Hamas use of human shields

[arkirk]

You are incorrect. If using human beings is a Hamas strategy, then the IDF is complicit in helping Hamas fulfill its strategy when the IDF fires at the human shields. But it is counterproductive for the IDF to help its enemy fulfill its strategy. Ergo, firing at human shields (helping Hamas fulfill its strategy) is incorrect. It is an argument based on simple reasoning.

Except Israel doesn't fire when they successfully use the human shield tactics.

However, sometimes the shields are too close to the target but not yet on the roof when the bomb is dropped. That's when you get a bunch of civilian casualties.

Personally, I think they should look at something like delayed-action bombs. Drop anyway, the bomb hits and starts screaming "I'm a 60 second bomb! I'm a 60 second bomb! 59, 58..." The hard part would be providing an anti-tamper system so they can't just haul the bomb away before it goes off.

Enough with these bombs and destructive ideas of yours. You are engaging in crazy talk. We don't need MORE BOMBS. Is this something you would be selling if you got people interested in it?

 

[Shadowy Man]

Except Israel doesn't fire when they successfully use the human shield tactics.

This seems inconsistent with your comment in another thread that it is sensible to shoot through a baby if a terrorist is holding it while shooting at you. The only other option is to die, you said. So, which is it? Shoot through the human shield or not?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Except Israel doesn't fire when they successfully use the human shield tactics.

This seems inconsistent with your comment in another thread that it is sensible to shoot through a baby if a terrorist is holding it while shooting at you. The only other option is to die, you said. So, which is it? Shoot through the human shield or not?

Different situation--the bombs are falling on magazines, not SAM launchers.