|
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 November 04 2023 05:27 Nebuchad wrote:
Hamas is banking on us feeling bad when civilians die. It is effective propaganda, it worked on me. I feel bad.
As we have already gone over multiple times, I reject the notion that Israel is defending itself, which you keep using.
Are you rejecting the idea that rockets are flying into Israel? Or are you taking this from a "yeah well they started it" angle?
I think its totally pointless to frame this as "yeah well maybe if they didn't take any land no one would shoot rockets at them" because its not like they are leaving. The theoretical solution to you framing it that way is just for Israel to not exist. That is what Hamas has said is the condition for their attacks to end.
Do you accept the idea that Hamas will continue to launch attacks until Israel is entirely gone? Have you listened to their recent interviews? I want to make sure you are operating under the same understanding.
Is your solution for Israel to be dissolved? What is your impression of what is necessary for rockets to not be launched into Israel?
|
On November 04 2023 05:42 WombaT wrote:
You aren’t obligated to bomb ambulances, it’s not something you are particularly forced into doing. You can choose to do it if you don’t particularly care for civilian collateral, which Israel patently don’t care for.
Can you please help me understand this line of thinking? If that ambulance was being used to transport a weapon to shoot at Israel, are you saying Israel needs to just accept that weapon will be shot as Israel?
If a rocket is going to be launched from the roof of a school, is Israel morally obligated to allow that rocket to be fired, even if it means it will kill Israelis?
I am sorry if I am misunderstanding you, but I must be. It feels like the conclusion of your line of thinking is that Hamas should be allowed to kill Israelis so long as the attacks are carried out from civilian structures like schools or hospitals.
|
On November 04 2023 05:50 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2023 05:42 WombaT wrote:
You aren’t obligated to bomb ambulances, it’s not something you are particularly forced into doing. You can choose to do it if you don’t particularly care for civilian collateral, which Israel patently don’t care for.
Can you please help me understand this line of thinking? If that ambulance was being used to transport a weapon to shoot at Israel, are you saying Israel needs to just accept that weapon will be shot as Israel? If a rocket is going to be launched from the roof of a school, is Israel morally obligated to allow that rocket to be fired, even if it means it will kill Israelis? I am sorry if I am misunderstanding you, but I must be. It feels like the conclusion of your line of thinking is that Hamas should be allowed to kill Israelis so long as the attacks are carried out from civilian structures like schools or hospitals.
Dude... this is basic humanity.
If you take your family hostage and demand $1,000,000 or you'll keep firing randomly into your neighborhood the appropriate response isn't to blow you and your family up to protect the neighborhood, let alone flattening your cul-de-sac with bombs.
|
On November 04 2023 05:47 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2023 05:27 Nebuchad wrote:
Hamas is banking on us feeling bad when civilians die. It is effective propaganda, it worked on me. I feel bad.
As we have already gone over multiple times, I reject the notion that Israel is defending itself, which you keep using. Are you rejecting the idea that rockets are flying into Israel? Or are you taking this from a "yeah well they started it" angle? I think its totally pointless to frame this as "yeah well maybe if they didn't take any land no one would shoot rockets at them" because its not like they are leaving. The theoretical solution to you framing it that way is just for Israel to not exist. That is what Hamas has said is the condition for their attacks to end. Do you accept the idea that Hamas will continue to launch attacks until Israel is entirely gone? Have you listened to their recent interviews? I want to make sure you are operating under the same understanding. Is your solution for Israel to be dissolved? What is your impression of what is necessary for rockets to not be launched into Israel?
When you say "They started it" I am picturing that in your mind it's part of history, in the past. It's not that they "started" it, they're currently doing the thing. And then Palestinians are reacting to the thing, one of the reactions being the terrorism by Hamas, at which point Israel strikes back and you come here to ask how Israel is supposed to defend itself.
The distinction is, like, I am Inigo Montoya, you killed my father 20 years ago, I am attacking you. When you react, it is reasonable to argue that you started it (by killing my father), but in your reaction you are defending yourself, because I start this specific duel.
