Palestine v Israel.

[aufbahrung]

What if all the invisible fiends where removed from the equation? would it start to seem less reasonable and more a psycho driven mud slinging match happening?

[Strontium Dog]

I don't think for one second that Israel are completely spotless. Is anyone? However, illegal settlements in no way justifies the wanton slaughter of 1400 people, and any country would respond militarily against a force that did that.

Who is justifying the slaughter?

Taking revenge on a civilian population is a war crime - whether by the IDF or Hamas.

How is this difficult to understand?

It's not difficult to understand, it just doesn't relate to the conflict in any way. Nobody is "taking revenge on a civilian population". Israel is targeting Hamas, and only Hamas.

[rainbow]

I don't think for one second that Israel are completely spotless. Is anyone? However, illegal settlements in no way justifies the wanton slaughter of 1400 people, and any country would respond militarily against a force that did that.

Who is justifying the slaughter?

Taking revenge on a civilian population is a war crime - whether by the IDF or Hamas.

How is this difficult to understand?

It's not difficult to understand, it just doesn't relate to the conflict in any way. Nobody is "taking revenge on a civilian population". Israel is targeting Hamas, and only Hamas.

Complete Bullshit, and you know it.

[pErvinalia]

Slaughtering babies and children and general citizens isn't defence. You really are a despicable human being.

You're revolting. A war has been forced on Israel, yet again. You don't think they would prefer to be left alone? What is it about native people defending themselves that upsets you so much?

The wholesale slaughter of innocent civilians.

[JimC]

I don't think for one second that Israel are completely spotless. Is anyone? However, illegal settlements in no way justifies the wanton slaughter of 1400 people, and any country would respond militarily against a force that did that.

Who is justifying the slaughter?

Taking revenge on a civilian population is a war crime - whether by the IDF or Hamas.

How is this difficult to understand?

It's not difficult to understand, it just doesn't relate to the conflict in any way. Nobody is "taking revenge on a civilian population". Israel is targeting Hamas, and only Hamas.

The IDF certainly claims it is only targeting Hamas. I'm sure they'd like to have a "silver bullet" that could only kill Hamas operatives, and no civilians.

But the reality is that Hamas are completely intertwined with the civilian population in Gaza. Inevitably, no matter that the targets are Hamas or their infrastructure, a large number of Palestinian civilians are either killed, wounded or made homeless, and the infrastructure such as water, sanitation, food supplies and medical support is so degraded that further deaths and misery abound. Now, I'm sure that Hamas is cynically aware of this, merges with civilian population deliberately, and is in fact banking on the fire of Israeli revenge to put little in the way of real limits to IDF military action. They would be hoping that the inevitable civilian carnage will harden world opinion against Israel and its western backers. So, for both ethical and Realpolitik reasons, Israel should be much more restrained in its military actions.

[pErvinalia]

Don't forget the public statements from Israeli officials who call the Palestinians human animals and that they should all be killed. There's plenty of Zionists who think the Palestinians should be eliminated. Can you imagine the IDF bombing an Israeli apartment block if there was a Hamas terrorist situated there?

[Strontium Dog]

The IDF certainly claims it is only targeting Hamas. I'm sure they'd like to have a "silver bullet" that could only kill Hamas operatives, and no civilians.

But the reality is that Hamas are completely intertwined with the civilian population in Gaza. Inevitably, no matter that the targets are Hamas or their infrastructure, a large number of Palestinian civilians are either killed, wounded or made homeless, and the infrastructure such as water, sanitation, food supplies and medical support is so degraded that further deaths and misery abound. Now, I'm sure that Hamas is cynically aware of this, merges with civilian population deliberately, and is in fact banking on the fire of Israeli revenge to put little in the way of real limits to IDF military action. They would be hoping that the inevitable civilian carnage will harden world opinion against Israel and its western backers. So, for both ethical and Realpolitik reasons, Israel should be much more restrained in its military actions.

And that's the difference between the two sides. Israel would happily eliminate every Hamas terrorist without harming a single hair on the head of any civilian, if they could. Hamas, as we have seen, will target everyone from babies to the elderly, burning, maiming, raping and butchering their way through every civilian they encounter.

If you have a solution for killing Hamas terrorists that doesn't risk killing innocent people, then let's hear it. I don't think it exists.

I'll also note that everyone here, along with the media, are putting an awful lot of faith in casualty figures that come direct from Hamas.

[JimC]

SD, I suspect that many in Israel would only prefer a perfect targeting of Hamas (with virtually no civilian casualties) because it would reduce the bad PR that Israel is increasingly receiving, rather than any real concern for Palestinian lives.

