NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.
Again one would think the Médecins Sans Frontières, and IFRC would have moved to the UN locations... now they are in the indefensible position of trying to explain of how they could not have seen these things play out. Worse they now have to prove they did not take part or even help in such events. For example why the hell did they not remove said patients from such dangers, even before the events of October 7th?
On November 20 2023 09:50 ChristianS wrote: Okay, since I wrote my post this morning, it looks like we have a couple developments: a video apparently showing a hidden access tunnel into the hospital, and some security cam footage purporting to show hostages being taken to the hospital (they’re calling it a “terror tunnel” but I don’t think that actually means anything). I trust independent investigators are already at work verifying that’s what these videos actually are; for the moment I’ll take it at face value.
So it seems like Hamas had some secret ways to get into the hospital. They also brought hostages there, which certainly suggests they consider it a “base” of some kind. So far it doesn’t seem like much of a “main headquarters” for a military organization, although maybe now is a good time to think about what that would even mean. Decentralization is kind of a big thing for insurgent groups like Hamas; what are the odds they even *have* a big Bond villain secret headquarters anywhere in Gaza? In all likelihood they’ve got a dispersed network of small cells, each with a few hiding places and some weapons at their disposal.
To me the biggest question from the start of this is what “eliminating Hamas” would even look like. I mean, there’s a lot to criticize in Israel’s concept of just how cheap Palestinian lives are when they’re deciding what strikes are “worth it,” but fundamentally all that would have to be judged against an achievable overall objective that they just don’t seem to have. They can kill a lot of Palestinians; some percentage of those (I doubt it’s over 10%) are militants that would have taken up arms against Israel. They can track down some weapons and military infrastructure, and seize or destroy them. But at the end of the day there’s still going to be millions of Palestinians, some percentage of which will still be willing to take up arms against Israel, and those insurgents still won’t have trouble getting ahold of guns to do it with.
It’s not impossible to “win” a war of occupation but nothing we’re seeing from the IDF seems even remotely capable of achieving it. It’s just the usual escalation of cruelty that wars of occupation always promote, with no end in sight.
I agree that decentralizing is 9999x more likely and I don’t think any Bond villain base” kinda thing even exists. It would be an easy target and would eliminate a huge reason Hamas chooses to use human shields to begin with. Decentralizing and spreading within easy sympathy targets is ideal in basically every way. We are seeing very clearly that from a strictly “military engagement” perspective, Hamas can be easily compared to some alt right militia group that managed to win an election. It’s not an army so much as a collection of shit heads all interested in genocide of Jews. They are getting completely clobbered.
But useful idiots are still useful. That’s why Iran and others will continue to try to make sure they have what they need to engage in whatever shit head activities tickle their uneducated fancies.
Right now I think “winning” should be framed as eliminating Hamas’s ability to control land and slither between hospitals. Now that I think about it, a blackberry bush is probably a perfect comparison. It’s a fool’s errand to try to wipe out all blackberries, but it’s totally achievable to carve out an area where you get rid of all of it and then take steps to make sure any little sprouts are noticed and plucked quickly before it turns into a big issue. That’s the ideal way to remove the threat of Hamas, IMO.
The way IDF seems to be approaching it is: squeeze Gaza like a tube of toothpaste and pull out all the Hamas roots (tunnels) they can along the way so that the total number of hospitals Hamas to slither around between is significantly reduced and the land they control is minimal or zero.
We’ve seen Egypt, Jordan, Yemen, Qatar, and Iran all express very clearly just how important the people of Gaza are and how it’s imperative they are relieved of their suffering. They sound like great candidates to help establish a new government to replace Hamas. Hamas being out of the picture will make it a lot harder for those nations to pretend they wish they could help but can’t. Here’s their chance. I guess we’ll just have to wait and see what kind of effort Arab nations with the means to help choose to help. I hope my cynicism is proven wrong.
On November 17 2023 10:41 Salazarz wrote: How the fuck do you figure that Israel is 'following rules of war' when just about every humanitarian organization involved in the region has repeatedly accused them of war crimes, just about every nation in the world -- including their staunch allies such as the US -- have called them out for unlawful killings and assassinations, and they have consistently refused to cooperate with any and all investigations into any of this stuff?
It's incredible how you keep accusing other people of 'bias' while simultaneously completely rejecting all evidence that runs contrary to whatever beliefs you have. It's also quite telling how you specifically point out how 'We all have empathy for the Israeli people and even their rage' but not a word about empathy for Palestinians.
Yes I was putting up the parts that were controversial. I also did not put up there that the grass is green.
The sad part is that it’s controversial for some of us to have empathy for Israeli’s but everyone has empathy for Palestinians. Very little for Hamas, you have to remember we consider Hamas different than Palestinians, and more than that we do not believe they support Palestinians interests.
Just about every poster active in this thread called the attack on Israel a vile act of terror and the deaths of Israeli civilians a huge tragedy. I can't recall a single person trying to justify the original attack as a 'necessity' or 'self defense' or 'justice' the way you and the other handful of Israel apologists are doing with the excessively brutal reprisal that Israel has been carrying out for over a month now.
And no, I don't think 'having empathy for Palestinians' is as obvious as greenness of grass is when we have people saying that a bodycount of ten thousands and counting is 'just unavoidable collateral damage bro' but maybe we have different standards for what counts as empathy, I don't know.
Edit: can you source the UN resolution accusing Israel of war crimes? I’d like to read it, when I try to Google it I get nothing official
You'll notice that I never said that UN resolutions accusing Israel of war crimes exist, and I'm not sure why you would think that is a worthwhile response when the US has in the past straight up said they will pull funding from the UN if there ever were to be any accusations more severe than 'condemn their actions of so and so' or whatever. It's like saying Russia must not be committing any war crimes because hey, there hasn't been a UN resolution that says so passed, never mind that they can veto anything they don't like.
So provide a non UN source on the factual claims you made. I so far can’t find anything that matches it and I’m assuming you didn’t just come up with it. Sorry if I was mistaken.