As opposed to, we have this conflict that we have had for decades, I am currently in the process of stabbing you repeatedly, you pull out a gun, I am horrified and I say "OMG A GUN??? Now I am forced to defend myself!"
|
On November 04 2023 04:28 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2023 03:14 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Welp, another war crime documented and admitted to. By both sides.
A war crime committed by Hamas. Hamas has recently reiterated their view that Palestinian civilians who die from attacks like this are martyrs, and that it is all worthwhile.
"Fuck it, there's ___ down there somewhere" is good policy when you've got an excellent wide receiver, not when you're sending explosives to a place the size of Philadelphia with 5/3rds the population.
|
On November 04 2023 05:55 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2023 05:50 Mohdoo wrote:On November 04 2023 05:42 WombaT wrote:
You aren’t obligated to bomb ambulances, it’s not something you are particularly forced into doing. You can choose to do it if you don’t particularly care for civilian collateral, which Israel patently don’t care for.
Can you please help me understand this line of thinking? If that ambulance was being used to transport a weapon to shoot at Israel, are you saying Israel needs to just accept that weapon will be shot as Israel? If a rocket is going to be launched from the roof of a school, is Israel morally obligated to allow that rocket to be fired, even if it means it will kill Israelis? I am sorry if I am misunderstanding you, but I must be. It feels like the conclusion of your line of thinking is that Hamas should be allowed to kill Israelis so long as the attacks are carried out from civilian structures like schools or hospitals. Dude... this is basic humanity. If you take your family hostage and demand $1,000,000 or you'll keep firing randomly into your neighborhood the appropriate response isn't to blow you and your family up to protect the neighborhood, let alone flattening your cul-de-sac with bombs.
What are you saying Israel should do? This feels like the same general evasive response so you'll need to actually be clear about what you are saying is the better solution to rockets being fired.
|
On November 04 2023 05:58 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2023 05:47 Mohdoo wrote:On November 04 2023 05:27 Nebuchad wrote:
Hamas is banking on us feeling bad when civilians die. It is effective propaganda, it worked on me. I feel bad.
As we have already gone over multiple times, I reject the notion that Israel is defending itself, which you keep using. Are you rejecting the idea that rockets are flying into Israel? Or are you taking this from a "yeah well they started it" angle? I think its totally pointless to frame this as "yeah well maybe if they didn't take any land no one would shoot rockets at them" because its not like they are leaving. The theoretical solution to you framing it that way is just for Israel to not exist. That is what Hamas has said is the condition for their attacks to end. Do you accept the idea that Hamas will continue to launch attacks until Israel is entirely gone? Have you listened to their recent interviews? I want to make sure you are operating under the same understanding. Is your solution for Israel to be dissolved? What is your impression of what is necessary for rockets to not be launched into Israel? When you say "They started it" I am picturing that in your mind it's part of history, in the past. It's not that they "started" it, they're currently doing the thing. And then Palestinians are reacting to the thing, one of the reactions being the terrorism by Hamas, at which point Israel strikes back and you come here to ask how Israel is supposed to defend itself.
What condition do you think is necessary for Hamas to stop firing rockets at Israel? Do you believe Hamas when they say the only way they will stop is when Israel no longer exists?
|
On November 04 2023 06:13 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2023 05:58 Nebuchad wrote:On November 04 2023 05:47 Mohdoo wrote:On November 04 2023 05:27 Nebuchad wrote:
Hamas is banking on us feeling bad when civilians die. It is effective propaganda, it worked on me. I feel bad.
As we have already gone over multiple times, I reject the notion that Israel is defending itself, which you keep using. Are you rejecting the idea that rockets are flying into Israel? Or are you taking this from a "yeah well they started it" angle? I think its totally pointless to frame this as "yeah well maybe if they didn't take any land no one would shoot rockets at them" because its not like they are leaving. The theoretical solution to you framing it that way is just for Israel to not exist. That is what Hamas has said is the condition for their attacks to end. Do you accept the idea that Hamas will continue to launch attacks until Israel is entirely gone? Have you listened to their recent interviews? I want to make sure you are operating under the same understanding. Is your solution for Israel to be dissolved? What is your impression of what is necessary for rockets to not be launched into Israel? When you say "They started it" I am picturing that in your mind it's part of history, in the past. It's not that they "started" it, they're currently doing the thing. And then Palestinians are reacting to the thing, one of the reactions being the terrorism by Hamas, at which point Israel strikes back and you come here to ask how Israel is supposed to defend itself. What condition do you think is necessary for Hamas to stop firing rockets at Israel? Do you believe Hamas when they say the only way they will stop is when Israel no longer exists?
