Merged Gaza just launched an unprovoked attack on Israel

[DrZoidberg]

I think the biggest factor in this conflict is the Palestinian widespread antisemitism. Irrational antisemitism. Hating Jews is normal among Palestinians. That’s what makes this so difficult for the Jews to manage the conflict.

What makes it so hard to manage the conflict is precisely that Palestinians do not hate Jews. They hate the people who stole their land, who happened to be Jewish. If Hindus had stolen their land, they would hate them too, while expressing their hatred with anti-Hindu invective.

At bottom this has little to do with religion at all, IMO.

That narrative is antisemitism IMHO.

...and besides, Israel isn't a Jewish state.

Benjamin Netanyahu disagrees with you:

Its not for him to decide, is it? He's a Jewish conservative nationalist. Of course this is his opinion.

But Israel was founded by socialist progressives and its all over their constitution, and there’s nothing Netanyahu can do to chsnge that.

Netanyahu isn't the pope of all Jews. He's a conservative dick-wad. Also now unpopular among Israelis. With his handling of Gaza he's managed to piss off every group.

Next election the revolving door will smack him hard in the ass as he exits.

His only reason for continuing to get elected was his promise to keep Jews safe. 7/10 was an epic fail for him. After that there was nothing he could do to survive politically.

Embattled Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said the country is “not a state of all its citizens” in yet another apparent attempt to win extremist anti-Arab support ahead of the upcoming general election.

The comments, made on Facebook, were a direct reference to the country’s 1.6 million Arabs, who make up almost a fifth of the population.


“Israel is not a state of all its citizens,” he wrote in response to comments from the TV host Rotem Sela. “According to the basic nationality law we passed, Israel is the nation state of the Jewish people – and only it.”

The racism and religious bigotry is explicit. It is enshrined in the Basic Law, and has been upheld by Israel's version of the Supreme Court.

Oh look at you filtering information to make it say what you want it to say. Well done.

At no point has any Israeli politician attempted to kick out the non-Muslims who live inside Israel. There are no racist apartheid laws. Israeli Muslims are even exempt from military service if they like. Which is pretty awesome for them.

Muslims often claim they have been kicked off their land, but its not true. The land Jews took from Muslims was land the Muslims, at that time, had abandoned, because they feared a non-existent genocide on Muslims.

The biggest fear Palestinians seem to have is that Jews will treat them like Muslims often treat religious minorities. But its so far been an irrational fear

 

[DrZoidberg]

I think the biggest factor in this conflict is the Palestinian widespread antisemitism. Irrational antisemitism. Hating Jews is normal among Palestinians. That’s what makes this so difficult for the Jews to manage the conflict.

What makes it so hard to manage the conflict is precisely that Palestinians do not hate Jews. They hate the people who stole their land, who happened to be Jewish. If Hindus had stolen their land, they would hate them too, while expressing their hatred with anti-Hindu invective.

At bottom this has little to do with religion at all, IMO.

That narrative is antisemitism IMHO.

...and besides, Israel isn't a Jewish state.

Benjamin Netanyahu disagrees with you:

Its not for him to decide, is it? He's a Jewish conservative nationalist. Of course this is his opinion.

Netanyahu has been saying the quiet part out loud for years, as the Knesset passes more and more legislation that enshrines bigotry and bias as national ideals. It is part of the Basic Law, and has been affirmed by Israel's highest court.

Sure. This is how politics work.

The intransigence of the Palestinians and other Muslim neighbors, as well as the total antisemitic racism among the western "progressive" left is pushing the entire nation toward right wing nationalism. This has been a trend the last 15 years. Incidentaly, the entire world also took a turn towards the right in this period.

It still doesn’t mean he has succeeded.

The non-Jews in Israel are still safe and protected. Anti-Muslim Jewish violence within Israel isn't a thing.

This idea that Muslims in Israel are oppressed or victims of apartheid is preposterpus

When they built the wall suicide attacks went from being a common occurrence to almost none. Clearly building it was the right thing to do.

But Israel was founded by socialist progressives and its all over their constitution, and there’s nothing Netanyahu can do to chsnge that.

