Welcome to our community

Be apart of something great, join today!

Register Log in

Israel Hamas War, West Bank, Etc. | Hostilities resume

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 2K
  • Views: 73K
  • Politics 
ZZLPHeels said:
I don’t think that is a fair comparison. 10/7 wasn’t just one lone gunman. It was a coordinated attack by hundreds of heavily armed terrorists. Not to mention the thousands of missiles that Hamas launched into Israel prior to and after 10/7. Hamas is a paramilitary terrorist organization. Law enforcement would not be leading the response to them.
Click to expand...
Of course law enforcement wouldn't be leading the response to them. But my question wasn't really about law enforcement, was it? I mean, I added that flourish to personalize the issue for you, but we both know the answer, right? Of course you wouldn't bomb the shit of the building. You'd find another way.

I don't mean that as a complete refutation of your point. Obviously it's not a perfect analogy for a number of reasons. Still, stay with me for a minute and let's think about the circumstances in which destroying the building could be justified. Well, if the guy was planning a huge chemical attack, or was putting the finishing touches on a nuke. In that case, the loss of life from bombing could be miniscule compared to not bombing.

So suppose law enforcement does that. Who would have the burden of proof? Would we insist that the victims prove that the bomber wouldn't have killed anyone else but for the bombing? Or would we make the police explain why they thought it necessary? You know the answer to that question as well. And that's precisely the weakness in your position on Gaza. It should be Israel's burden to demonstrate why it is necessary to kill huge numbers of people to protect itself, not the Palestinians' burden to show that it is not.

[Note: this is one reason why the "what should Israel do" question is so empty]

I see absolutely no reason to trust Israel's claims about doing the minimum required to win this war. I see no reason to trust anything they say, given how many times they've provably lied and dissembled. And yes, I'm aware that Hamas is not exactly a committed truth teller. Conflict often produces propaganda on all sides. In absence of any actual proof that slaughtering civilians is necessary, I'm going with the common intuition that it's not. There is almost never a situation anywhere in which killing hundreds of thousands and starving millions (maybe or maybe not to the point of death) is necessary to defeat a paramilitary organization.
 
Does anyone think Israel regrets including Sinwar in the 1,000's of prisoners
superrific said:
All this proves is that you don't know what genocide means.
Click to expand...
According to the 1948 International Genocide Convention it means committing acts "with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group."

Agree?
 
RaiGuy said:
No one is disputing the existence of tunnels, as Israel themselves built some under one of the Gaza hospitals. What is disputed is how to deal with them. Flattening everything above them is not the course of action that should be taken. Israel is able to conduct targeted attacks, but they decide going for total destruction is better.
Click to expand...
Then why post the video and the BBC and say no one can confirm the tunnels under the hospitals? That’s not in dispute. The jest is there are tunnels under the hospitals. Folks posting that video and saying “but is it real?” Is done so that people question the existence.
 
superrific said:
The underlined language undermines everything you've been saying for 100 pages. I appreciate the assist in debunking.
Click to expand...
I would underline "with intent". The population of Gaza, since the 1948 Genocide Convention, has grown at 3x the world average. Does that sound like Israel, who is more than capable of committing genocide, has intent to commit genocide?

You understand that civilians are going to die in war, right? You can't just say any number of deaths qualifies as "in part" for committing genocide.
 
superrific said:
Of course law enforcement wouldn't be leading the response to them. But my question wasn't really about law enforcement, was it? I mean, I added that flourish to personalize the issue for you, but we both know the answer, right? Of course you wouldn't bomb the shit of the building. You'd find another way.

I don't mean that as a complete refutation of your point. Obviously it's not a perfect analogy for a number of reasons. Still, stay with me for a minute and let's think about the circumstances in which destroying the building could be justified. Well, if the guy was planning a huge chemical attack, or was putting the finishing touches on a nuke. In that case, the loss of life from bombing could be miniscule compared to not bombing.

So suppose law enforcement does that. Who would have the burden of proof? Would we insist that the victims prove that the bomber wouldn't have killed anyone else but for the bombing? Or would we make the police explain why they thought it necessary? You know the answer to that question as well. And that's precisely the weakness in your position on Gaza. It should be Israel's burden to demonstrate why it is necessary to kill huge numbers of people to protect itself, not the Palestinians' burden to show that it is not.