Probably yes it would be that Israel no longer exists.
|
On November 04 2023 06:12 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2023 05:55 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 04 2023 05:50 Mohdoo wrote:On November 04 2023 05:42 WombaT wrote:
You aren’t obligated to bomb ambulances, it’s not something you are particularly forced into doing. You can choose to do it if you don’t particularly care for civilian collateral, which Israel patently don’t care for.
Can you please help me understand this line of thinking? If that ambulance was being used to transport a weapon to shoot at Israel, are you saying Israel needs to just accept that weapon will be shot as Israel? If a rocket is going to be launched from the roof of a school, is Israel morally obligated to allow that rocket to be fired, even if it means it will kill Israelis? I am sorry if I am misunderstanding you, but I must be. It feels like the conclusion of your line of thinking is that Hamas should be allowed to kill Israelis so long as the attacks are carried out from civilian structures like schools or hospitals. Dude... this is basic humanity. If you take your family hostage and demand $1,000,000 or you'll keep firing randomly into your neighborhood the appropriate response isn't to blow you and your family up to protect the neighborhood, let alone flattening your cul-de-sac with bombs. What are you saying Israel should do? This feels like the same general evasive response so you'll need to actually be clear about what you are saying is the better solution to rockets being fired.
Stop their ethnic cleansing campaign, stop killing thousands of innocent children, stop their illegal occupation. Stuff like that.
|
On November 04 2023 06:18 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2023 06:12 Mohdoo wrote:On November 04 2023 05:55 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 04 2023 05:50 Mohdoo wrote:On November 04 2023 05:42 WombaT wrote:
You aren’t obligated to bomb ambulances, it’s not something you are particularly forced into doing. You can choose to do it if you don’t particularly care for civilian collateral, which Israel patently don’t care for.
Can you please help me understand this line of thinking? If that ambulance was being used to transport a weapon to shoot at Israel, are you saying Israel needs to just accept that weapon will be shot as Israel? If a rocket is going to be launched from the roof of a school, is Israel morally obligated to allow that rocket to be fired, even if it means it will kill Israelis? I am sorry if I am misunderstanding you, but I must be. It feels like the conclusion of your line of thinking is that Hamas should be allowed to kill Israelis so long as the attacks are carried out from civilian structures like schools or hospitals. Dude... this is basic humanity. If you take your family hostage and demand $1,000,000 or you'll keep firing randomly into your neighborhood the appropriate response isn't to blow you and your family up to protect the neighborhood, let alone flattening your cul-de-sac with bombs. What are you saying Israel should do? This feels like the same general evasive response so you'll need to actually be clear about what you are saying is the better solution to rockets being fired. Stop their ethnic cleansing campaign, stop killing thousands of innocent children, stop their illegal occupation. Stuff like that.
But if they are still having rockets fired at them, what is the point? Hamas is shooting rockets as civilians and they recently killed a bunch of civilians. And they still have a bunch of hostages. So is it really a net-positive for Israel to stop when Hamas will keep going?
Same question for you: What condition do you think is necessary for Hamas to stop attacking Israel?
|
On November 04 2023 06:15 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2023 06:13 Mohdoo wrote:On November 04 2023 05:58 Nebuchad wrote:On November 04 2023 05:47 Mohdoo wrote:On November 04 2023 05:27 Nebuchad wrote:
Hamas is banking on us feeling bad when civilians die. It is effective propaganda, it worked on me. I feel bad.
