Merged Gaza just launched an unprovoked attack on Israel

[Loren Pechtel]

It's just we recognize that going around slapping a "genocide" label on something doesn't make it genocide.

No, of course "we" recognize that. Labels don't make it genocide.
What makes it genocide is a starvation campaign following a murderous indiscriminate campaign of violence mostly targeting civilians including women and children.

THAT is genocide.

"A recent analysis of Israeli military data and Health Ministry figures revealed that at least 83% of the people killed in Gaza were civilians; if only confirmed militant deaths are counted, the percentage may be even higher, above 86%. That would mean over 51,000 Gazan civilians have been killed so far—a number supported by both health ministry reporting and independent expert assessments."
IDF Data

Simple test: From that article

Instead, the classified data backs up the findings of several studies suggesting Israel’s bombardment of Gaza has killed civilians at a rate with few parallels in modern warfare.

Note the deception. They are talking about the rate of civilian casualties--not the percent that are civilian. That talks about the pace of the war, not the accuracy of the shooting.

The first article pretends to rebut the 90% civilian number--but their data fails to control for whether the civilians got out of the city before the fighting. Thus it is completely useless, and the fact that it pretends to be useful is a big strike against it.

The second pretends it's mostly women and children, something already shown wrong. Far more children lost their father than their mother, far more men than women lost a limb. That says military age deaths skew highly male. And note the data collection technique they mention: fill out an online form. That's proof of death?!

And your last one claims an increasing civilian death rate is due to Israeli tactics, not considering that Hamas is engineering it. And it's based on very early data from Hamas.

And of course that doesn't include the ongoing body count from starvation and malnutrition, which - according to you - cannot include any Hamas because they're rolling in food they appropriated from aid distributions.

Hamas has done an incredibly poor job of convincing us that there is starvation. 12 fake cases, why can't they find a single real one? Should be trivial if the conditions are as claimed. The only explanation that makes any sense is there aren't real ones.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Dr. Zoidberg has deliberately made this thread into a sewer to deflect from his apologia for genocide and starvation of children.

I just have a problem with racism and bigotry. When the degree of racist hatred is this bad, it makes having adult conversations hard. The racism just seems to hamper the ability to think straight

Just stop that bullshit. Being critical of government policy in Israel is not racism or bigotry. No one has ever in this thread criticized any Israeli just for being Jewish.

That's not what we are objecting to. We are pointing out the extremely biased scale being used to judge actions.

 

[ZiprHead]

If you feel that military force against Hamas and Gazans in general is a good thing, then that's an opinion I don't share, but which you can probably justify. But if you feel that such force is in any way helpful to the hostages, you are utterly delusional.

The problem here is "good". It's not good. It's the least bad. It is entirely reasonable for Israel to set up the situation such that the fighting is not on their territory--Israel has no way to make there be no fighting. And note that it has gotten the majority of them out.

You missed my point. The question is not whether it is "good", it is whether it is "in any way helpful to the hostages".

It's not.

Not? Without the hammering Israel would not have gotten any of them back.

The only time any of the hostages have been gotten back has been during ceasefires.

 

[Arctish]

Well then, you must think an "Israeli" national identity is a sham. The Supreme Court of Israel agrees with you.

What do you mean?

I mean what I was talking about here, and every other time I have linked to a report on the ruling of Israel's Supreme Court that denied the petition of citizens of Israel who wanted to be identified as Israeli on their national ID cards.

Do you have actual quotes of someone doing that, or just distorted interpretations of what someone actually said?

I posted two articles where the supposedly moderate PA president does that.

The AP article you quoted here about Abbas saying Jesus was a Palestinian messenger doesn't indicate he denies Jesus was a Jew, it says he said Jesus was from Palestine and it notes that Bethlehem is in Palestine.

You really can't be that naive? And connect it with his idiotic statement about the Jewish Temple, and it is clear that he is denying Jewish connection to the Land of Israel. No matter how much effort you want to expend on apologetics.

