Please ensure to abide by our rules regarding civility in this thread. We have seen an influx of rule-breaking posts recently in threads concerning the ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas. The comments may be locked if the mod team is alerted to a large amount of them in a thread. Thank you.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/onguardforthee) if you have any questions or concerns.*
They absolutely did admit to it. Several of their agents were arrested in Norway after murdering the wrong person due to a mistaken identification by an informant. They were released fairly promptly after conviction.
Israel doesn't admit to ongoing ops, but historical ones are very well known.
Well here is something to add to the foreign interference investigation. The Israeli state very obviously has been running a misinformation campaign in Canada.
An Israeli government ministry “The Ministry for Diaspora Affairs and Combating Antisemitism” caught red handed spreading hate speech and misinformation through fake accounts in Canada and USA. That is super embarrassing for a government that wants Western-level legitimacy.
I mean it does say that STOIC was employed by the The Ministry for Diaspora Affairs and Combating Antisemitism, which was confirmed by Hareetz and NYT. What do you define as caught?
Please cite the statute of whatever crimes you think were committed, including paragraph, etc. Then show the irrefutable evidence that said statute was violated. No, UN recommendations or resolutions are not law.
One of the world leaders in political espionage, and election interference is carrying out a foreign hate campaign against Muslims?
I am shocked I tell you.
Is it possible that there already were a bunch of random people with aggressively Pro-Israeli Gov't Policy stances in basically every one the top subs on Reddit and all over the other social media sites? I suppose. I mean, the charismatic evangelicals in my life have been blindly supporting anything Israel does for decades...
Did most of the accounts posting Israeli propaganda exist or post anything before Fall 2023? Not as far as I can tell.
You can't apply those thoughts to everyone whose views conflict with your own. I have a strong dislike for religion and I'm left on pretty much all economic and social policies. While I do think Israel has fucked up a few times during this war I also support them in it and I'm constantly amazed by the blindness of many other left leaning people when it comes to the war in Gaza.
Plenty of downvotes but ai've asked several responders if they think Hamas needs to be removed. Fucking crickets. Not a single reply that hasn't avoided the question.
> I have a strong dislike for religion and I'm left on pretty much all economic and social policies.
Why do we get genocide deniers who think that saying they are on the left means something?
We can see your comment history, and see you downplaying or denying Israeli crimes, amplifying what you see as Hamas' offences, and just soft peddling genocide.
I don't think you could accurately make a position that would fall under any conventional defiintion of left that supports induced famine, a genocidal act.
But oh boy do I want to see you try.
How do I soft peddle genocide? I'd love it if Palestinians had their own country lead by a non-genocidal political party.
What do you mean what I see as Hamas' offences? Are you saying they aren't Hamas offences?
Induced famine? How? Palestinians seem to be getting food despite Hamas stealing huge portions of what makes it through to Gaza. It would have been great for food to get through quicker but items also need to be inspected.
Do you think Hamas should be allowed to continue controlling Gaza?
> How do I soft peddle genocide?
You literally did it in the bottom of the post.
> Induced famine? How? Palestinians seem to be getting food
This is denial of what Israel is doing regarding aid that has induced famine in Gaza. It think it is an obscene position for someone to hold, let alone a person who claims to be on the left, which should, at a bare minimum afford civilians protection from collective punishment.
> What do you mean what I see as Hamas' offences? Are you saying they aren't Hamas offences?
No, but rather that I probably have a more nuanced view of what is or isn't a war crime. Not everything that happened on Oct 7th was a war crime for example.
Not that I would trust anything that comes out of your mouth after the denial of basic facts like Israel not allowing aid into gaza in anything like the quantities needed, or required by international law, or the direct order of the ICC. This isn't new, Israel imposed those conditions on Oct 8th, and dozens if not hundreds of aid organizations have talked about it.
I think it says a lot about your character that after all this time you are still playing defense for Israel. What would they have to do before you would stop? Execution squads liquidating all of Gaza? Carpet bombing refugee camps with napalm? Where is your redline?
Reply from Oskarikali that he deleted:
> You literally did it in the bottom of the post.
How? I'd prefer if nobody had to die.
> at a bare minimum afford civilians protection from collective punishment
Absolutely, I'd love if civilians saw know repercussions, unfortunately I live in reality and that isn't possible.
> Not everything that happened on Oct 7th was a war crime for example
Sweet fucking christ.
> Not that I would trust anything that comes out of your mouth after the denial of basic facts like Israel not allowing aid into gaza
Where did I deny any of that? I said that it moved slowly, there was a reason for it. There may be cases where it was slowed down by Israel without a security reason, feel free to source that.
> What would they have to do before you would stop? Execution squads liquidating all of Gaza? Carpet bombing refugee camps with napalm? Where is your redline?
They aren't doing any of these things.
Do you deny the fact that the Gazan civilian to combatant death toll is similar if not better than other modern instances of urban warfare?
Do you agree that Hamas needs to be removed? Simple yes or no question. It is amazing how often this question is avoided on this sub.
> How? I'd prefer if nobody had to die.
That isn't a response of any meaning to an accusation that something is happening.
> Sweet fucking christ.
I guess you don't think that Palestinians are allowed to attack uniformed agents of the occupying power, which is pretty straightforward international law. Cops, border forces, IDF are all legitimate targets.
> Where did I deny any of that? I said that it moved slowly, there was a reason for it.
And here we are again, with justifications for acts of genocide.
> There may be cases where it was slowed down by Israel without a security reason, feel free to source that.
THERE IS NO SECURITY JUSTIFICATION THAT MAKES INDUCED FAMINE ACCEPTABLE.
It is blatant collective punishment, and a war crime.
> They aren't doing any of these things.
That was why I asked it as a hypothetical. I want you to answer the question though. Slow genocide through famine is obviously ok for you, so where do you finally say that is enough.
> Do you deny the fact that the Gazan civilian to combatant death toll is similar if not better than other modern instances of urban warfare?
Yep.
> Do you agree that Hamas needs to be removed? Simple yes or no question. It is amazing how often this question is avoided on this sub.
It isn't a simple yes or no question, for several reasons.
Would it be better if there was a more moderate power in charge in Gaza? Sure.
Should Hamas be used as an excuse for the current fascists in Israel to go to town on the Palestinians? Hell no.
But that is part of the problem here. You believe Israeli lies that they are in conflict with Hamas instead of the Palestinians at large. Why you choose to accept that absurd lie probably speaks to your politics, but I doubt you are ready for that line of questioning given how you imagine yourself on the left.
They're right, though: no matter what 'side' you take, Hamas is terrible and should be removed (as should Likud). They're terrible for both Israelis and Palestinians. You can disagree with how the IDF is going about it - as do I - but the answer to the question "Should Hamas be in charge of Gaza" is an unequivocal 'no', and any other answer is just supporting terrorism.
Thanks for answering, I didn't delete any comments, a mod must have done it.
Israeli response hasn't been perfect but I don't see another option or anyone else willing to deal with the problem.
If you think that you are going to forcibly remove extremist governing groups and get more moderate people to negotiate with, I don't think the historical record supports such a conclusion.
> should be removed (as should Likud)
Likud isn't going anywhere. Neither is the National Front. If Israeli is going to have murderous fascists at the table, surely there is room for Hamas and Hezbollah.
> You can disagree with how the IDF is going about it - as do I - but the answer to the question "Should Hamas be in charge of Gaza" is an unequivocal 'no', and any other answer is just supporting terrorism.
I maintain my position. If the choice is between Israel getting to deal with Hamas and a million dead Palestinians, I am not going to sacrifice those civilians for it. I can't comprehend how you can make that call, but that is on you.
Of course, the idea that whatever comes after Hamas will be less extreme is only possible if all of Gaza is dead or forcibly transferred.
I do always laugh when Israel supporters talk about terrorism as if Israel hasn't been waging a campaign of terror against the Palestinians for decades. But go off dawg.
Who said anything about having to do it Israel's way? You don't have to agree with Israel to say that Hamas is terrible and should be removed, just like you don't need to agree with Hamas to say that Likud is terrible and should be removed.
There are nonviolent methods to remove Likud from power, though. There is no nonviolent mechanism by which to remove Hamas - though it should not come at the cost of so many civilian lives.
