The dead "children" of Gaza

[untermensche]

For those who suspect clerical errors:

Another shahid poster, this time of a group all killed in one attack:

https://www.facebook.com/5475850052...7585005264284/779268878762561/?type=1&theater

3 of them are "children".

The only difference between those young men and young men anywhere else is they live in a place that has been oppressed by a powerful nation for decades.

End the oppression and these people will not vanish. But that is the price you pay for oppression.

Eventually if the oppression is gone they will die away. That is the only way to get rid of them. Unless you kill every male child.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Loren Pechtel said

The average Muslim is not a problem. The problem is the Islamists, a tiny subset of the Muslims.

But the Hamas Islamists in Gaza say "The average infidel is not a problem. The problem is the Israelis, a tiny subset of Humanity."

And so? Is it OK to kill their children? 40 or 50, 39 or 49, one or a few less? That makes everything "kosher"?

Hamas has a big problem with the average Jew--they're on lands that Islam considers conquered.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

For those who suspect clerical errors:

Another shahid poster, this time of a group all killed in one attack:

https://www.facebook.com/5475850052...7585005264284/779268878762561/?type=1&theater

3 of them are "children".

The only difference between those young men and young men anywhere else is they live in a place that has been oppressed by a powerful nation for decades.

End the oppression and these people will not vanish. But that is the price you pay for oppression.

Eventually if the oppression is gone they will die away. That is the only way to get rid of them. Unless you kill every male child.

That was a shahid poster. That means everyone on it is a combatant, not an innocent.

 

[untermensche]

The only difference between those young men and young men anywhere else is they live in a place that has been oppressed by a powerful nation for decades.

End the oppression and these people will not vanish. But that is the price you pay for oppression.

Eventually if the oppression is gone they will die away. That is the only way to get rid of them. Unless you kill every male child.

That was a shahid poster. That means everyone on it is a combatant, not an innocent.

They are fighting against oppression.

That is not forbidden in many morale codes. And the people who die doing it are worshiped by the oppressed for their sacrifice. That is how humans normally act.

 

[arkirk]

That was a shahid poster. That means everyone on it is a combatant, not an innocent.

They are fighting against oppression.

That is not forbidden in many morale codes. And the people who die doing it are worshiped by the oppressed for their sacrifice. That is how humans normally act.

Loren: Your insistence on using Bush's language to describe Muslims puts you in a class with him. You just don't seem to get it. Kill a lot of innocents and some you fail to kill grow up to fight you. They all started out as innocents. In my estimation they still are innocents defending their country against monstrous odds. You still haven't answered my question about whether or not you have skin in this game? If this conflict were to suddenly disappear, what would it cost you?

 

[laughing dog]

Loren Pechtel said



But the Hamas Islamists in Gaza say "The average infidel is not a problem. The problem is the Israelis, a tiny subset of Humanity."

And so? Is it OK to kill their children? 40 or 50, 39 or 49, one or a few less? That makes everything "kosher"?

Hamas has a big problem with the average Jew--they're on lands that Islam considers conquered.

Estimates of the world Jewish population place more than half the world's Jews living outside of Israel (source:  ewish_population_by_country)US. So, the average Jew are not on lands that Islam considers conquered.

 

[Cobalt]

Why would Islam still consider land as conquered when it has since been conquered by someone else? I can understand why Islamists might wish it was still in their control, but that doesn't change any of the relevant facts.

 

[Jayjay]

I stumbled into the source of the claim about that "13-year old" kid:

The Meir Amit Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center (PDF):

The Palestinian Health Ministry’s list included the name of Ibrahim Jamal Kamal Nasr from Khan Yunis, who was killed in an attack on July 18, 2014. The list states that he was “13 years old” (No. 303, Appendix C). In fact, he was a 26-year-old Fatah / Abu al-Rish Battalions operative. In our assessment, this is not an innocent technical error, but rather the deliberate inclusion on the list of a 13-year-old boy with a name similar to the name of an adult terrorist operative who was killed.

