Reply With QuoteI said "okay, then" to indicate I was ready to move on, but evidently you are not ready for that. Whenever you want to continue, though, we can discuss the use of Palestinian children as human shields by the IDF.
Hang on. You said "I'm perfectly calm, but making such a statement and furthermore demanding an apology after saying something that offensive goes well beyond a civil discussion."Originally Posted by Starker
So now with "Okay then", does that mean you admit you misunderstood me and misrepresented what I said? Yet you continue with this interrogative tone instead of apologizing. Like I said, I've argued with you in good faith and with respect. I expect the same from you. If you don't trust me, then there's no other point in continuing than for other TTLG members to see the evidence we present.
I said "okay, then" to indicate I was ready to move on, but evidently you are not ready for that. Whenever you want to continue, though, we can discuss the use of Palestinian children as human shields by the IDF.
When I make a mistake, when I misunderstand someone, I admit that and apologize. I strive to understand what the other person means rather than looking for gotchas I can exploit. I was hoping for a conversation of mutual respect with you, Starker. I've meant no ill will towards you, regardless of having an opposing view to yours. I genuinely mean it when I say that I care about discussing all sides of a topic in good faith. But although I'm a bit disappointed, we can certainly move on.
I don't know the exact numbers, but there is evidence of Hamas training children. The Palestinian Authority has created several paramilitary training camps for teenagers. And assuming Hamas would accept such a liability? That is not how Hamas looks at it. To them it is a strategic victory if they manage to get Palestinian children killed in Israeli strikes. When Hamas launches rockets at Israel, Israel of course responds and fires at those sites. Hamas knows this, and it is not by accident they place children around their launchers. But your question/point can be turned around. Why would Israel indiscriminately kill Palestinian civilians knowing perfectly well it wouldn't end well for Israel? What is there for Israel to gain?
Even according to Israel's claims (which, to be clear, I trust about as far as I can comfortably spit out a rat), there are no more than 200 "child soldiers". Even if it was true, though, among the thousands of children killed, it would barely make a dent.
Children are a liability, because they are not disciplined and they are hardly effective fighters. In a war, they are more likely than not to get their unit killed. No doubt there have been some training efforts for youths to prepare them for the future, but that's not unusual even in regular militaries where you can voluntarily join at 16-17 years old in some parts of the world.
Israel kills Palestinian civilians, because it simply does not care about civilian casualties. Also, it's in the current government's interest to make the war as long and bloody as possible.
Last edited by Starker; 26th Sep 2024 at 16:24.
Now you're simply ignoring many of the points I've presented. Israel carefully plans its strikes so as to minimize civilian casualties. Israel warns civilians before a strike (leaflets, the knock, phoning residents). Israel has set up a safe zone in the south, and in addition to directing external humanitarian aid there, Israel is also giving food and medicine to Palestinian civilians.
You don't trust Israel, and you seem to trust Palestinian authorities. I trust Israel and I don't trust Palestinian authorities.
So, when Israel bombed that refugee camp and killed over a 100 civilians, did it warn anyone beforehand? Did it carefully plan the strike to keep the civilians killed at about 100?
You are likewise ignoring many of the points I have presented, most of which was sourced from independent groups and Israeli organisations like B'Tselem. Approximately 0% of my information comes from Arabic or Palestinian sources (if there is any at all, then it's maybe a very rare article from Al Jazeera I happen to stumble upon). I predominantly read Israeli and international media when it comes to the conflict.
For example, how about the torture in Israel's prisons? Do you think a musician deserves to have his ribs fractured and his hearing permanently damaged while detained without any charges for months? Was he a Hamas musician?
What about the widespread destruction of the infrastructure, including cultural heritage and religious sites such as cemeteries? Israel has dropped several times more bombs on Gaza than was dropped on any one city in WW2. Here's an article, for example, where you can see the devastation in satellite photos, including entire residential areas and farmland: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-68006607
What about the number of journalists killed being more than in any war in history?
What about 83% of required aid being blocked by Israel while there is dangerous levels of malnutrition, starvation, and a severe lack of medicine? Israeli officials have made statements of killing off Palestinians with hunger and disease. So far, it very much looks like their plan is working.