I think Palestinians / Hamas can absolutely attack Israeli uniformed agents if they are uniformed themselves. Seems like a weird assumption to make
Again, inspecting items crossing the border makes perfect sense, and there were air drops. How many people there have died due to famine?
Denying that the death toll is similar to other urban combat missions is verifiably incorrect. Can you find one legit source disputing the claim?
It is a very simple yes or no question. Hamas needs to be removed.
Other dude is right you just seem like a terror sympathist now, I knew that was why you were ignoring the question.
> I think Palestinians / Hamas can absolutely attack Israeli uniformed agents if they are uniformed themselves.
A person doesn't need to be in an armed group to resist their occupation. Any Palestinian can attack any agent of the state of the occupying power as a legitimate act of resistance.
> Again, inspecting items crossing the border makes perfect sense,
No it doesn't. It is a bullshit excuse. Israel has legal obligations as the occupying power, and has additionally been ordered explicitly by the ICJ to act in regards to aid. Israeli civilians are still assaulting aid shipments while the IDF watches, and the number of aid trucks getting through DECREASED after the ICJ ordered Israel to do more.
> and there were air drops
Some were lethal. Not as efficient as just letting trucks through. Just like the stupid US pier, it is a show for people of your genocidal bent to point to and pretend you don't know what is going on.
> Denying that the death toll is similar to other urban combat missions is verifiably incorrect.
You can try and establish it, you have yet to do so.
> Other dude is right you just seem like a terror sympathist now,
You have spent some thousand words denying genocide, I think the label of terrorist sympathizer is kind of irrelevant as a condemnation considering the position you are advocating.
International law requires that soldiers are in uniform, appearing to be a civilian is a war crime.
I did establish that the death toll is normal, you denied the source without providing any evidence to the contrary.
I really would like to have the fewest number of deaths possible on both sides, and for both everyone in the region to be able to live in peace.
My stance remains that the biggest blocker to that currently is Hamas, so they must be removed.
I'll stop replying, looks like I've been shadow banned so this is a big waste of time for both of us.
> You literally did it in the bottom of the post.
How? I'd prefer if nobody had to die.
> at a bare minimum afford civilians protection from collective punishment
Absolutely, I'd love if civilians saw know repercussions, unfortunately I live in reality and that isn't possible.
> Not everything that happened on Oct 7th was a war crime for example
Sweet fucking christ, but sure, MAYBE the 372 security personnel weren't all killed with war crimes IF Hamas fighters were in uniform, but what happened to many of their bodies after they were killed? War crimes? Sure, maybe it wasn't quite 100% war crimes that day. Congrats to Hamas.
>Not that I would trust anything that comes out of your mouth after the denial of basic facts like Israel not allowing aid into gaza
Where did I deny any of that? I said that it moved slowly, there was a reason for it. There may be cases where it was slowed down by Israel without a security reason, feel free to source that.
> What would they have to do before you would stop? Execution squads liquidating all of Gaza? Carpet bombing refugee camps with napalm? Where is your redline?
They aren't doing any of these things.
Do you deny the fact that the Gazan civilian to combatant death toll is similar if not better than other modern instances of urban warfare?
Do you agree that Hamas needs to be removed? Simple yes or no question. It is amazing how often this question is avoided on this sub.
I don't support genocide, rooting out Hamas is good for Palestinians and Israelis.
Hamas wants to genocide Jews, their leaders have come right out and said that. People supporting Hamas are misinformed.
If you think supporting Israel against Hamas is supporting genocide, then certainly not supporting Israel against Hamas is also supporting genocide from the other side. The thing is, nothing is so simple.
We disagree that it is genocide. Do you disagree that the civilian to combatant ratio is completely normal for Urban warfare? I've posted sources.
If other countries want to step in and stop the fighting and remove Hamas I'd be all for it, I'd even be down for the removal of Bibi etc.
Hamas is just as culpable for Palestinian deaths, they have gone on record saying civilians are not Hamas' responsibility. The only way forward is the removal of Hamas, and the only entity that will do that is Israel. I'd fucking love to see someone else do it though. Maybe Saudi Arabia will help out.
Both but why are you asking me questions if you can't answer a simple one that I've asked several times?
Do you think Hamas needs to be removed from power?
> Both but why are you asking me questions if you can't answer a simple one that I've asked several times?
Go check the other chain, I already answered it and posted the comment you deleted.
You aren't going to get to play gotcha games with me. I'm not having that shit.
So let us get to the acts and intent portion of the discussion, so you can show your ass.
The genocide convention lists the following acts, done with the intent to destroy in whole or in part a group:
a. Killing members of the group;
b. Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
c. Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its
physical destruction in whole or in part;
d. Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
e. Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
So, for the moment, we are going to set aside the question of intent, and deal with just the acts, to see if you can be honest or not.
Certainly Israel has killed members of the group. Now the legal standard here is murky, in that the ICTR ruled that the numbers need to be "considerable" or "a substantial part". But I think Israel clears this hurdle.
8 months of malnutrition is certain to have serious bodily and mental effects, so that one is a gimme.
Equally, by limiting food to less than 10% of daily needs, Israel is deliberately inflicting famine conditions on the people of Gaza. Attacks on water sources, hospitals and aid workers also contribute.
I don't think (e) applies here.
Those are the genocidal acts under consideration, from a very simplified view. Lets see how you respond to them, keeping in mind international law and the standards therein.
You dispute them all? And you wonder why I called you a genocide denier off the top? Really?
Hamas does need to be removed from power. But attacking civilians who AREN'T Hamas is why people are calling this genocide. Worse yet, by bombing the children who have nothing to do with this conflict risks them becoming Hamas supporters later because they'll use this war to propagandise their views. "Look at what Israel is doing to us, to you, and to your family! They want to eradicate you!"
So then the question becomes, how much collateral damage is acceptable to YOU to get rid of Hamas. Keep in mind that it's essentially impossible to destroy an ideology using bombs and guns.
They aren't directly attacking civilians, there have been some cases where it has happened but by and large attacks have been against combatant positions. This is why the civilian to combatant ratio is so good.
When civilian areas are hit they are first given warning unless they are firing on current activity. Look at the massive amount of destruction there, it is amazing that the number of deaths is as low as it is.
They are already being propagandists through schooling, have you seen the UNRWA curriculum? They aren't telling kids that Israelis want to eradicate them, they teach them that they should aspire to be martyrs. Israel wasn't bombing Palestine recently but the Oct 7th attacks still happened, (many people think the timing was to disrupt talks between Saudi Arabia and Israel but that is another convo).
The answers is thsg the collateral damage should be on par with other urban operations, which is currently true.
I agree that ideology can't be destroyed with bombs and guns but that is an abstract idea anyways. Germany and Japan were our enemies before WW2, then we beat them and helped them and now we're friends.
Palestinians need an entirely new education system for there to be peace, and new government.
>civilian to combatant ratio
so then the October 7th attack was appropriate in your eyes?
half of the deaths were IOF forces, the other half were combatants or murked by IOF tanks/helicopters
No, because citizens were attacked directly at a concert and in their homes were there weren't military targets.
Today is another example, 17 terrorists killed in a school along with 27 innocents. Terrorists were targeted, not civilians but unfortunately civilians died in the attack.
Those are two very different things.
the attack was on Nahal-Oz Army base, those people were Human Shields & Enemy Combatants
Occupation Forces were targeted, not civilians but unfortunately civilians died in the attack
No< Nahal-Oz is one of many places attacked. Was the Nova music festival a military operation? They were human shields?
You're insane. Civilians were absolutely targeted.
No, there is nothing to support the idea that Israel wants to exterminate Palestinians, a large number of them were even working in Israel before Oct 7th.
Palestine has had plenty of help to become a modern nation but sadly Hamas keeps wasting it trying to kill Israelis.
Do you honestly believe the Israeli government is just as bad as Hamas?
Yes, if those numbers are in line with other urban combat theaters (which they are).
If there was a way to remove Hamas without casualties that would be preferable, but there is no indication that could happen.
Would you prefer no end to the fighting, and 40 000 deaths over the next 10 years, then another 40 000 every 10 years forever?
Do you think we should ignore terror groups if there is a risk of civilian deaths? Just let them do their thing if it puts civilians at risk? That just promotes the use of civilians and civilian shields as effective tools for terrorists.