I have no reason to doubt their analysis. However, this examination of ~450 names, this is the only one where they found forgery of someone's age. This could be either because there aren't any more, or because Hamas discourages its own members and other militants from publishing names of their casualties until after the conflict is over. Either way, one name is hardly a reason to think there is significant inflation of child casualties going on. This could be a case of masquerading a single individual for whatever reason.

 

[untermensche]

I stumbled into the source of the claim about that "13-year old" kid:

The Meir Amit Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center (PDF):

The Palestinian Health Ministry’s list included the name of Ibrahim Jamal Kamal Nasr from Khan Yunis, who was killed in an attack on July 18, 2014. The list states that he was “13 years old” (No. 303, Appendix C). In fact, he was a 26-year-old Fatah / Abu al-Rish Battalions operative. In our assessment, this is not an innocent technical error, but rather the deliberate inclusion on the list of a 13-year-old boy with a name similar to the name of an adult terrorist operative who was killed.

I have no reason to doubt their analysis. However, this examination of ~450 names, this is the only one where they found forgery of someone's age. This could be either because there aren't any more, or because Hamas discourages its own members and other militants from publishing names of their casualties until after the conflict is over. Either way, one name is hardly a reason to think there is significant inflation of child casualties going on. This could be a case of masquerading a single individual for whatever reason.

Of course this is nothing.

Israel is like the US. It doesn't really give a shit who it kills, as long as there is a possibility, even slim, they may kill a combatant who represents an incredibly small threat to Israel itself.

That is the crime here.

Not lying about the ages of the dead.

 

[Frikki]

For those who suspect clerical errors:

Another shahid poster, this time of a group all killed in one attack:

https://www.facebook.com/5475850052...7585005264284/779268878762561/?type=1&theater

3 of them are "children".

The only difference between those young men and young men anywhere else is they live in a place that has been oppressed by a powerful nation for decades.

End the oppression and these people will not vanish. But that is the price you pay for oppression.

Eventually if the oppression is gone they will die away. That is the only way to get rid of them. Unless you kill every male child.

Chickenhawks don´t understand that. They be like "Can´t they just send some poor people to fight for them? That´s what I do. look at Iraq, I was the biggest cheerleader but did not put my own ass on the line."

 

[Frikki]

They are fighting against oppression.

That is not forbidden in many morale codes. And the people who die doing it are worshiped by the oppressed for their sacrifice. That is how humans normally act.

Loren: Your insistence on using Bush's language to describe Muslims puts you in a class with him. You just don't seem to get it. Kill a lot of innocents and some you fail to kill grow up to fight you. They all started out as innocents. In my estimation they still are innocents defending their country against monstrous odds. You still haven't answered my question about whether or not you have skin in this game? If this conflict were to suddenly disappear, what would it cost you?

He is not in the same class as Bush. Bush has actually worn a uniform, other than little league.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

That was a shahid poster. That means everyone on it is a combatant, not an innocent.

They are fighting against oppression.

That is not forbidden in many morale codes. And the people who die doing it are worshiped by the oppressed for their sacrifice. That is how humans normally act.

1) They are attacking civilians--forbidden by any civilized moral code.

2) The point of the poster was that the mistake wasn't a one-off. 3 of 9 were reported as being under 18. Their presence on the poster is proof they are combatants.

- - - Updated - - -

Why would Islam still consider land as conquered when it has since been conquered by someone else? I can understand why Islamists might wish it was still in their control, but that doesn't change any of the relevant facts.

Why does any country want back an area that has rebelled and left?

 

[Jayjay]

2) The point of the poster was that the mistake wasn't a one-off. 3 of 9 were reported as being under 18. Their presence on the poster is proof they are combatants.

I can only count 2 of them being reported as children: Ibrahim Nasser (the 26/13-year old of your first example, upper left corner), and Wassim Slahiy (15-year old, upper right corner). Who's the third?

So out of 450 names at the time, only one being reported as underage when he isn't, and another underage person being confirmed as a combatant. Extrapolated to current situation with roughly five times the total casualties, that'd mean there are maybe 10 child combatants in the list in total. It's possible that there are others but not simply being reported as such, but that's still an insignificant fraction of the total of two thousand. Even if we categorically removed all males 15 and over from the list, it'd not be relevant.

