|
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. |
On June 11 2024 04:40 Suibne wrote:
Several high ranking generals from NATO countries have already said that none of their militaries would operate like Israel has. Both for this rescue operation. And for the war in general. And we have tons of examples how western countries operate urban warfare. Even Israel right now does urban warfare way different than they did in all the other recent invasions of Gaza. And there has been one every 5 years or so since Israel pulled out of Gaza.
As for hostage operations. There is no example of a successful hostage rescue where 50 civilians died fro every hostage rescued.
And I am also not aware of a hostage mission that started with an air strike.
Honestly, I am not sure how you can even argue for this point. Because it is so obviously false and has no single argument behind it.
Also, your 1 to 4 points, where exactly did Israel kill all those civilians. Because you don't describe that. If a civilian dies because of a breaching charge, then that is fully understandable. Hostages also get killed in crossfire during rescues from time to time. That is normal. The deaths in this case, and the cause of their deaths, is completely unprecedented for western units.
You have to go to Russian botched rescue attempts like the Moscow opera, where they killed all the hostages because they pumped in a faulty sedative. Or the one at the Beslan school.
If you want to see how urban warfare looks in modern war when both sides really want to win go check on how towns look in Ukraine.
If you want to see what western countries do historically when the gloves are off go look at pictures from WWII.
If you have the luxury of fighting inferior forces you can choose to hold back if you want too like the US did in both Iraq and Afghanistan but that's a choice not an absolute.
As for where people died.
I imagine some were killed in the initial airstrikes, at least a couple were killed because they were in the apartment.
But the majority probably died when the fighting broke out either from gunfire (probably mostly Hamas fault) or air/drone strikes during that fighting.
Your also taking Hamas numbers at face value (~200+) while Israels are about half of that. Also note that Hamas does not differentiate fighters from civilians in their numbers.
You think Israel has some kind of moral imperative to fight in a certain way in this situation and you keep bringing up situations that have no relation to this one to "prove" it.
You could just as well flip it and say that once the team got the hostages in the truck and started driving away Hamas should not have opened fire because no western army would have opened fire because they are in a dense urban environment completely packed with civilians and the rules of engagement would absolutely prohibit taking that fight when the enemy is driving away.
|
Are you comparing Israel and the west with Russia? Didn't I specifically say "no western country?"
Or are you going to invoke the fire bombing of Tokyo and Dresden next? Seriously people?
By comparing Israel to what Russia is doing in Ukraine right now, you gave given the strongest anti-Israel argument possible.
I never said you can't win urban warfare through flattening most buildings. Because obviously you can.
And yes, the talking point that death counts from the Gaza ministry of Health as being 'Hamas propaganda' because Hamas is in control of the ministry of health as that is the civilian wing of Hamas is a great proIsrael talking point.
But there is a reason every western mainstream news media keeps parroting these numbers. And that is because historically these numbers have always proven to be quite accurate. Israel on the other hand has been pulling numbers from their ass, or refusing to even give them. Like that clown did on Piers Morgan.
Honestly, you guys are being played for fools by Israel by just repeating their propaganda. You have fucking access to western media. Read what they write. It is not hard.
You were giving an account of where the civilians killed died. And then in your summary, you never included that. And now you just say you imagine something, because you have no idea. And neither have I. I am just saying it is a really high death count for this type of mission. And you guys argue that there are many similar cases with similar death counts and this is a normal death count and it can be fully explained. Yet you don't even know why or how the people that died, died.
You just in your brain decided that you want to be antiHamas, and therefore proIsrael. And therefore, you need to defend what Israel did.
Israel absolutely has a moral imperative because they are doing these killings with western weapons. And the US is banned from providing weapons to countries that commit war crimes. It is 100% not allowed.
Also, Israel in the past has not been anything like they are today. And one of the major arguments used for western support for Israel is that Israel represents western democracy and western values in the middle east.
If Israel just wants to be an Arabs with funny Hebrew names massacring Arabs, 'because that is what Arabs do', then that is fine. But then why should they be given free western weapons to do that?
So if your argument that Israel has no moral imperative to not commit war crimes, because we can't expect them to fight certain ways in certain situations because of morality, then fine. But then we all know what exactly you are arguing for. Wait. You already just said that.
|
No I'm just saying that fighting in urban environments is extremely brutal by default. And if the populations is still there a lot of people will die.
And in this case people did not have time to get out of there for obvious reasons.
How do you think Israel should have handled this? Just let Hamas keep the hostages?
|
I am not sure you know what you are even saying. I think you should first have a good hard think about what you are actually believe. And then maybe come back here to argue with others.