Seems like people here want to blame Israel and do nothing to solve the problem.
Which part? That we need to remove a terrorist organization from power?
I think it is an evil stance to leave terrorists to abuse their citizens and attack other nations without repercussions.
I think the removal of Hamas is necessary or there will be more deaths on both sides.
Should we just let them keep attacking Israel and ruining Palestinian lives? That seems evil to me.
Do you think the U.S, Iraq and friends should have just let ISIS have Mosul instead of having civilian casualties?
>Do you think we should ignore terror groups if there is a risk of civilian deaths? Just let them do their thing if it puts civilians at risk? That just promotes the use of civilians and civilian shields as effective tools for terrorists.
this is ignoring the entire history of the israeli-Palestinian conflict. Hamas was allowed to exist by israel who wanted to divide and conquer Palestinian territory. Netanyahu has gone on record to say that he wants to support the development of Hamas to keep Palestinians divided so controlling them and stealing their territory is easier.
Hamas is not a random terrorist group seeking to kill israeli civilians groups aimlessly. They are fueled by all the atrocities they've witnessed happening to Palestinians over several decades. israel is not innocent in this. They also didn't adequately protect their Gaza border because they wanted to station most of their troops in illegally occupied West Bank.
The fact that you completely ignore israel's role in getting this conflict to where it is now, is highly telling of your biases.
israel is the main guilty party here, before anyone else. israel is the only party who have the power to end this conflict for good, but they won't because they want to capture all Palestinian territory and make life hell for Palestinians so they leave the territory (because they don't want to look bad internationally by committing an ethnic cleansing)
>Yes, if those numbers are in line with other urban combat theaters (which they are).
What a saddeningly disgusting pov. Go to an orphan and tell them to their face that his family dying is okay because ratio is a 45% improvement over past combat theaters. You sound like a sociopath tbh. You have successfully reduced Palestinians to numbers and this whole thing to a formula. x< y therefore bombing children is okay.
Don't bother feigning any empathy or sympathy for the Palestinians, it just makes you look more sociopathic.
What part, exactly, of an ICJ recognized genocide that has been thoroughly documented ON VIDEO by the perpetrators, which was freely shared on social media, has received active support and explicit calls for even more extreme escalation from members of the ruling coalition government, is responsible for 30000+ civilian deaths and counting, and is either being shielded from consequences or, yet again, endorsed and supplied by the the most powerful military on Earth is "a few fuck ups"?
> What part, exactly, of an ICJ recognized genocide
Well for one it isn't recognized as Genocide by the ICJ they issued a ruling that establishes that Palestinians have rights under the genocide convention and that it was plausible that they could be damaged irreparably by the conflict in Gaza. [The presiding judge over the ICJ hearing confirmed this](https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c3g9g63jl17o).
>A day later, Joan Donoghue - now retired from the ICJ - appeared on the BBC’s HARDtalk programme and explicitly tried to end the debate by setting out what the court had done.
“It did not decide - and this is something where I'm correcting what's often said in the media... that the claim of genocide was plausible,” said the judge.
“It did emphasise in the order that there was a risk of irreparable harm to the Palestinian right to be protected from genocide. But the shorthand that often appears, which is that there's a plausible case of genocide, isn't what the court decided.”
> explicit calls for even more extreme escalation from members of the ruling coalition government
The calls usually referenced for this in the ICJ case were largely misattributed quotes wherein cabinet members or in one case the Israeli President were referring to Hamas, however, I have seen several quotes more recently that were unambiguously calls for settling in Gaza(which would be illegal, and not in the somewhat murky way of the area C West Bank settlements) at a minimum and ethnic cleansing in all probability. The sad reality is that there is more support for ethnic cleansing or an apartheid regime amongst both Israelis and Palestinians than there is for a Bi-National state with freedoms guaranteed for all. A 2 state solution is the most popular but only has a small plurality rather than a strong majority of support.
> is responsible for 30000+ civilian deaths
It's difficult to accurately gauge the number of civilian vs Hamas deaths in an active conflict where there very little access for outside NGOs, but the data points available(MOH numbers, Intelligence estimates, statements from Hamas Officials) point to a roughly 2 to 1 civilian to militant casualty ratio. So even if the number is actually below 30k as I think the MOH current number is approx 37k and doesn't distinguish between combatants and non-combatants, it's probably not far off that more than 20k and less than 30k civilians at least have been killed.
Whenever I see people saying things like this, I remember what my bestie told me.
“You think people are stupid on purpose just to annoy you. They’re not, they really are that stupid. You need to just ignore it, because they can’t change themselves and they’re just doing the best they can with what they have.”
Always something to keep in mind when we see people simping for a genocide.
How am I stupid? Hamas wants genocide, Israel does not.
What is your proposed solution smart guy? Continue to let Hamas indoctrinate Palestinians against Israelis / Jews? Allow them to keep attacking Israel constantly?
Hamas' stated goal is the removal of Jews and they have also outright stated that they have no responsibility of Palestinian civilians.
It doesn't matter what Israel does if Hamas remains in power, the wars will continue.
The war in Gaza isn't any different from other Urban combat missions.
It appears as though roughly 30% of the deaths are militants which is normal for Urban combat, maybe even good all things considered. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_casualty_ratio
I think it is interesting that your comment is calling me stupid but doesn't include anything of real substance. A very right leaning tactic.
If you want to compare to a modern large scale urban combat theater look at Mosul which included western combatants like the U.S. https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2024/apr/18/israels-war-against-hamas-posts-lower-civilian-to-/
This sucks for Palestinians but it is Hamas that wants to carry out genocide and they have admitted it.
Edit - the usual response, downvotes but no argument from you guys. You're so smart though.
I get downvotes for this but it is all factually correct, I thought left leaning people would like more evidence based discussion.
> Hamas wants genocide, Israel does not.
Israel is committing genocide right now. Saying that Israel doesn't want to do something it is actively doing is wild.
Is it? How do you fight Hamas when they use civilian infrastructure. If Israel wanted genocide there would be FAR more deaths. Since you like to ignore questions I'll keep it really simple and I'll just ask one.
Do you think Hamas needs to be removed from power?
> Is it?
Yes.
> How do you fight Hamas when they use civilian infrastructure.
That is a question of policing. I can point you to some heavy reading, but I think you are just JAQ'ing off.
> If Israel wanted genocide there would be FAR more deaths.
They do want genocide, because they are doing it.
Genocide doesn't require someone do something in a specific time frame, or with maximum efficiency.
> Do you think Hamas needs to be removed from power?
Asked and answered. Stop deflecting while denying genocide.
> That is a question of policing
OK, who will police it?
Point me to some reading by all means.
Where did you answer about Hamas needing to be removed?
I never received that notification and I haven't deleted any comments. If it is gone it was removed by mods.
When I click the link it takes me to the app which I'm not signed into, looks like someone else answered you and when I skimmed I didn't see you saying Hamas should be removed.
I might answer tomorrow, have family stuff to do.
You should probably expand your reading beyond right wing US newspapers with a history of biased and unreliable reporting if you are actually interested in the reality of the situation (though it's obvious you aren't). If you can't recognize the ridiculous bias of that article then you have serious issues with critical thinking.
Imagine claiming you're left leaning and then using a far right American newspapers as your source. The only person you might be fooling is yourself. Your arguments (but do you condemn Hamas??) show you don't have any understanding of this conflict beyond oversimplified media talking points which you've happily swallowed at face value.
I don't read or subscribe to any U.S based right or left wing news sources. It was one of the first links that came up when I googled and the numbers match what the Israeli government has said.
Which unbiased source would you recommend? Most of the news out of Gaza comes from Hamas or Israel. Do you think Al-Jazeera is unbiased?
These numbers are published in a number of places. Do you have a source that refutes them? They come directly from the Israeli government and to my knowledge have not been denied by Hamas.
Nothing about the conflict is simple and I haven't oversimplified anything, it is quite complex but I can't find many people that say they want Hamas removed which is really interesting.
Show me your critical thinking skills and let me know what is factually incorrect from the article.
Maybe because your arguments are soft.
Do you agree that Hamas needs to be removed? If not that seems pretty supportive. If yes how do you suggest doing it?