 

[arkirk]

Loren: What is YOUR INTEREST in this matter? I have seen in your posts a continuous slant to legitimize violent actions against the Palestinian people throughout this and other threads on this forum. This nit-picking of statistics gathered in a chaotic outdoor prison by people under fire is highly suspect to me. Is it your purpose to portray virtually everything any Palestinian does as morally and criminally wrong? Are you aware it is possible to be a 22 year old Palestinian and still not be a "combatant?" Just because somebody is over 18 does not legitimize murdering him. How do you justify the killing of 11 non Palestinian United Nations workers in refuge shelters (formerly schools)? That is nearly four times the total Jewish civilian casualties in this entire conflict, yet you remain silent about these people. What if the U.N. had the power to retaliate for its losses in by bombing Israel? The whole calculus of the Israeli argument for continuing this war of aggression against a civilian population is racist on its face. I am here giving you a chance to prove to me it isn't racism. You don't answer my questions. Instead you just hunt up the inevitable bookkeeping errors of a population under bombardment.

If every able bodied man in Gaza is counted as a combatant, then your calculus does not allow any Palestinian man to continue to exist regardless of what he does and Israel is merely hunting young men in Gaza. I think that is criminal. You have not made it clear if a young man in Gaza can do anything to not be a target. You are de facto attempting to legitimize killing people on the basis of their RACE AND AGE. If he's 26, he's fair game? This is as crazy as justifying killing babies by calling them "baby snakes."

Is there anything you would do to make peace in the area possible? Name one suggestion you have made to ameliorate the conflict. I am trying to determine whether you are simply a racist or if you instead have some more callous interest in these killings like perhaps investments in the arms companies that supply the equipment that facilitiates the ongoing slaughter in Gaza. What is your interest in this matter? Can you tell me it is peace? Please explain. I won't even require references.

 

[untermensche]

They are fighting against oppression.

That is not forbidden in many morale codes. And the people who die doing it are worshiped by the oppressed for their sacrifice. That is how humans normally act.

1) They are attacking civilians--forbidden by any civilized moral code.

Not true.

There are no such prohibitions when you are being oppressed by a much stronger power.

It is the oppressive power that puts it's civilians at risk. The immorality is totally on the side of the oppressor.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Loren: What is YOUR INTEREST in this matter? I have seen in your posts a continuous slant to legitimize violent actions against the Palestinian people throughout this and other threads on this forum.

My interest is that I recognize the danger the Islamists pose.

I see no legitimate resistance--legitimate resistance is aimed at the oppressors, not the civilians.

Are you aware it is possible to be a 22 year old Palestinian and still not be a "combatant?"

I never said that a 22 year old must be a combatant. What I've said is that when you see far too many 22 year olds compared to their share of the population it's virtually certain many of them were combatants.

How do you justify the killing of 11 non Palestinian United Nations workers in refuge shelters (formerly schools)?

1) Just because they're working for the UN doesn't mean they're not *ALSO* working for Hamas.

2) Hamas is very good at human shield tactics. They repeatedly try to cause civilian casualties, especially foreign civilian casualties. The death of the hostage is normally considered the fault of the hostage taker no matter how they actually died.

That is nearly four times the total Jewish civilian casualties in this entire conflict,

It's not a sporting event. Keeping score like this shows you don't understand the situation.

Is there anything you would do to make peace in the area possible? Name one suggestion you have made to ameliorate the conflict. I am trying to determine whether you are simply a racist or if you instead have some more callous interest in these killings like perhaps investments in the arms companies that supply the equipment that facilitiates the ongoing slaughter in Gaza. What is your interest in this matter? Can you tell me it is peace? Please explain. I won't even require references.

I don't believe peace in the area can be obtained at an acceptable price. I believe the status quo is as close to peace as we are going to see until the Islamists lose power or things really hit the crapper.

- - - Updated - - -

1) They are attacking civilians--forbidden by any civilized moral code.

Not true.

There are no such prohibitions when you are being oppressed by a much stronger power.