Definitely creates an awkward situation for these organizations who were so desperate to have some kinda placeholder information that they decided to trust Hamas and folks loyal to Hamas.
On November 20 2023 06:00 Nebuchad wrote: Mohdoo's reaction exemplifies why I don't think it's a very good strategy to talk about specific events. If the IDF somehow manages to stop lying at some point, the people on his side will be vindicated, and if the IDF is shown to be lying they won't care at all. I don't think there's a good outcome with this strategy, we either lose ground or break even.
I generally agree with this, but I'm not sure it matters in this context.
Israel is engaged in an ongoing ethnic cleansing campaign and if that isn't immediately obvious and heinous to one at this point I don't believe there's some magic argument that will disabuse one of that belief.
On November 20 2023 06:00 Nebuchad wrote: Mohdoo's reaction exemplifies why I don't think it's a very good strategy to talk about specific events. If the IDF somehow manages to stop lying at some point, the people on his side will be vindicated, and if the IDF is shown to be lying they won't care at all. I don't think there's a good outcome with this strategy, we either lose ground or break even.
It's fine to talk about specific events, just gotta drop the kiddie flow charts. For the IDF approach to be wrong overall, it's not a requirement for them to be lying/wrong about every single thing every single time. That's just not how complex interactions work. Even Russia was best served by the truth in some specific instances of the Ukraine war.
You made a good point some time ago that human shields should work, that it's not okay to drop a dozen civilians or destroy critical infrastructure to kill a terrorist. We should stick to that instead of dying on the hill that the terrorist must not exist because the IDF claims he exists and the IDF are the baddies so nothing they say can be real. It's unnecessary insanity.
What you said is true but I still don't think it's a very good strategy. There isn't really a benefit that we gain from this interaction. I could have talked about the bunker that's been under the hospital for years cause my Twitter feed yesterday was full of people who were saying that the IDF was about to "discover" that bunker, and maybe I should have considering we now have to bring it up today, but I just don't think it's worth it overall.
Not even two pages and now the discussion is "Does Israel even commit war crimes". I know I was not satisfied with the level of the conversation before that but surely that's a noticeable drop.
Think I'll stick to my guns on this one and stop discussing specific events. I urge you guys to do the same.
On November 20 2023 06:00 Nebuchad wrote: Mohdoo's reaction exemplifies why I don't think it's a very good strategy to talk about specific events. If the IDF somehow manages to stop lying at some point, the people on his side will be vindicated, and if the IDF is shown to be lying they won't care at all. I don't think there's a good outcome with this strategy, we either lose ground or break even.
It's fine to talk about specific events, just gotta drop the kiddie flow charts. For the IDF approach to be wrong overall, it's not a requirement for them to be lying/wrong about every single thing every single time. That's just not how complex interactions work. Even Russia was best served by the truth in some specific instances of the Ukraine war.
You made a good point some time ago that human shields should work, that it's not okay to drop a dozen civilians or destroy critical infrastructure to kill a terrorist. We should stick to that instead of dying on the hill that the terrorist must not exist because the IDF claims he exists and the IDF are the baddies so nothing they say can be real. It's unnecessary insanity.
What you said is true but I still don't think it's a very good strategy. There isn't really a benefit that we gain from this interaction. I could have talked about the bunker that's been under the hospital for years cause my Twitter feed yesterday was full of people who were saying that the IDF was about to "discover" that bunker, and maybe I should have considering we now have to bring it up today, but I just don't think it's worth it overall.
Not even two pages and now the discussion is "Does Israel even commit war crimes". I know I was not satisfied with the level of the conversation before that but surely that's a noticeable drop.
Think I'll stick to my guns on this one and stop discussing specific events. I urge you guys to do the same.
That conversation is evergreen around here regardless, but I'm willing to try most things.
On November 17 2023 10:41 Salazarz wrote: How the fuck do you figure that Israel is 'following rules of war' when just about every humanitarian organization involved in the region has repeatedly accused them of war crimes, just about every nation in the world -- including their staunch allies such as the US -- have called them out for unlawful killings and assassinations, and they have consistently refused to cooperate with any and all investigations into any of this stuff?
It's incredible how you keep accusing other people of 'bias' while simultaneously completely rejecting all evidence that runs contrary to whatever beliefs you have. It's also quite telling how you specifically point out how 'We all have empathy for the Israeli people and even their rage' but not a word about empathy for Palestinians.
Yes I was putting up the parts that were controversial. I also did not put up there that the grass is green.
The sad part is that it’s controversial for some of us to have empathy for Israeli’s but everyone has empathy for Palestinians. Very little for Hamas, you have to remember we consider Hamas different than Palestinians, and more than that we do not believe they support Palestinians interests.
Just about every poster active in this thread called the attack on Israel a vile act of terror and the deaths of Israeli civilians a huge tragedy. I can't recall a single person trying to justify the original attack as a 'necessity' or 'self defense' or 'justice' the way you and the other handful of Israel apologists are doing with the excessively brutal reprisal that Israel has been carrying out for over a month now.
And no, I don't think 'having empathy for Palestinians' is as obvious as greenness of grass is when we have people saying that a bodycount of ten thousands and counting is 'just unavoidable collateral damage bro' but maybe we have different standards for what counts as empathy, I don't know.
Edit: can you source the UN resolution accusing Israel of war crimes? I’d like to read it, when I try to Google it I get nothing official
You'll notice that I never said that UN resolutions accusing Israel of war crimes exist, and I'm not sure why you would think that is a worthwhile response when the US has in the past straight up said they will pull funding from the UN if there ever were to be any accusations more severe than 'condemn their actions of so and so' or whatever. It's like saying Russia must not be committing any war crimes because hey, there hasn't been a UN resolution that says so passed, never mind that they can veto anything they don't like.
So provide a non UN source on the factual claims you made. I so far can’t find anything that matches it and I’m assuming you didn’t just come up with it. Sorry if I was mistaken.
Super dramatic and edgy, before meeting people like you I had no clue on why Bernie did so bad with his door to door campaign.