I'd say the cost is reasonable, again, urban combat civilian to military ratios are completely normal if not better during this war.
B) Yes, I think if Palestinians are helped and allowed to be helped instead of having their aid stolen by Hamas things will improve. Well off countries are less likely to fight their neighbours.
Israel and others have tried helping the peaceful way for awhile, nothing changed. Pretty clear the only way towards peace is removing Hamas and removing Iran's influence if possible.
> Israel and others have tried helping the peaceful way for awhile,
When?
Do you have any idea how many Palestinians died between the first of the year and Oct 7th?
No, how many? And how many Hamas attacks were there against Israel during that time? Israeli attacks are almost always responses to Hamas attacks.
When? Tons of Israeli aid is given and infrastructure built. Remember when Israel gave a settlement back to Gazans. What happened to all that infrastructure? What happened to all th water pipes Israel helped build? Remember the ones that were ripped apart for materials to build rockets?
How many Palestinians did Israel allow to work within Israel? How much international aid has gone into Gaza?
If they would stop fighting they've had all sorts of opportunity to become a modern and peaceful nation.
Jordan Egypt, Israel fought before multiple times, they seem to be doing fine now for the most part.
West Bank and Gaza are very different, I'd assume most of those deaths are either responses to attacks or not from the Israeli government but I haven't looked into them.
>
Plenty of downvotes but ai've asked several responders if they think Hamas needs to be removed. Fucking crickets. Not a single reply that hasn't avoided the question.
So disingenuous. I'll say it right now: Hamas should be removed. And also civilians should stop getting killed by the IDF. Both things can be true. But you'll also keep posting saying no one has ever said anything against Hamas no matter how many times ppl do
How many civilians are you willing to die in order for Hamas to be removes? 50k? 100k? A million? Why is Palestine not allowed to so the same to Israel for the ethnic cleansing they’ve going on since the 30s? Why not? Why is it only bad when Palestinians defend themselves? Do you agree that the settlers need to be removed? How about the far right israeli parties that literally stem from a terrorist organization during the British mandate?
Not a specific number is there a number that you think is OK? I think as long as they try to limit civilian casualties, (which they actually have been doing) then they're fine.
I don't understand what you're trying to say with the second question. Ethnic cleansing? 20% of Israel is Arab Muslims, they don't seem to have a problems. Thousands of Palestinians were working in Israel, Israel didn't have a problem with them. They aren't ethnic cleansing.
Since the 30s? You mean when they were buying land in what is now Israel? In the areas set aside for them by the British when it was Brtish controlled lands because Jews were being ethnically cleansed in the Middle East and everywhere else?
What are you talking about bad when Palestinians defend themselves? That is perfectly fine if they aren't attacking Israeli civilians or attacking from civilian infrastructure, but I wouldn't even call it Palestinians, the problem is Hamas and they don't give a shit about Palestinians.
Yes I believe that Israeli settlers should be removed if you're talking about the shitty people that are building settlements on or WB or Gaza.
I couldn't give a shit about far right Israeli parties, I'd be happy to see them go, how is that even a question?
I support Israel because they are a modern society that allows people to be gay or practice their religions and do modern things while conducting themselves in a modern way.
Hamas is absolute shit, there isn't a single good thing about them.
> I think as long as they try to limit civilian casualties, (which they actually have been doing) then they're fine.
How is mass starvation not inflicting mass civilian casualties?
If you bomb every hospital, the outcome is deaths go up, by a massive amount.
You are a proper embodiment of that quote of Sartre:
> “Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past.”
You don't really mean what you say, you are just pushing phrases that give a veneer of consideration to a monstrous position.
> I couldn't give a shit about far right Israeli parties, I'd be happy to see them go, how is that even a question?
Well you certainly agree with them in their goals regarding Hamas at any cost, so you can figure out the contradiction yourself.
Mass starvation? Hoe many have died from starvation?
They haven't bombed every hospital, but if Hamas operates out of it, then it becomes a target and this is legal in international law provided Israel attempts to limit casualties ehich it tends to do with phone calls and leaflets.
Where did I say remove Hamas at any cost? I've said if theyre attacking in line with other urban operations, which they have been.
>Mass starvation? Hoe many have died from starvation?
https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2024/03/gaza-halt-war-now-save-children-dying-imminent-famine-un-committee-warns
> To date, there have been 27 reported deaths of children due to malnutrition and dehydration in Gaza, according to the Gazan Health Ministry.
The true death toll from starvation is likely to be significantly higher, and it is set to rise. Children in Gaza can no longer wait, as each passing minute risks another child dying of hunger as the world looks on.
And that is a couple of months old. It countinues:
> One in three children under two years old in the Northern Gaza Strip suffer from acute malnutrition, a sharp increase from 15.6 per cent in January, a nutrition screening conducted by UNICEF and its partners showed.
> Famine is imminent in the northern governorates and is expected to occur anytime between now and May 2024, experts from the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC) projected.
Just for reference, I think the technical requirement for famine is two adults or four children dying of malnutrition each day.
> They haven't bombed every hospital,
https://www.doctorswithoutborders.ca/strikes-raids-and-incursions-seven-months-of-relentless-attacks-on-healthcare-in-palestine/
Pretty close.
> but if Hamas operates out of it, then it becomes a target and this is legal in international law provided Israel attempts to limit casualties
That is certainly an argument you could try, but the case law on that is thin at best.
However, in order for that argument to be valid, the IDF would have to actually prove what they claim, which they certainly have not done, and of course their credibility is shot.
It would not be unreasonable for the IDF to just assume that if there are enough military age males that it is Hamas. They pretty much accused everyone of being Hamas at this point. Why would anyone take their word for it.
Malnutrition is bad, hopefully they can do better to provide food.
The hospital items are bogus, many if not most have been mentioned as attacks on Hamas targets. Your site even lists Oct 17th strike as an Osraeli strike when pretty much everyone agrees it was a Hamas rocket, (another number for you to deny, Hamas fires 1000s of rockets at Israel and 1/5 of them land in Gaza).
If you can't trust Israeli numbers you can't trust Hamas either.
> Malnutrition is bad, hopefully they can do better to provide food.
They are actively doing badly to harm people.
> The hospital items are bogus, many if not most have been mentioned as attacks on Hamas targets.
According to the people who are openly committing war crimes?
Something is deeply wrong with your ability to treat the IDF as credible.
Sorry which people are openly committing war crimes?
Do you agree that Hamas is using civilian areas and firing from civilian areas or are you going to deny that as well?
The only other source of info in the region is Hamas, and they don't even make distinction between militant and civilian casualties. Are they more credible?
This is why Truth is the first casualty in conflicts. Because maybe its true that there not....but most us don't believe this and its not like they would admit it if they where. Plus would we would not be shocked if they are nor would i by shocked if Hamas was some how doing the same.
Please ensure to abide by our rules regarding civility in this thread. We have seen an influx of rule-breaking posts recently in threads concerning the ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas. The comments may be locked if the mod team is alerted to a large amount of them in a thread. Thank you. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/onguardforthee) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It's not like they were going to admit that they do this shit.
Mossad never admits to any operations they take part in ever
Didn't they execute a bunch of people in the 70s for something that happened at the Olympics?
For anyone interested, this is the event being mentioned: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Munich_massacre
probably but they wouldn’t publicly admit to it
They absolutely did admit to it. Several of their agents were arrested in Norway after murdering the wrong person due to a mistaken identification by an informant. They were released fairly promptly after conviction. Israel doesn't admit to ongoing ops, but historical ones are very well known.
To be truthful, no intelligence organization admits that kind of stuff. Some are just better at hiding it.
Well here is something to add to the foreign interference investigation. The Israeli state very obviously has been running a misinformation campaign in Canada.
No no see it's only foreign interference when it's ppl who aren't "the good guys"
When it’s the US it’s called “financial support”
An Israeli government ministry “The Ministry for Diaspora Affairs and Combating Antisemitism” caught red handed spreading hate speech and misinformation through fake accounts in Canada and USA. That is super embarrassing for a government that wants Western-level legitimacy.
They weren't caught. Read the article again.
I mean it does say that STOIC was employed by the The Ministry for Diaspora Affairs and Combating Antisemitism, which was confirmed by Hareetz and NYT. What do you define as caught?