As we have already gone over multiple times, I reject the notion that Israel is defending itself, which you keep using. Are you rejecting the idea that rockets are flying into Israel? Or are you taking this from a "yeah well they started it" angle? I think its totally pointless to frame this as "yeah well maybe if they didn't take any land no one would shoot rockets at them" because its not like they are leaving. The theoretical solution to you framing it that way is just for Israel to not exist. That is what Hamas has said is the condition for their attacks to end. Do you accept the idea that Hamas will continue to launch attacks until Israel is entirely gone? Have you listened to their recent interviews? I want to make sure you are operating under the same understanding. Is your solution for Israel to be dissolved? What is your impression of what is necessary for rockets to not be launched into Israel? When you say "They started it" I am picturing that in your mind it's part of history, in the past. It's not that they "started" it, they're currently doing the thing. And then Palestinians are reacting to the thing, one of the reactions being the terrorism by Hamas, at which point Israel strikes back and you come here to ask how Israel is supposed to defend itself. What condition do you think is necessary for Hamas to stop firing rockets at Israel? Do you believe Hamas when they say the only way they will stop is when Israel no longer exists? Probably yes it would be that Israel no longer exists.
Is that what you want to happen? Is it that you think they should be relocated through some sort of global effort to find them a new home?
|
On November 04 2023 06:30 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2023 06:15 Nebuchad wrote:On November 04 2023 06:13 Mohdoo wrote:On November 04 2023 05:58 Nebuchad wrote:On November 04 2023 05:47 Mohdoo wrote:On November 04 2023 05:27 Nebuchad wrote:
Hamas is banking on us feeling bad when civilians die. It is effective propaganda, it worked on me. I feel bad.
As we have already gone over multiple times, I reject the notion that Israel is defending itself, which you keep using. Are you rejecting the idea that rockets are flying into Israel? Or are you taking this from a "yeah well they started it" angle? I think its totally pointless to frame this as "yeah well maybe if they didn't take any land no one would shoot rockets at them" because its not like they are leaving. The theoretical solution to you framing it that way is just for Israel to not exist. That is what Hamas has said is the condition for their attacks to end. Do you accept the idea that Hamas will continue to launch attacks until Israel is entirely gone? Have you listened to their recent interviews? I want to make sure you are operating under the same understanding. Is your solution for Israel to be dissolved? What is your impression of what is necessary for rockets to not be launched into Israel? When you say "They started it" I am picturing that in your mind it's part of history, in the past. It's not that they "started" it, they're currently doing the thing. And then Palestinians are reacting to the thing, one of the reactions being the terrorism by Hamas, at which point Israel strikes back and you come here to ask how Israel is supposed to defend itself. What condition do you think is necessary for Hamas to stop firing rockets at Israel? Do you believe Hamas when they say the only way they will stop is when Israel no longer exists? Probably yes it would be that Israel no longer exists. Is that what you want to happen? Is it that you think they should be relocated through some sort of global effort to find them a new home?
No it is not what I want to happen, because that would be ethnically cleansing Israeli people and, you will be shocked to find out, I am not in favor of ethnic cleansing.
|
On November 04 2023 06:28 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2023 06:18 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 04 2023 06:12 Mohdoo wrote:On November 04 2023 05:55 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 04 2023 05:50 Mohdoo wrote:On November 04 2023 05:42 WombaT wrote:
You aren’t obligated to bomb ambulances, it’s not something you are particularly forced into doing. You can choose to do it if you don’t particularly care for civilian collateral, which Israel patently don’t care for.
Can you please help me understand this line of thinking? If that ambulance was being used to transport a weapon to shoot at Israel, are you saying Israel needs to just accept that weapon will be shot as Israel? If a rocket is going to be launched from the roof of a school, is Israel morally obligated to allow that rocket to be fired, even if it means it will kill Israelis? I am sorry if I am misunderstanding you, but I must be. It feels like the conclusion of your line of thinking is that Hamas should be allowed to kill Israelis so long as the attacks are carried out from civilian structures like schools or hospitals. Dude... this is basic humanity. If you take your family hostage and demand $1,000,000 or you'll keep firing randomly into your neighborhood the appropriate response isn't to blow you and your family up to protect the neighborhood, let alone flattening your cul-de-sac with bombs. What are you saying Israel should do? This feels like the same general evasive response so you'll need to actually be clear about what you are saying is the better solution to rockets being fired. Stop their ethnic cleansing campaign, stop killing thousands of innocent children, stop their illegal occupation. Stuff like that. But if they are still having rockets fired at them, what is the point? Hamas is shooting rockets as civilians and they recently killed a bunch of civilians. And they still have a bunch of hostages. So is it really a net-positive for Israel to stop when Hamas will keep going? Same question for you: What condition do you think is necessary for Hamas to stop attacking Israel?