I have already said how I think Israel should get back their hostages.
|
On June 11 2024 04:46 Suibne wrote:
Are you trolling or what? You implied there are similar situations. Then I gave examples of some that are different. And your contention was that my examples are not the same. And now you are pretending I misunderstood something.
I thought you were pretending to misunderstand me as a debate tactic. But now it seems you misunderstood your past self? Can that even be true?
Sorry, I was trying to say I am not aware of any similar situations. I was saying the situations you cited did not appear to be valid comparisons. And I was meaning to ask if you have additional examples to cite.
I was trying to be polite but I apologize if it comes across as dishonest. I will be more clear: I think you used a false equivalence as a core assumption when trying to prove Israel's hostage rescue operation deviated significantly from other tested and verified methods. I don't think you have the understanding necessary to make that judgment. I do not either. But I am not saying Israel did a good job. I don't think you have shown they did a bad job because you have not shown comparable examples with comparable results while using different methods.
Every now and then, we get a new member who turns out to be a total expert in this or that niche history or military or whatever stuff. So I was totally open to the possibility you really are some kinda super knowledgeable new poster. But I am saying right now that does not appear to be the case. But I would love to be proven wrong because I love learning more about this type of thing.
|
Ok, then I will wait for you to give me that comparable situation.
|
On June 11 2024 05:07 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:
No I'm just saying that fighting in urban environments is extremely brutal by default. And if the populations is still there a lot of people will die.
And in this case people did not have time to get out of there for obvious reasons.
How do you think Israel should have handled this? Just let Hamas keep the hostages?
Why does this question still come up we all knew that Israel would handle it like this we're not opposing them because we're surprised or disappointed we're opposing them because we think it's wrong
|
Maybe because some people here think the bar for what is a war crime is lower when it is urban warfare?
|
On June 11 2024 05:15 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On June 11 2024 05:07 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:
No I'm just saying that fighting in urban environments is extremely brutal by default. And if the populations is still there a lot of people will die.
And in this case people did not have time to get out of there for obvious reasons.
How do you think Israel should have handled this? Just let Hamas keep the hostages? Why does this question still come up we all knew that Israel would handle it like this we're not opposing them because we're surprised or disappointed we're opposing them because we think it's wrong
I mean in general for the entire Gaza conflict I can agree that what they are doing is wrong. But do you really think they should not try to rescue hostages if they have the chance?
|
On June 11 2024 05:18 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:Show nested quote +On June 11 2024 05:15 Nebuchad wrote:On June 11 2024 05:07 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:
No I'm just saying that fighting in urban environments is extremely brutal by default. And if the populations is still there a lot of people will die.
And in this case people did not have time to get out of there for obvious reasons.
How do you think Israel should have handled this? Just let Hamas keep the hostages? Why does this question still come up we all knew that Israel would handle it like this we're not opposing them because we're surprised or disappointed we're opposing them because we think it's wrong I mean in general for the entire Gaza conflict I can agree that what they are doing is wrong. But do you really think they should not try to rescue hostages if they have the chance?
There has been a ceasefire offer accepted by Hamas for... I want to say months by now, where all the hostages go home, Israel is rejecting it because they don't want all hostages to go home if it means they can't kill more Palestinians.
|
On June 11 2024 05:18 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:Show nested quote +On June 11 2024 05:15 Nebuchad wrote:On June 11 2024 05:07 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:
No I'm just saying that fighting in urban environments is extremely brutal by default. And if the populations is still there a lot of people will die.
And in this case people did not have time to get out of there for obvious reasons.
How do you think Israel should have handled this? Just let Hamas keep the hostages? Why does this question still come up we all knew that Israel would handle it like this we're not opposing them because we're surprised or disappointed we're opposing them because we think it's wrong I mean in general for the entire Gaza conflict I can agree that what they are doing is wrong. But do you really think they should not try to rescue hostages if they have the chance?
No one here has said Israel can't carry out hostage rescue operations.
The problem is here that disproportional use of force seems to have been part of the plan.
If this mission went wrong, and Israel had to improvise to get out their soldiers after a failed rescue, then at least there is an argument to say "too many people died, because our plan went wrong".
There is also no reason to think right now that the operation could not have been equally successful with less force being used. If you know hostages are being kept in an apartment complex, then what is the point of flattening every apartment complex just around it? Before you move in? Not sure if that is what happened, but that seems the most logical explanation. Because the hostage takers wouldn't even know about all the woman and children that just died in the apartment next door to them. In fact, it would give them time to execute the hostages.