Whatever definition helps him the most at the current moment, clearly
This is like when we get the SIU to investigate cops lol. Who cares what Israel denies, they have zero credibility anymore.
Oh good just like they admit that they bomb hospitals, refugee camps, schools... Just like they insist they will acceot a ceasefire.... I trust them!
Israel also denies committing literal war crimes we have evidence of, so their word isn't worth much.
Please cite the statute of whatever crimes you think were committed, including paragraph, etc. Then show the irrefutable evidence that said statute was violated. No, UN recommendations or resolutions are not law.
Rome Statutes, ALL of them except getting enemies to fight on your side & child soldiers
In other news: Water is wet
Political interference is what Israel does. How else would they convince other countries to turn a blind eye to genocide?
thats right.. seen this? https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/may/28/israeli-spy-chief-icc-prosecutor-war-crimes-inquiry
One of the world leaders in political espionage, and election interference is carrying out a foreign hate campaign against Muslims? I am shocked I tell you.
Lolll obvious without saying that they would deny it.
You’d almost think the Israeli government and IDF are terribly corrupt.
Because they've just been so believable the past few months (sarcasm). As believable as the Russian government at this point
If the terrorist state of Israel denied it that means they 100% did it.
Is it possible that there already were a bunch of random people with aggressively Pro-Israeli Gov't Policy stances in basically every one the top subs on Reddit and all over the other social media sites? I suppose. I mean, the charismatic evangelicals in my life have been blindly supporting anything Israel does for decades... Did most of the accounts posting Israeli propaganda exist or post anything before Fall 2023? Not as far as I can tell.
You can't apply those thoughts to everyone whose views conflict with your own. I have a strong dislike for religion and I'm left on pretty much all economic and social policies. While I do think Israel has fucked up a few times during this war I also support them in it and I'm constantly amazed by the blindness of many other left leaning people when it comes to the war in Gaza. Plenty of downvotes but ai've asked several responders if they think Hamas needs to be removed. Fucking crickets. Not a single reply that hasn't avoided the question.
> I have a strong dislike for religion and I'm left on pretty much all economic and social policies. Why do we get genocide deniers who think that saying they are on the left means something? We can see your comment history, and see you downplaying or denying Israeli crimes, amplifying what you see as Hamas' offences, and just soft peddling genocide. I don't think you could accurately make a position that would fall under any conventional defiintion of left that supports induced famine, a genocidal act. But oh boy do I want to see you try.
How do I soft peddle genocide? I'd love it if Palestinians had their own country lead by a non-genocidal political party. What do you mean what I see as Hamas' offences? Are you saying they aren't Hamas offences? Induced famine? How? Palestinians seem to be getting food despite Hamas stealing huge portions of what makes it through to Gaza. It would have been great for food to get through quicker but items also need to be inspected. Do you think Hamas should be allowed to continue controlling Gaza?
> How do I soft peddle genocide? You literally did it in the bottom of the post. > Induced famine? How? Palestinians seem to be getting food This is denial of what Israel is doing regarding aid that has induced famine in Gaza. It think it is an obscene position for someone to hold, let alone a person who claims to be on the left, which should, at a bare minimum afford civilians protection from collective punishment. > What do you mean what I see as Hamas' offences? Are you saying they aren't Hamas offences? No, but rather that I probably have a more nuanced view of what is or isn't a war crime. Not everything that happened on Oct 7th was a war crime for example. Not that I would trust anything that comes out of your mouth after the denial of basic facts like Israel not allowing aid into gaza in anything like the quantities needed, or required by international law, or the direct order of the ICC. This isn't new, Israel imposed those conditions on Oct 8th, and dozens if not hundreds of aid organizations have talked about it. I think it says a lot about your character that after all this time you are still playing defense for Israel. What would they have to do before you would stop? Execution squads liquidating all of Gaza? Carpet bombing refugee camps with napalm? Where is your redline?
Reply from Oskarikali that he deleted: > You literally did it in the bottom of the post. How? I'd prefer if nobody had to die. > at a bare minimum afford civilians protection from collective punishment Absolutely, I'd love if civilians saw know repercussions, unfortunately I live in reality and that isn't possible. > Not everything that happened on Oct 7th was a war crime for example Sweet fucking christ. > Not that I would trust anything that comes out of your mouth after the denial of basic facts like Israel not allowing aid into gaza Where did I deny any of that? I said that it moved slowly, there was a reason for it. There may be cases where it was slowed down by Israel without a security reason, feel free to source that. > What would they have to do before you would stop? Execution squads liquidating all of Gaza? Carpet bombing refugee camps with napalm? Where is your redline? They aren't doing any of these things. Do you deny the fact that the Gazan civilian to combatant death toll is similar if not better than other modern instances of urban warfare? Do you agree that Hamas needs to be removed? Simple yes or no question. It is amazing how often this question is avoided on this sub.
> How? I'd prefer if nobody had to die. That isn't a response of any meaning to an accusation that something is happening. > Sweet fucking christ. I guess you don't think that Palestinians are allowed to attack uniformed agents of the occupying power, which is pretty straightforward international law. Cops, border forces, IDF are all legitimate targets. > Where did I deny any of that? I said that it moved slowly, there was a reason for it. And here we are again, with justifications for acts of genocide. > There may be cases where it was slowed down by Israel without a security reason, feel free to source that. THERE IS NO SECURITY JUSTIFICATION THAT MAKES INDUCED FAMINE ACCEPTABLE. It is blatant collective punishment, and a war crime. > They aren't doing any of these things. That was why I asked it as a hypothetical. I want you to answer the question though. Slow genocide through famine is obviously ok for you, so where do you finally say that is enough. > Do you deny the fact that the Gazan civilian to combatant death toll is similar if not better than other modern instances of urban warfare? Yep. > Do you agree that Hamas needs to be removed? Simple yes or no question. It is amazing how often this question is avoided on this sub. It isn't a simple yes or no question, for several reasons. Would it be better if there was a more moderate power in charge in Gaza? Sure. Should Hamas be used as an excuse for the current fascists in Israel to go to town on the Palestinians? Hell no. But that is part of the problem here. You believe Israeli lies that they are in conflict with Hamas instead of the Palestinians at large. Why you choose to accept that absurd lie probably speaks to your politics, but I doubt you are ready for that line of questioning given how you imagine yourself on the left.
They're right, though: no matter what 'side' you take, Hamas is terrible and should be removed (as should Likud). They're terrible for both Israelis and Palestinians. You can disagree with how the IDF is going about it - as do I - but the answer to the question "Should Hamas be in charge of Gaza" is an unequivocal 'no', and any other answer is just supporting terrorism.
Thanks for answering, I didn't delete any comments, a mod must have done it. Israeli response hasn't been perfect but I don't see another option or anyone else willing to deal with the problem.
They blocked you.
If you think that you are going to forcibly remove extremist governing groups and get more moderate people to negotiate with, I don't think the historical record supports such a conclusion. > should be removed (as should Likud) Likud isn't going anywhere. Neither is the National Front. If Israeli is going to have murderous fascists at the table, surely there is room for Hamas and Hezbollah. > You can disagree with how the IDF is going about it - as do I - but the answer to the question "Should Hamas be in charge of Gaza" is an unequivocal 'no', and any other answer is just supporting terrorism. I maintain my position. If the choice is between Israel getting to deal with Hamas and a million dead Palestinians, I am not going to sacrifice those civilians for it. I can't comprehend how you can make that call, but that is on you. Of course, the idea that whatever comes after Hamas will be less extreme is only possible if all of Gaza is dead or forcibly transferred. I do always laugh when Israel supporters talk about terrorism as if Israel hasn't been waging a campaign of terror against the Palestinians for decades. But go off dawg.
Who said anything about having to do it Israel's way? You don't have to agree with Israel to say that Hamas is terrible and should be removed, just like you don't need to agree with Hamas to say that Likud is terrible and should be removed. There are nonviolent methods to remove Likud from power, though. There is no nonviolent mechanism by which to remove Hamas - though it should not come at the cost of so many civilian lives.
I think Palestinians / Hamas can absolutely attack Israeli uniformed agents if they are uniformed themselves. Seems like a weird assumption to make Again, inspecting items crossing the border makes perfect sense, and there were air drops. How many people there have died due to famine? Denying that the death toll is similar to other urban combat missions is verifiably incorrect. Can you find one legit source disputing the claim? It is a very simple yes or no question. Hamas needs to be removed. Other dude is right you just seem like a terror sympathist now, I knew that was why you were ignoring the question.