To be clear, I in no way condone anything Hamas has done and consider their methods despicable. But I likewise consider mass killings of civilians despicable. Especially when Israel has now demonstrated that it can use more targeted attacks when it wants to, as happened in the recent waves of terrorist attacks in Lebanon when they set off bombs in buses, streets, and people's homes, but kept the number of dead and injured bystanders far lower than in Gaza, primarily targeting Hezbollah military members and its civilian operations.
As for warning people before the strikes, if they are targeting Hamas and only Hamas, as you say, why would Israel warn the enemy? Would that not be counterproductive? In fact, reports from Gaza seem to indicate that Israel is in fact not doing that:https://edition.cnn.com/middleeast/l...20cb6a96bcec92
Also, if someone gave you a few minutes of warning before destroying your home, let's say by dropping something on the roof of your home, how many members of your family do you think you could gather and get to a safe distance in that short of a time?
Last edited by Starker; 26th Sep 2024 at 17:28.
I've noted that in a number of these strikes, particularly where refugee camps are concerned, it's not the initial Israeli attack which has caused the majority of casualties, but secondary explosions from ammo dumps. The questions I'd be asking is why do Hamas hide among civilian refugees, and why do they store munitions in refugee camps.
Similarly, when juvenile militants are killed. The real scandal is in the arming of children in the first place, because with the best will in the world, no military is going to wait to see an enemy combatant's birth certificate.
However, the biggest issue when bombs are falling is often not what happens above ground, but what is below it. Since Gaza is absolutely riddled with tunnels, even an airstrike some distance away can bring down numerous buildings, because that's gravity. And when you consider how many of these tunnels are also booby-trapped with explosives... well.
The IDF was after a key Hamas commander named Ibrahim Biari. The IDF probably chose a moment that would result in the maximum probability of taking him out with the minimum amount of civilian casualties. But it is nonetheless horrible. All civilian deaths are tragic.
Not having yet answered is not the same as ignoring. At that point my attention went to your attempt at elevating yourself above me morally, and I had to call you out. Up until that point, I carefully responded to all of your eight questions. I also asked you a question to which you still haven't responded: "It is not by any means an easy situation for Israel, as their enemy won't rest until Israel has been wiped off the face of the Earth. How do you deal with that?" You probably know that in the Hamas Covenant it says to destroy Israel and kill all Jews. For example in Article 7, it says: "The Day of Judgment will not come about until Moslems fight Jews and kill them. Then, the Jews will hide behind rocks and trees, and the rocks and trees will cry out: 'O Moslem, there is a Jew hiding behind me, come and kill him." And you know that in 1948, Israel was willing to accept the partition plan, a two-state solution, but the Arabs rejected it and five surrounding Arab nations declared war on Israel. So I ask my question again, what do you say Israel should do? What would you do in Israel's place?You are likewise ignoring many of the points I have presented, most of which was sourced from independent groups and Israeli organisations like B'Tselem.
Maybe you tell the truth, or maybe you're exaggerating, I don't know. Be that as it may, could you give me a link to the article on Israel's claim that there is around 200 Hamas child soldiers? To strengthen your credibility.Approximately 0% of my information comes from Arabic or Palestinian sources (if there is any at all, then it's maybe a very rare article from Al Jazeera I happen to stumble upon). I predominantly read Israeli and international media when it comes to the conflict.
Based on all of my replies (assuming you've read them all), you know my thoughts. Torturing innocent civilians is wrong. Further than that, I cannot say until I've read more about this particular case.For example, how about the torture in Israel's prisons? Do you think a musician deserves to have his ribs fractured and his hearing permanently damaged while detained without any charges for months? Was he a Hamas musician?
