Israel at war

[shack]

Read whose mind? Gallant? I am not reading his mind, but I am saying there is doubt as to what he, and by extension Israel is doing in Gaza.

We are fighting human animals" - not sure who he was referring to exactly - Hamas or the civilians there, but given my observation of Israeli attitudes towards the Palestinians in general, I am leaning towards interpreting this as collective punishment.

I agree your statement was not unequivocal, however, for the reasons I pointed out, the fact you suspect he was referring to Palestinians when it so very clear he was referring only to Hamas, I stand by what I said in my post.

And that includes how could he be so stupid as to call Palestinians animals in a public statement? He was repeating the official policy of the Israeli government which is to eradicate the sub-human animals of Hamas, who committed sub-human atrocities. It's unfathomable to think otherwise, except under certain circumstances.

There is zero doubt as to what he meant.

 

[toguy5252]

Where is my statement claiming that? You're asking me to defend a statement I never made. That's called a strawman.

I said the attacks on Japan weren't purely punitive or they would be illegal. I didn't say Israel's attacks were. However, I only got involved in a thread responding to someone who implied they were, which is why I have considered relevant to bring up.

did I misread the last paragraph of your post?

 

[Frankfooter]

It is clear that he is referring to the "human animals" who carried out the atrocities of Oct. 7. That was a brutal and atrocious Hamas attack and Israel has explicitly said that they are going after and fighting Hamas. I find it hard to even consider that he was referring to the civilians but the fact that you are actually inclined to believe "human animals" meant the civilians, shows that you have a very strong bias against Israel.

Its quite clear that the leader of the IDF was referring to the people of Gaza, not just Hamas.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1711982388585046315

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1712877548420345989

 

[Frankfooter]

Maybe I am missing it but I would love to see the Hamas leader sit down for a press conference and explain what was going on in their tiny minds when they decided to enact October 7th?
What did they think they would achieve?
Have they achieved it?
What did they think would happen?
Did it happen?
Did they really think it through and consider the possibility of the outcome?
When they launched a raid into Israel, did they prepare by making sure the hospitals food and water supplies would be ok?
Shine on you crazy Diamond....
Explain please.

Probably the same thing they thought in 2008, 2012, 2014, 2018, 2021 and 2022.
That they were resisting the illegal occupation and illegal blockade.
CBC posted a quote from Hamas in the first few days saying that this time they were responding to a massive increase in settler terrorist attacks, more land theft and the storming of the Al Aqsa, which is pretty much what they responded to in 2021.

Israel has not held peace talks in a decade.
Its a 75 year old occupation.

That's the problem.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1719036507980460370

 

[shack]

It isn't clear to me, given Israeli attitudes. It could have just been rhetoric, or just a bad choice of words, but was something more tacit being said? Its possible. But then again, may be not. We'd have to wait and see.

Accepted. Thanks for hearing me out.

 

[Frankfooter]

Did the chief suggest any other way to eliminate hamas?

Mandela was listed as a terrorist.
The IRA were 'terrorists'.

There are other options to trying to kill the indigenous population.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1718993497498489202

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1719068923771998513

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1719046293396353220

 

[Frankfooter]

And that includes how could he be so stupid as to call Palestinians animals in a public statement? He was repeating the official policy of the Israeli government which is to eradicate the sub-human animals of Hamas, who committed sub-human atrocities. It's unfathomable to think otherwise, except under certain circumstances.

There is zero doubt as to what he meant.

The videos are posted.
Watch them.

No wonder Norman Finkelstein posted this.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1718692104900104652

 

[Not getting younger]

DM, genuinely has military experience. If you read his posts, you'd know this.

“So” lots of people here with experience or expertise in different areas. How often do you listen to people with that in finance or economics?

What it does mean, is that they have insight, others don’t. If DM were an authority he’d be a top ranked general advising Israel. No different than if I knew everything, I’d own my own tropical island.

Wait and see how the ground offensive plays out imo. If there’s anything that might have relevance is how the US went after Al Qaida. They didn’t exactly play cat and mouse with special forces.

 

[Frankfooter]

So basically you are purporting to have the ability to read his mind based on your small sample size. What percentage of Israelis have that view? Any polls to reference or just your admittedly anecdotal evidence?

