• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

Hamas use of human shields

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/182729


Hamas video of rooftop deterrence and encouraging the behavior.

So what?

Think his point is that civilian casualties in Gaza are a purposeful strategy by Hamas.

In most cases, prior to the attacks, residents have been warned to leave, either via phone calls by the Israel military or by the firing of warning missiles.

http://www.ochaopt.org/documents/ocha_opt_sitrep_09_07_2014.pdf
 
The police in the US are not allowed to fire into a crowd in the hope of killing some suspect.

Only the Israelis are allowed to do that.
 
That would mean the IDF is complicit in helping Hamas fulfill its strategy, and that cannot possibly be correct.

Reductio ad absurdum
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.

- - - Updated - - -

The police in the US are not allowed to fire into a crowd in the hope of killing some suspect.

Only the Israelis are allowed to do that.
Um, the US does it with drone attacks.
 
Reductio ad absurdum
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.

- - - Updated - - -

The police in the US are not allowed to fire into a crowd in the hope of killing some suspect.

Only the Israelis are allowed to do that.
Um, the US does it with drone attacks.

What a tangled web we get stuck in when we abandon humanistic values. We start quibbling over the fine points associated with crimes against humanity. Our lives on this planet are not some sort of a video game. The death toll in terms of real human beings in Gaza is now above 600 and I take it Loren and Derek can find some technical or grammatical reason for that being okay! We have seen them all here in this forum. I can't help but wonder why. What induces that type of thinking?

Even if you believe in good and bad people and Satan as a generator of bad peoples' actions there is still no reason to murder helpless and innocent people. You can't say to these bad people, "You made me do this!" You are admitting you are of inferior character and able to be induced to inhuman actions against innocents in service of your own paranoia. That is easily as bad as anything Hamas is doing. In fact, it is the same thing...only more efficiently carried out.
 
Can you imagine any police operation where the cops end up shooting as many criminals as innocent bystanders being considered a success? (with the exception where they shoot nobody at all of course.)
 
Reductio ad absurdum
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.
 
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.
Then you have a logical problem in spinning the Palestinian civilian casualty count.
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.
Ah, the blame the victim route (they cannot do the shield right). Wow.
 
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.

And if the babies, the deaf, the elderly, and the wheelchair bound don't immediately exit the building it's their fault for getting themselves killed.
 
Reductio ad absurdum
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.

- - - Updated - - -

The police in the US are not allowed to fire into a crowd in the hope of killing some suspect.

Only the Israelis are allowed to do that.
Um, the US does it with drone attacks.
Fortunately not in US yet.
 
Except Israel doesn't fire when they successfully use the human shield tactics.
Then you have a logical problem in spinning the Palestinian civilian casualty count.
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.
Ah, the blame the victim route (they cannot do the shield right). Wow.

It's not a matter of not being able to do it right, it's a matter of not being able to do it fast enough.
 
Then you have a logical problem in spinning the Palestinian civilian casualty count.
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.
Ah, the blame the victim route (they cannot do the shield right). Wow.

It's not a matter of not being able to do it right, it's a matter of not being able to do it fast enough.
You are still blaming the victim because getting their fast enough is part of doing it right. And, of course, there are IDF bombings where there is not enough time to do it right or get out fast enough.
 
I have a nine year old niece who is more objective towards One Direction than Loren is of Israel.
 
Back
Top Bottom