First one is aging super bad already and they like you probably have not read what war crimes are. If you meant something else sorry but I’m not clicking through a bunch of bad articles.
The second one amnesty report is interesting.
Third one is not really helpful but again I think you were more interested in being dramatic than helpful.
Yeah, the decidedly not American guy living in South Korea pointing out that there are literally thousands of reports and articles about the variety of crimes committed by Israel is a great example of why Bernie's door to door campaign did so badly. That makes about as much sense as the rest of your posting in this thread.
On November 18 2023 11:12 RvB wrote: The bodies of hostages found in the vicinity are just a coincidence I guess.
Article from Reuters on what comes next and the risk of insurgency. Also looks at who might lead Gaza and why Arab states are hesitant to take over security for some time.
Nov 17 (Reuters) - Israel risks facing a long and bloody insurgency if it defeats Hamas and occupies Gaza without a credible post-war plan to withdraw its troops and move toward the creation of a Palestinian state, U.S. and Arab officials, diplomats and analysts said.
None of the ideas floated so far by Israel, the United States and Arab nations for the post-war administration of Gaza have managed to gain traction, according to two U.S. and four regional officials as well as four diplomats familiar with the discussions, raising fears the Israeli military may become mired in a prolonged security operation. from its chief ally, Washington.
As Israel tightens its control over northern Gaza, some officials in Washington and Arab capitals fear it is ignoring lessons from the U.S. invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan when swift military victories were followed by years of violent militancy.
If Gaza's Hamas-run government is toppled, its infrastructure destroyed and its economy ruined, the radicalization of an enraged population could fuel an uprising targeting Israeli troops in the enclave's narrow streets, diplomats and officials say.
Israel, the U.S. and many Arab states agree that Hamas should be ousted after it launched a cross-border raid on Oct. 7 that killed some 1,200 people and took around 240 hostages. But there is no consensus on what should replace it.
Arab countries and Western allies have said a revitalized Palestinian Authority (PA) – which partially governs the West Bank – is a natural candidate to play a greater role in Gaza, home to some 2.3 million people.
But the credibility of the Authority – run by 87-year-old President Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah party - has been undermined by its loss of control over Gaza to Hamas in a 2007 conflict, its failure to halt the spread of Israeli settlements in the West Bank, and accusations of widespread corruption and incompetence.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said at the weekend that the PA in its current form should not take charge of Gaza. He said the Israeli military was the only force capable of eliminating Hamas and ensuring that terrorism did not reappear. In the wake of Netanyahu's comments, Israeli officials have insisted that Israel does not intend to occupy the Gaza Strip.
....
A proposal for a two-year transitional administration of technocrats in Gaza backed by U.N. and Arab forces has been floated by Western partners and some Middle Eastern states, diplomats said.
But there has been resistance from key Arab governments – including Egypt - to being drawn into what they regard as the Gaza quagmire, the diplomats said.
Regional powers fear that any Arab forces deployed in Gaza might have to use force against Palestinians and no Arab nation wants its military put in that position.
May as well be as long as Israel refuses external arbiters to have a look around anything. A less trustful lot than even Hamas, heinous as they are, they arent perpetual bullshitters to this degree
They've already embedded journalists from multiple independent outlets but more is better. The video with the tunnel and weapons has been geolocated by reuters. That Al Shifa is used for military purposes is also not a secret. See [1][2][3(6.48)] [4] at Al Shifa And [5][6][7] near Al Shifa. International humanitarian law requires you to be as far away from hospitals and the like as possible so firing from near the hospital is already a war crime. I did not even include sources from further back.
That Hamas bullshits less has to be some kind of joke. This is the same organisation that intimidates journalists [1][7], holds press conferences at hospitals [1][7], stages scenes [1], funds 'journalists' to spread propaganda [8], uses hostages for propaganda [9], and denies using civilian areas for military purposes while at the same time claiming to detonate explosives in a tunnel near a mosque [10]. Their whole military strategy is based around using civilians as a shield and then showing the world the dead civilians.
Yes my comment on Hamas was hyberbolic in the extreme, too many beers were had that day. I retract.
I don’t think it’s in dispute that Hamas generally employ these tactics, which your sources do confirm.
Just Israel is making rather specific claims about this specific hospital, which Christian has already alluded to much more thoroughly and elegantly than I can.
There’s not really a negative, at least from a humanitarian/vetting process from having some kind of consistent feet on the ground in terms of international observers
I'm always at my best after drinking :p.
The view that the evidence the IDF provided was thin and that any evidence has to be independently verified is reasonable but people were doubting the IDF to the extent that there were speculations on why they'd lie. Considering the way Hamas operates, that the IDF had already said they'd provide more evidence, the active fighting, and the extensive booby trapping of the tunnels that took it too far.
Anyway I was going to respond to Christian but reality has already caught up and I'm sure we'll see more in the days to come.
On November 20 2023 02:26 MaGic~PhiL wrote: Ive seen several israeli politicans speaking and acting clearly in a way that doesnt even hide the fact that they think humans in Gaza are expendable..
I have a question to the "Pro Israel" faction here (JimmiC, RvB, RenSC2 e.g):
1) Have you watched a couple of israeli politicans speak on this issue? NO -> u cant answer ofc If yes -> 2) Do you agree? 3) How does it make you feel?
(please spare me the whataboutism with "hamas is inhumane too"..we are already 100% in agreement that Hamas is a inhumane terrible terrorist organization as far as Im concerned)
I don't support them or their rhetoric. I support a two state solution and the Palestinians right to self determination. The Israeli far right is a large obstacle to that but different to Hamas in two important ways. Because Israel is a parliamentary democracy: 1. They have to govern in a coalition so the worst excesses won't become reality. Even with someone as Netanyahu as prime minister. I don't like Netanyahu at all and he's one of the chief architects of the current mess but he's also not as far gone as some think. 2. They'll lose power. The current coalition has already lost legitimacy and is polling poorly. They're not entrenched like Hamas is.