Netanyahu isn't the pope of all Jews. He's a conservative dick-wad. Also now unpopular among Israelis. With his handling of Gaza he's managed to piss off every group.

Next election the revolving door will smack him hard in the ass as he exits.

His only reason for continuing to get elected was his promise to keep Jews safe. 7/10 was an epic fail for him. After that there was nothing he could do to survive politically.

Embattled Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said the country is “not a state of all its citizens” in yet another apparent attempt to win extremist anti-Arab support ahead of the upcoming general election.

The comments, made on Facebook, were a direct reference to the country’s 1.6 million Arabs, who make up almost a fifth of the population.


“Israel is not a state of all its citizens,” he wrote in response to comments from the TV host Rotem Sela. “According to the basic nationality law we passed, Israel is the nation state of the Jewish people – and only it.”

The racism and religious bigotry is explicit. It is enshrined in the Basic Law, and has been upheld by Israel's version of the Supreme Court.

Oh look at you filtering information to make it say what you want it to say. Well done.

I am highlighting his actual, translated from Hebrew words, so you don't miss them.

At no point has any Israeli politician attempted to kick out the non-Muslims who live inside Israel.

That is incorrect. Palestinians have been forced out plenty of times in the past. Just ask Loren. I'm sure he remembers that village of Israeli citizens the government tried to strip of their citizenship merely because they weren't Jews. Or ask Derec. I'm sure he can find all sorts of dirt on the Israelis who were dropped off at the border with Jordan and told to keep walking east.

Israel has kept the ethnic cleansing to a moderate pace since the 1970s but it looks to be gearing up for a major pogrom over the next few months.

All these are fringe cases that have reasons. Yes, they are a troubling development. But from these to make the case that Israel is trying to steal land from Palestinians is stupid

There are no racist apartheid laws.

Except for the racist apartheid law that says Israelis must be identified as either Jews or Arabs on their national ID cards so the government can tell which ones get preferential treatment from the Jewish State, drive on the Jews Only roads, live in the Jews Only settlements, ride on the Jews Only buses, etc.

In Israel Muslims have preferential treatment. The government is bending over backward to accomodate Muslims

And not to belabour the point, but Israel controls Jerusalem. The second Temple was destroyed. The most sacred Temple for all Jews. They have not demolished the Al-Aqsa mosque to rebuild the second Temple. Which would be the obvious thing for a nationalistic Jewish government to do. I wonder why?

Israeli Muslims are even exempt from military service if they like. Which is pretty awesome for them.

So can the Ultra Orthodox. Big deal.

It is a big deal. Jews do a long military service

Muslims often claim they have been kicked off their land, but its not true. The land Jews took from Muslims was land the Muslims, at that time, had abandoned, because they feared a non-existent genocide on Muslims.

This is bullshit akin to the Lost Cause mythology in the United States.

The Transfer Committee of the Jewish Agency for Palestine worked long and hard to figure out a way to forcibly remove Palestinians. Villages were attacked, civilians were massacred, more than nearly 700,000 people were made refugees and their properties were confiscated, all according to Plan (Dalet).

Bah. Stop twisting facts

 

[Arctish]

Muslims often claim they have been kicked off their land, but its not true. The land Jews took from Muslims was land the Muslims, at that time, had abandoned, because they feared a non-existent genocide on Muslims.

This is bullshit akin to the Lost Cause mythology in the United States.

The Transfer Committee of the Jewish Agency for Palestine worked long and hard to figure out a way to forcibly remove Palestinians. Villages were attacked, civilians were massacred, more than nearly 700,000 people were made refugees and their properties were confiscated, all according to Plan (Dalet).

Bah. Stop twisting facts

Twisting facts???

What fact do you think I'm twisting? The existence of a committee in the Jewish Agency for Palestine dedicated to devising means of achieving ethnic cleansing in Palestine so Jews could create a State with a Jewish majority in a part of the world where they hadn't been in the majority for thousands of years? The existence of Plan Dalet? The massacres and ethnic cleansing that resulted from Irgun and Lehi terrorists carrying out the Plan? The confiscation of properties belonging to refugee Palestinians?