He hasn't denied the connection. He doesn't think the connection European Jews have to it outweighs the connection the native people of Palestine have to it.

Abbas was born into a family with Jewish ancestry in a town with a mixed Jewish, Muslim, and Christian population. I highly doubt he is unaware that Palestinian Jews lived in Palestine alongside of Palestinians of other faiths for thousands of years.

I haven't looked into the question about the location of the First Temple but AFAIK archeologists have yet to find any trace of it on Temple Mount.

 

[Arctish]

BTW, the name Palestine as a place name for the region goes all the way back to the 5th century BCE when Heredotus recorded that name in his work Histories. There are older inscriptions that reference very similar sounding names for the same place.

As far as I know, Herodotus referred only to the coastal strip by that name. Which would be consistent with the land where the Philistines settled during the Bronze Age collapse.

And this means what, exactly? That Herodotus failed to use Google Maps correctly, therefore his use of the word "Palestine" as a name for the region he was describing can be ignored and your silly quibbling has merit?

Anyway, a discussion of what sounds can be spelled out in Arabic says nothing about what name the Palestinian people call their homeland, whether its the one that has been in use for the past 2,500 years or some other word.

Except that the Land of Israel is not the homeland of the Arabs. Not even Philiistia is, as Philistines have nothing whatsoever to do with people calling themselves "Palestinian" today. Maybe give Gaza back to Greece? #landBack
And it's not just "Palestine" that trips them up. Take the city of Shechem. Romans built a new city at that site and called it "Flavia Neapolis". Arabs came and corrupted it to "Nablus".

The land of Israel isn't the homeland of Germans, Russians, Hungarians, Romanians, or Yemenis either.

It's the homeland of the Palestinian people. Which version of the god of Abraham each individual believes is the real one, if any, does not affect their ancestry, their ethnicity, or their Right to call Palestine their ancestral homeland.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Dr. Zoidberg has deliberately made this thread into a sewer to deflect from his apologia for genocide and starvation of children.

I just have a problem with racism and bigotry. When the degree of racist hatred is this bad, it makes having adult conversations hard. The racism just seems to hamper the ability to think straight

Just stop that bullshit. Being critical of government policy in Israel is not racism or bigotry. No one has ever in this thread criticized any Israeli just for being Jewish.

That's not what we are objecting to. We are pointing out the extremely biased scale being used to judge actions.

Also that Jews are just supposed to accept that sometimes a foreign force will invade and kidnapp some of your people, and because they are Jews they should just learm to live with it. While the rest of us are of course allowed to defend ourselves. Just not Jews

 

[DrZoidberg]

We have aid workers coming back saying this is not being done by "snipers" who work from the shadows so they cannot be identified but by Israelis soldiers doing so out in the open.

And you don't see the double standard?

The shooters work from the shadows and can't be identified. Thus it's Israel, why???

Did your train of thought derail before you got to the second half of the last sentence???

And your faith is blinding you.

Your "evidence" is shots from unidentified people. Unidentified is unidentified, I'm questioning why you assume it's Israel. The outcome of such shots is highly negative for Israel, highly positive for Hamas. Shouldn't that put Hamas on the suspect list?

Because western eyewitnesses have said it was Israeli soldiers who were doing the shooting. That was the second part you ignored.

It doesn't matter if there's eye witnesses. It doesn't make Israel guilty. As long as Hamas fighters look like civilians, then civilians will keep accidentally get shot. Soldiers primary objective is to stay alive and not take unnecessary risks. This is why it's so extremely irresponsible by Hamas not to wear uniforms. Its pretty basic to modern warfare.

Other Arab nations know this. Which informs their current attitude towards Hamas.

Another army that behaved almost as bad as Hamas was ISIS. All other Arab nation lost all love for ISIS, really fast

Think of the sniper cases. Those weren't fog of war, they clearly were targeted. But we have zero evidence of the identity of the shooters.