[Note: this is one reason why the "what should Israel do" question is so empty]

I see absolutely no reason to trust Israel's claims about doing the minimum required to win this war. I see no reason to trust anything they say, given how many times they've provably lied and dissembled. And yes, I'm aware that Hamas is not exactly a committed truth teller. Conflict often produces propaganda on all sides. In absence of any actual proof that slaughtering civilians is necessary, I'm going with the common intuition that it's not. There is almost never a situation anywhere in which killing hundreds of thousands and starving millions (maybe or maybe not to the point of death) is necessary to defeat a paramilitary organization.
Click to expand...

I don't think that Israel is doing the minimum required to win this more, nor are they doing the maximum. Sometimes the "minimum" is a worse option for all involved because it results in a longer, protracted war that produces more casualties than a shorter, more intense war would have.

In this case, you have a well-armed terrorist organization with thousands of fighters that has openly stated it desires to commit genocide against Israel. On 10/7, it acted on those desires and killed over 1,000 Israelis in a matter of hours. Prior to and after 10/7, it launched missiles by the thousands into Israeli cities. That's not something that any sovereign nation would tolerate, and Israel rightfully said "enough is enough." This wasn't a single guy in a bunker....it was a well-armed, military opponent. The situation in Gaza is warfare. It isn't law enforcement. It is warfare, similar to what we saw with the GWOT in Iraq and Afghanistan. The difference is, for Israel the enemy is based on all sides of it. It isn't Israel's fault that Hamas has intentionally built its military infrastructure inside of and underneath civilian infrastructure in Gaza. It isn't Israel's fault that Hamas has plainly stated that it welcomes Palestinian civilian casualties because they help bolster its cause. It isn't Israel's fault that Hamas doesn't wear uniforms. War is ugly.
 
HintonJamesHeel said:
Then why post the video and the BBC and say no one can confirm the tunnels under the hospitals? That’s not in dispute. The jest is there are tunnels under the hospitals. Folks posting that video and saying “but is it real?” Is done so that people question the existence.
Click to expand...
Because Israel claims every building has a tunnel under it and it used by Hamas. That’s just excuses to justify wiping out Gaza
 
ZZLPHeels said:
It isn't Israel's fault that Hamas has intentionally built its military infrastructure inside of and underneath civilian infrastructure in Gaza.
Click to expand...
Yes it is. That was always the only possible outcome of the blockade. You can't attract capital to a blockaded region. You can't build factories since you can't get access to reliable power, imports or exports. Literally Gaza has no choice but to accept oil money for jihad because otherwise they would all starve.
 
superrific said:
Yes it is. That was always the only possible outcome of the blockade. You can't attract capital to a blockaded region. You can't build factories since you can't get access to reliable power, imports or exports. Literally Gaza has no choice but to accept oil money for jihad because otherwise they would all starve.
Click to expand...
If Hamas had the capability to build elaborate tunnels under every part of Gaza, they also had the capability to use those materials and personnel to build things that would actually benefit the population there as a whole. They chose to build the tunnels.
 
RaiGuy said:
Because Israel claims every building has a tunnel under it and it used by Hamas. That’s just excuses to justify wiping out Gaza
Click to expand...
I check the AP's live Gaza cam.... it looks like there's a few buildings left.

Screenshot 2025-06-10 10.08.29 AM - Display 1.png
 
ZZLPHeels said:
If Hamas had the capability to build elaborate tunnels under every part of Gaza, they also had the capability to use those materials and personnel to build things that would actually benefit the population there as a whole.
Click to expand...
Like what? What thing that would benefit the population can run without reliable water or power? Who would ever invest in a region subject to blackouts at an occupying power's whims.

I promise you, from years of teaching corporate finance, that the discount rate on any project would be so high that the project would probably have to quadruple its capital in five years to attract any investment. That, as you probably can figure out, is a very very difficult endeavor, especially when you don't have reliable power or water.
 
ZenMode said:
Gaza Humanitarian Foundation says Hamas attacked a bus of its workers, 5 dead

June 11 (Reuters) - The U.S- and Israeli-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation accused Hamas militants of attacking a bus on Wednesday carrying Palestinians working with the organization, leading to at least five deaths and multiple injuries.

Click to expand...
It sounds like those were members of Netanyahu-backed Abu Shabab gang that Israel used for the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation. They weren't humanitarians. Sounds like bad guys attacking worse guys.
 
ZenMode said:
Gaza Humanitarian Foundation says Hamas attacked a bus of its workers, 5 dead

June 11 (Reuters) - The U.S- and Israeli-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation accused Hamas militants of attacking a bus on Wednesday carrying Palestinians working with the organization, leading to at least five deaths and multiple injuries.

Click to expand...
Good thing they were bringing more people to a starvation zone. I would think there would have been food in there if it was actually humanitarian in nature.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top