Maybe later today I'll dig up the old thread about the Israeli historians like Benny Morris publishing all the evidence anyone needs in order to realize that the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians was deliberate and continued well into the 1950s, was briefly stalled in the 1960s and then resumed as Israelis moved settlers into the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

I don't know how anyone who has been on these boards for more than six months could have missed it, but the evidence of deliberate, pre-planned, on-going ethnic cleansing by Zionists since the 1940s is well documented and abundant.

 

[laughing dog]

[QUOTE="laughing dog]

If the IDF literally killed every single Gazan civilian in their attempts to eliminate Hamas, according to your reasoning, that extirpation of Gazans is ok because it was "unintentional".

The death toll is at ~1.5% even if we take Hamas numbers seriously. Your hyperbolic hypothetical is just that.

It is. Nice evasion. I wonder shy.

 

[ZiprHead]

Amnesty International is notoriously hostile to Israel.

Doesn't mean they are wrong.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Israel was given an opportunity, effectively no questions asked in their response. The western world looked away for a couple months. Netanyahu didn't achieve much. We are hearing 20% losses for Hamas. That isn't progress.

I think much has been achieved. IDF is claiming ~13k dead terrorist fighters. If we assume ~40k Hamas fighters and ~20k belonging to other terror groups (Islamic Jihad, PFLP, DFLP etc.) So that is just over 20%. But killing more than 1/5 of the enemy fighters in a few months is actually pretty good.
Consider another thing. The 60k estimate is more than 10% of all military age males in Gaza - that's a big share. Which means less than half of this number are likely the equivalent of western "active duty", the rest being "reservists". But those who have been fighting (and dying) in the early months of this war would have been mostly "active duty", with "reservists" kept, well, in reserve. That means that the effective losses are greater than the 20% figure would suggest, esp. when you add those wounded and/or captured.
Then there are leaders. The death of Marwan Issa has finally been confirmed, and he was, with Sinwar and Deif, part of the Hamas triumvirate in Gaza. Just yesterday, in an operation at the Al Shifa hospital, IDF captured Mahmoud Kawasme who was involved in the kidnapping and murder of 3 Israeli teenagers in 2014.

None of these people weren't expendable.

Then you have to consider all the terror tunnels and other Hamas infrastructure that was destroyed.

Source? Just how much has actually been destroyed?

Contrary to what you wrote, IDF managed to accomplish much in less than 6 months. Now it is necessary to go into Rafah and finish the job. Once this last stronghold falls, the end of major operations will be very close at hand.

"Finish the job"? Man, you must love your military fiction. As if there is a Boss Man at the end of the level and once he is defeated Israel wins and we can just all live in peace.

Biden wouldn't be speaking against Netanyahu publicly if the guy indicated there was some viable exit strategy here.

Biden is speaking against Netanyahu publicly because of the threat to his reelection by the anti-Israel caucus of the Democratic Party, consisting of Muslims/Arabs and their useful idiots on the far left.

It must be easy to live life assuming that those that disagree with you are anti-Semitic monsters.

Currently the Israelis are living with fear, but at home, with markets, and food, and beds. I'm tiring of dead or starving being the bar used for whether things are humane for the Gazans at this point. How long do you think Gazans should suck it up?

Suck up what exactly? The war?

The displacement. Already brought it up. How long must they live in tents, with really no manner to get food, medical care on demand.

Hamas could end this war by releasing the hostages and surrendering. We should not expect Israel to have to "suck up" the fact that Hamas is determined to repeat 10/7 over and over again, as they have clearly stated.

The back and forth of Gaza = Hamas, Hamas = Gaza. Hamas doesn't care about the Gazans.

Over a thousand Israelis were slaughtered, but now over a one million Gazans are displaced and suffering (and certainly more tha5n one thousand Gazan civilians are dead). The Gazans have no infrastructure in place, no police, no government, no one to tell them what is next.
For how long?

Until Hamas is defeated. Maybe Gazans should wake up and take up arms against Hamas. Italians hanged Mussolini. Maybe Gazans can hang Sinwar.

Hamas can't be defeated. That is a fantasy. It is also so easy to talk about how other people should wage a revolution. Why haven't the North Koreans revolted yet?