The point of not illegally occupying land, engaging in an ethnic cleansing campaign, slaughtering thousands of innocent children? Uhhh...? Maybe the whole not being raging war criminals that would be in the Hague if international law was anything more than a cynical tool of Western hegemony thing?
|
Think this is the subliminal message to remind Israel that "the end of the runway is approaching" like last time.
Washington (CNN) — President Joe Biden and his top advisers are warning Israel with growing force that it will become increasingly difficult for it to pursue its military goals in Gaza as global outcry intensifies about the scale of humanitarian suffering there.
Biden, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and Secretary of State Antony Blinken – who departed Thursday for Israel with a message on protecting civilian lives – have all explicitly pressed the case in recent private conversations with the Israelis, telling them that eroding support will have dire strategic consequences for Israel Defense Forces operations against Hamas.
Behind the scenes, American officials also believe there is limited time for Israel to try to accomplish its stated objective of taking out Hamas in its current operation before uproar over the humanitarian suffering and civilian casualties – and calls for a ceasefire – reaches a tipping point.
In fact, there is recognition within the administration that that moment may arrive quickly: Some of the president’s close advisers believe that there are only weeks, not months, until rebuffing the pressure on the US government to publicly call for a ceasefire becomes untenable, sources told CNN.
There have been no signs that Israel’s offensive is slowing. The Israeli military said Thursday it is surrounding Gaza City and “deepening” its operations there. CNN witnessed the skies of Northern Gaza illuminated by flares and explosions as the bombardment intensified late Thursday night.
Particularly jarring to Biden and his national security team, two sources familiar with the matter said, were Israeli airstrikes this week that targeted a refugee camp in northern Gaza, resulting in grim scenes of widespread destruction and deaths. The president “didn’t like this at all,” one of the sources said.
“The problem for [Israel] is that the criticism is getting louder, not just among their detractors, but from their best friends,” one senior administration official said.
Israel Defense Forces spokesman Lt. Col. Jonathan Conricus claimed the strike was targeting a Hamas commander hiding in an underground bunker and that when the complex imploded it possibly collapsed nearby buildings.
Source
|
On November 04 2023 06:31 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2023 06:30 Mohdoo wrote:On November 04 2023 06:15 Nebuchad wrote:On November 04 2023 06:13 Mohdoo wrote:On November 04 2023 05:58 Nebuchad wrote:On November 04 2023 05:47 Mohdoo wrote:On November 04 2023 05:27 Nebuchad wrote:
Hamas is banking on us feeling bad when civilians die. It is effective propaganda, it worked on me. I feel bad.
As we have already gone over multiple times, I reject the notion that Israel is defending itself, which you keep using. Are you rejecting the idea that rockets are flying into Israel? Or are you taking this from a "yeah well they started it" angle? I think its totally pointless to frame this as "yeah well maybe if they didn't take any land no one would shoot rockets at them" because its not like they are leaving. The theoretical solution to you framing it that way is just for Israel to not exist. That is what Hamas has said is the condition for their attacks to end. Do you accept the idea that Hamas will continue to launch attacks until Israel is entirely gone? Have you listened to their recent interviews? I want to make sure you are operating under the same understanding. Is your solution for Israel to be dissolved? What is your impression of what is necessary for rockets to not be launched into Israel? When you say "They started it" I am picturing that in your mind it's part of history, in the past. It's not that they "started" it, they're currently doing the thing. And then Palestinians are reacting to the thing, one of the reactions being the terrorism by Hamas, at which point Israel strikes back and you come here to ask how Israel is supposed to defend itself. What condition do you think is necessary for Hamas to stop firing rockets at Israel? Do you believe Hamas when they say the only way they will stop is when Israel no longer exists? Probably yes it would be that Israel no longer exists. Is that what you want to happen? Is it that you think they should be relocated through some sort of global effort to find them a new home? No it is not what I want to happen, because that would be ethnically cleansing Israeli people and, you will be shocked to find out, I am not in favor of ethnic cleansing.