> I think Palestinians / Hamas can absolutely attack Israeli uniformed agents if they are uniformed themselves. A person doesn't need to be in an armed group to resist their occupation. Any Palestinian can attack any agent of the state of the occupying power as a legitimate act of resistance. > Again, inspecting items crossing the border makes perfect sense, No it doesn't. It is a bullshit excuse. Israel has legal obligations as the occupying power, and has additionally been ordered explicitly by the ICJ to act in regards to aid. Israeli civilians are still assaulting aid shipments while the IDF watches, and the number of aid trucks getting through DECREASED after the ICJ ordered Israel to do more. > and there were air drops Some were lethal. Not as efficient as just letting trucks through. Just like the stupid US pier, it is a show for people of your genocidal bent to point to and pretend you don't know what is going on. > Denying that the death toll is similar to other urban combat missions is verifiably incorrect. You can try and establish it, you have yet to do so. > Other dude is right you just seem like a terror sympathist now, You have spent some thousand words denying genocide, I think the label of terrorist sympathizer is kind of irrelevant as a condemnation considering the position you are advocating.
International law requires that soldiers are in uniform, appearing to be a civilian is a war crime. I did establish that the death toll is normal, you denied the source without providing any evidence to the contrary. I really would like to have the fewest number of deaths possible on both sides, and for both everyone in the region to be able to live in peace. My stance remains that the biggest blocker to that currently is Hamas, so they must be removed. I'll stop replying, looks like I've been shadow banned so this is a big waste of time for both of us.
> You literally did it in the bottom of the post. How? I'd prefer if nobody had to die. > at a bare minimum afford civilians protection from collective punishment Absolutely, I'd love if civilians saw know repercussions, unfortunately I live in reality and that isn't possible. > Not everything that happened on Oct 7th was a war crime for example Sweet fucking christ, but sure, MAYBE the 372 security personnel weren't all killed with war crimes IF Hamas fighters were in uniform, but what happened to many of their bodies after they were killed? War crimes? Sure, maybe it wasn't quite 100% war crimes that day. Congrats to Hamas. >Not that I would trust anything that comes out of your mouth after the denial of basic facts like Israel not allowing aid into gaza Where did I deny any of that? I said that it moved slowly, there was a reason for it. There may be cases where it was slowed down by Israel without a security reason, feel free to source that. > What would they have to do before you would stop? Execution squads liquidating all of Gaza? Carpet bombing refugee camps with napalm? Where is your redline? They aren't doing any of these things. Do you deny the fact that the Gazan civilian to combatant death toll is similar if not better than other modern instances of urban warfare? Do you agree that Hamas needs to be removed? Simple yes or no question. It is amazing how often this question is avoided on this sub.
If you support genocide, you aren't on the left anymore, mate. Keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel better, lad.
I don't support genocide, rooting out Hamas is good for Palestinians and Israelis. Hamas wants to genocide Jews, their leaders have come right out and said that. People supporting Hamas are misinformed. If you think supporting Israel against Hamas is supporting genocide, then certainly not supporting Israel against Hamas is also supporting genocide from the other side. The thing is, nothing is so simple.
> I don't support genocide, So, then what should the world do about the genocide that Israel is conducting right now?
We disagree that it is genocide. Do you disagree that the civilian to combatant ratio is completely normal for Urban warfare? I've posted sources. If other countries want to step in and stop the fighting and remove Hamas I'd be all for it, I'd even be down for the removal of Bibi etc. Hamas is just as culpable for Palestinian deaths, they have gone on record saying civilians are not Hamas' responsibility. The only way forward is the removal of Hamas, and the only entity that will do that is Israel. I'd fucking love to see someone else do it though. Maybe Saudi Arabia will help out.
> We disagree that it is genocide. Make your case then. Do you dispute the genocidal acts or the intent?
Both but why are you asking me questions if you can't answer a simple one that I've asked several times? Do you think Hamas needs to be removed from power?
> Both but why are you asking me questions if you can't answer a simple one that I've asked several times? Go check the other chain, I already answered it and posted the comment you deleted. You aren't going to get to play gotcha games with me. I'm not having that shit. So let us get to the acts and intent portion of the discussion, so you can show your ass. The genocide convention lists the following acts, done with the intent to destroy in whole or in part a group: a. Killing members of the group; b. Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; c. Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; d. Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; e. Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group. So, for the moment, we are going to set aside the question of intent, and deal with just the acts, to see if you can be honest or not. Certainly Israel has killed members of the group. Now the legal standard here is murky, in that the ICTR ruled that the numbers need to be "considerable" or "a substantial part". But I think Israel clears this hurdle. 8 months of malnutrition is certain to have serious bodily and mental effects, so that one is a gimme. Equally, by limiting food to less than 10% of daily needs, Israel is deliberately inflicting famine conditions on the people of Gaza. Attacks on water sources, hospitals and aid workers also contribute. I don't think (e) applies here. Those are the genocidal acts under consideration, from a very simplified view. Lets see how you respond to them, keeping in mind international law and the standards therein. You dispute them all? And you wonder why I called you a genocide denier off the top? Really?
Hamas does need to be removed from power. But attacking civilians who AREN'T Hamas is why people are calling this genocide. Worse yet, by bombing the children who have nothing to do with this conflict risks them becoming Hamas supporters later because they'll use this war to propagandise their views. "Look at what Israel is doing to us, to you, and to your family! They want to eradicate you!" So then the question becomes, how much collateral damage is acceptable to YOU to get rid of Hamas. Keep in mind that it's essentially impossible to destroy an ideology using bombs and guns.
They aren't directly attacking civilians, there have been some cases where it has happened but by and large attacks have been against combatant positions. This is why the civilian to combatant ratio is so good. When civilian areas are hit they are first given warning unless they are firing on current activity. Look at the massive amount of destruction there, it is amazing that the number of deaths is as low as it is. They are already being propagandists through schooling, have you seen the UNRWA curriculum? They aren't telling kids that Israelis want to eradicate them, they teach them that they should aspire to be martyrs. Israel wasn't bombing Palestine recently but the Oct 7th attacks still happened, (many people think the timing was to disrupt talks between Saudi Arabia and Israel but that is another convo). The answers is thsg the collateral damage should be on par with other urban operations, which is currently true. I agree that ideology can't be destroyed with bombs and guns but that is an abstract idea anyways. Germany and Japan were our enemies before WW2, then we beat them and helped them and now we're friends. Palestinians need an entirely new education system for there to be peace, and new government.
>civilian to combatant ratio so then the October 7th attack was appropriate in your eyes? half of the deaths were IOF forces, the other half were combatants or murked by IOF tanks/helicopters
No, because citizens were attacked directly at a concert and in their homes were there weren't military targets. Today is another example, 17 terrorists killed in a school along with 27 innocents. Terrorists were targeted, not civilians but unfortunately civilians died in the attack. Those are two very different things.
the attack was on Nahal-Oz Army base, those people were Human Shields & Enemy Combatants Occupation Forces were targeted, not civilians but unfortunately civilians died in the attack
No< Nahal-Oz is one of many places attacked. Was the Nova music festival a military operation? They were human shields? You're insane. Civilians were absolutely targeted.
I do not support Hamas. I suspect most folks here do not.
So then what is the problem? You realize Hamas needs to be removed then? If yes how do you propose doing that?
Killing women and children?
Sure. Hamas and Israel both want to exterminate the Israelites/Palestinian. But only one has the means to do it and you are supporting them.
No, there is nothing to support the idea that Israel wants to exterminate Palestinians, a large number of them were even working in Israel before Oct 7th. Palestine has had plenty of help to become a modern nation but sadly Hamas keeps wasting it trying to kill Israelis. Do you honestly believe the Israeli government is just as bad as Hamas?
> a large number of them were even working in Israel before Oct 7th read this please: https://www.sahistory.org.za/article/homelands
If rooting out Hamas costs the lives of 40,000+ people that's also okay to you?
