Merged Gaza just launched an unprovoked attack on Israel

[laughing dog]

It occurs to me that if Hamas is using the kidnapped Israeli citizens as human shields, then it is justifuable to kill the human shields, because they should have escaped and gone somewhere else - according to the IDF and several posters here.

Just thinking about that today.

Hamas needs to make it possible for the civilians to go somewhere safe. But there isn't.

I wonder why.

They can't be temporarily be moved out of Gaza because fighters hide among the refugees. They're all potential fighters.

The fact that the IDF have no way of distinguishing from fighters and civilians of course impact civilians negatively. Combat uniforms for soldiers aren't just decorative

And Israeli hostages have been accidentally shot. For this reason.

The hostages were shot because soldiers were scared. The soldiers were not under fire at the time. In fact, I saw reports that after the first two hostages were shot, their commander gave an order to cease fire because he thought the remaining shirtless man waving a white “flag” and speaking Hebrew might be Israeli, but they couldn’t hear and they killed the last one

And those here who are pro-Palestinian are you somehow fine with Hamas still having hostages? Was it OK that Hamas first took them? What's the logic here?

It is not okay to kidnap anyone or imprison them without trial. It is wrong. Just like it is wrong to kill noncombatants in order to save one’s political position.

 

[repoman]

30,000 foot view, who gives a fuck what any of us are saying.

But also, I think that some people here are painting themselves into a corner that will not allow them to say that they were wrong.

Dr Zoidberg, I think you are most like this. You will not look for other information sources because some fucking strangers here on this stupid board will laugh at you, another stranger, if you modify your position.

I suggest you expand your search field of data gathering.

 

[Shadowy Man]

I also see repeated blaming Israel for acts that almost certainly are Hamas deliberately killing civilians.

An honest question: can you point to an example?

Hamas respects no rules of engagement. What more do you need to know? Hamas have been open about their behaviour from the start. As well as demonstrating it

Then it should be easy to point to a reported example of what Loren refers to. I’m not necessarily doubting it, I just want to read about it.

 

[Gospel]

I don't believe that what the Palestinians lacked was the will to implement their proposals. IMO what they lacked was the support of other nations with power and influence, or enough power and influence of their own.

Absolutely. even Israel had an opportunity to support the Palestinians that wanted to oust their corrupt leadership. However rather than providing support to the correct faction, they provided support to Hamas.

 

[ZiprHead]

We already know Hamas is lying about the numbers of civilian dead.

Evidence-free assertion.

Their numbers are internally inconsistent.

Evidence-free assertion.

 

[Shadowy Man]

I also see repeated blaming Israel for acts that almost certainly are Hamas deliberately killing civilians.

An honest question: can you point to an example?

Hamas respects no rules of engagement. What more do you need to know? Hamas have been open about their behaviour from the start. As well as demonstrating it

Furthermore, it comes across as a bit arrogant that “all I need to know” is what you assert? Should I not be able to get facts from reliable sources or should I only have to rely on the expertise of worldly intellects such as yours and Loren’s?

I asked an honest question about a statement of fact. If it’s an actual fact then it should be nearly trivial to support such a fact with documentation.

 

[Rhea]

I can't fix the spelling error in the previous post. Too much time has elapsed.

@Arctish - You can always “report” your own post, quote the part needing change, and ask if a mod is available to fix it for you.

 

[Derec]

Hamas' rotten offer of "ceasefire":
Hamas proposes 3-stage 135-day truce and hostage deal, leading to war’s end – reports

They want a total Israeli withdrawal and release of 1500 terrorist prisoners, including 500 serving life sentences.

Netanyahu has already rejected it, and I hope the offer stays rejected. One of the goals of 10/7 was to kidnap Israelis to effect release of terrorists imprisoned by Israel. Giving in to this demand would be a major victory for Hamas. Biden administration better not pressure Netanyahu into a premature ceasefire. Unfortunately, Biden is under some pressure by the Jihadist wing of his own party - congresscritters like Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib and also people like the mayor of Dearborn Abdullah Hammoud - as well as the Jihadists' useful idiots like other Squaddies (AOC, Cori Bush et al).

Also, no ceasefire is likely to last for long as long as Hamas is in power - they are bound to attack Israel again. Destroying Hamas as an entity capable of controlling Gaza should remain the goal. Yes, the war is already going for four months. But Hamas is in retreat. Israel killed around 10k fighters. If we assume a similar number of wounded, that's ~20k out of the fight. How many total fighters are there? Estimates are that Hamas had ~40k fighters total, but since Islamic Jihad and other minor factions (like the Popular Front - splitters!) are also taking part we should add another ~20k. So about 1/6 is killed and another 1/6 wounded. Not bad! Especially since better trained/capable fighters were probably first to be used. What's left is probably mostly the equivalent of reservists.

