties" which seems be the case given that two thirds of the dead are women and children.

Unfortunately, it seems that this will only be analyzed after the war is over, Israel will not accept a ceasefire for this to be investigated (as the genocide investigation initiated by South Africa asks). It is also difficult to know exactly what is happening when the collateral victims usually include journalists (more than a hundred so far: List of journalists killed in the Israel–Hamas war Israeli airstrike, Israeli airstrike, Israeli airstrike, Israeli airstrike, Israeli airstrike, Israeli airstrike... )

[PointOfViewGun]

Most of the apologists don't really understand Hamas. Many delude themselves into thinking that Hamas will spare those that have loyally repeated their propaganda and made excuses for them. This is ludicrous. Hamas excludes no one outside of their narrow interpretation of Islam in their desire for the total annihilation of all infidels.
You who defend and rally around Hamas may feel safe in demanding the world force Israel to capitulate to Hamas, seeing it as a problem that won't affect you. But I guarantee it will one day. Long before Hamas has put the last Jew to the sword they will begin attacks on other western nations, in the style of Oct 7 and the Mumbai and Paris attacks, while feeding you (usually fabricated) sob stories so you will continue to support them against whatever group they have labeled "oppressors" this week, and do what you can to block any meaningful opposition.
Then one day they will show up at your home, and drop the facade. They will show you what they have always been and you refused to see.
Hamas are happy to take advantage of your misguided pity for them, but in the end you and your families are still just dirty infidels worthy only of torture, rape, and murder.

What's really ludicrous is to try to shut down criticism of Israel's actions by labeling anyone expressing facts of what's happening as Hamas apologists. No one demanded Israel to capitulate to Hamas. Our analysis is not based on any story put forward by Hamas. Most are based on sources from Israel. This attempt to appeal to hysteria by trying to make Hamas a global boogey man just to accept anything and everything Israel claims at face value is just beyond ludicrous. It's unexplainable why someone would go down that route.

Did the IDF target and kill those children or were they caught in the crossfire? Intent matters. Collateral damage is in no way the ing same as going out and purposely targeting civilians in war time.
My failure? You don't even believe in your own pathetic argument. It's why you keep avoiding my question about the PKK. It would expose the hypocrisy of your argument and show not even you believe in that. Honestly you'd probably just give excuses for the Turkish government no doubt.
No they are certainly not. If Israel was targeting civilians there would be much more than the current amount of dead. You backed yourself into a corner.
I await that citation for your claim that Israel is targeting civilians to be killed purposely.

When you see every death as collateral and every statement from an Israeli official as mere rhetoric there isn't much to show. Targeting civilians doesn't require you to kill every single civilian you can kill. By your logic, Hamas didn't target any civilians because there were plenty of civilians they didn't harm on October 7. Talking about corners...

[Vanoi]

There are videos of children being shot, there has been bombing without mercy (literally, cemeteries have been bombed and razed without any military justification), and it is difficult to distinguish between collateral casualties and "we don't give a ### about the collateral casualties" which seems be the case given that two thirds of the dead are women and children.

Unfortunately, it seems that this will only be analyzed after the war is over, Israel will not accept a ceasefire for this to be investigated (as the genocide investigation initiated by South Africa asks). It is also difficult to know exactly what is happening when the collateral victims usually include journalists (more than a hundred so far: List of journalists killed in the Israel–Hamas war Israeli airstrike, Israeli airstrike, Israeli airstrike, Israeli airstrike, Israeli airstrike, Israeli airstrike... )

Criticism of Israel's actual tactics is very fair and is something I think all of us can agree too. I don't think the Israelis are doing enough to protect against civilian casualties and they do deserve some blame for the people dying. However that's still not intentional targeting of civilians. And using civilians as shields from attacks like Hamas is doing is a war crime.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huma...%20war%20crime.

Military necessity can justify the use of force in certain circumstances, where there is a military advantage to be gained by an attack.[15] When the use of force is excessive relative to its anticipated military advantage it is said to be disproportionate. Disproportionate force is prohibited under international law.

Risk to civilians does not bar military action, but the principle of proportionality requires that precautions be taken to minimize the harm to these protected persons. This analysis includes considerations like whether circumstances permit the attacker to time a military action to minimize the presence of civilians at the location.[16]

Under the Rome Statute, using protected persons as shields in an international armed conflict is a war crime.[17]

When you see every death as collateral and every statement from an Israeli official as mere rhetoric there isn't much to show. Targeting civilians doesn't require you to kill every single civilian you can kill. By your logic, Hamas didn't target any civilians because there were plenty of civilians they didn't harm on October 7. Talking about corners...

So you don't have a citation? My logic is that there's a clear difference between civilians killed in collateral damage and those killed purposely. International law that I just cited supports my own point as military action is allowed even at risk to civilians. Hamas using human shields is also a war crime.

[Muizer]

Do you accept the benchmark that if Israel didn't turn Gaza into one big refugee camp and treat it like a Soviet gulag Hamas wouldn't be lashing out like it did on October 7?

I accept that Palestinians would seek to do something about it. I accept that this may involve military action. I definitely do not accept the way it happened on October 7. As a government, Hamas knew they were committing their people to a war that would be fought in Gaza and they're completely unrepentant about it. Somehow I feel that this is something the Pro-Palestinian argument around the war is trying to sidestep.