Which is why hostage rescues usually have very little violence. They are covert missions that use the element of surprise. Throwing large bombs beforehand, or during extraction doesn't help with the success of the mission.
Yes, the most cynical analysis is that Israel wants the hostages to stay in Gaza. Because if somehow tomorrow Hamas decides to just free all of them, the pressure on Netanyahu to stop all military operations will become even larger.
What Netanyahu does need to continue his military operations though is a successful military hostage rescue.
|
On June 11 2024 05:15 Suibne wrote:
Ok, then I will wait for you to give me that comparable situation.
What I am saying is that if there is not a comparable situation, there is no comparison to be made. If no comparison can be made, no relative judgment can be made. We can assess the deaths and objectives and whatnot as a matter of fact. But we can't say Israel did better or worse than others.
I am saying I am choosing not to say whether they did the rescue itself well. All I am saying is that Israel is within their right to try to rescue their hostages. But I am not able to judge how the operation went in some kinda scale if I have nothing to compare it to.
|
On June 11 2024 05:25 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On June 11 2024 05:18 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:On June 11 2024 05:15 Nebuchad wrote:On June 11 2024 05:07 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:
No I'm just saying that fighting in urban environments is extremely brutal by default. And if the populations is still there a lot of people will die.
And in this case people did not have time to get out of there for obvious reasons.
How do you think Israel should have handled this? Just let Hamas keep the hostages? Why does this question still come up we all knew that Israel would handle it like this we're not opposing them because we're surprised or disappointed we're opposing them because we think it's wrong I mean in general for the entire Gaza conflict I can agree that what they are doing is wrong. But do you really think they should not try to rescue hostages if they have the chance? There has been a ceasefire offer accepted by Hamas for... I want to say months by now, where all the hostages go home, Israel is rejecting it because they don't want all hostages to go home if it means they can't kill more Palestinians.
I don't think you view it as simple as that. I think it would be more honest to point out the agreements Israel has agreed to and compare it to the agreements Hamas has agreed to. The differences between those 2 agreements is the point of contention.
I think there are problematic conclusions to the line of thinking you are describing. You appear to be indicating Israel had an option to get all hostages back, but chose not to go down that path. Since you mentioned this when you were asked if Israel was justified in trying to get their hostages back, are you also saying Israel is not within their right to try to rescue them by force because they did not agree to the same ceasefire terms as Hamas did? I don't want to put words in your mouth, but you appear to be implying Israel loses their moral justification for rescuing their hostages by force when they decline a ceasefire proposal by Hamas.
If we know Israel has accepted some agreements and we know Hamas has accepted some agreements, isn't it more accurate to say they are not able to agree on terms of ceasefires? If you are saying Israel declining proposals removes their moral justification for rescuing their hostages, shouldn't that depend on the specifics of the proposals? Obviously Israel shouldn't be expected to agree to anything and everything. The specifics matter.
|
If there is no comparable situation, then you can NEVER make the argument that this death toll is within the norm.
So then we can agree:
1) It was high
2) We don't know if it is within the norm
And we disagree that because of that, absolutely no judgment can be made. Wouldn't that be convenient?
So we have all the reasons to question this death toll and therefore use of force by Israel.
Israel being within their right to do a rescue operation has ZERO percent to do with how they carry out the rescue operation. Literally two different subjects. Why do you now want to argue that?
Ok, you think you personally are not able to judge their operation. So then just sit back and watch me and others do that.
|
And yes, the hostage negotiation is that simple. Hamas is perfectly willing to release all hostages to get a permanent seize fire. That's the entire reason they took them in the first place. Yes, it was a war crime. But that is the reason they were taken: so Hamas can get a permanent seize fire. And maybe also get some of their own hostages who are in Israeli prison back.
The reason why there is no deal is that Israel is 100% unwilling to make any deal that includes a permanent seize fire. Because they want to eliminate Hamas first. They have said this from day 1. All the way until today. So I am confused why you think that this is not 'that simple'.
You can argue that Israel is right to prioritize eliminating Hamas over releasing the hostages. But you cannot argue that Israel is trying 100% to get the hostages back, but they simply can't because Hamas doesn't want to free them.
Yes, Hamas should free all their hostages tomorrow, unconditionally. But Israel should also stop all these military operations tomorrow, unconditionally. Neither of them are going to do that.
Israel has therefore said publicly that eliminating Hamas is way more important that freeing the hostages. Which is why the families of hostages are so angry. And why they have been protesting against Netanyahu almost since week 1.