Am I understanding this correctly? Please let me know where my impression is wrong, if anywhere.
You are saying the 2 following things:
1: The only way for Israel to prevent Israeli civilians from being killed by Hamas is for Israel to no longer exist
2: You want Israel to continue existing
When you combine these, the resulting situation is Israeli civilians continuing to be killed.
If I may ask a follow-up: Since all of the ethics you have put forth so far indicate you are not in favor of Israeli civilians being killed by Hamas, I can only assume you would like Hamas to be removed from power in some way. Is that true? Do you want Hamas to be removed from power in some way? And if so, through what mechanism? I think all of your desires are great and totally ethical, but the issue is that Hamas continues to kill people in the scenario we have developed so far. Can you help me understand the mechanism through which Hamas's ability to kill Israeli civilians is removed?
|
On November 04 2023 06:42 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2023 06:28 Mohdoo wrote:On November 04 2023 06:18 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 04 2023 06:12 Mohdoo wrote:On November 04 2023 05:55 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 04 2023 05:50 Mohdoo wrote:On November 04 2023 05:42 WombaT wrote:
You aren’t obligated to bomb ambulances, it’s not something you are particularly forced into doing. You can choose to do it if you don’t particularly care for civilian collateral, which Israel patently don’t care for.
Can you please help me understand this line of thinking? If that ambulance was being used to transport a weapon to shoot at Israel, are you saying Israel needs to just accept that weapon will be shot as Israel? If a rocket is going to be launched from the roof of a school, is Israel morally obligated to allow that rocket to be fired, even if it means it will kill Israelis? I am sorry if I am misunderstanding you, but I must be. It feels like the conclusion of your line of thinking is that Hamas should be allowed to kill Israelis so long as the attacks are carried out from civilian structures like schools or hospitals. Dude... this is basic humanity. If you take your family hostage and demand $1,000,000 or you'll keep firing randomly into your neighborhood the appropriate response isn't to blow you and your family up to protect the neighborhood, let alone flattening your cul-de-sac with bombs. What are you saying Israel should do? This feels like the same general evasive response so you'll need to actually be clear about what you are saying is the better solution to rockets being fired. Stop their ethnic cleansing campaign, stop killing thousands of innocent children, stop their illegal occupation. Stuff like that. But if they are still having rockets fired at them, what is the point? Hamas is shooting rockets as civilians and they recently killed a bunch of civilians. And they still have a bunch of hostages. So is it really a net-positive for Israel to stop when Hamas will keep going? Same question for you: What condition do you think is necessary for Hamas to stop attacking Israel? The point of not illegally occupying land, engaging in an ethnic cleansing campaign, slaughtering thousands of innocent children? Uhhh...? Maybe the whole not being raging war criminals that would be in the Hague if international law was anything more than a cynical tool of Western hegemony thing?
I understand what you're saying. But what I am asking is what is necessary for Hamas to stop attacking Israeli civilians. If you think it is bad for Israeli civilians to be killed, and you also think Hamas will continue killing Israeli civilians until Israel no longer exists (since they have directly reinforced their intention to do that in recent interviews), what is the path for Israeli civilians to no longer be killed? It feels like relocation is the only option within the scenario you are providing. Am I misunderstanding you, or are you saying Israelis should be relocated?
|
Northern Ireland27265 Posts
On November 04 2023 05:50 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2023 05:42 WombaT wrote:
You aren’t obligated to bomb ambulances, it’s not something you are particularly forced into doing. You can choose to do it if you don’t particularly care for civilian collateral, which Israel patently don’t care for.
Can you please help me understand this line of thinking? If that ambulance was being used to transport a weapon to shoot at Israel, are you saying Israel needs to just accept that weapon will be shot as Israel? If a rocket is going to be launched from the roof of a school, is Israel morally obligated to allow that rocket to be fired, even if it means it will kill Israelis? I am sorry if I am misunderstanding you, but I must be. It feels like the conclusion of your line of thinking is that Hamas should be allowed to kill Israelis so long as the attacks are carried out from civilian structures like schools or hospitals.
If an attack is in progress, or reasonable intelligence exists that they’re imminently, if it’s somewhat targeted then yes there’s a fair case to be made there.