Hamas has threatened to kill any Gazan who goes to recieve aid from USAID. From their perspective it's their "right" to kill any Gazan in that line. And we know they have no problem killing their own people. So it fits their methods.

 

[DrZoidberg]

If you feel that military force against Hamas and Gazans in general is a good thing, then that's an opinion I don't share, but which you can probably justify. But if you feel that such force is in any way helpful to the hostages, you are utterly delusional.

The problem here is "good". It's not good. It's the least bad. It is entirely reasonable for Israel to set up the situation such that the fighting is not on their territory--Israel has no way to make there be no fighting. And note that it has gotten the majority of them out.

You missed my point. The question is not whether it is "good", it is whether it is "in any way helpful to the hostages".

It's not.

Not? Without the hammering Israel would not have gotten any of them back.

The only time any of the hostages have been gotten back has been during ceasefires.

Because Netanyahu's cabinet twisted his arm forcing him to play into Hamas' hands, exchanging hostages for thousands of Palestinian fanatics. Thousands of fantatics who are now fighting Israel. Agreeing to that "prisoner" exchange was idiotic for Israel.

How many IDF soldiers, and Gazan civilians, have died because of these guys were released back into the ranks of Hamas? People don't like to think of that.

Validating Hamas' methods is dangerous. Not just for Israel, bur for world peace. If they get away with it, then every dictator around the world will take notice. The degree of carnage in Gaza is unacceptable. Yet, so many aren't holding Hamas accountable. But blaming Israel. That's nuts. And not good for the future peace of this world.

 

[Tigers!]

If you feel that military force against Hamas and Gazans in general is a good thing, then that's an opinion I don't share, but which you can probably justify. But if you feel that such force is in any way helpful to the hostages, you are utterly delusional.

The problem here is "good". It's not good. It's the least bad. It is entirely reasonable for Israel to set up the situation such that the fighting is not on their territory--Israel has no way to make there be no fighting. And note that it has gotten the majority of them out.

You missed my point. The question is not whether it is "good", it is whether it is "in any way helpful to the hostages".

It's not.

Not? Without the hammering Israel would not have gotten any of them back.

The only time any of the hostages have been gotten back has been during ceasefires.

Hamas only wanted ceasefires when they were being particularly hammered by Israel. They were not doing it out of the goodness of their hearts. They could release hostages at any time.

 

[laughing dog]

If you feel that military force against Hamas and Gazans in general is a good thing, then that's an opinion I don't share, but which you can probably justify. But if you feel that such force is in any way helpful to the hostages, you are utterly delusional.

The problem here is "good". It's not good. It's the least bad. It is entirely reasonable for Israel to set up the situation such that the fighting is not on their territory--Israel has no way to make there be no fighting. And note that it has gotten the majority of them out.

You missed my point. The question is not whether it is "good", it is whether it is "in any way helpful to the hostages".

It's not.

Not? Without the hammering Israel would not have gotten any of them back.

That is an opinion. Another opinion is that the hostages were taken for two reasons: bargaining purposes and retaliation mitigation, The former suggests possible hostage with such devastation while the latter shoes a drastic miscalculation on the part of Hamas.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

If you feel that military force against Hamas and Gazans in general is a good thing, then that's an opinion I don't share, but which you can probably justify. But if you feel that such force is in any way helpful to the hostages, you are utterly delusional.

The problem here is "good". It's not good. It's the least bad. It is entirely reasonable for Israel to set up the situation such that the fighting is not on their territory--Israel has no way to make there be no fighting. And note that it has gotten the majority of them out.

You missed my point. The question is not whether it is "good", it is whether it is "in any way helpful to the hostages".

It's not.

Not? Without the hammering Israel would not have gotten any of them back.

The only time any of the hostages have been gotten back has been during ceasefires.