 

[DrZoidberg]

I also see repeated blaming Israel for acts that almost certainly are Hamas deliberately killing civilians.

An honest question: can you point to an example?

Hamas respects no rules of engagement. What more do you need to know? Hamas have been open about their behaviour from the start. As well as demonstrating it

Furthermore, it comes across as a bit arrogant that “all I need to know” is what you assert? Should I not be able to get facts from reliable sources or should I only have to rely on the expertise of worldly intellects such as yours and Loren’s?

I asked an honest question about a statement of fact. If it’s an actual fact then it should be nearly trivial to support such a fact with documentation.

Its a terrorist organisation. With all the Bells and whistles. Have you been living under a rock? Just Google. Its not like its a well hidden fact

 

[DrZoidberg]

Hamas' rotten offer of "ceasefire":
Hamas proposes 3-stage 135-day truce and hostage deal, leading to war’s end – reports

They want a total Israeli withdrawal and release of 1500 terrorist prisoners, including 500 serving life sentences.

Netanyahu has already rejected it, and I hope the offer stays rejected. One of the goals of 10/7 was to kidnap Israelis to effect release of terrorists imprisoned by Israel. Giving in to this demand would be a major victory for Hamas. Biden administration better not pressure Netanyahu into a premature ceasefire. Unfortunately, Biden is under some pressure by the Jihadist wing of his own party - congresscritters like Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib and also people like the mayor of Dearborn Abdullah Hammoud - as well as the Jihadists' useful idiots like other Squaddies (AOC, Cori Bush et al).

Also, no ceasefire is likely to last for long as long as Hamas is in power - they are bound to attack Israel again. Destroying Hamas as an entity capable of controlling Gaza should remain the goal. Yes, the war is already going for four months. But Hamas is in retreat. Israel killed around 10k fighters. If we assume a similar number of wounded, that's ~20k out of the fight. How many total fighters are there? Estimates are that Hamas had ~40k fighters total, but since Islamic Jihad and other minor factions (like the Popular Front - splitters!) are also taking part we should add another ~20k. So about 1/6 is killed and another 1/6 wounded. Not bad! Especially since better trained/capable fighters were probably first to be used. What's left is probably mostly the equivalent of reservists.

Funny wording though. Sounded a bit like "Final Solution". He needs better speech writers

 

[Shadowy Man]

I also see repeated blaming Israel for acts that almost certainly are Hamas deliberately killing civilians.

An honest question: can you point to an example?

Hamas respects no rules of engagement. What more do you need to know? Hamas have been open about their behaviour from the start. As well as demonstrating it

Furthermore, it comes across as a bit arrogant that “all I need to know” is what you assert? Should I not be able to get facts from reliable sources or should I only have to rely on the expertise of worldly intellects such as yours and Loren’s?

I asked an honest question about a statement of fact. If it’s an actual fact then it should be nearly trivial to support such a fact with documentation.

Its a terrorist organisation. With all the Bells and whistles. Have you been living under a rock? Just Google. Its not like its a well hidden fact

I know they are a terrorist organization. I am not doubting that. I just wanted Loren to back up his statement that Israel has been blamed for acts that are "almost certainly Hamas deliberately killing civilians". I have googled this some and found some close examples, such as a hospital being hit, which "Hamas blamed an Israeli airstrike, while the Israeli military blamed a rocket misfired by other Palestinian militants."[1] But that isn't quite what he said, in that it wasn't claimed to be deliberate nor by Hamas, but "other Palestinian militants". In another link, the Anti-Defamation League accuses Hamas of essentially killing its own civilians by utilizing them as human shields.[2]. But in those cases, they are still being killed by the IDF, just being sacrificed by Hamas.


Loren made an explicit allegation and I'm just curious to see it backed up. Hamas deliberately killing civilians that it is blaming on Israel. Do you or he have an example, or will I just have to keep plowing through google? If you know it to be true, you must have learned it somewhere, so it should be easy for you to help guide me to a story about it. That's all I ask.

It's not very collegial to make an allegation then when someone honestly acts for an example to retort "you should just believe me, and if you don't know it's your own fault for not googling hard enough for it." I'm not trying to be an adversary here.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

So you would agree that the civilian death toll is acceptably low, yes? Any other options would result in more Israeli deaths, eirher now or on the future.

No one can imagine any other method of reducing civilian casualties ( assuming that’s a desirable result) because the IDF are masters at limiting collateral damage.

This is your position, yes?

If somebody else has a viable approach why have they not proposed it?

Note that they have already rejected US military doctrine as killing more than their approach.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

You can read their Charter yourself. Loren and I discussed specific sections here.