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/20/middleeast/israel-gaza-settlers-daniella-weiss/index.html

Karnai Shomron, West BankCNN —
The message went out the day before on several WhatsApp groups: A chance to meet Daniella Weiss, the godmother of the Zionist settler movement, for an informational session on the reestablishment of Israeli settlements in Gaza after the war.

By the time the evening’s host had put out freshly baked chocolate babka for the 20 guests circled in her living room in the Karnai Shomron settlement in the West Bank, Weiss was already well into her pitch.

But her audience needed little convincing. They were true believers with deep nostalgia for Gush Katif, even if some were too young to have been able to remember it existing. The bloc of 21 Israeli settlements was forcibly evacuated by the Israel Defense Forces in 2005 when Israel left the Gaza Strip.

“Register, register. You’ll be in Gaza,” Weiss said with an intense gaze, the 78-year-old telling her audience she is absolutely convinced it will happen in her lifetime.

...

A poll in January from The Jewish People Policy Institute found that 26% of Israelis advocate for the reconstruction of the Gush Katif settlements after the war is over. Among supporters of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s right-wing coalition government, the number jumps to 51% compared to 3% for supporters of the opposition.

Late that month, jubilant crowds packed an auditorium in Jerusalem for the “Victory of Israel” conference calling for the resettlement of Gaza.

...

The statistics are interesting because even though this faction is a significant minority, within the coalition party in charge, they are a slim majority.

 

[laughing dog]

The biggest fear Palestinians seem to have is that Jews will treat them like Muslims often treat religious minorities. But its so far been an irrational fear

Life in the West Bank - is a relatively mild report. And the settler violence is extensively reported. Here are but two reports - 2023 - Worst year for settler violence and Settler violence.

You really need to get some perspective.

 

[Copernicus]

Israel had the power to remove that terrorist government.

How? Israel is trying now, and you see how difficult it is. Especially since Hamas is popular among the populace. Even those that support other factions, like Islamic Jihad or PFLP still support terrorism against Israel.
In the earlier conflicts, like the 2008/9 Operation Cast Lead, Israel had been pressured to end hostilities early, well before removal of Hamas could be accomplished.

I misspoke by calling Hamas a "government". It was only ever a group that was once elected to administer Gaza in 2006. But "popular"? What makes you think that Hamas is popular? Do you have polling data? They don't have popular elections anymore. Maybe you have psychic powers that allow you to know what is in the hearts and minds of people living in that concentrated population of stateless Palestinians.

Did Israel have the power to remove the Hamas leadership there? The Gaza Strip has been owned and controlled by Israel since it was created. Israel controls food, water, and power supplied to Gaza and forbids its captive residents to have a seaport or airport. Israel has one of the best-equipped and trained military forces in the region and has invaded the strip before to punish terrorist actions by those confined to the strip. The entire economy of the Gaza Strip has always been in Israeli hands. Hamas was allowed to receive aid from foreign sources by Israel, and the Israeli government was fully aware of their anti-Zionist rhetoric. Hamas was allowed to run the Gaza Strip, because they were useful to Israeli policy in the West Bank. They served as a cat's paw to weaken the PLO by splitting unified opposition to land grabs by Israel in the West Bank.

 

[ZiprHead]

I misspoke by calling Hamas a "government". It was only ever a group that was once elected to administer Gaza in 2006. But "popular"? What makes you think that Hamas is popular? Do you have polling data? They don't have popular elections anymore. Maybe you have psychic powers that allow you to know what is in the hearts and minds of people living in that concentrated population of stateless Palestinians.

I wouldn't trust any poll of Gazans about Hamas. Can you imagine what would happen to a Gazan who expressed to a pollster that Hamas should go and Hamas finds out about it?

 

[Derec]

I misspoke by calling Hamas a "government". It was only ever a group that was once elected to administer Gaza in 2006. But "popular"? What makes you think that Hamas is popular?