Ceasefires that were only agreed to because of how much damage Israel has done to their organization.

And they've gotten some back in raids.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Think of the sniper cases. Those weren't fog of war, they clearly were targeted. But we have zero evidence of the identity of the shooters.

Hamas has threatened to kill any Gazan who goes to recieve aid from USAID. From their perspective it's their "right" to kill any Gazan in that line. And we know they have no problem killing their own people. So it fits their methods.

The sniper issues were earlier. Nobody claimed to have seen the shooters so there was no way to know what side they were on. Yet people automatically believe they were IDF. To accept that they were Hamas is to admit there is a horror that can't be fixed.

 

[Arctish]

Think of the sniper cases. Those weren't fog of war, they clearly were targeted. But we have zero evidence of the identity of the shooters.

Hamas has threatened to kill any Gazan who goes to recieve aid from USAID. From their perspective it's their "right" to kill any Gazan in that line. And we know they have no problem killing their own people. So it fits their methods.

The sniper issues were earlier. Nobody claimed to have seen the shooters so there was no way to know what side they were on. Yet people automatically believe they were IDF. To accept that they were Hamas is to admit there is a horror that can't be fixed.

Which specific incidents are you talking about?

Don't be vague.

Also, while you have a point that murder is a horror than cannot be completely prevented, that doesn't mean we should give up on trying to minimize the number of murders or stop trying to identify and prosecute the murderers.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Think of the sniper cases. Those weren't fog of war, they clearly were targeted. But we have zero evidence of the identity of the shooters.

Hamas has threatened to kill any Gazan who goes to recieve aid from USAID. From their perspective it's their "right" to kill any Gazan in that line. And we know they have no problem killing their own people. So it fits their methods.

The sniper issues were earlier. Nobody claimed to have seen the shooters so there was no way to know what side they were on. Yet people automatically believe they were IDF. To accept that they were Hamas is to admit there is a horror that can't be fixed.

Because Hamas said so. It's still a mystery to me why anyone still trusts Hamas. Have they ever been honest about anything so far? I'm not saying IDF's numbers are kosher either. But IDF are at least trying to be believable. Hamas are consistently out in bizarre fantasy land.

 

[ZiprHead]

Nobody claimed to have seen the shooters so there was no way to know what side they were on.

Yes, they have. I posted the statements on video of eyewitnesses.

You, in an unusual manner, ignored that post.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Validating Hamas' methods is dangerous. Not just for Israel, bur for world peace. If they get away with it, then every dictator around the world will take notice. The degree of carnage in Gaza is unacceptable. Yet, so many aren't holding Hamas accountable. But blaming Israel. That's nuts. And not good for the future peace of this world.

What's unique about Gaza is how they have so much control of the propaganda. Saddam killed more than Hamas to try to skirt the oil for food program, but nobody was trumpeting their plight because it wasn't the Jews doing it.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

That is an opinion. Another opinion is that the hostages were taken for two reasons: bargaining purposes and retaliation mitigation, The former suggests possible hostage with such devastation while the latter shoes a drastic miscalculation on the part of Hamas.

Of course it was about bargaining. It's just that past history has established a very high value on hostages, they got so many that no deal was feasible. And every past deal has ended up being worse for Israel.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Nobody claimed to have seen the shooters so there was no way to know what side they were on.

Yes, they have. I posted the statements on video of eyewitnesses.

You, in an unusual manner, ignored that post.

I'm talking about the sniper ones from a while back, not the Hamas shooting people seeing aid and claiming it's the IDF.

 

[southernhybrid]

So, are all the Rabbis and Jewish people who are now protesting against Israel also antisemitic? /s

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/08/26/...e_code=1.hE8.dJ9o.UiOqi8om2Gqh&smid=url-share

As Israel’s tactics in Gaza have increasingly provoked international condemnation, rabbis from across the world are taking the unusual step of speaking out against the Israeli government’s conduct in the war, on moral and religious grounds.