Saying that something like that was bound to happen considering the oppression of Gaza is exactly that: sidestepping. It depicts Hamas as if their actions are driven by grief and anger, not reason. Well, governments do not have that luxury no matter how bad it gets. They still need to realize the consequences aren't just for themselves but for their people. And the 'funny' thing is, Hamas do realize that, in that they are content to martyr them for the cause. It's outsider observers that aren't acknowledging it.

[Sir Adrian]

Did the IDF target and kill those children or were they caught in the crossfire? Intent matters. Collateral damage is in no way the ing same as going out and purposely targeting civilians in war time.

Being purposefully obtuse is a not a winning tactic. I can't post the video because of ToS but if you google Jenin kid deaths you will an 8 year old and a 15 year old shot in the head on purpose. And those are not the only cases. There are many other videos of IDF soldiers torturing civilians or shooting them or using drones to bomb houses, etc.

You live under the illusion that there are good guys in this war.

[PointOfViewGun]

So you don't have a citation? My logic is that there's a clear difference between civilians killed in collateral damage and those killed purposely. International law that I just cited supports my own point as military action is allowed even at risk to civilians. Hamas using human shields is also a war crime.

No need for new citations. They've been provided enough in this thread; cutting water and food to Gaza, sniping random civilians on the streets, demolishing cemeteries and leveling entire city blocks out of many examples coupled with calls for genocide from Israeli authorities while Israeli soldiers cheering about all civilians being legitimate targets in Gaza. What we have in Gaza is a calculated killing of Palestinian civilians and civilian infrastructure to make the area uninhabitable. You can hide behind your human shields points all you want which is quite debatable but we know for a fact that Israel used Palestinians, even kids, as human shields repeatedly in their operations in West Bank in the past. Coincidentally, you have not been mentioning that.

I accept that Palestinians would seek to do something about it. I accept that this may involve military action. I definitely do not accept the way it happened on October 7. As a government, Hamas knew they were committing their people to a war that would be fought in Gaza and they're completely unrepentant about it. Somehow I feel that this is something the Pro-Palestinian argument around the war is trying to sidestep.

Saying that something like that was bound to happen considering the oppression of Gaza is exactly that: sidestepping. It depicts Hamas as if their actions are driven by grief and anger, not reason. Well, governments do not have that luxury no matter how bad it gets. They still need to realize the consequences aren't just for themselves but for their people. And the 'funny' thing is, Hamas do realize that, in that they are content to martyr them for the cause. It's outsider observers that aren't acknowledging it.

Again, no one is sidestepping anything. No one argued that Hamas didn't want the war to be dragged into Gaza where they are better equipped to hurt the Israeli army. Not one person argued that Hamas wanted to avoid civilians in Gaza getting hurt at all costs. You really need to stop basing your arguments against things nobody argued. What makes it intellectually dishonest is that you use this principle only in favor of Israel.

[nhytgbvfeco2]

Being purposefully obtuse is a not a winning tactic. I can't post the video because of ToS but if you google Jenin kid deaths you will an 8 year old and a 15 year old shot in the head on purpose. And those are not the only cases. There are many other videos of IDF soldiers torturing civilians or shooting them or using drones to bomb houses, etc.

You live under the illusion that there are good guys in this war.

TIL Jenin is in Gaza.
You're talking about a separate issue. The kids were also not just innocently going about their day, as you might have noticed from the video. Still, they should not have been shot. IDF ROE would not allow use of deadly force in this case, and the soldiers were deinitely in the wrong.

From minute one, everyone here has condemned the murders of civilians on October 7. Nobody here supports the expansion or "victory" of Hamas

You support a ceasefire immediately, do you not? That's supporting a Hamas victory.

[mishkin]

TIL Jenin is in Gaza.
You're talking about a separate issue. The kids were also not just innocently going about their day, as you might have noticed from the video. Still, they should not have been shot. IDF ROE would not allow use of deadly force in this case, and the soldiers were deinitely in the wrong.

the millionth time israel's soldiers are in the wrong.

You support a ceasefire immediately, do you not? That's supporting a Hamas victory.

The ing United Nations is begging Israel to accept a ceasefire so they can assist the Palestinian population. But I know, they support Hamas.

[PointOfViewGun]

The Israeli soldiers are singing in mass in Gaza that are no uninvolved civilians. Any argument defending Israeli army about attacking civilians is moot.

[mishkin]

"I'm coming to occupy Gaza / and beat Hezbollah / I stick by one mitzvah / to wipe off the seed of Amalek / I left home behind me / won't come back until victory / we know our slogan / there are no "uninvolved civilians"

Can any Hebrew speaker confirm the translation of that song?

[PointOfViewGun]

"I'm coming to occupy Gaza / and beat Hezbollah / I stick by one mitzvah / to wipe off the seed of Amalek / I left home behind me / won't come back until victory / we know our slogan / there are no "uninvolved civilians"

Can any Hebrew speaker confirm the translation of that song?

The video was posted by Israeli journalist close to Netanyahu with the following text (Google translated):

I am coming to conquer GazaAnd Hezbollah gives head
And stick to one mitzvah
protest the seed of Amalek

I left the house behind
Until victory, I will not return
You know our password
There are no uninvolved

The footage was also shown at the ICJ hearing reported by Sky News with likely better translated subtitles.

[nhytgbvfeco2]

But I know, they support Hamas.

Correct.

[mishkin]

The video was posted by Israeli journalist close to Netanyahu with the following text (Google translated):



The footage was also shown at the ICJ hearing reported by Sky News with likely better translated subtitles.

There's like, a lot of scum in Israel.

Correct.

Hey, since you're here, can you also confirm those fascist, genocidal chants in the Israeli army?