You can think about this yourself, you don't need me to explain to you how that works. It is a dilemma for Israel: they want to take out the Hamas fighters along with the launchers, yet they want to save civilian lives (and I know you don't believe Israel cares about civilians, so is it pointless for me to give you a serious answer?). These two goals are mutually exclusive. As a result the IDF has to make difficult decisions weighing a number of variables, including the target value, civilian count, damage to infra, etc. In a very densely populated urban area, such as Gaza, it is impossible to prevent all civilian casualties. And also, such a large percentage of the population being children, it is impossible to avoid innocent children from dying.As for warning people before the strikes, if they are targeting Hamas and only Hamas, as you say, why would Israel warn the enemy? Would that not be counterproductive? In fact, reports from Gaza seem to indicate that Israel is in fact not doing that:https://edition.cnn.com/middleeast/l...20cb6a96bcec92
Also, if someone gave you a few minutes of warning before destroying your home, let's say by dropping something on the roof of your home, how many members of your family do you think you could gather and get to a safe distance in that short of a time?
I'll take a look at the points I haven't yet answered, and I'd appreciate it if you could give my question a fair treatment and write me your thoughts on the matter. Thanks.
When the IRA set off bombs in the UK, do you think a good solution would have been to bomb Irish cities and kill any IRA members they could possibly get their hands on without any regard to civilian casualties? You know how the lyrics go to this?
On that early August morning they kicked in our back door
but for every man they took away, they missed a hundred more.
What Israel is doing now, this does not end Hamas. In the very best (fairly unrealistic) scenario, they diminish Hamas influence until it loses relevance and another (possibly worse) organisation takes its place as the circumstances that created Hamas have only changed for the worse. The truth of the matter is that Israel cannot simply bomb their way out of this situation.
What should Israel do is such a broad question that it's nearly impossible to answer. But with regard to Hamas specifically, what usually is done in these situations where it's a large force against a much smaller force is first, possibly, a realignment of the smaller force (predominantly through violent means, but not exclusively) and then negotiations. In the history of such conflicts, this is the only solution that has ever worked outside of outright genocide.
Right now, though, Israel is playing by the Hamas playbook and doing exactly what they wanted. They have overreacted by killing massive amounts of ordinary people and brought widespread destruction to Gaza, placing the people in Gaza in a situation hostile to human life, with no hope and no future. All of this has had the effect of turning bystanders into symphatisers and sympathisers into active participants. As a cherry on top, it has even drawn other groups in and widened the conflict not only in the West Bank, but also outside of Israel.
As even the US advised Israel, a more targeted approach would have drastically reduced these risks. And Israel has demonstrated that is has the capability to take a more targeted approach. It just chooses not to because Bibi & Co need a prolonged war and want to make Gaza uninhabitable by destroying crucial infrastructure and arable land.
Just take a look at the sources I have cited in the thread (or anywhere else, for that matter), if you don't believe me. You'll find they are all from places like Associated Press, Reuters, BBC, or Israeli newspapers such as The Times of Israel. As for the "child soldiers" Israel is claiming to be active in Gaza, there are many sources, but here is just one of them:
https://www.foxnews.com/world/exclus...against-israel
The IDF told Fox New Digital that “Over 170 minors are active in the military wings of Hamas and Islamic Jihad in the Gaza Strip...children are taught by Hamas from a young age to hate Israel and Jews and already in schools, youth movements and summer camps, children undergo theoretical and practical military training.”
The number of 170 children is the current number of active minors compelled to aid Hamas terrorists, it was claimed.The numbers speak for themselves, but aside for things like the mass killing of children, I would also point out the denial of food and medicine to the population. I would also point out the dehumanising language of Israeli officials and leaders and outright calls for ethnic cleansing, including with the use of bioweapons. I would point out violence in West Bank that's supported by the state. I could go on, but much of what I have to say has already been addressed fairly early in this thread, especially in the Shaun video I posted and the video that lists some of the arguments that are used to justify the mass killings.
Thanks for your reply, Starker. I appreciate you putting thought into it. I don't have time to reply today, as a friend is coming over, but I just wanted to write that it'll probably take me a few days to get back to you. I'm also a bit disappointed in myself regarding my response to your second reply. I changed my reply in the hopes you wouldn't see it, but you did. For openness, I'll explain to everyone what I wrote: I called your response manipulation and twisting my words, and I suggested you consider an apology. Perhaps that was a bit too much. I apologize to you instead, for going over the top with my words. I still maintain that you mischaracterized what I wrote and scolded me for doing something I didn't, but that does not give me a pass to behave inappropriately. I strive to be more British next time.