Yes, not all of them. But many of them.
|
On June 11 2024 06:12 Suibne wrote:
And yes, the hostage negotiation is that simple. Hamas is perfectly willing to release all hostages to get a permanent seize fire. That's the entire reason they took them in the first place. Yes, it was a war crime. But that is the reason they were taken: so Hamas can get a permanent seize fire. And maybe also get some of their own hostages who are in Israeli prison back.
The reason why there is no deal is that Israel is 100% unwilling to make any deal that includes a permanent seize fire. Because they want to eliminate Hamas first. They have said this from day 1. All the way until today. So I am confused why you think that this is not 'that simple'.
You can argue that Israel is right to prioritize eliminating Hamas over releasing the hostages. But you cannot argue that Israel is trying 100% to get the hostages back, but they simply can't because Hamas doesn't want to free them.
Yes, Hamas should free all their hostages tomorrow, unconditionally. But Israel should also stop all these military operations tomorrow, unconditionally. Neither of them are going to do that.
Israel has therefore said publicly that eliminating Hamas is way more important that freeing the hostages. Which is why the families of hostages are so angry. And why they have been protesting against Netanyahu almost since week 1.
Yes, not all of them. But many of them.
You are making edits to the specific language used. Nebuchad said "Palestinians". You are saying "Hamas".
Situation 1: Israel declines agreements where Hamas retains their ruling powers as a component of a permanent cease-fire
Situation 2: Israel declines agreements where Palestinians are allowed to continue living
These 2 situations have key differences. They can't be labeled equivalent.
|
You can't be serious. Yes, it is not clear how many hostages are being held by Hamas. And now many by other armed factions, like Islamic Jihad. But still, any deal that happens is between Hamas and Israel. Hamas is never going to make a deal with Israel where Hamas disbands itself. Just as Israel is not going to make a deal with Hamas where Israel disbands itself.
That sucks, because it would be great if Hamas didn't exist, Israel had a liberal more left leaning government underwriting western values. And the Palestinians had a viable nation state.
I am saying 'Hamas' because any deal that frees hostages is a deal between Hamas and the Israeli government. That's why I don't say 'Palestinians'. And I am 'editing' what Nebuchar wrote? No. You are confused.
But we are living in a shit show now. Partially created by Hamas. Partially created by Netanyahu, and other Israeli politicians.
So if the question right now is why Israel hasn't made a deal to release all hostages, the only answer is that Israel prioritizing being able to continue their military operations over freeing the hostages. There is no other reason. And it is that simple. And your situation 1 and situation 2 are complete nonsense. I don't even know why you are bringing that up.
In fact, I think this again indicates that you are quite confused.
If I would agree with you now that indeed Israel should never accept any deal where Hamas doesn't unconditionally surrender. Then how could I then have any criticism of people who hold the absurd position that Hamas is correct in demanding that Israel should dismantle their Zionist state?
So yeah, Israel is willing to allow for deals where ' Palestinians are allowed to continue living'.
Isn't that a pro genocide statement you just made? WTF is that? Every person on the planet already has the right to live, a priori. You don't need a deal with Israel for that. In fact, Israel is obliged to give every single Palestinian, that is not a Hamas militant, much much more than that. Including food, water, education, safety, medical care. All that. Israel is bound by international law to give them that, unconditionally. And beyond that. Palestinians have a right to their own viable state that they themselves govern. So why the fuck bring up that Israel is willing to accept deals where all Palestinians don't get genocided. What is that?
I am pretty sure Hamas is also perfectly willing to accept a dismantlement of Israel were some Jews can still stay alive.
In fact, I am pretty sure Israel IS unwilling to make any deal, or better accept a scenario, where Israel kills 0 innocent Palestinians until the end of time. Israel has always made deals. And Israel has always kept killing innocent Palestinians.
|
This is... This is boooring. I answered Cuddle's question: there is a way to free all of the hostages right now and they're not doing it, as such you don't get props for freeing hostages while killing 250+ people, as usual politics are only complicated when people are trying to hide a simple truth.
|
The UN SC has just backed the thee phase permanent seize fire proposal that frees all hostages. That Israel drew up behind the scenes. It is the deal Biden says Israel is willing to accept. But that then Netanyahu publicly said Biden was lying about. And that Israel meant that this would be a deal they would accept AFTER Hamas is eliminated. The US didn't veto it for Netanyahu. Hamas says they are positive. Let's see Netanyahu either reject it, or let's watch Netanyahu blow up his own government to make this deal.
And then let's watch Mohdoo here explain it all to us.
|
iirc 50 hostages were freed by way of negotiations during a brief ceasefire. How many have been freed by way of warfare so far?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