Well in 2006 they managed to win the legislative elections. And polling after that shows them consistently as one of the most popular Palestinian factions. Note that most other factions - Islamic Jihad, PFLP and even parts of Fatah do not disagree with Hamas when it comes to attacking Israel and killing Jews. In fact, 10/7 massacre remains very popular among Palestinians.
Poll shows sustained Palestinian support for Hamas despite mounting Gaza death toll
The poll does not distinguish between Gaza and West Bank, but still:

According to the survey, which was carried out between 5-10 March and sampled some 1,580 Palestinian adults in Gaza and the occupied West Bank, 70 percent of respondents said they were satisfied with the role Hamas has played during the course of the war, with 61 percent also approving of the role played by its Gaza-based leader, Yahya Sinwar. [...]
The survey also found that 71 percent of Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank believed that the attack on southern Israel on 7 October was “correct”, a drop of just one percent, according to the organisation’s previous poll published in December.

What makes you think that Hamas is not popular?

Did Israel have the power to remove the Hamas leadership there? The Gaza Strip has been owned and controlled by Israel since it was created.

Wrong. Egypt ran Gaza Strip from 1948-1967. And after 2005, Israel disengaged from the Strip. Hamas took over after that.

Israel controls food, water, and power supplied to Gaza and forbids its captive residents to have a seaport or airport.

Again, wrong. Gaza also has a border with Egypt. But what do you want Israel to do? Shut down all deliveries until Gazans depose Hamas? Can you imagine the outcry?! As it stands, Israel is letting in >100 trucks in every day and they are still being accused of "starving" Gaza.
As to the airport, they had one until they decided to start the Second Intifada and kill Israeli civilians. Israel would have no objections to airports or seaports in Gaza had Gazans decided to live next to Israel in peace instead of continuously attacking Israel. Actions have consequences.

Israel has one of the best-equipped and trained military forces in the region and has invaded the strip before to punish terrorist actions by those confined to the strip. '

But they were never given a free hand to actually depose Hamas. Israel had always been pressured into agreeing to a quick ceasefire after running some airstrikes and limited incursions. Because of the scale and brutality of the 10/7 massacre, Israel had been given more of a leeway, but still not enough, since US objects to IDF going into Rafah.

The entire economy of the Gaza Strip has always been in Israeli hands. Hamas was allowed to receive aid from foreign sources by Israel, and the Israeli government was fully aware of their anti-Zionist rhetoric. Hamas was allowed to run the Gaza Strip, because they were useful to Israeli policy in the West Bank. They served as a cat's paw to weaken the PLO by splitting unified opposition to land grabs by Israel in the West Bank.

That is completely ahistorical. We see now that removing Hamas from power is not that easy. Part of it is certainly that they enjoy strong support amongst Gazans. They would not be able to recruit ~40k fighters, almost 10% of male military age population, if they did not.

 

[Derec]

None of these people weren't expendable.

"None of these people weren't expendable"? So, all of these people were expendable?
And who is "these people"? The closest antecedent are the three Israeli teens who were murdered by Hamas in 2014.

Source? Just how much has actually been destroyed?

Estimates of how much has been destroyed vary, but if you had followed the news, it gets reported when a tunnel is found and destroyed. There have been a bunch. Example:
IDF says it uncovered major Gaza tunnel passing under hospital, university

"Finish the job"? Man, you must love your military fiction. As if there is a Boss Man at the end of the level and once he is defeated Israel wins and we can just all live in peace.

Local Boss Man is Yaya Sinwar. And yes, Israel definitely can win this war by killing/capturing him and destroying remaining Hamas units.
Whether that will lead to a lasting peace or not is entirely up to Gazans. Allies won in Germany by driving Boss Man Hitler to suicide and by defeating the Wehrmacht. But it was up to Germans to accept that and not engage in guerilla warfare. They chose wisely. Palestinians have, up to now, chosen foolishly.

It must be easy to live life assuming that those that disagree with you are anti-Semitic monsters.

Many are. Those tearing down posters of kidnapped Israeli civilians are definitely "anti-Semitic monsters". Those who say that 10/7 was justified are definitely monsters. But I do acknowledge that most are just useful idiots, not monsters.

The displacement. Already brought it up. How long must they live in tents, with really no manner to get food, medical care on demand.