Even if he did mean the civilians, who had nothing to do with the attack and committed no sub-human atrocities so why should he mean them, do you think that he'd be stupid enough to call the civilians that in a public statement? Seriously?

I don't doubt that many Israelis have a bias against Palestinians, but to assume that bias is extreme enough to be calling them sub-human animals (I forget the exact wording) exists among the vast majority of Israelis such that you can readily assume the minister was referring to Palestinians and not simply Hamas (the perpetrators that the IDF says that they're going after) in itself is further example of an anti-Israeli bias.

Without scientific polling to back up your point about most Israelis considering Palestinians animals, then, as I said, you are claiming to have the ability to read minds because he most certainly did not say Palestinians. The Israeli government's (in who's capacity he is speaking for) official policy is going after and eliminating HAMAS. Not Palestinians. It is nothing more than conjecture on your part.

Watch the videos and hear what he says.
This is what you have become.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1711982388585046315

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1712877548420345989

 

[DinkleMouse]

did I misread the last paragraph of your post?

I don't think your misread it, but maybe you missed the context of it. Or perhaps I wasn't clear about the context. But I'm happy to clarify.

That paragraph references the sections above it. Someone else has claimed that Israel was justified in purely punitive attacks. I didn't say their attacks were purely punitive, I merely said they weren't justified in carrying out purely punitive attacks. It was a response to someone else's comments, not a condemnation of my own.

I've called them war crimes, and I believe they are. I think it's possible they violate the non-reciprocity portion of the laws of armed conflict (meaning I think it's possible they are purely punitive), but I'm not sure. I am certain enough to satisfy myself, however, that the Israeli attacks would not meet the threshold of a proportional proportionality analysis to be justified and for that reason I call them war crimes. But whether they are purely punitive or whether Israel simply doesn't care about the Palestinian civilians I can't say. The ICC is looking into that and in generally I believe the ICC does an excellent job in investigations and manages to remain unbiased, so I'll happily accept whatever timing they reach if they declare the attacks didn't violate non-reciprocity.

 

[Robert Mugabe]

Probably the same thing they thought in 2008, 2012, 2014, 2018, 2021 and 2022.
That they were resisting the illegal occupation and illegal blockade.
CBC posted a quote from Hamas in the first few days saying that this time they were responding to a massive increase in settler terrorist attacks, more land theft and the storming of the Al Aqsa, which is pretty much what they responded to in 2021.

Israel has not held peace talks in a decade.
Its a 75 year old occupation.

That's the problem.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1719036507980460370

What was Hamas thinking? For over three decades, it has had the same brutal idea of victory | AP News

 

[shack]

Its quite clear that the leader of the IDF was referring to the people of Gaza, not just Hamas.

Especially when you project your hateful and spiteful way of thinking onto someone else.

It is a pleasure to discuss the topic with someone rational and willing to listen to someone else's point of view (kautilya) instead of gaslighting, twisting words and accusing others every single time of supporting genocide and apartheid for daring to see things differently than you.

I thanked kautilya for what I considered a mutually respectful, yet potentially delicate debate.

Instead you continue to prove my point that you instigate more nasty, dishonest and accusatory discussions than anybody else BY FAR.

YOU ARE A DETRIMENT TO TERB.

 

[Frankfooter]

I don't think your misread it, but maybe you missed the context of it. Or perhaps I wasn't clear about the context. But I'm happy to clarify.

That paragraph references the sections above it. Someone else has claimed that Israel was justified in purely punitive attacks. I didn't say their attacks were purely punitive, I merely said they weren't justified in carrying out purely punitive attacks. It was a response to someone else's comments, not a condemnation of my own.

I've called them war crimes, and I believe they are. I think it's possible they violate the non-reciprocity portion of the laws of armed conflict (meaning I think it's possible they are purely punitive), but I'm not sure. I am certain enough to satisfy myself, however, that the Israeli attacks would not meet the threshold of a proportional proportionality analysis to be justified and for that reason I call them war crimes. But whether they are purely punitive or whether Israel simply doesn't care about the Palestinian civilians I can't say. The ICC is looking into that and in generally I believe the ICC does an excellent job in investigations and manages to remain unbiased, so I'll happily accept whatever timing they reach if they declare the attacks didn't violate non-reciprocity.

