Israel assaults Iran, pounds Lebanon, Hezbollah

  • Thread starter Thread starter uncmba
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 705
  • Views: 13K
  • Politics 
RaiGuy said:
So you’re saying it’s ok that they damage/destroy nearly every building in Gaza because they gave a warning? Also, what if you were living with your spouse and 4 young children and 2 elderly parents that need physical assistance…would you have time to pack up your belongings, get them out, and walk somewhere that is deemed safe? There are no hotels to go to. Where would you go? What would you take? Where would you go to after your whole neighborhood has been demolished? A tent city you say? Wait, they bomb those too. Where else can you go?
Do you see how your argument makes no sense? Also, the total death toll is much higher than the reported 40k. There are many still missing and many others dying from treatable diseases, starvation, dehydration, etc…. Also, remember, half the population is children. Nearly 20,000 children have been orphaned (not just parents, but many losing their whole extended family). There are thousands more children that have had body parts amputated. How are they supposed to evacuate?

It’s easy to say from the comfort of your couch that they should just evacuate if they get a warning, but it’s not that simple.
Click to expand...
Love your post. Just one question though, what part of Gaza is “deemed safe?”
 
Patb78 said:
Love your post. Just one question though, what part of Gaza is “deemed safe?”
Click to expand...
haha exactly. I was referring to the areas that Israel tells people to evacuate to before they proceed to bomb said area.
 
UNCatTech said:
You keep focusing one one day instead of the 75 year history.

No one is arguing that Oct 7th, 2023 was ok or acceptable. But it doesn't justify the level of response or the years of slowly expanding and refusing to recognize the Palestinians.

But keep focusing on the one thing you seem to believe justifies genocide.
Click to expand...
@Paine @RaiGuy

The theme of the conversations is basically the same among the three of you.

Yes, I am focusing on just the recent attack by Hamas and the response by Israel. The past may have been a factor in causing current events, but they aren't relevant as it relates to the question of whether or not Israel's response is proportional. The claim was made by superrific that there's "sure a lot of collateral damage".

First, it's safe to say that there is no ethical or political argument that is going to make sense of dead children being pulled from under what was once an apartment building or mosque or school. It's natural to see such horrific images and assume that whatever caused it has to be evil and must be stopped. That visceral response doesn't mean that Israel's response isn't proportional and justified or that Israel's response has genocidal intentions. Around 3,000 Americans died on September 11. Does that make the civilian deaths in Afghanistan and Iraq excessive? About 2,400 Americans died in the Pearl Harbor attack. Does that make the civilian deaths caused by America excessive?

All wars are different and raw numbers, like the 40:1 ratio in Gaza, doesn't tell the whole story. Fighting in the mountains of Afghanistan is much different than fighting a urban warfare in a densely populated area like Gaza.

I said it before....Hamas, with only knives and guns, killed 1,000 civilians in about 8 hours. Israel would have had to kill over a million civilians in the first year of the war to equal Hamas' rate of civilian death. If Israel wanted to, they absolutely could kill a million civilians, and probably more in a year, with the weapons available to them.

But that's not what they are doing. In fact, if their goal is genocide, this has to rank as the single worst execution of genocide in the history of mankind.

The fact that they have only killed about 40k is, given the circumstances should be viewed as an accomplishment given the circumstances. The circumstances being:

  • 15,000 civilians per square mile
  • A military that purposely fires weapons from civilian locations
  • A military that has purposely built tunnels under apartment buildings, mosques, hospitals and schools
  • Purposely uses civilians as human shields
  • Discourages civilians from leaving areas that Israel intends to bomb
  • A meaningful portion of the civilians have absolutely no issue dying as martyrs in wthink think
I think I have presented my case about as clearly as I can. If there is disagreement, there is no harm in just agreeing to disagree.
 
Last edited:
ZenMode said:
@Paine @RaiGuy

The theme of the conversations is basically the same among the three of you.

Yes, I am focusing on just the recent attack by Hamas and the response by Israel. The past may have been a factor in causing current events, but they aren't relevant as it relates to the question of whether or not Israel's response is proportional. The claim was made by superrific that there's "sure a lot of collateral damage".