If there is anything in this war that has affected me, it's the heinous atrocities committed against civilians. The terrorist actions of Hamas of course, but also the enormous numbers of Palestinian civilians, especially children, who have been senslessly killed. The suggestion that a large amount of the children killed were Hamas child soldiers and/or Hamas deliberately placing them in the path of Israel's bombs (as if they had time to just scrounge up random children in the middle of a war) made me choose words that were more biting than I would usually have used.
But still, I consider that kind of attitude towards the victims really untoward. I've seen people try to justify the mass killings in various ways (for example blaming Palestinians for once having voted for Hamas a long time ago), but I've never seen this line of attack being used against the victims. I have to admit it really caught me off guard.
Comparing the situation to the IRA is really not logical.
Big news this morning. Boom boom sheikh the room.
Seeding densely populated areas with hundreds of remotely activated bombs, which are very likely to kill or injure people other than your intended targets, is pretty much a definition of indiscriminate.Israel does not bomb indiscriminately, and in fact goes to great lengths to minimize civilian casualties.
---
Is Hamas evil for deliberately targeting civilians? Absolutely. Is Likud evil for deliberately targeting civilians? Absolutely. Do both sides believe that they are divinely justified to commit such atrocities, in the name of the same god? ABSOLUTELY! Is that the stupidest, most evil excuse ever invented by our species? ABSOLUTELY.
Will the violence end, while superstitious thugs, who believe in magical sky beings, are allowed to have political power? No fucking way.
Christo-Fascists, Islamo-Fascists and the biblical grand daddy of them all, Judeo-Fascists, are all one family, Abrahamic-Fascists. They have been a shit stain on humanity for millennia and their blood soaked daddy-god delusion shows no sign of waning. They will burn this life to ashes while praying and murdering in hopes of the next, of a final battle and a final reward which never has and never will arrive.
(And BTW, I am half Jewish so if anyone wants to call me anti-Semitic for saying that, they can half-fuck themselves.)
This endless war is not between Likud and Hamas. It's not between Arabs and Jews. It's between stupidity and humanity. Arrogance and humility. Superstition and honesty.
That's why it's endless, because human stupidity is boundless.
Consider this, theo-fascists. Even if Yahweh/Allah existed, he is clearly not on your side or this fight would be ancient history.
---
On a more practical question: I am still waiting for the "one state solution" crowd in here, to explain how that would work, for either side. What are the nuts and bolts of your final solution?
Likud crows that it is "winning". Really? It has the upper, blood soaked hand, for the moment but it is surrounded by new and old enemies while it's allies become less and less keen to support its atrocities.
Hamas and its kin, demand the elimination of all Jews, like that is ever going to happen.
So, "one-staters" of either side, please explain how your dream state can actually be achieved.
It really isn't between the political parties. It doesn't matter who is in pretty in Israel, the extremists will try to kill Jews and want to destroy Israel. Be honest.
The IDF do not try to kill civilians, they just don't allow their enemies to use the ultimate cheat code - human shields.
Or you could be honest and admit that Likud is embroiled in a campaign of indiscriminate murder of civilians, just like Hamas.It doesn't matter who is in pretty in Israel, the extremists will try to kill Jews and want to destroy Israel. Be honest.
Hamas wants to eliminate Jews. Likud wants to eliminate Arabs. Is this really about what either side wants or about what they are doing.
So how about your one state solution, S.E.? Still waiting on the details.
I don't know what you're talking about re: "my" one state solution. I'm all for a two state solution, peace, and the total withdrawal of all Israel "settlers" from the West Bank though.
And FYI was totally against the Israeli invasion of the Gaza Strip after Oct 07th precisely because I knew what the civilian death toll would be, especially as the Israel chat spaces were talking in terms of a massive reprisal which has happened, and I think there should be a ceasefire.