And you did not show that they aren't still proposing de-facto genocide. They just removed the explicit call for it.

Hamas would not expend so much blood nor treasure if their goal was just a single Palestinian state where all could live in peace.

I disagree.

I think the Palestinians believe the only way they can be secure is to have their own State, the only place they have a right to call their own is Palestine. I believe they are willing to spend just as much blood and treasure as Zionist Jews have spent in order to have one.

What they want or believe is basically irrelevant--because it's outside money driving the terrorism.

Palestinian plans, going all the way back to their response to the UN partition plan, have consistently been inclusive. They want the government that rules over them to be dedicated to the well being of all the Palestinian people, not one that prefers some Palestinians over others.

False--they have always wanted a system that put them above the Jews.

You can take that with a very large grain of salt. The ideals expressed in the Charter don't necessarily conform with the opinions of Hamas' leadership, much less the rank-and-file militants.

Since Hamas's leadership would have endorsed that charter before publishing I think we can take it very seriously. No salt required.

Hamas are like Bin Laden - they are deadly seriously about what they say and many find that frightening. In the west we are so used to the feckless nature of our government's, politicians and other institutions etc. that it is unnerving to meet those who mean what they say and say what they mean.

The Charter says they reject the persecution of any human being or the undermining of their rights on nationalist, religious, or sectarian grounds.

I see that as an ideal, not something we can expect from the current leadership. I don't trust terrorists or their proteges to be anywhere near that fair minded or respectful of other people's beliefs, cultures, or choices. Or their right to live, for that matter.

But the charter was "modified" to sound better to western ears--but it still requires the destruction of Israel. Radical Islam believes that deals with non-Muslims are only to be made until it's advantageous to break them. Why should we think this is anything different?

 

[Copernicus]

So you would agree that the civilian death toll is acceptably low, yes? Any other options would result in more Israeli deaths, eirher now or on the future.

No one can imagine any other method of reducing civilian casualties ( assuming that’s a desirable result) because the IDF are masters at limiting collateral damage.

This is your position, yes?

If somebody else has a viable approach why have they not proposed it?

Note that they have already rejected US military doctrine as killing more than their approach.

Viable approach to what? Netanyahu's absolute victory? He doesn't even know what that would look like. The man is flailing about and seemingly unable to come up with any viable solution other than to keep killing people. He should negotiate a serious cessation of hostilities that would involve prisoner/hostage exchanges, but nothing can be achieved unless he shows some willingness to sit down and talk with Hamas and its allies. Diplomacy is the only way this mess can be resolved in the end. There is no longer any justification for continuing the violence.

Released hostages tell PM: Only saving remaining captives will be ‘absolute victory’​

Blinken: Israelis were dehumanized on Oct. 7; that can’t be a license to dehumanize others​

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I also see repeated blaming Israel for acts that almost certainly are Hamas deliberately killing civilians.

An honest question: can you point to an example?

Look for anything that says "IDF snipers".

I think I have already posted this one:

https://www.itv.com/news/2024-01-23/moment-civilian-brandishing-white-flag-in-gaza-safe-zone-is-shot-dead

Of course no location is given but "safe zone" is enough--the IDF wasn't within sniper range of any part of the safe zone.

And note: "volley of shots". Snipers do not shoot volleys of shots. The shooter must be considerably closer.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I agree that a Two State solution could work but the obstacles are actually larger.

The Two State solution requires an equitable division of the land and resources of Palestine so that both States can prosper. The faction that currently has control over arable land, aquifers, mineral deposits, etc., isn't going to give it up without a fight.

It does not require any particular distribution as neither place has an economy driven by any such resource.

And note that most of Gaza's water woes are because they use pipe for rockets rather than water. The damage is self inflicted.

There is a big disparity in the efficiency with which the two sides use water.

Integration in a single State would be less economically disruptive, which is why I think it's more likely to succeed.

Palestinian plans, going all the way back to their response to the UN partition plan, have consistently been inclusive. They want the government that rules over them to be dedicated to their well being, not one that prefers some Palestinians over others.

We will have to disagree on that.

Have you ever looked at the Palestinian proposals?

Have you ever looked at the details?? They bury the unacceptable stuff under as many layers as possible to let people pretend they are acceptable.

You can take that with a very large grain of salt. The ideals expressed in the Charter don't necessarily conform with the opinions of Hamas' leadership, much less the rank-and-file militants.

Since Hamas's leadership would have endorsed that charter before publishing I think we can take it very seriously. No salt required.

Hamas are like Bin Laden - they are deadly seriously about what they say and many find that frightening. In the west we are so used to the feckless nature of our government's, politicians and other institutions etc. that it is unnerving to meet those who mean what they say and say what they mean.