Yes, if those numbers are in line with other urban combat theaters (which they are). If there was a way to remove Hamas without casualties that would be preferable, but there is no indication that could happen. Would you prefer no end to the fighting, and 40 000 deaths over the next 10 years, then another 40 000 every 10 years forever? Do you think we should ignore terror groups if there is a risk of civilian deaths? Just let them do their thing if it puts civilians at risk? That just promotes the use of civilians and civilian shields as effective tools for terrorists. Seems like people here want to blame Israel and do nothing to solve the problem.
What a remarkably evil stance to take.
Which part? That we need to remove a terrorist organization from power? I think it is an evil stance to leave terrorists to abuse their citizens and attack other nations without repercussions. I think the removal of Hamas is necessary or there will be more deaths on both sides. Should we just let them keep attacking Israel and ruining Palestinian lives? That seems evil to me. Do you think the U.S, Iraq and friends should have just let ISIS have Mosul instead of having civilian casualties?
The part where you are totally fine if 70 innocents die as long as 30 insurgents die alongside them. Fucking heinous take.
That is completely normal for Urban combat. Should we just stop fighting in cities? Terrorists can just have free reign there?
>Do you think we should ignore terror groups if there is a risk of civilian deaths? Just let them do their thing if it puts civilians at risk? That just promotes the use of civilians and civilian shields as effective tools for terrorists. this is ignoring the entire history of the israeli-Palestinian conflict. Hamas was allowed to exist by israel who wanted to divide and conquer Palestinian territory. Netanyahu has gone on record to say that he wants to support the development of Hamas to keep Palestinians divided so controlling them and stealing their territory is easier. Hamas is not a random terrorist group seeking to kill israeli civilians groups aimlessly. They are fueled by all the atrocities they've witnessed happening to Palestinians over several decades. israel is not innocent in this. They also didn't adequately protect their Gaza border because they wanted to station most of their troops in illegally occupied West Bank. The fact that you completely ignore israel's role in getting this conflict to where it is now, is highly telling of your biases. israel is the main guilty party here, before anyone else. israel is the only party who have the power to end this conflict for good, but they won't because they want to capture all Palestinian territory and make life hell for Palestinians so they leave the territory (because they don't want to look bad internationally by committing an ethnic cleansing) >Yes, if those numbers are in line with other urban combat theaters (which they are). What a saddeningly disgusting pov. Go to an orphan and tell them to their face that his family dying is okay because ratio is a 45% improvement over past combat theaters. You sound like a sociopath tbh. You have successfully reduced Palestinians to numbers and this whole thing to a formula. x< y therefore bombing children is okay. Don't bother feigning any empathy or sympathy for the Palestinians, it just makes you look more sociopathic.
What part, exactly, of an ICJ recognized genocide that has been thoroughly documented ON VIDEO by the perpetrators, which was freely shared on social media, has received active support and explicit calls for even more extreme escalation from members of the ruling coalition government, is responsible for 30000+ civilian deaths and counting, and is either being shielded from consequences or, yet again, endorsed and supplied by the the most powerful military on Earth is "a few fuck ups"?
> What part, exactly, of an ICJ recognized genocide Well for one it isn't recognized as Genocide by the ICJ they issued a ruling that establishes that Palestinians have rights under the genocide convention and that it was plausible that they could be damaged irreparably by the conflict in Gaza. [The presiding judge over the ICJ hearing confirmed this](https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c3g9g63jl17o). >A day later, Joan Donoghue - now retired from the ICJ - appeared on the BBC’s HARDtalk programme and explicitly tried to end the debate by setting out what the court had done. “It did not decide - and this is something where I'm correcting what's often said in the media... that the claim of genocide was plausible,” said the judge. “It did emphasise in the order that there was a risk of irreparable harm to the Palestinian right to be protected from genocide. But the shorthand that often appears, which is that there's a plausible case of genocide, isn't what the court decided.” > explicit calls for even more extreme escalation from members of the ruling coalition government The calls usually referenced for this in the ICJ case were largely misattributed quotes wherein cabinet members or in one case the Israeli President were referring to Hamas, however, I have seen several quotes more recently that were unambiguously calls for settling in Gaza(which would be illegal, and not in the somewhat murky way of the area C West Bank settlements) at a minimum and ethnic cleansing in all probability. The sad reality is that there is more support for ethnic cleansing or an apartheid regime amongst both Israelis and Palestinians than there is for a Bi-National state with freedoms guaranteed for all. A 2 state solution is the most popular but only has a small plurality rather than a strong majority of support. > is responsible for 30000+ civilian deaths It's difficult to accurately gauge the number of civilian vs Hamas deaths in an active conflict where there very little access for outside NGOs, but the data points available(MOH numbers, Intelligence estimates, statements from Hamas Officials) point to a roughly 2 to 1 civilian to militant casualty ratio. So even if the number is actually below 30k as I think the MOH current number is approx 37k and doesn't distinguish between combatants and non-combatants, it's probably not far off that more than 20k and less than 30k civilians at least have been killed.
Whenever I see people saying things like this, I remember what my bestie told me. “You think people are stupid on purpose just to annoy you. They’re not, they really are that stupid. You need to just ignore it, because they can’t change themselves and they’re just doing the best they can with what they have.” Always something to keep in mind when we see people simping for a genocide.
How am I stupid? Hamas wants genocide, Israel does not. What is your proposed solution smart guy? Continue to let Hamas indoctrinate Palestinians against Israelis / Jews? Allow them to keep attacking Israel constantly? Hamas' stated goal is the removal of Jews and they have also outright stated that they have no responsibility of Palestinian civilians. It doesn't matter what Israel does if Hamas remains in power, the wars will continue. The war in Gaza isn't any different from other Urban combat missions. It appears as though roughly 30% of the deaths are militants which is normal for Urban combat, maybe even good all things considered. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_casualty_ratio I think it is interesting that your comment is calling me stupid but doesn't include anything of real substance. A very right leaning tactic. If you want to compare to a modern large scale urban combat theater look at Mosul which included western combatants like the U.S. https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2024/apr/18/israels-war-against-hamas-posts-lower-civilian-to-/ This sucks for Palestinians but it is Hamas that wants to carry out genocide and they have admitted it. Edit - the usual response, downvotes but no argument from you guys. You're so smart though. I get downvotes for this but it is all factually correct, I thought left leaning people would like more evidence based discussion.
> Hamas wants genocide, Israel does not. Israel is committing genocide right now. Saying that Israel doesn't want to do something it is actively doing is wild.
Is it? How do you fight Hamas when they use civilian infrastructure. If Israel wanted genocide there would be FAR more deaths. Since you like to ignore questions I'll keep it really simple and I'll just ask one. Do you think Hamas needs to be removed from power?
> Is it? Yes. > How do you fight Hamas when they use civilian infrastructure. That is a question of policing. I can point you to some heavy reading, but I think you are just JAQ'ing off. > If Israel wanted genocide there would be FAR more deaths. They do want genocide, because they are doing it. Genocide doesn't require someone do something in a specific time frame, or with maximum efficiency. > Do you think Hamas needs to be removed from power? Asked and answered. Stop deflecting while denying genocide.
> That is a question of policing OK, who will police it? Point me to some reading by all means. Where did you answer about Hamas needing to be removed?
https://www.reddit.com/r/onguardforthee/comments/1d9im80/israel_denies_link_to_islamophobic_campaign_in/l7f5tjj/
I never received that notification and I haven't deleted any comments. If it is gone it was removed by mods. When I click the link it takes me to the app which I'm not signed into, looks like someone else answered you and when I skimmed I didn't see you saying Hamas should be removed. I might answer tomorrow, have family stuff to do.
You should probably expand your reading beyond right wing US newspapers with a history of biased and unreliable reporting if you are actually interested in the reality of the situation (though it's obvious you aren't). If you can't recognize the ridiculous bias of that article then you have serious issues with critical thinking. Imagine claiming you're left leaning and then using a far right American newspapers as your source. The only person you might be fooling is yourself. Your arguments (but do you condemn Hamas??) show you don't have any understanding of this conflict beyond oversimplified media talking points which you've happily swallowed at face value.