It is the oppressive power that puts it's civilians at risk. The immorality is totally on the side of the oppressor.

No. It matters not the relative strengths.


*IF* attacking civilians is acceptable then you have no beef with anything Israel has done--the same rules apply to both sides.

 

[untermensche]

No. It matters not the relative strengths.


*IF* attacking civilians is acceptable then you have no beef with anything Israel has done--the same rules apply to both sides.

Of course the strength is relevant.

That is why it is Israel oppressing the Palestinians and the Palestinians representing a miniscule threat to Israel.

You cannot have one side oppressing another unless one side is much stronger.

And oppression is the crime, not the response, which is permitted, even the targeting of civilians.

The oppressor puts those civilians at risk. They are responsible for their deaths.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

No. It matters not the relative strengths.


*IF* attacking civilians is acceptable then you have no beef with anything Israel has done--the same rules apply to both sides.

Of course the strength is relevant.

You are in effect saying that weakness makes right. I suppose cold viruses are superior to humans.

That is why it is Israel oppressing the Palestinians and the Palestinians representing a miniscule threat to Israel.

You cannot have one side oppressing another unless one side is much stronger.

And oppression is the crime, not the response, which is permitted, even the targeting of civilians.

The oppressor puts those civilians at risk. They are responsible for their deaths.

What I see is that you simply want something to support the Palestinians regardless of the facts.

Remember, it was the Palestinians that tried to destroy the Jews, not the other way around.

 

[Bronzeage]

Of course the strength is relevant.

You are in effect saying that weakness makes right. I suppose cold viruses are superior to humans.

That is why it is Israel oppressing the Palestinians and the Palestinians representing a miniscule threat to Israel.

You cannot have one side oppressing another unless one side is much stronger.

And oppression is the crime, not the response, which is permitted, even the targeting of civilians.

The oppressor puts those civilians at risk. They are responsible for their deaths.

What I see is that you simply want something to support the Palestinians regardless of the facts.

Remember, it was the Palestinians that tried to destroy the Jews, not the other way around.

The verb "destroy" is used in a very vague sense. There is a lot of history which is being neglected, especially the parts about how so many Palestinians fled their own property for fear of being killed, and later not allowed to return. This is in living memory for many Palestinians, so it's not so hard to understand why they resist the Israelis with everything at their disposal. The idea that Israel started as some kind of hippie commune and turned to violence only as a last resort is some kind of Billy Jack movie scenario, not reality or history.

 

[arkirk]

Loren's "facts" seem to ALL SUPPORT THE CONTINUED USE OF AMERICAN MADE WEAPONS ON PALESTINIANS...NO MATTER WHAT. He still has to offer one idea that would de-escalate the conflict. All he does is repeat his unsupported justifications for the continuance of the slaughter. He even went so far as to suggest that the U.N. workers may have been working for Hamas! The next thing we will hear from him, the rockets came from the U.N.

Is Loren invested in military supply to Israel? He is politically invested for sure. But is he profiting from this? Is he under some kind of contractual obligation to unconditionally support Israel? I find his answers beyond the pale.

He flatly denies there is any chance of peace....then denies that it is thinking like his that creates and maintains the condition. In other words, his answer is to press on till it becomes genocide. If you follow his advice, that is where this is headed. Obama's knee jerk and cowardly loyalty to Israel mirrors the relationship Reagan had with the apartheid government in South Africa. How much more terrible must things get before we see the light on this issue? The U.S. needs to at least threaten to withdraw support from Israel and condition its return on making peace with the Palestinian people...including Hamas.

Boycott, divestment and sanctions seems a more likely consequence of Israel's continued actions. Eventually, Israel will collapse and when it does,we will end up with a ONE STATE SOLUTION....ONE SECULAR STATE. The idea of a Jewish state will have to go out the window when we start to clean up this mess. Netanyahu is putting his country in a grave place and as the Pete Seeger song goes..."The big fool says to push on."

It is long past the time when we can continue to make excuses for Netanyahu's racism. He is on the way to an "Arab solution" not unlike the "Jewish solution" tried in Germany in the last century.