On November 20 2023 09:50 ChristianS wrote: Okay, since I wrote my post this morning, it looks like we have a couple developments: a video apparently showing a hidden access tunnel into the hospital, and some security cam footage purporting to show hostages being taken to the hospital (they’re calling it a “terror tunnel” but I don’t think that actually means anything). I trust independent investigators are already at work verifying that’s what these videos actually are; for the moment I’ll take it at face value.
So it seems like Hamas had some secret ways to get into the hospital. They also brought hostages there, which certainly suggests they consider it a “base” of some kind. So far it doesn’t seem like much of a “main headquarters” for a military organization, although maybe now is a good time to think about what that would even mean. Decentralization is kind of a big thing for insurgent groups like Hamas; what are the odds they even *have* a big Bond villain secret headquarters anywhere in Gaza? In all likelihood they’ve got a dispersed network of small cells, each with a few hiding places and some weapons at their disposal.
To me the biggest question from the start of this is what “eliminating Hamas” would even look like. I mean, there’s a lot to criticize in Israel’s concept of just how cheap Palestinian lives are when they’re deciding what strikes are “worth it,” but fundamentally all that would have to be judged against an achievable overall objective that they just don’t seem to have. They can kill a lot of Palestinians; some percentage of those (I doubt it’s over 10%) are militants that would have taken up arms against Israel. They can track down some weapons and military infrastructure, and seize or destroy them. But at the end of the day there’s still going to be millions of Palestinians, some percentage of which will still be willing to take up arms against Israel, and those insurgents still won’t have trouble getting ahold of guns to do it with.
It’s not impossible to “win” a war of occupation but nothing we’re seeing from the IDF seems even remotely capable of achieving it. It’s just the usual escalation of cruelty that wars of occupation always promote, with no end in sight.
I agree that decentralizing is 9999x more likely and I don’t think any Bond villain base” kinda thing even exists. It would be an easy target and would eliminate a huge reason Hamas chooses to use human shields to begin with. Decentralizing and spreading within easy sympathy targets is ideal in basically every way. We are seeing very clearly that from a strictly “military engagement” perspective, Hamas can be easily compared to some alt right militia group that managed to win an election. It’s not an army so much as a collection of shit heads all interested in genocide of Jews. They are getting completely clobbered.
But useful idiots are still useful. That’s why Iran and others will continue to try to make sure they have what they need to engage in whatever shit head activities tickle their uneducated fancies.
Right now I think “winning” should be framed as eliminating Hamas’s ability to control land and slither between hospitals. Now that I think about it, a blackberry bush is probably a perfect comparison. It’s a fool’s errand to try to wipe out all blackberries, but it’s totally achievable to carve out an area where you get rid of all of it and then take steps to make sure any little sprouts are noticed and plucked quickly before it turns into a big issue. That’s the ideal way to remove the threat of Hamas, IMO.
The way IDF seems to be approaching it is: squeeze Gaza like a tube of toothpaste and pull out all the Hamas roots (tunnels) they can along the way so that the total number of hospitals Hamas to slither around between is significantly reduced and the land they control is minimal or zero.
We’ve seen Egypt, Jordan, Yemen, Qatar, and Iran all express very clearly just how important the people of Gaza are and how it’s imperative they are relieved of their suffering. They sound like great candidates to help establish a new government to replace Hamas. Hamas being out of the picture will make it a lot harder for those nations to pretend they wish they could help but can’t. Here’s their chance. I guess we’ll just have to wait and see what kind of effort Arab nations with the means to help choose to help. I hope my cynicism is proven wrong.
I get extremely nervous any time you decide you’ve come up with a great analogy, although in this case I’m not really sure what this blackberry business even is. Maybe you have to have experience picking blackberries?
To some extent it sounds like you’re getting at a clear and hold strategy. Which, you know, is certainly how the British or US handled it whenever they had some insurgent territory they wanted to beat into submission. In this case, though, I’m not sure what the strategically important footholds would even be. You keep saying “slither between hospitals” like you think if the IDF just controls all the hospitals, there will be nowhere else to hide. But the whole point of a decentralized insurgency is to not be as predictable as to only hide in one type of building. They can hide in apartments or tunnels or the back room of a grocery store or w/e, there’s no reason they even need to poke their head out until the IDF has moved onto another area.
Meanwhile the IDF strategy you’re describing is the exact opposite of clear and hold – it’s apparently to match an army around the map, fight whoever is there, and then keep marching. If Hamas is split up into thousands of little hidey-holes across the territory I don’t see how they have any chance of even killing Hamas militants preferentially over civilians in the slightest; compared to civilians Hamas fighters are much more likely to have the resources and training to hide and avoid Israeli troops and bombs indefinitely. Then after they’ve done that for a while, your best hope is that they can persuade some other Arab nation to occupy Gaza indefinitely? Why the hell would that be a good outcome?
Insurgents aren’t blackberries, and they aren’t toothpaste. If they’ve got hundreds or thousands of hideouts like the one under that hospital, I don’t see how Israel has any chance of “eliminating Hamas” in a reasonable time frame. At which point what are they even accomplishing? Lotta dead civilians, lotta angry survivors who are almost certainly more receptive than ever to joining an insurgency, but other than that, seems like not a whole lot?
On November 18 2023 11:12 RvB wrote: The bodies of hostages found in the vicinity are just a coincidence I guess.
Article from Reuters on what comes next and the risk of insurgency. Also looks at who might lead Gaza and why Arab states are hesitant to take over security for some time.
Nov 17 (Reuters) - Israel risks facing a long and bloody insurgency if it defeats Hamas and occupies Gaza without a credible post-war plan to withdraw its troops and move toward the creation of a Palestinian state, U.S. and Arab officials, diplomats and analysts said.
None of the ideas floated so far by Israel, the United States and Arab nations for the post-war administration of Gaza have managed to gain traction, according to two U.S. and four regional officials as well as four diplomats familiar with the discussions, raising fears the Israeli military may become mired in a prolonged security operation. from its chief ally, Washington.
As Israel tightens its control over northern Gaza, some officials in Washington and Arab capitals fear it is ignoring lessons from the U.S. invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan when swift military victories were followed by years of violent militancy.