And yes, Hamas clearly demonstrated zero concern for Jewish civilian casualties in their incursion, and the rocket attacks. But that does not change the rest of my argument, that increasingly, the world will not tolerate a continuing heavy death toll of Palestinian civilians. (It is disingenuous of you to suggest those figures are greatly inflated - so many reports from many sources, so much clear video evidence that this war is killing many...)

Israel started its current campaign against Hamas with a lot of world support in their PR bank. It is rapidly depleting, including within traditional allies.

[JimC]

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-11-04/ ... /103064430

Israel has admitted to carrying out an air strike on an ambulance in the northern Gaza Strip it said was being used by a "Hamas terrorist cell".

The deadly attack near Gaza's biggest hospital, Al-Shifa, came as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu ruled out a ceasefire in Gaza unless the hostages held by Hamas are released.

If you read the article in full, you will see 2 radically different versions, each of which could be true, and that outside observers have little chance of telling which is correct.

Perhaps the ambulance was only carrying injured civilians. One doubts that Israel would have deliberately targeted that, if only for the potential for bad PR. So, it could have been a targeting error, or mistaken intelligence that suggested a Hamas presence that was in fact not there.

It is also a reasonable possibility, as IDF sources have suggested, that the ambulance contained Hamas operatives and weapons, and therefore was a legitimate target. However, even if true, it was a risky and ethically fraught decision to attack, because it was part of an ambulance convoy containing civilians.

In the heat of this conflict, it is almost impossible to tell which competing narrative is correct...

[rainbow]

The IDF certainly claims it is only targeting Hamas. I'm sure they'd like to have a "silver bullet" that could only kill Hamas operatives, and no civilians.

But the reality is that Hamas are completely intertwined with the civilian population in Gaza.

The IDF are completely intertwined with the civilian population of Israel.

There is barely a household in Israel that doesn't harbour an IDF combatant. Are these 'legitimate targets'?

[Brian Peacock]

....

Perhaps the ambulance was only carrying injured civilians. One doubts that Israel would have deliberately targeted that, if only for the potential for bad PR. ...

Israel have total control of the phone network, which has allowed them to gather intelligence and target some individuals with a high degree of accuracy, including journalists it seems.

[rainbow]

It is also a reasonable possibility, as IDF sources have suggested, that the ambulance contained Hamas operatives and weapons, and therefore was a legitimate target. However, even if true, it was a risky and ethically fraught decision to attack, because it was part of an ambulance convoy containing civilians.

Ambulances and hospitals are never legitimate targets, even if they contain wounded soldiers.

Read the Geneva Convention:

Article 19 demands that medical units, i.e. hospitals and mobile medical facilities, may in no circumstances be attacked.

[rainbow]

....

Perhaps the ambulance was only carrying injured civilians. One doubts that Israel would have deliberately targeted that, if only for the potential for bad PR. ...

Israel have total control of the phone network, which has allowed them to gather intelligence and target some individuals with a high degree of accuracy, including journalists it seems.

Pegasus, and other spyware are on nearly every cellphone in Israel especially Gaza.

The IDF knew what Hamas were planning. They are complicit.
Netanyahu and his gang of criminals wanted an incident, so they could retaliate. Blood is on their hands.

[Strontium Dog]

It is also a reasonable possibility, as IDF sources have suggested, that the ambulance contained Hamas operatives and weapons, and therefore was a legitimate target. However, even if true, it was a risky and ethically fraught decision to attack, because it was part of an ambulance convoy containing civilians.

Ambulances and hospitals are never legitimate targets, even if they contain wounded soldiers.

Read the Geneva Convention:

Article 19 demands that medical units, i.e. hospitals and mobile medical facilities, may in no circumstances be attacked.

I think it's you who needs to read Article 19.

The protection to which civilian hospitals are entitled shall not cease unless they are used to commit, outside their humanitarian duties, acts harmful to the enemy.

So it's perfectly legal to attack an ambulance which has been commandeered by terrorists.

What is definitely against the convention is combatants embedding themselves in neutral zones like hospitals.

[Svartalf]

....

Perhaps the ambulance was only carrying injured civilians. One doubts that Israel would have deliberately targeted that, if only for the potential for bad PR. ...

Israel have total control of the phone network, which has allowed them to gather intelligence and target some individuals with a high degree of accuracy, including journalists it seems.

Pegasus, and other spyware are on nearly every cellphone in Israel especially Gaza.

The IDF knew what Hamas were planning. They are complicit.
Netanyahu and his gang of criminals wanted an incident, so they could retaliate. Blood is on their hands.