In the entitled and equally infantile world of these unrestrained murderers, they actually believe this.
Israel at war
- Thread starter Butler1000
- Start date
Unilaterally? It has to be negotiated.
I note that you keep changing the topic and put words in other people's mouths.
If so, then I can say that you support genocide. You support the Oct. 7 attack. You knew what the result would be. Hence you support the death and suffering of Gazans, who are collateral damage in Israel's attempt to destroy the perpetrators of the Oct. 7 terrorism, because Hamas uses them as human shields.
I just proved that you, frank, support terrorism and genocide.
looks like their first mistake was to support hamas and their second mistake was not to move their ass south
So you're now arguing that Hamas has no other option but to destroy Israel or be destroyed?
You really are messed up and can't see what you've become.
Just stop killing people.
End apartheid.
End the occupation.
Stop bombing people.
As I said to DM, they are attempting something different this time. Their plan is not to inflict punishment and hope that Gaza gets the point, they are trying to specifically and precisely (as much as it's possible seeing that Hamas uses the civilians as shields) eliminate all of Hamas, the terrorists who initiate the terror attacks and have shown to not care about the citizenry.
Do you think that Hamas are good leaders for Gazans?
Do you believe that Hamas truly wants peace and will negotiate in good faith.
Unless you believe that the answer is yes to both questions, Israel has no option other than to try this new strategy.
How do you negotiate with a nuclear armed, military occupation?
You just said Israel is out to destroy all of Hamas, so clearly you don't support negotiations, you only support genocide.
I support peace and the end of apartheid.
I back BDS and both sides being held to the law.
You support death.
That is not what they said they'd do and is not what they are doing.
Yes. 100%. Those are paraflares. Compare to this video of white phosphorus illumination:
I'll also point out that it's kind of shit for illumination. A white phos grenade in the dark woods or a basement or something is like turning the sun on. But for wide-area illumination it's kind of poopy.
WP is great for smoke, as long as you can keep redeploying it because it doesn't last long, and it's outstanding for target marking. For all other uses, it's garbage.
It's not tomato/tomato. Their summary said Article III of CCW doesn't apply if you use incindiary munitions for non-incindiary proposes, but that's not that CCW says at all.CCW says they straight up aren't incindiary and therefore don't apply. Those are very different things.
If you didn't airburst it, it would be the world's worst illumination. "Oh great, we called in an artillery illumination and it exploded in the ground illuminating exactly as much as we could have accomplished with a grande or flare but with he added fun of worrying about getting it on us and melting our skin."
You want me to prove a negative? That's tough to do. You can check the US DOD Law of War Manual. It calls out WP as not falling under the CCW. But aside from that, what part of the exception from CCW do you think doesn't apply? The only munition manufactured as an incindiary that contains WP is the Mk 77 bomb, where the WP is a small portion used only as an accelerant and Israel owns 0 of them. You're asking me to explain why the words mean what they say though. Why are you trusting Amnesty and their shitty summary rather than just reading the CCW yourself? It's not like it's so big it needs a summary, and the difference is glaringly obvious.
I assume you're taking about this page? https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/10/12...israels-use-white-phosphorus-gaza-and-lebanon
I'd suggest you dig deeper. On it, HRW says, "Human Rights Watch and many CCW states parties have recommended closing that loophole and strengthening the restriction on the use of ground-launched incendiary weapons." There's a link there that takes you here:
But in the very first point on that factsheet, it says:
"By describing incendiary weapons as those “primarily designed” to set fires or burn humans, Protocol III’s definition of incendiary weapons excludes most multipurpose incendiary munitions. The definition does not encompass munitions, such as white phosphorus, that are “primarily designed” to create smokescreens or signal troops, yet have the same cruel incendiary effects."
So HRW endorses a document which explicitly says "WP is not covered by article III". I'm not sure what more I can give you.
Strawman. We're talking about if its correct to say using WP is by itself is a war crime. Israel's own federal laws have no bearing. I've also never argued they are correct to use WP or that I support it. I'm saying you posted a tweet that said using WP is a war crime, and I'm not going to get strawmanned into debating something else.