First, it's safe to say that there is no ethical or political argument that is going to make sense of dead children being pulled from under what was once an apartment building or mosque or school. It's natural to see such horrific images and assume that whatever caused it has to be evil and must be stopped. That visceral response doesn't mean that Israel's response isn't proportional and justified or that Israel's response has genocidal intentions. Around 3,000 Americans died on September 11. Does that make the civilian deaths in Afghanistan and Iraq excessive? About 2,400 Americans died in the Pearl Harbor attack. Does that make the civilian deaths caused by America excessive?

All wars are different and raw numbers, like the 40:1 ratio in Gaza doesn't tell the whole story. Fighting in the mountains of Afghanistan is much different than fighting a urban warfare in a densely populated area like Gaza.

I said it before....Hamas, with only knives and guns, killed 1,000 civilians in about 8 hours. Israel would have had to kill over a million civilians in the first year of the war to equal Hamas' rate of civilian death. If Israel wanted to, they absolutely could kill a million civilians, and probably more, in a year with the weapons available to them.

But that's not what they are doing. In fact, if their goal is genocide, this has to rank as the single worst execution of genocide in the history of mankind.

The fact that they have only killed about 40k is, given the circumstances should be viewed as an accomplishment given the circumstances. The circumstances being:

  • 15,000 civilians per square mile
  • A military that purposely fires weapons from civilian locations
  • A military that has purposely built tunnels under apartment buildings, mosques, hospitals and schools
  • Purposely uses civilians as human shields
  • Discourages civilians from leaving areas that Israel intends to bomb
  • A meaningful portion of the civilians have absolutely no issue dying as martyrs in war.
Click to expand...
I don’t think countries (at least democratic countries) have “intentions”. Israel is not a single actor. Bibi may have intentions. The war cabinet may have intentions. The orthodox settlers may have intentions. The liberals may have intentions. But it is not clear to me that the country has an intention - at least not a singular one. It just has actions.
 
Calheel said:
I don’t think countries (at least democratic countries) have “intentions”. Israel is not a single actor. Bibi may have intentions. The war cabinet may have intentions. The orthodox settlers may have intentions. The liberals may have intentions. But it is not clear to me that the country has an intention - at least not a singular one. It just has actions.
Click to expand...
I agree. I would add that actions often reveal intentions. I've seen nothing in the actions of IDF that makes me believe there is intention to commit genocide or intentionally kill civilians. That doesn't mean that there aren't IDF fighters who do terrible things. That is true of every country in every war and I hope that those people are appropriately punished.
 
ZenMode said:
I agree. I would add that actions often reveal intentions. I've seen nothing in the actions of IDF that makes me believe there is intention to commit genocide or intentionally kill civilians. That doesn't mean that there aren't IDF fighters who do terrible things. That is true of every country in every war and I hope that those people are appropriately punished.
Click to expand...
Doctors from hospitals around Gaza have reported children with sniper wounds to the head and chest.
 
RaiGuy said:
Try watching the video to see what he means.
Click to expand...
I tried. Like I said, anytime a media outlet states "we're liberated from having to report on both sides of an issue", that's a no-go for me. I'll stick with the NYT and CNN.
 
ZZLPHeels said:
I tried. Like I said, anytime a media outlet states "we're liberated from having to report on both sides of an issue", that's a no-go for me. I'll stick with the NYT and CNN.
Click to expand...
That's because those sites focus on the Israeli side. CNN literally did a special report about the mental health of Israeli soldiers that are scarred by running over Palestinians (some still alive) with their tanks, but rarely cover the side of the Palestinians. The number of victims is not proportional at all, so the coverage should show that.
 
RaiGuy said:
That's because those sites focus on the Israeli side. CNN literally did a special report about the mental health of Israeli soldiers that are scarred by running over Palestinians (some still alive) with their tanks, but rarely cover the side of the Palestinians. The number of victims is not proportional at all, so the coverage should show that.
Click to expand...
That's untrue and I'm pretty sure you know it. CNN and the NYT report extensively on both sides of the issue. In fact, the article about the IDF using human shields that was posted above came from CNN. Meanwhile, Al Jazeera has journalists on the Hamas and PIJ payroll:

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top