But tell me more about how Likud wants to eliminate Arabs. I've never heard this. I've heard a lot of things, but not this. I mean, Likud havs had Arab (Druze) members before so ��
Ok, S.E.. My bad. But it does sound like you are trying to pin the problem on one side, in that quote. I apologize if/that I misread your post.
Likud just declared an expansion of their final solution to the Palestine Problem by expanding their aggression to Lebanon. Regardless of the past, modern Likud under, Netanyahu, is seeking a One State solution and that can only be achieved by eliminating all the competition in the region. They just extended the boundaries of that region and there is no reason to believe they will stop at Lebanon, just like there is no reason to believe that they will suddenly stop targeting civilians or committing atrocities. Likud might not have an overt doctrine of eliminating Arabs but Netanyahu's choices and actions require their elimination to achieve peace on his terms.
That said, I know that Hamas and their ilk would love to commit their own atrocities on a similar scale but simply lack the means at present.
The Children of Abraham, acting like teenagers for 5,000 years.
Likud, if you can believe it or not, are the moderates in Israel (they actually used to be center right before they took a more radical turn). But they cast their lot with even more radical parties whose rhetoric has been pretty much unchecked. Amichay Eliyahu from Jewish Power, for example, has called for the use of nuclear bombs. Smotrich from Religious Zionist has called for flooding Palestinian territories with Jewish settlers. Giora Eiland, the former head of the Security Council, has called for the use of biological warfare to kill off Palestinians with disease.
But the current tactic that's actually being employed seems to be to block food, medicine and hygiene products from reaching the population in Gaza to the point that the average Gazan only gets to eat one meal every other day, tens of thousands of children require treatment for malnutrition, and disease outbreaks are rampant.
Last edited by Starker; 28th Sep 2024 at 14:59.
That's a wild conspiracy theory though. Even Bibi doesn't want Lebanon. What Israelis really want is peace on their terms, which means dividing the land up how they want. That means annexing large parts of the West Bank at least, and that's because there are factions that believe it is owed them being at the old name of a lot of it is Judea.
But I do believe that the main problem is the Islamic terrorism. If there were no attacks from the Gaza Strip, if Hamas had built up the nation instead of using millions to arm and build a tunnel network, Israel would have nothing to fight against. And they'd actually like that.
As to Lebanon - it's 100% the fault of Hizbollah. I fully support everything Israel is doing there, including the pager and radio attacks which were probably the most targeted attacks in human history. Hizbollah are a bunch of maniacs who attached Israel on Oct 8th totally unprovoked. I've no sympathy for them and a huge number of Lebanese and other Arabs will be very pleased with Israel's actions against them. They are Iranian puppets and no better than the Waffen SS. You wouldn't be upset if they got pager bombs to the face, would you?
I don't know how little don't get it. Don't attack Israel and Israel won't attack you. Simple.
O.K. So bombs randomly exploding in markets and cafes is number one on your top-ten most surgical assassination tactics? I hope you do not own firearms or operate them in public places, if that is your definition of targeted.I fully support everything Israel is doing there, including the pager and radio attacks which were probably the most targeted attacks in human history.
Now I am confused again, because the "settlement" of the West bank is a huge part of Likud's policy of provocation, a kind of gradual, gentle terrorism. A few homes here, an adult or child "terrorist" there. Midnight arrests, disappearances, enhanced interrogations. Likud calculated that eventually Hamas would strike back and give them the justification to go scorched earth on innocent people in Gaza. And Likud knowingly and willingly sacrificed its own, innocent Israeli citizens to create that narrative.I'm all for a two state solution, peace, and the total withdrawal of all Israel "settlers" from the West Bank though.
And now Likud is attacking Yemen.
How can you get a two state solution when you keep adding new enemy states to the other side of the equation? You can see why I mistook you for a One Stater.
Because we all know that the best way to generate sympathy for our cause is to randomly explode bombs in public places.I've no sympathy for them and a huge number of Lebanese and other Arabs will be very pleased with Israel's actions against them.