You brought up a lot of things - I thought it best to ask for clarification.
And to answer your question: as long as the war is going on, I reckon. And then some time thereafter. It will take some time for Gaza to be rebuilt. After the war is over it will be easier to bring food and other supplies, but much of infrastructure and living units have been damaged or destroyed.

The back and forth of Gaza = Hamas, Hamas = Gaza. Hamas doesn't care about the Gazans.

And yet, Hamas and groups like it are popular in Gaza. Sure, they are not congruent sets, but there is a big ∩. And many of those who do not support Hamas for whatever reason still support groups with similar aims when it comes to Israel. Islamic Jihad is even worse than Hamas on all counts. PFLP may not call for a theocracy, but they also want to abolish Israel and their Abu Mustafa Brigades have participated in the 10/7 massacre.

Hamas can't be defeated. That is a fantasy.

On the contrary. It is fantasy to think of Hamas as some supernatural Hydra-like entity. Of course they can be defeated.
The ideology behind it will be a tougher nut to crack. Ultimately, Gazans must decide to abandon their vainglorious hopes of conquering Israel. And the pipeline of moneys and weapons from the regime in Tehran must be stopped too.

It is also so easy to talk about how other people should wage a revolution. Why haven't the North Koreans revolted yet?

I don't know. Maybe they should have. But North Korea hadn't invaded the South last year leading to war between the two, which is why we are talking about Gaza instead.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Gazans would also be safer and have more access to aid in refugee facilities in Ashkelon. Heck, they'd be safer and have more access to aid right there in Gaza if Israel stopped bombing and shelling the part of the Strip where it told them to go to seek safety.

Sorry if reality intrudes again but no they won't.

It doesn't matter how much you want Israel to take responsibility for the disaster brought about by violent Islamic terrorists. They are not going to do it because it would be tantamount to social suicide. It would be helping the Islamicists achieve their goals of genocide and destruction of Israelis.

Tom

I take it you're in the 'Palestinians are inherently evil and would poison our blood' camp.

it's true that Israel would cease to be a Jewish State if it were to accept non-Jews as full citizens and respect the Right of Return and the Rights of refugees. But the State of Israel won't cease to exist if Gazan orphans and mothers with young children move into refugee camps in the Ashkelon area. Israel is pretty darn proud of its ability to take in waves of immigrants and provide housing for them. And it's not like Israel would be footing the bill, either.

So racism and religious bigotry aside, what's the problem?

1) Letting them move into refugee camps in Ashkelon would mean writing off the city. I don't think it's current occupants would approve of your approach. It's not poisoning the blood, it's the booby traps they would leave behind.

2) Letting them move into refugee camps anywhere in Israel would mean they would become permanent refugees. Hamas would kill them if they tried to return Gaza.

3) Hamas would not allow their human shields to leave.

I said "Racism and bigotry aside, what's the problem?".

That does not mean "add a side of racism and bigotry to what you are serving".

If all you have to offer is racism and bigotry, then don't respond to questions that specifically call for answers that don't have that content. But if you do have something else, then post it and support your claims.

Also, are there two different classes of Israelis? Your posts indicate some Israelis should not, for reasons having to do with their safety, have Palestinians living nearby, while the other kind of Israeli can move into newly built settlements in Palestinian towns and villages in the West Bank, and you're perfectly fine with that. What's with the double standards?

I'm simply giving you reality, not racism or bigotry. I'm talking about what Hamas would do, not what the people want to happen.

And since you seem in denial about human shields:

(Arabic, but Facebook will robotranslate it)


Look at the last point in the list--that's a specific call for human shields. And it's effectively proof they are violating the Geneva conventions as there would be no attack on the hospital if there wasn't resistance from the hospital.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

You claimed the bombardment was indiscriminate. If it were indiscriminate the expected result would be at most the same percent of Hamas killed as civilians and in practice the percent of Hamas killed would be far lower due to their tunnels. The fact that the ratio is skewed 20:1 (by Hamas data, more like 50:1 by Israeli data) is a clear rebuttal to it being indiscriminate.

Let me reiterate what I wrote earlier, with an addition in bold:

So Israel has killed one percent of the Gazan population. In five months.