Israel started off by cutting off all water, food and power to Gaza.
That's a war crime right there, that made it very clear that they had no problem with collective punishment or harming civilians.
The Israeli supporters love to use the word 'terrorist', or targeting civilians yet will never allow that word to be used to described Israelis when they target civilians.

The UN Secretary General is very clear in this interview on BBC.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1718775373595328670

 

[DinkleMouse]

As far as I recall one of the main factors considered in case of Hiroshima and nagasaki was that the ground was flat there which would help the wave of destruction to go further

They were air-detonated so I don't think flatness would have had any bearing on it. I've never heard that myself, but if you have a source I'd love to read it. This is a summary of all the major points that went into the decision as far as I believe:

The Selection of the Target | The Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki | Historical Documents | atomicarchive.com

The Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki by The Manhattan Engineer District, June 29, 1946. The Selection of the Target. Some of the most frequent queries concerning the atomic bombs are those dealing with the selection of the targets and the decision as to when the bombs would be used.

www.atomicarchive.com

Even in more detail works I've read there was no indication of terrain being a big factor.

 

[Frankfooter]

What was Hamas thinking? For over three decades, it has had the same brutal idea of victory | AP News

Why wouldn't you ask the same of Israel?
Ben Gurion warned that if Israel didn't settle for the two state solution they would be stuck with apartheid. Multiple Israeli PM's have warned the same.
So why has Israel not settled in 75 years and instead keeps trying to violently take more of Palestine?

What are they thinking?
Do you think their goals are really an ethnically cleansed, 'racially pure' Israel?
Is it apartheid?

 

[Frankfooter]

Especially when you project your hateful and spiteful way of thinking onto someone else.

It is a pleasure to discuss the topic with someone rational and willing to listen to someone else's point of view (kautilya) instead of gaslighting, twisting words and accusing others every single time of supporting genocide and apartheid for daring to see things differently than you.

I thanked kautilya for what I considered a mutually respectful, yet potentially delicate debate.

Instead you continue to prove my point that you instigate more nasty, dishonest and accusatory discussions than anybody else BY FAR.

YOU ARE A DETRIMENT TO TERB.

I knew you would go on the attack once the videos were posted.
You can't call out Israeli military for such obviously racist and genocidal talk, so you have to yell at me instead.

You've spent 3 weeks demanding I answer a question that you finally admitted I answered 3 weeks ago and here you are again accusing me of being dishonest.

I'd say someone who defends killing 3457 children is more of a detriment to the board, if anyone asked.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1719041652835094859

 

[Klatuu]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1719109955616195040

 

[Klatuu]

Tonight in the West Bank, ethnic cleansing is happening in front of the world

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1719107647973040602

 

[toguy5252]

I don't think your misread it, but maybe you missed the context of it. Or perhaps I wasn't clear about the context. But I'm happy to clarify.

That paragraph references the sections above it. Someone else has claimed that Israel was justified in purely punitive attacks. I didn't say their attacks were purely punitive, I merely said they weren't justified in carrying out purely punitive attacks. It was a response to someone else's comments, not a condemnation of my own.

I've called them war crimes, and I believe they are. I think it's possible they violate the non-reciprocity portion of the laws of armed conflict (meaning I think it's possible they are purely punitive), but I'm not sure. I am certain enough to satisfy myself, however, that the Israeli attacks would not meet the threshold of a proportional proportionality analysis to be justified and for that reason I call them war crimes. But whether they are purely punitive or whether Israel simply doesn't care about the Palestinian civilians I can't say. The ICC is looking into that and in generally I believe the ICC does an excellent job in investigations and manages to remain unbiased, so I'll happily accept whatever timing they reach if they declare the attacks didn't violate non-reciprocity.

I have some small familiarity with the IDF and Israeli policy and except in the case of demolishing terroist homes, which they believe has some deterrent effect (questionable in my view) they do not act in a punitive or reckless way. All of their strikes are targeted based upon intelligence. That is not to say that they do not make mistakes or that there is not collateral damage. If they did not care about Palestinian lives they would not have give the warnings to leave etc.

 

[Frankfooter]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1719015378808922219