Over the past few weeks, as reports of mass killings in Gaza have spread and experts declared the area is officially suffering from famine, a significant number of clergy across the spectrum of Jewish observance and affiliation have signed a series of high-profile, carefully crafted public letters criticizing the Israeli government.

Associations representing Reform congregations and Conservative rabbis — denominations that encompass nearly half of American Jews — have called for Israel to release additional aid, citing Jewish values and what one group called a “moral priority” to feed the hungry. Nearly three dozen rabbis were arrested in demonstrations in New York and Washington last month, calling for more aid to Gaza and for Israel and its prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, to end the war.

Perhaps most notably, the ranks of those raising concerns now also include a small group of Orthodox rabbis, whose communities have broadly not wavered in their staunch support of Israel throughout the war.

Last week about 80 Orthodox rabbis signed an open letter demanding “moral clarity, responsibility, and a Jewish Orthodox response” to what they called a humanitarian crisis in Gaza. Signers included chief rabbis of Poland and Norway, and the former chief rabbi of Ireland. Organizers said that more than half of those who signed the letter were from the United States.

“We affirm that Hamas’s sins and crimes do not relieve the government of Israel of its obligations to make whatever efforts are necessary to prevent mass starvation,” the letter said. “Orthodox Jewry, as some of Israel’s most devoted supporters, bears a unique moral responsibility. We must affirm that Judaism’s vision of justice and compassion extends to all human beings.”

A primary organizer was Rabbi Yosef Blau, the former religious leader of Yeshiva University, a Modern Orthodox institution in Manhattan. Rabbi Blau said his concerns encompassed not only the Israeli government’s treatment of civilians in Gaza but also reported violence against Palestinians by Orthodox Jewish settlers in the West Bank.

“The responsibility and the lack of concern that Hamas has for the health and welfare of its own people does not free Israel from having responsibility for the destruction that it has caused,” Rabbi Blau said. “It is not a zero-sum game.”

The Jewish community is far from a monolith, and support for the tactics and mission of Israel’s war in Gaza has varied. But until recently, many mainstream Jewish organizations and leaders had defended Israel’s war against Hamas, if with growing unease.

“Even in the midst of a horrific immoral war started by Hamas, it doesn’t take away from our responsibility to feed and to provide medical care for the civilian population,” he said.

Some of the rabbis’ positions echo the anguished calls of protesters and prominent academics, authors, politicians and retired military leaders in Israel, who are increasingly raising alarms about potential war crimes being carried out by the government in their name.

Ministers in the Netanyahu government who have called for Israeli settlers to expel and replace Palestinians in Gaza have “consistently morally compromised Israel’s actions,” the Union for Reform Judaism said last month.

“No one should spend the bulk of their time arguing technical definitions between starvation and pervasive hunger. The situation is dire, and it is deadly,” the group wrote. “Nor should we accept arguments that because Hamas is the primary reason many Gazans are either starving or on the verge of starving, that the Jewish State is not also culpable in this human disaster.”

In the United States, the war has created painful rifts within the Jewish community dividing families, congregations, religious schools and community organizations. Older and more religiously observant Jews have been stauncher defenders of Israel, arguing that the country’s very survival is at stake — as well as the safety of Jews outside Israel.

But as the war has dragged on, younger and more secular Jews have recoiled from images of carnage and destruction in Gaza, seeing Israel and its government as responsible for the war’s continuation and its toll of devastation.

There's more in the article if you dare to read it. It's not behind a paywall. Good to see so many Jewish people waking up to the reality of what Israel is doing to innocent people.

 

[ZiprHead]

There's more in the article if you dare to read it. It's not behind a paywall. Good to see so many Jewish people waking up to the reality of what Israel is doing to innocent people.

There was an anti war demonstration in Israel last week. Attended by a huge number of people. Percentage wise, the demonstration would have been the equivalent of 17 million people in the United States.