I wonder how the U.S. would feel if a foreign invader came here and killed 3.4 million people in five months. None too happy, I’d think.

Addition: But, since the killing of 3.4 million Americans in five months was not INDISCRIMINATE, why, that’s perfectly OK, then. Carry on killing as you are!

Yet another non-rebuttal.

It's a standard Hamas talking point that the IDF attacks are "indiscriminate". That would result in pretty much a random distribution of casualties, but we see an extremely non-random distribution. Thus the attacks must not be indiscriminate.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

So Israel has killed one percent of the Gazan population. In five months.
I wonder how the U.S. would feel if a foreign invader came here and killed 3.4 million people in five months. None too happy, I’d think.

Classic "reverse victim and offender". You are forgetting (or ignoring) that Gaza started this war by invading Israel and murdering >1,200 people and kidnaping 100s of others.

Gaza did no such thing. Hamas - an usurper - did it.

1) In common usage in situations like this a country and it's government are often used interchangeably.

2) The fact that a war is pursued by someone not democratically elected doesn't mean that another country is wrong in collateral damage inflicted on the country. Or must Ukraine not hit orcish oil refineries?

3) And yet again we see the people support it:

Public Opinion Poll No (91) | PCPSR

www.pcpsr.org

71% say the 10/7 attack was the right thing to do.

And note that the majority admit Hamas is taking the aid.

And note that 81% of people who saw videos of Hamas committing atrocities on 10/7 say that Hamas did not commit atrocities. The only explanation for this that makes any sense is that they consider committing atrocities on Jews to be proper behavior.

And note that the majority of the population wants to see Hamas in power at the end of the war.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Moral equivalency got nothing to do with negotiation. No. I recognize the reality of negotiating. If both parties are serious, they will bargain which means ignoring the bluster and bigotry. If at least one is not, nothing will happen.
I have lots if experience negotiating. If course not as much was at stake, but the same basic principles apply - neither hide had much trust in the other, and one side was out to obliterate the other organization.

In my view, the report you cite is evidence someone is trying to scuttle any ceasefire negotiations.

The problem here is that the core demand of each side is effectively the death of the other side.

You're locked in a room with someone, there's a gun on the table. Negotiate who will eat a bullet.

You seem to feel it's possible, present how you will solve this?

There is nothing to solve because your hypothetical is nonsense.

You negotiate. Negotiating does not guarantee success.

The point is that sometimes there is no solution acceptable to both parties. That's what we have here: Hamas: the existence of Israel is unacceptable. Israel: the existence of Israel is mandatory. What would be a position both could agree to?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

You claimed the bombardment was indiscriminate. If it were indiscriminate the expected result would be at most the same percent of Hamas killed as civilians and in practice the percent of Hamas killed would be far lower due to their tunnels. The fact that the ratio is skewed 20:1 (by Hamas data, more like 50:1 by Israeli data) is a clear rebuttal to it being indiscriminate.

Dropping 2,000 pound bombs that completely destroys entire city blocks in one fell swoop is pretty indiscriminant in my book.

The average bomb kills nobody despite being dropped in a city. That seems like some very good targeting. Looking around here the only places I could find where that would be even a remote possibility are outside the edge of the city, one flood control basin in the city and one gravel quarry in the city--and I'm in a suburban area, nowhere near as dense as what we are seeing.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I don't think Al-Jazeera is a terrorist mouthpiece. They've historically been very level headed. Just because I support Israels attack on Gaza doesn't make me blind to the fact that any armed incursion anywhere doesn't come at a huge cost to those living there. Obviously the Palestinian people are suffering. Obviously many of them are innocent, and the fucking sucks.

Al Jazeera used to be a good source. But now they are controlled by Qatar--and Qatar has been funding Hamas.

It was always owned by the Qatari royal family. Right from the start they've had a sacred policy of not involving themselves in what Al-Jazeera is reporting about. They have editorial autonomy. It's always been like that.

Yes, the Qatari royal family and government funds Hamas.

And they also understand that a news publication only has value if it is free to write whatever they want to. Al-Jazeera has a degree of freeedom news publications driven by the need to generate add revenue, doesn't have. BBC is another one.