So you take them at their word that they reject the persecution of any human being or the undermining of their rights on nationalist, religious, or sectarian grounds?

I take them at their word that "River to the sea - Palestine will be free" means no Jews.

Palestine will be free does not necessarily mean Palestine will have no Jews.

The Hamas Charter makes a distinction between Jews and Zionists. You should read it.

Jews accept dhimmi status. Zionists don't.

I wouldn't go that far. I don't trust terrorists or their proteges to be anywhere near that fair minded or respectful of other people's beliefs, cultures, or choices. Or their right to live, for that matter.

The 7th of Oct. should have convinced anyone as to what Hamas really thinks and wants of the Jews.

...which is why I don't trust the Hamas leadership to uphold the ideals expressed in the Charter, and why I think Hamas needs to be defeated on the ground and at the ballot box.

1) They will never allow themselves to face the ballot box.

2) That's still ignoring the elephant of the outside money for terror.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I also see repeated blaming Israel for acts that almost certainly are Hamas deliberately killing civilians.

An honest question: can you point to an example?

Hamas respects no rules of engagement. What more do you need to know? Hamas have been open about their behaviour from the start. As well as demonstrating it

No, because they don't admit to framing the IDF.

 

[Copernicus]

...
I also see repeated blaming Israel for acts that almost certainly are Hamas deliberately killing civilians.

An honest question: can you point to an example?

Look for anything that says "IDF snipers".

Loren, you have no response to Shadowy Man's request. Anyone can Google "IDF Snipers", but that does not turn up examples of Israelis being blamed for acts in which Hamas almost certainly did the killing. You are making the claim, so you are the one who should back it up. Surely, you can find some evidence for it, if you didn't just make it up out of thin air.

 

[Shadowy Man]

I also see repeated blaming Israel for acts that almost certainly are Hamas deliberately killing civilians.

An honest question: can you point to an example?

Look for anything that says "IDF snipers".

I think I have already posted this one:

https://www.itv.com/news/2024-01-23/moment-civilian-brandishing-white-flag-in-gaza-safe-zone-is-shot-dead

Of course no location is given but "safe zone" is enough--the IDF wasn't within sniper range of any part of the safe zone.

And note: "volley of shots". Snipers do not shoot volleys of shots. The shooter must be considerably closer.

I read this article and it's inconclusive as to whether it was "Hamas deliberately killing civilians and blaming it on IDF". It's certainly possible, and the IDF denies knowledge of the incident. But it is difficult to know if it was Hamas and if it was deliberate, at least from the information provided within the article you linked.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I would like to see what you looked at. Please link to them if you can find them.

I don't believe that what the Palestinians lacked was the will to implement their proposals. IMO what they lacked was the support of other nations with power and influence, or enough power and influence of their own.

Of course. It couldn't have been that they didn't want to implement them because that would mean you're on the wrong side.

There were anti-Jewish before WW2 when the Jewish population was much fewer. Unlikely that now being more Jews in the area would decrease the chances of future pogroms. there was the expulsion from Jews from Morocco to Afghanistan in 1948-51 (or so). If the local Arabs could not live with the existing Jewish communities then why would it be better now?
I would not blame the Jews or any one else for that matter, being reluctant to trust others.

Who are you talking about when you say "they"?

Why are you blaming Palestinians for what Moroccans did? That's like blaming the Swiss for what the Belgians did.

Why do you think it was any different in Palestine? Pogroms were simply the way it was in the Muslim world.

And why are you saying the local Arabs could not live in peace with the existing Jewish communities? They did it for centuries before Zionism and a massive influx of European immigrants determined to achieve Jewish sovereignty fractured Palestinian society.

You have repeatedly been shown what that "peace" was like. You continue to pretend it was an acceptable situation.

Hamas, Hezbollah, and Islamic Jihad are extremist organizations full of terrorists and zealots. They do not represent the Palestinian people as a whole any more than Kach represents Israelis.

Except they have had a lifetime of control of the educational system. To a large degree they do represent the views of the people.

Yes, there are violent racist bigots willing to murder people to maintain racial, religious, and ethnic separation in Israel and Palestine. It will take courage and fortitude to stand up to them. But if you want peace, you have to support the peacemakers and defy the warmongers. You can't just surrender your principles when the going gets tough. Not if you want to have any principles, that is.

But first you put down the LSD. To support a peacemaker in Gaza would be to get them killed.

The Hamas Charter makes a distinction between Jews and Zionists. You should read it.

I have not looked at it for a few years now. The original or the latest version?

Presumably the latest version is the one the current leaders endorsed.

https://irp.fas.org/world/para/docs/hamas-2017.pdf

Palestinians are the descendants of Arabs living there in 1947.

Note that this means that the Jews have no right to be there. Genocide.