If Gaza's Hamas-run government is toppled, its infrastructure destroyed and its economy ruined, the radicalization of an enraged population could fuel an uprising targeting Israeli troops in the enclave's narrow streets, diplomats and officials say.
Israel, the U.S. and many Arab states agree that Hamas should be ousted after it launched a cross-border raid on Oct. 7 that killed some 1,200 people and took around 240 hostages. But there is no consensus on what should replace it.
Arab countries and Western allies have said a revitalized Palestinian Authority (PA) – which partially governs the West Bank – is a natural candidate to play a greater role in Gaza, home to some 2.3 million people.
But the credibility of the Authority – run by 87-year-old President Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah party - has been undermined by its loss of control over Gaza to Hamas in a 2007 conflict, its failure to halt the spread of Israeli settlements in the West Bank, and accusations of widespread corruption and incompetence.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said at the weekend that the PA in its current form should not take charge of Gaza. He said the Israeli military was the only force capable of eliminating Hamas and ensuring that terrorism did not reappear. In the wake of Netanyahu's comments, Israeli officials have insisted that Israel does not intend to occupy the Gaza Strip.
....
A proposal for a two-year transitional administration of technocrats in Gaza backed by U.N. and Arab forces has been floated by Western partners and some Middle Eastern states, diplomats said.
But there has been resistance from key Arab governments – including Egypt - to being drawn into what they regard as the Gaza quagmire, the diplomats said.
Regional powers fear that any Arab forces deployed in Gaza might have to use force against Palestinians and no Arab nation wants its military put in that position.
May as well be as long as Israel refuses external arbiters to have a look around anything. A less trustful lot than even Hamas, heinous as they are, they arent perpetual bullshitters to this degree
They've already embedded journalists from multiple independent outlets but more is better. The video with the tunnel and weapons has been geolocated by reuters. That Al Shifa is used for military purposes is also not a secret. See [1][2][3(6.48)] [4] at Al Shifa And [5][6][7] near Al Shifa. International humanitarian law requires you to be as far away from hospitals and the like as possible so firing from near the hospital is already a war crime. I did not even include sources from further back.
That Hamas bullshits less has to be some kind of joke. This is the same organisation that intimidates journalists [1][7], holds press conferences at hospitals [1][7], stages scenes [1], funds 'journalists' to spread propaganda [8], uses hostages for propaganda [9], and denies using civilian areas for military purposes while at the same time claiming to detonate explosives in a tunnel near a mosque [10]. Their whole military strategy is based around using civilians as a shield and then showing the world the dead civilians.
Yes my comment on Hamas was hyberbolic in the extreme, too many beers were had that day. I retract.
I don’t think it’s in dispute that Hamas generally employ these tactics, which your sources do confirm.
Just Israel is making rather specific claims about this specific hospital, which Christian has already alluded to much more thoroughly and elegantly than I can.
There’s not really a negative, at least from a humanitarian/vetting process from having some kind of consistent feet on the ground in terms of international observers
I'm always at my best after drinking :p.
The view that the evidence the IDF provided was thin and that any evidence has to be independently verified is reasonable but people were doubting the IDF to the extent that there were speculations on why they'd lie. Considering the way Hamas operates, that the IDF had already said they'd provide more evidence, the active fighting, and the extensive booby trapping of the tunnels that took it too far.
Anyway I was going to respond to Christian but reality has already caught up and I'm sure we'll see more in the days to come.
On November 20 2023 02:26 MaGic~PhiL wrote: Ive seen several israeli politicans speaking and acting clearly in a way that doesnt even hide the fact that they think humans in Gaza are expendable..
I have a question to the "Pro Israel" faction here (JimmiC, RvB, RenSC2 e.g):
1) Have you watched a couple of israeli politicans speak on this issue? NO -> u cant answer ofc If yes -> 2) Do you agree? 3) How does it make you feel?
(please spare me the whataboutism with "hamas is inhumane too"..we are already 100% in agreement that Hamas is a inhumane terrible terrorist organization as far as Im concerned)
I don't support them or their rhetoric. I support a two state solution and the Palestinians right to self determination. The Israeli far right is a large obstacle to that but different to Hamas in two important ways. Because Israel is a parliamentary democracy: 1. They have to govern in a coalition so the worst excesses won't become reality. Even with someone as Netanyahu as prime minister. I don't like Netanyahu at all and he's one of the chief architects of the current mess but he's also not as far gone as some think. 2. They'll lose power. The current coalition has already lost legitimacy and is polling poorly. They're not entrenched like Hamas is.
I usually do my best work in such a scenario, dunno wtf happened the other night :p
I still do favour independent observers on the ground for a variety of reasons, mostly humanitarian mitigations but also to vet things. Lest we enter wholeheartedly the world of conspiracy theories, granted those particularly invested in those basically can’t be swayed by anything.
I’m sure we will find out more in the coming days, it does at least appear that Hamas did have a presence in the hospital at the very least, I think that’s reasonable to say. The potentially thorny issue of whether this went on underneath the noses of various aid groups has been raised in thread and I’m sure if there’s anything to that we’ll be hearing a lot about it.
You do make a good point, as bizarro world as it seems on the face of it Netanyahu is positively moderate compared to some voices over there.
On November 20 2023 09:50 ChristianS wrote: Okay, since I wrote my post this morning, it looks like we have a couple developments: a video apparently showing a hidden access tunnel into the hospital, and some security cam footage purporting to show hostages being taken to the hospital (they’re calling it a “terror tunnel” but I don’t think that actually means anything). I trust independent investigators are already at work verifying that’s what these videos actually are; for the moment I’ll take it at face value.
So it seems like Hamas had some secret ways to get into the hospital. They also brought hostages there, which certainly suggests they consider it a “base” of some kind. So far it doesn’t seem like much of a “main headquarters” for a military organization, although maybe now is a good time to think about what that would even mean. Decentralization is kind of a big thing for insurgent groups like Hamas; what are the odds they even *have* a big Bond villain secret headquarters anywhere in Gaza? In all likelihood they’ve got a dispersed network of small cells, each with a few hiding places and some weapons at their disposal.