If you’re just bombing civilian targets on the off chance they might be, it’s not particularly functionally different from just indiscriminately bombing civilian targets.
|
On November 04 2023 07:55 Mohdoo wrote:
Am I understanding this correctly? Please let me know where my impression is wrong, if anywhere.
You are saying the 2 following things:
1: The only way for Israel to prevent Israeli civilians from being killed by Hamas is for Israel to no longer exist
2: You want Israel to continue existing
When you combine these, the resulting situation is Israeli civilians continuing to be killed.
If I may ask a follow-up: Since all of the ethics you have put forth so far indicate you are not in favor of Israeli civilians being killed by Hamas, I can only assume you would like Hamas to be removed from power in some way. Is that true? Do you want Hamas to be removed from power in some way? And if so, through what mechanism? I think all of your desires are great and totally ethical, but the issue is that Hamas continues to kill people in the scenario we have developed so far. Can you help me understand the mechanism through which Hamas's ability to kill Israeli civilians is removed?
I think that if Israel stopped their ongoing campaign of occupying Palestinians, ethnically cleansing them, and occasionally murdering a bunch of their family members, the proposition of joining Hamas would look a lot less enticing to a lot of Palestinians, and as such Hamas would lose some of its capacity to hurt Israel.
I also believe that if Palestine was allowed to become a state, that state would not be governed by Hamas, but by some version of the Palestinian Authority, and that would also make it harder for Hamas to continue their actions as they wouldn't be in power within the place they're operating from.
I'm sure you're thinking of all of the problematic situations that could occur, but please remember that the first problem is that the government of Israel PREFERS the current situation of being attacked by Hamas from time to time to an alternative where they have to let Palestinians have a state and keep their land. So in the real world, as opposed to your mind palace where Hamas is the only problem that we have to solve, the first issue is that we would have to convince a government of fascists that the lives of civilians that are perceived as subhumans are more important than seizing land, and that's already a task that I don't think is very easily achievable.
|
Norway28875 Posts
Mohdoo they're not launching nukes and Israel has pretty fantastic anti-rocket defense. According to this, 'tens of thousands' of rocket and mortar attacks have resulted in 27 Israeli civilian deaths (and 1900 injuries, not ignoring that). Consequently I think that yes, if rockets are being fired from a school, retaliating by bombing that school is deeply immoral and way out of proportion. I'm not saying they should ignore everything, but you honestly seem to be arguing in favor of 'in a hostage situation, killing the hostages is fine if it lets you kill the bad guys' to an absurd degree. If someone is shooting a rocket and that rocket has a 10% chance of injuring someone and a 0.15% chance of killing someone then retaliating in a way that has an 80%+ chance of killing several civilians does in fact strike me as deeply immoral.
These equations obviously change depending on how dangerous someone is. If someone is about to nuke a city and you can only kill them by taking 1000 civilians, hey, sucks, but those civilians have to go. But if someone is a limited threat and the collateral damage is likely to be several tenfold the damage those people are likely to cause, again, different equation.
People are actually largely in favor of and looking for holistic, complex answers that protect civilian life on both sides, whereas you seem to be trying to turn it into some simplistic dichotomy where we're either in favor of Hamas killing Israelis with impunity or we just have to accept that palestinian civilian lives are worthless as long as Hamas uses them as hostages. In general, people understand the need for a military response and the need for a neutering of Hamas, but not at every price.
It's kinda like you're arguing for killing the north korean leadership to liberate the population of north korea, and then someone saying 'but then they'll nuke Seoul' makes you respond with 'so you're saying we should just let the kim dynasty oppress their population with no repercussions??' and we're like 'I mean that sucks and we don't like that at all but it's better than Seoul being nuked'. Sometimes damage control is the best we can do, then steps towards a lasting peace has to be a parallel effort achieved in other ways. Targeting the leadership that lives outside Gaza could be one thing. Tempting Iran in some way might be another. Disbanding settlements and returning stolen land/homes could be a third. But stuff like 'force 2-10 million people to move somewhere else' isn't a viable option, nor is bombing a school to get a rocket launcher.
|
Northern Ireland27265 Posts
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