This is highly disingenuous. The bombs were not "random" but were small focused explosions highly likely to injure only the person carrying them, and those people were in Hizbollah's command structure because that is who ordered the pagers. It was extremely well targeted and you can tell this because even Hizbollah have not tried to spin it that 100s of civilians were killed or injured, because they weren't. Yes, there were a few civilian casualties but for almost 3000 bombs it was a tiny, tiny number of innocent people that were affected compared to the number of actual Hizbollah. Even the Hizbollah themselves have said the pagers belonged to "to employees of various Hezbollah units and institutions". You can google that EXACT statement to find the source, which is Hizbollah.
Yes, the West Bank behaviour is ridiculous and criminal. But the way to stop it is not to launch attacks on Israel, it's to make peace and then talk about it. The land theft should be condemned but you can only stop it when there is peace and Israel no longer has the excuse of "security" to raid, displace and set up new walls and rules to restrict the Palestinians.Now I am confused again, because the "settlement" of the West bank is a huge part of Likud's policy of provocation, a kind of gradual, gentle terrorism.
To be fair to them though, I think they've had enough now and might want to just get all the Palestinians out. If a peace isn't found that'll be what happens eventually anyway. A peaceful solution would be better of course, because living side by side in peace is the right thing to do.
No, it's attacking Houthi rebels in Yemen, who have been attacking Israel totally unprovoked.And now Likud is attacking Yemen.
Come on man, stop this propaganda bs.
It's convenient to blame the conflict on religion, and while it plays its part, I think the core of the matter is that people just want a safe place to live without being oppressed and having to live in fear. Sure, they will invoke their deities when fighting for their cause but I don't think religion is the cause of the conflict or that it would be magically gone without these people being religious. Kind of the same as with the IRA troubles, sure the fighting parties were either protestant or catholic but it's all too convenient to label that as the cause of the conflict. Also like what's happening in Sudan, where muslims with Arab origins are killing black muslims. Both are muslim and they might invoke Allah for their cause but it's really more of a tribal conflict.
These types of conflicts might be less heated without religion as a factor, but there's no guarantee people would live in peace without religion. I refer you to the atrocities committed by Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, the Kims, etc. For the record, I'm not saying atheism is the cause of those conflicts, but rather that people will always find an excuse to bash each other's head in, even without religion.
This is just my opinion on these matters, I will state this once but I don't want to derail the thread, it should remain about the Israel-Palestine conflict and not a general discussion about the evils and virtues of religion.
Last edited by Harvester; 30th Sep 2024 at 05:30.
Yes, I agree. Most of these things are war for territory and control. They seem quite ungodly in fact.
The conservative and orthodox Jews who make up Likud believe the territories are theirs because God gave it to them. Why do you suppose Iran is waging a war against a country that it doesn't border and isn't directly threatened by? Why do you suppose Jews and evangelical Christians around the world support Israel? The Middle East is always at war because it's full of theocracies. This is ALL about religion.
I think it's mostly about a safe place to live for the Jews who protect the safe haven they were offered after WW2, and the Palestinians fighting back against being oppressed. Sure, people with the same religion or semi-adjacent religion will support their brethren, like the Evangelical Christians and such and the members of other Arab nations who are angry at the treatment of the Palestinians. However if they were able to somehow work out this conflict, a lot of the hate in the region would simmer down I think, or at least not evolve into action. Back when things were a little more peaceful, there were talks and trade negotiations going on between Israel and Egypt and Saudi Arabia. Some people will remain islamophobes or antisemites but if there's no real reason to be angry at either party because everyone gets a fair treatment these will be mostly beliefs at the personal level and the occasional demonstration instead of turning into action like we see now. I think at the core it's about people wanting to have a safe place to live, not the direct application of Torah or Quran verses that lies at the center of this conflict. People will quote those verses and invoke their Gods to support their cause, but when everyone feels and is safe and can provide for themselves people we would see less hate between different population groups. Everyone drags their religion into it but at the basic level people want to feel safe, be treated fairly, and make a living for themselves.
A bit of a messy post which could be worded better but I'm strapped for time.
Summary: religion can be and is a catalyst in this conflict, but at the heart it’s a territorial conflict.
Last edited by Harvester; 30th Sep 2024 at 12:54.
Posting Permissions