Irrelevant. You can't drop any weapon on a civilians home. That's what I've been saying. Using any weapon against civilians is unlawful except when proportional proportionality applies. There is not extra rule about WP, and the use of WP does not by itself constitute a war crime. Yes, that means you can't use it on a civilian house. But you also can't shoot machine gun bullets or throw grenades into a civilian house. That doesn't mean you can post a video of the IDF shooting machine guns or chucking grenades and automatically say it's a war crime. You certainly can't post a video of them eating an orange, say it's them throwing a grenade and declare it's a war crime, which seems like a more apt comparison.
I'm arguing that if and when Hamas is gone, Gazans will be the greatest beneficiaries.
The world is better off without Hamas, just like the world, including Germans, was better off without Hitler.
Even though you make ridiculous statements that no rational person can take seriously, I have a serious question for you?
Do you actually think that Hamas can destroy Israel? Seriously?
You clearly think I've taken a position I haven't and are now replying to my posts only half reading them and assuming what I'm saying. That's not a great strategy. If that's not the case, I have no idea how you think this reply is relevant to anything I said in the post you quoted.They have tried other things.
One good example is the Great March of Return in 2018.
They tried protesting and got the same result, Israel killing people.
Gaza’s Great March of Return protests explained
Here’s the backstory of the Great March of Return protests and the conditions that have brought Gaza to this point.www.aljazeera.com
How did Hamas pull this off? Hamas generally kills a handful of Israelis at a time. In 15 years they killed less than 400. Now in one day they kill 1,400. How?
For the record, I don't think there's any reason to try and sit at a table with Hamas to talk peace. Hamas is a terrorist organization. You can't negotiate with terrorists.
I'm saying it can't be finished. Hamas cannot be eliminated. I'm saying Israel's actions help Hamas.
and here your trusted source says 45 ppl were killed
hamas math
Ok, I concede your points. WP is not listed as incendiary and its not a war crime in a military setting.
However, given the density of Gaza and the lack of any safe zone anywhere, using WP or dropping bombs on refugee camps like they just did in Jabalia are likely war crimes at this point. So the tweet may have correctly said it was a war crime but for the wrong reason. I'll still back HRW and Amnesty for two reasons, one, there isn't any other more trustworthy independent sources at present and two, the use of WP has yet to be tested in a court and their arguments may hold weight there even if its not the letter of the CCW.
I expect the next day or two will be people trying to justifying dropping 6 tons of bombs on Jabilya, or whoever much they dropped.
That is clearly and exactly what Netanyahu said that they would do.
As reported by Reuters on Oct.11:
Israel's new war cabinet vows to wipe Hamas off the earth
Don't you ever get tired of lying and then being show that you've lied? You have no shame.
Israel's new war cabinet vows to wipe Hamas off the earth | Reuters
Prior to October 7, Israel had killed more than 6,000 Palestinians in retaliation for attacks that killed about 310 Israelis. What did that get them? 1,400 dead Israelis and 8,000 more dead Palestinians. Every time Israel is attacked they react in response. The result is just more and more death.
I wouldn't "do nothing". But I would do the opposite of what they always have. It's the one thing they've never tried.
You think they can eliminate Hamas? The whole world unified to fight the Nazis and they're still around. But you think Israel can eliminate Hamas? Unless the plan is to wipe all Palestinians and any memory of Palestine off the planet, that's not going to work. They'll kill more people, give Hamas more recruits, and the cycle will continue.
*Sign* Do you remember when I said I wasn't going up keep repeating myself that Hamas are an abhorrent terrorists organization and they should be hunted down and eliminated, and asked you to acknowledge that so I wouldn't have to keep repeating myself? You acknowledged it. So please stop pretending I'm on Hamas' side and think they are reasonable people.
Last edited:
Wow, its almost like the they counted the dead one at a time as they found them instead of making up a number.
I do find it disgusting that people would try to justify bombing refugees and then try to minimize the killings.
Takes a special kind of person.