To me the biggest question from the start of this is what “eliminating Hamas” would even look like. I mean, there’s a lot to criticize in Israel’s concept of just how cheap Palestinian lives are when they’re deciding what strikes are “worth it,” but fundamentally all that would have to be judged against an achievable overall objective that they just don’t seem to have. They can kill a lot of Palestinians; some percentage of those (I doubt it’s over 10%) are militants that would have taken up arms against Israel. They can track down some weapons and military infrastructure, and seize or destroy them. But at the end of the day there’s still going to be millions of Palestinians, some percentage of which will still be willing to take up arms against Israel, and those insurgents still won’t have trouble getting ahold of guns to do it with.
It’s not impossible to “win” a war of occupation but nothing we’re seeing from the IDF seems even remotely capable of achieving it. It’s just the usual escalation of cruelty that wars of occupation always promote, with no end in sight.
I agree that decentralizing is 9999x more likely and I don’t think any Bond villain base” kinda thing even exists. It would be an easy target and would eliminate a huge reason Hamas chooses to use human shields to begin with. Decentralizing and spreading within easy sympathy targets is ideal in basically every way. We are seeing very clearly that from a strictly “military engagement” perspective, Hamas can be easily compared to some alt right militia group that managed to win an election. It’s not an army so much as a collection of shit heads all interested in genocide of Jews. They are getting completely clobbered.
But useful idiots are still useful. That’s why Iran and others will continue to try to make sure they have what they need to engage in whatever shit head activities tickle their uneducated fancies.
Right now I think “winning” should be framed as eliminating Hamas’s ability to control land and slither between hospitals. Now that I think about it, a blackberry bush is probably a perfect comparison. It’s a fool’s errand to try to wipe out all blackberries, but it’s totally achievable to carve out an area where you get rid of all of it and then take steps to make sure any little sprouts are noticed and plucked quickly before it turns into a big issue. That’s the ideal way to remove the threat of Hamas, IMO.
The way IDF seems to be approaching it is: squeeze Gaza like a tube of toothpaste and pull out all the Hamas roots (tunnels) they can along the way so that the total number of hospitals Hamas to slither around between is significantly reduced and the land they control is minimal or zero.
We’ve seen Egypt, Jordan, Yemen, Qatar, and Iran all express very clearly just how important the people of Gaza are and how it’s imperative they are relieved of their suffering. They sound like great candidates to help establish a new government to replace Hamas. Hamas being out of the picture will make it a lot harder for those nations to pretend they wish they could help but can’t. Here’s their chance. I guess we’ll just have to wait and see what kind of effort Arab nations with the means to help choose to help. I hope my cynicism is proven wrong.
I get extremely nervous any time you decide you’ve come up with a great analogy, although in this case I’m not really sure what this blackberry business even is. Maybe you have to have experience picking blackberries?
To some extent it sounds like you’re getting at a clear and hold strategy. Which, you know, is certainly how the British or US handled it whenever they had some insurgent territory they wanted to beat into submission. In this case, though, I’m not sure what the strategically important footholds would even be. You keep saying “slither between hospitals” like you think if the IDF just controls all the hospitals, there will be nowhere else to hide. But the whole point of a decentralized insurgency is to not be as predictable as to only hide in one type of building. They can hide in apartments or tunnels or the back room of a grocery store or w/e, there’s no reason they even need to poke their head out until the IDF has moved onto another area.
Meanwhile the IDF strategy you’re describing is the exact opposite of clear and hold – it’s apparently to match an army around the map, fight whoever is there, and then keep marching. If Hamas is split up into thousands of little hidey-holes across the territory I don’t see how they have any chance of even killing Hamas militants preferentially over civilians in the slightest; compared to civilians Hamas fighters are much more likely to have the resources and training to hide and avoid Israeli troops and bombs indefinitely. Then after they’ve done that for a while, your best hope is that they can persuade some other Arab nation to occupy Gaza indefinitely? Why the hell would that be a good outcome?
Insurgents aren’t blackberries, and they aren’t toothpaste. If they’ve got hundreds or thousands of hideouts like the one under that hospital, I don’t see how Israel has any chance of “eliminating Hamas” in a reasonable time frame. At which point what are they even accomplishing? Lotta dead civilians, lotta angry survivors who are almost certainly more receptive than ever to joining an insurgency, but other than that, seems like not a whole lot?
It seems a Herculean leaning practically impossible endeavour.
I guess we’re still waiting to see if Israel will pivot away from the absolutely doomed bombing strategy anyway.
I’m unsure of the logistics that would be actually involved, or if the will is there to have boots on the ground in number in harms way. Would systematically trying to cripple the extensive tunnel network at least reduce Hamas’ capacity to operate and reduce potential future harm that way?
It’s certainly less morally objectionable to me than bombing more civilians than Hamas fighters, and it may be more practically beneficial if one’s aim is to safeguard Israel in the future.
Israel continues to paralyze the international response. The IDF can keep making whichever discoveries they want, it won't justify the bombardment. They can keep talking about the actual legal requirements for attacking hospitals, that won't justify it either. There's a reason why they talk about legality, but not goodness, ethics or morality. The latter terms are required for justification of actions on a human level. The former is the requirement for the military, which is just a branch of the state and nothing more.
Israel has succeeded in facing no consequences (yet) for this bombardment. Fortunately however Israel has not succeeded in appeasing the international public. That is key for the future of Palestinians, as they need the support of the people in the US if there's ever going to be meaningful pressure put on Israel. No amount of evidence being presented from this point forward will change people's perception of Israel's leadership and the IDF. That's a big accomplishment, because previously Israel hasn't seen such a strong response for its anti-Palestinian policies.
On November 20 2023 09:50 ChristianS wrote: Okay, since I wrote my post this morning, it looks like we have a couple developments: a video apparently showing a hidden access tunnel into the hospital, and some security cam footage purporting to show hostages being taken to the hospital (they’re calling it a “terror tunnel” but I don’t think that actually means anything). I trust independent investigators are already at work verifying that’s what these videos actually are; for the moment I’ll take it at face value.