I think you are unncessarily critical of them.

You really think they have editorial freedom?!?!

And finally, in an enviroment where rockets and bombs are flying, some are not going to hit their intended targets. It's just going to happen. And that sucks.

Just because you support a side in a conflict, don't make the mistake of whitewashing whatever that side does. War is inherently problematic.

I'm not trying to ignore what is happening. I was pointing out the claim of "indiscriminate" is totally bogus. If it were truly indiscriminate you would see a lower percentage of terrorist dead (because they have the tunnels to hide in) than civilian dead. Instead, even by their own data the odds of a terrorist dying are 20x the odds of a civilian dying.

And note that the Palestinian dead count has problems. Partially from being bogus, partially from Hamas:

IDF says it did not open fire at aid convoy in Gaza but claims Palestinian gunmen were responsible

The first aid ship has reached Gaza since the beginning of the war, while Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's office says it has approved "plans for action" in Rafah.

www.cnn.com

Which is far more consistent with what I would have expected to happen than the initial reports were. Hamas does not want aid reaching the people, shooting up those trying to get the aid is not at all unexpected.

The numbers supplied by Hamas are at best lies. At worst random. Hamas do not have the data with which to inform anyone of how it's going.

Israel most likely have accurate data. I'm convinced that Isarael has better records on the Palestinians than either the PA or Hamas does. But they also have an incentive to downplay Palestinian losses. So can't be trusted either.

Except history shows that the Israeli numbers are pretty accurate. I do agree they would be less accurate this time--but that's just a lack of data. Nobody knows exact numbers.

How the fuck do we calculate percentages in this mess of a conflict? Percentages of what fantsy number someone pulled out of their ass?

If a journalist on site thinks it looks like indiscrimitate bombing then it's perfectly fine that they print that. No matter the truth.

Journalism isn't perfect. It's just the best we can do.

The problem is that it's a Hamas talking point clearly at odds with reality. All major journalistic organizations will pretty much report what Hamas claims because to do otherwise would put their people in danger or get them barred--and to them not being able to cover a story is far worse than false coverage.

Look what happened with reporting on Trump press conferences--you wanted to report, you reported what he wanted, you didn't ask even remotely hard questions. And he could only kick reporters out, not kill them.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Agreed. We can't believe Hamas's numbers.

MSN

The big issue is that Hamas considers its killed soldiers as civilians. Taking them out of their inflated numbers, the combat to civilian death ratio is about 1:2. I agree with the author of this article that any death of a civilian is a tragedy. However, civilians usually make up 90% of deaths from combat (according to united nations). Israel is far better at limiting civilian deaths in urban warfare than the rest of the world (better than the US; far better than Russia). The goal should really be to stop wars.

And note that this misses a couple of things:

1) Things like that "500 dead" from the IJ oops. No way they are going to admit they didn't exist, so they are counted.

2) How many are rockets that fall short? (Typically 10-20% of the dead) How many were deliberately killed by Hamas?

 

[laughing dog]

Moral equivalency got nothing to do with negotiation. No. I recognize the reality of negotiating. If both parties are serious, they will bargain which means ignoring the bluster and bigotry. If at least one is not, nothing will happen.
I have lots if experience negotiating. If course not as much was at stake, but the same basic principles apply - neither hide had much trust in the other, and one side was out to obliterate the other organization.

In my view, the report you cite is evidence someone is trying to scuttle any ceasefire negotiations.

The problem here is that the core demand of each side is effectively the death of the other side.

You're locked in a room with someone, there's a gun on the table. Negotiate who will eat a bullet.

You seem to feel it's possible, present how you will solve this?

There is nothing to solve because your hypothetical is nonsense.

You negotiate. Negotiating does not guarantee success.

The point is that sometimes there is no solution acceptable to both parties. That's what we have here: Hamas: the existence of Israel is unacceptable. Israel: the existence of Israel is mandatory. What would be a position both could agree to?

It is up to the involved parties to make the determination that a solution cannot be negotiated, not kibitzers from the peanut gallery . Certainly not based on opening demands.