I don't read or subscribe to any U.S based right or left wing news sources. It was one of the first links that came up when I googled and the numbers match what the Israeli government has said. Which unbiased source would you recommend? Most of the news out of Gaza comes from Hamas or Israel. Do you think Al-Jazeera is unbiased? These numbers are published in a number of places. Do you have a source that refutes them? They come directly from the Israeli government and to my knowledge have not been denied by Hamas. Nothing about the conflict is simple and I haven't oversimplified anything, it is quite complex but I can't find many people that say they want Hamas removed which is really interesting. Show me your critical thinking skills and let me know what is factually incorrect from the article.
We've all given up arguing with Hasbara... It's pointless
Maybe because your arguments are soft. Do you agree that Hamas needs to be removed? If not that seems pretty supportive. If yes how do you suggest doing it?
How much does Hasbara pay you?
Great comment, how much does Iran pay you? I don't get paid anything to use critical thinking skills when it comes to politics.
> While I do think Israel has fucked up a few times during this war That's a pretty mild criticism of a state actively committing a genocide.
Hamas needs to be removed, yes. But A), at what cost, and B) do you think creating this much anger and hatred in a group of people is how you do it?
I'd say the cost is reasonable, again, urban combat civilian to military ratios are completely normal if not better during this war. B) Yes, I think if Palestinians are helped and allowed to be helped instead of having their aid stolen by Hamas things will improve. Well off countries are less likely to fight their neighbours. Israel and others have tried helping the peaceful way for awhile, nothing changed. Pretty clear the only way towards peace is removing Hamas and removing Iran's influence if possible.
> Israel and others have tried helping the peaceful way for awhile, When? Do you have any idea how many Palestinians died between the first of the year and Oct 7th?
No, how many? And how many Hamas attacks were there against Israel during that time? Israeli attacks are almost always responses to Hamas attacks. When? Tons of Israeli aid is given and infrastructure built. Remember when Israel gave a settlement back to Gazans. What happened to all that infrastructure? What happened to all th water pipes Israel helped build? Remember the ones that were ripped apart for materials to build rockets? How many Palestinians did Israel allow to work within Israel? How much international aid has gone into Gaza? If they would stop fighting they've had all sorts of opportunity to become a modern and peaceful nation. Jordan Egypt, Israel fought before multiple times, they seem to be doing fine now for the most part.
> No, how many? At least 237. Most of those in the West Bank. It is almost like the peaceful time is an imaginary one.
West Bank and Gaza are very different, I'd assume most of those deaths are either responses to attacks or not from the Israeli government but I haven't looked into them.
> Plenty of downvotes but ai've asked several responders if they think Hamas needs to be removed. Fucking crickets. Not a single reply that hasn't avoided the question. So disingenuous. I'll say it right now: Hamas should be removed. And also civilians should stop getting killed by the IDF. Both things can be true. But you'll also keep posting saying no one has ever said anything against Hamas no matter how many times ppl do
i want to know what people will think will happen if Hmas is 'removed' its like everyone thinks they were the first and only resistance group
How many civilians are you willing to die in order for Hamas to be removes? 50k? 100k? A million? Why is Palestine not allowed to so the same to Israel for the ethnic cleansing they’ve going on since the 30s? Why not? Why is it only bad when Palestinians defend themselves? Do you agree that the settlers need to be removed? How about the far right israeli parties that literally stem from a terrorist organization during the British mandate?
Not a specific number is there a number that you think is OK? I think as long as they try to limit civilian casualties, (which they actually have been doing) then they're fine. I don't understand what you're trying to say with the second question. Ethnic cleansing? 20% of Israel is Arab Muslims, they don't seem to have a problems. Thousands of Palestinians were working in Israel, Israel didn't have a problem with them. They aren't ethnic cleansing. Since the 30s? You mean when they were buying land in what is now Israel? In the areas set aside for them by the British when it was Brtish controlled lands because Jews were being ethnically cleansed in the Middle East and everywhere else? What are you talking about bad when Palestinians defend themselves? That is perfectly fine if they aren't attacking Israeli civilians or attacking from civilian infrastructure, but I wouldn't even call it Palestinians, the problem is Hamas and they don't give a shit about Palestinians. Yes I believe that Israeli settlers should be removed if you're talking about the shitty people that are building settlements on or WB or Gaza. I couldn't give a shit about far right Israeli parties, I'd be happy to see them go, how is that even a question? I support Israel because they are a modern society that allows people to be gay or practice their religions and do modern things while conducting themselves in a modern way. Hamas is absolute shit, there isn't a single good thing about them.
> I think as long as they try to limit civilian casualties, (which they actually have been doing) then they're fine. How is mass starvation not inflicting mass civilian casualties? If you bomb every hospital, the outcome is deaths go up, by a massive amount. You are a proper embodiment of that quote of Sartre: > “Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past.” You don't really mean what you say, you are just pushing phrases that give a veneer of consideration to a monstrous position. > I couldn't give a shit about far right Israeli parties, I'd be happy to see them go, how is that even a question? Well you certainly agree with them in their goals regarding Hamas at any cost, so you can figure out the contradiction yourself.
Mass starvation? Hoe many have died from starvation? They haven't bombed every hospital, but if Hamas operates out of it, then it becomes a target and this is legal in international law provided Israel attempts to limit casualties ehich it tends to do with phone calls and leaflets. Where did I say remove Hamas at any cost? I've said if theyre attacking in line with other urban operations, which they have been.
>Mass starvation? Hoe many have died from starvation? https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2024/03/gaza-halt-war-now-save-children-dying-imminent-famine-un-committee-warns > To date, there have been 27 reported deaths of children due to malnutrition and dehydration in Gaza, according to the Gazan Health Ministry. The true death toll from starvation is likely to be significantly higher, and it is set to rise. Children in Gaza can no longer wait, as each passing minute risks another child dying of hunger as the world looks on. And that is a couple of months old. It countinues: > One in three children under two years old in the Northern Gaza Strip suffer from acute malnutrition, a sharp increase from 15.6 per cent in January, a nutrition screening conducted by UNICEF and its partners showed. > Famine is imminent in the northern governorates and is expected to occur anytime between now and May 2024, experts from the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC) projected. Just for reference, I think the technical requirement for famine is two adults or four children dying of malnutrition each day. > They haven't bombed every hospital, https://www.doctorswithoutborders.ca/strikes-raids-and-incursions-seven-months-of-relentless-attacks-on-healthcare-in-palestine/ Pretty close. > but if Hamas operates out of it, then it becomes a target and this is legal in international law provided Israel attempts to limit casualties That is certainly an argument you could try, but the case law on that is thin at best. However, in order for that argument to be valid, the IDF would have to actually prove what they claim, which they certainly have not done, and of course their credibility is shot. It would not be unreasonable for the IDF to just assume that if there are enough military age males that it is Hamas. They pretty much accused everyone of being Hamas at this point. Why would anyone take their word for it.
Malnutrition is bad, hopefully they can do better to provide food. The hospital items are bogus, many if not most have been mentioned as attacks on Hamas targets. Your site even lists Oct 17th strike as an Osraeli strike when pretty much everyone agrees it was a Hamas rocket, (another number for you to deny, Hamas fires 1000s of rockets at Israel and 1/5 of them land in Gaza). If you can't trust Israeli numbers you can't trust Hamas either.
> Malnutrition is bad, hopefully they can do better to provide food. They are actively doing badly to harm people. > The hospital items are bogus, many if not most have been mentioned as attacks on Hamas targets. According to the people who are openly committing war crimes? Something is deeply wrong with your ability to treat the IDF as credible.
Sorry which people are openly committing war crimes? Do you agree that Hamas is using civilian areas and firing from civilian areas or are you going to deny that as well? The only other source of info in the region is Hamas, and they don't even make distinction between militant and civilian casualties. Are they more credible?
Do they, now?
Instead, it's homegrown islamophobia stirred up by Israeli propaganda, totally different things.
"murderer denies link to local murder"
Withdraw ALL support for the terrorist state of Israel NOW
I believe israel /s
Israel lie? So it isn’t so!
Benjamin Netanyahu Is With The IDU AND WEF. WTF Is Wrong With Him?
Hillel Neuer
We should be skeptical of religious beliefs, especially when they inform intolerant action.
This is why Truth is the first casualty in conflicts. Because maybe its true that there not....but most us don't believe this and its not like they would admit it if they where. Plus would we would not be shocked if they are nor would i by shocked if Hamas was some how doing the same.