So it seems like Hamas had some secret ways to get into the hospital. They also brought hostages there, which certainly suggests they consider it a “base” of some kind. So far it doesn’t seem like much of a “main headquarters” for a military organization, although maybe now is a good time to think about what that would even mean. Decentralization is kind of a big thing for insurgent groups like Hamas; what are the odds they even *have* a big Bond villain secret headquarters anywhere in Gaza? In all likelihood they’ve got a dispersed network of small cells, each with a few hiding places and some weapons at their disposal.
To me the biggest question from the start of this is what “eliminating Hamas” would even look like. I mean, there’s a lot to criticize in Israel’s concept of just how cheap Palestinian lives are when they’re deciding what strikes are “worth it,” but fundamentally all that would have to be judged against an achievable overall objective that they just don’t seem to have. They can kill a lot of Palestinians; some percentage of those (I doubt it’s over 10%) are militants that would have taken up arms against Israel. They can track down some weapons and military infrastructure, and seize or destroy them. But at the end of the day there’s still going to be millions of Palestinians, some percentage of which will still be willing to take up arms against Israel, and those insurgents still won’t have trouble getting ahold of guns to do it with.
It’s not impossible to “win” a war of occupation but nothing we’re seeing from the IDF seems even remotely capable of achieving it. It’s just the usual escalation of cruelty that wars of occupation always promote, with no end in sight.
I agree that decentralizing is 9999x more likely and I don’t think any Bond villain base” kinda thing even exists. It would be an easy target and would eliminate a huge reason Hamas chooses to use human shields to begin with. Decentralizing and spreading within easy sympathy targets is ideal in basically every way. We are seeing very clearly that from a strictly “military engagement” perspective, Hamas can be easily compared to some alt right militia group that managed to win an election. It’s not an army so much as a collection of shit heads all interested in genocide of Jews. They are getting completely clobbered.
But useful idiots are still useful. That’s why Iran and others will continue to try to make sure they have what they need to engage in whatever shit head activities tickle their uneducated fancies.
Right now I think “winning” should be framed as eliminating Hamas’s ability to control land and slither between hospitals. Now that I think about it, a blackberry bush is probably a perfect comparison. It’s a fool’s errand to try to wipe out all blackberries, but it’s totally achievable to carve out an area where you get rid of all of it and then take steps to make sure any little sprouts are noticed and plucked quickly before it turns into a big issue. That’s the ideal way to remove the threat of Hamas, IMO.
The way IDF seems to be approaching it is: squeeze Gaza like a tube of toothpaste and pull out all the Hamas roots (tunnels) they can along the way so that the total number of hospitals Hamas to slither around between is significantly reduced and the land they control is minimal or zero.
We’ve seen Egypt, Jordan, Yemen, Qatar, and Iran all express very clearly just how important the people of Gaza are and how it’s imperative they are relieved of their suffering. They sound like great candidates to help establish a new government to replace Hamas. Hamas being out of the picture will make it a lot harder for those nations to pretend they wish they could help but can’t. Here’s their chance. I guess we’ll just have to wait and see what kind of effort Arab nations with the means to help choose to help. I hope my cynicism is proven wrong.
I get extremely nervous any time you decide you’ve come up with a great analogy, although in this case I’m not really sure what this blackberry business even is. Maybe you have to have experience picking blackberries?
To some extent it sounds like you’re getting at a clear and hold strategy. Which, you know, is certainly how the British or US handled it whenever they had some insurgent territory they wanted to beat into submission. In this case, though, I’m not sure what the strategically important footholds would even be. You keep saying “slither between hospitals” like you think if the IDF just controls all the hospitals, there will be nowhere else to hide. But the whole point of a decentralized insurgency is to not be as predictable as to only hide in one type of building. They can hide in apartments or tunnels or the back room of a grocery store or w/e, there’s no reason they even need to poke their head out until the IDF has moved onto another area.
Meanwhile the IDF strategy you’re describing is the exact opposite of clear and hold – it’s apparently to match an army around the map, fight whoever is there, and then keep marching. If Hamas is split up into thousands of little hidey-holes across the territory I don’t see how they have any chance of even killing Hamas militants preferentially over civilians in the slightest; compared to civilians Hamas fighters are much more likely to have the resources and training to hide and avoid Israeli troops and bombs indefinitely. Then after they’ve done that for a while, your best hope is that they can persuade some other Arab nation to occupy Gaza indefinitely? Why the hell would that be a good outcome?
Insurgents aren’t blackberries, and they aren’t toothpaste. If they’ve got hundreds or thousands of hideouts like the one under that hospital, I don’t see how Israel has any chance of “eliminating Hamas” in a reasonable time frame. At which point what are they even accomplishing? Lotta dead civilians, lotta angry survivors who are almost certainly more receptive than ever to joining an insurgency, but other than that, seems like not a whole lot?
I agree with all of your skepticism and most of your predictions. I think that’s why Israel’s actual plan is likely to just force as many people towards Egypt as possible so that Egypt can end up with a big enough Muslim Brotherhood 2.0 problem that they are forced to be a non-zero contributor to solving the problem. So long as Palestinians are only an Israel problem, neighboring Muslim nations are more than happy to kick their feet back and grab a bag of popcorn. I expect that would change if Egypt started getting wobbly again.
On November 20 2023 09:50 ChristianS wrote: Okay, since I wrote my post this morning, it looks like we have a couple developments: a video apparently showing a hidden access tunnel into the hospital, and some security cam footage purporting to show hostages being taken to the hospital (they’re calling it a “terror tunnel” but I don’t think that actually means anything). I trust independent investigators are already at work verifying that’s what these videos actually are; for the moment I’ll take it at face value.
So it seems like Hamas had some secret ways to get into the hospital. They also brought hostages there, which certainly suggests they consider it a “base” of some kind. So far it doesn’t seem like much of a “main headquarters” for a military organization, although maybe now is a good time to think about what that would even mean. Decentralization is kind of a big thing for insurgent groups like Hamas; what are the odds they even *have* a big Bond villain secret headquarters anywhere in Gaza? In all likelihood they’ve got a dispersed network of small cells, each with a few hiding places and some weapons at their disposal.
To me the biggest question from the start of this is what “eliminating Hamas” would even look like. I mean, there’s a lot to criticize in Israel’s concept of just how cheap Palestinian lives are when they’re deciding what strikes are “worth it,” but fundamentally all that would have to be judged against an achievable overall objective that they just don’t seem to have. They can kill a lot of Palestinians; some percentage of those (I doubt it’s over 10%) are militants that would have taken up arms against Israel. They can track down some weapons and military infrastructure, and seize or destroy them. But at the end of the day there’s still going to be millions of Palestinians, some percentage of which will still be willing to take up arms against Israel, and those insurgents still won’t have trouble getting ahold of guns to do it with.
It’s not impossible to “win” a war of occupation but nothing we’re seeing from the IDF seems even remotely capable of achieving it. It’s just the usual escalation of cruelty that wars of occupation always promote, with no end in sight.
I agree that decentralizing is 9999x more likely and I don’t think any Bond villain base” kinda thing even exists. It would be an easy target and would eliminate a huge reason Hamas chooses to use human shields to begin with. Decentralizing and spreading within easy sympathy targets is ideal in basically every way. We are seeing very clearly that from a strictly “military engagement” perspective, Hamas can be easily compared to some alt right militia group that managed to win an election. It’s not an army so much as a collection of shit heads all interested in genocide of Jews. They are getting completely clobbered.
But useful idiots are still useful. That’s why Iran and others will continue to try to make sure they have what they need to engage in whatever shit head activities tickle their uneducated fancies.
Right now I think “winning” should be framed as eliminating Hamas’s ability to control land and slither between hospitals. Now that I think about it, a blackberry bush is probably a perfect comparison. It’s a fool’s errand to try to wipe out all blackberries, but it’s totally achievable to carve out an area where you get rid of all of it and then take steps to make sure any little sprouts are noticed and plucked quickly before it turns into a big issue. That’s the ideal way to remove the threat of Hamas, IMO.
The way IDF seems to be approaching it is: squeeze Gaza like a tube of toothpaste and pull out all the Hamas roots (tunnels) they can along the way so that the total number of hospitals Hamas to slither around between is significantly reduced and the land they control is minimal or zero.
We’ve seen Egypt, Jordan, Yemen, Qatar, and Iran all express very clearly just how important the people of Gaza are and how it’s imperative they are relieved of their suffering. They sound like great candidates to help establish a new government to replace Hamas. Hamas being out of the picture will make it a lot harder for those nations to pretend they wish they could help but can’t. Here’s their chance. I guess we’ll just have to wait and see what kind of effort Arab nations with the means to help choose to help. I hope my cynicism is proven wrong.
I get extremely nervous any time you decide you’ve come up with a great analogy, although in this case I’m not really sure what this blackberry business even is. Maybe you have to have experience picking blackberries?
To some extent it sounds like you’re getting at a clear and hold strategy. Which, you know, is certainly how the British or US handled it whenever they had some insurgent territory they wanted to beat into submission. In this case, though, I’m not sure what the strategically important footholds would even be. You keep saying “slither between hospitals” like you think if the IDF just controls all the hospitals, there will be nowhere else to hide. But the whole point of a decentralized insurgency is to not be as predictable as to only hide in one type of building. They can hide in apartments or tunnels or the back room of a grocery store or w/e, there’s no reason they even need to poke their head out until the IDF has moved onto another area.
Meanwhile the IDF strategy you’re describing is the exact opposite of clear and hold – it’s apparently to match an army around the map, fight whoever is there, and then keep marching. If Hamas is split up into thousands of little hidey-holes across the territory I don’t see how they have any chance of even killing Hamas militants preferentially over civilians in the slightest; compared to civilians Hamas fighters are much more likely to have the resources and training to hide and avoid Israeli troops and bombs indefinitely. Then after they’ve done that for a while, your best hope is that they can persuade some other Arab nation to occupy Gaza indefinitely? Why the hell would that be a good outcome?
Insurgents aren’t blackberries, and they aren’t toothpaste. If they’ve got hundreds or thousands of hideouts like the one under that hospital, I don’t see how Israel has any chance of “eliminating Hamas” in a reasonable time frame. At which point what are they even accomplishing? Lotta dead civilians, lotta angry survivors who are almost certainly more receptive than ever to joining an insurgency, but other than that, seems like not a whole lot?
I agree with all of your skepticism and most of your predictions. I think that’s why Israel’s actual plan is likely to just force as many people towards Egypt as possible so that Egypt can end up with a big enough Muslim Brotherhood 2.0 problem that they are forced to be a non-zero contributor to solving the problem. So long as Palestinians are only an Israel problem, neighboring Muslim nations are more than happy to kick their feet back and grab a bag of popcorn. I expect that would change if Egypt started getting wobbly again.
It sounds to me like your analysis of Israel’s plan isn’t actually that different than GH’s. They’re just going to make life as miserable for Palestinians as they can until they die or vacate the territory. “Clear and hold” – except they’re not just clearing insurgents, they’re clearing all Palestinians, and they’re not just holding strategically important footholds, they’re holding the whole territory. In fact, the only people that *might* be able to survive a campaign like that are insurgents. Whisper communication networks, concealed tunnels, and hidden weapons stashes all sound pretty useful if you’re hoping to stay alive through an apocalypse like that.
Here maybe GH or Neb would call me overly optimistic, but I simply don’t believe Israel’s international backing is willing to tolerate that. Fundamentally Israel needs the US et al. to survive and keep doing this. Maybe a Trump administration would want to back a campaign like that, but for the moment I just don’t think an outcome that bloody is actually within their ability to achieve. Which means all they’ll be able to do is march around massacring civilians and shouting “Oct 7” at critics until that loses its rhetorical force enough that they’re forced to go home. Lots dead, nothing accomplished.
EPT
