Ed General Israel/Palestine discussion thread - Part 3

[Nessie]

There is no "humane" way to destroy Hamas. They have acted to ensure any possible actions that would take them down inflict considerable harm on Gazans in general, because Hamas doesn't care about the welfare of Gaza. A lot of people here have basically concluded this means Hamas should not be taken down, or that the only permissible methods are ones that won't actually work.

That is a mistake.

Israel has boxed Hamas literally in to a corner in Gaza, such that any attempt to fight back can be condemned as terrorism and/or hiding behind civilians.

Israel has no interest in a negotiated settlement, that means a nation state for the Palestinians co-existing with Israel.

Hamas cannot be defeated militarily. Even if this action greatly weakens them, it will have also served to recruit a new set of fighters.

So the circle of violence will continue.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Israel has boxed Hamas literally in to a corner in Gaza

And world has boxed all the Jews into a corner that is Israel.

Again this is a discussion of scaling the map and the time frame in and out to decide where everything "starts" and declaring a winner from there.

 

[lobosrul5]

Israel has boxed Hamas literally in to a corner in Gaza, such that any attempt to fight back can be condemned as terrorism and/or hiding behind civilians.

What would you have Israel do. Tell Hamas to come out, form a battle line and have it out at noon on a battleground of their choosing? Like this is frickin warped. A nation state must let a terrorist group fight back by means other than terrorism or its "not fair"

Israel has no interest in a negotiated settlement, that means a nation state for the Palestinians co-existing with Israel.

They left Gaza to its own devices after they elected a terrorist group that wants to kill all Jews to represent them. And now, that decision has bitten them squarely in the ass. OR they could've maintained the occupation. OR they could've let terrorists walk among them. All of those decisions would've bitten them squarely in the ass.

Hamas cannot be defeated militarily. Even if this action greatly weakens them, it will have also served to recruit a new set of fighters.

So the circle of violence will continue.

An assertion not in evidence. We don't hear a whole lot out of ISIS since Mosul unless I'm mistaken.

 

[lobosrul5]

And world has boxed all the Jews into a corner that is Israel.

Again this is a discussion of scaling the map and the time frame in and out to decide where everything "starts" and declaring a winner from there.

They're actually boxed in by "everyone else". Egypt could've opened the border. The Arab states could've taken in Palestinians. Hell western Europe could've take them in. But, no its all Israel's fault for the temerity of existing.

 

[theprestige]

Israel has boxed Hamas literally in to a corner in Gaza, such that any attempt to fight back can be condemned as terrorism and/or hiding behind civilians.

A humane people would take the L and resign themselves to peaceful submission.

Hamas cannot defeat Israel. All they can do is murder Israelis and promise to stop if they get what they want.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Israel has boxed Hamas literally in to a corner in Gaza, such that any attempt to fight back can be condemned as terrorism and/or hiding behind civilians.

Israel has no interest in a negotiated settlement, that means a nation state for the Palestinians co-existing with Israel.

Hamas cannot be defeated militarily. Even if this action greatly weakens them, it will have also served to recruit a new set of fighters.

So the circle of violence will continue.

It's like you're trying to say "Terrorism is a valid tactic" without saying it.

 

[JoeMorgue]

In another context a while back I used talked about what I called the "Bad people get to always be bad" thing, a moral standard where bad people get to declare their "badness" just part of who they are and declare that it will never change and "good" people have the moral onus put on them to accommodate for it.

You're a Thanksgiving dinner with your family. Your cousin has bought his girlfriend, who is black. Your racist uncle makes a big deal out of it. You get angry at your cousin because he ruined Thanksgiving because "You knew how Uncle Bobby was going to react."

No. The cousin didn't ruin Thanksgiving, the racist uncle did.

"But he's not gonna change! That's just how he is" is the excuse the racist uncle gets to use or have people use in his proxy and that's absolute nonsense.

Hamas does get extra credit because THEY are incapable of just not being terrorists.

Again Israel doesn't get points taken away because it has the capability of being better.

And nobody is worried that every time Hamas kills someone it's gonna create more Jewish extremists, or at least not in that "Well yeah but it's your fault because you know how they were going to react" way.

I'm sure a vague, glib "Okay but that doesn't change how it is" is going to be the retort but...

Basically we're doing "It's your fault for feeding the troll" argument but with much bigger stakes. As if Hamas expecting a reaction to their evil and getting one means they morally win because we fell for it.

 

[theprestige]

One thing nobody talks about is that the Middle East and the rest of the world would really benefit from fewer islamofascist societies. Liberating Gaza and the West Bank won't actually make the world a better place, not even for the people who live there.

 

[Ziggurat]

Israel has boxed Hamas literally in to a corner in Gaza, such that any attempt to fight back can be condemned as terrorism and/or hiding behind civilians.

You are literally and explicitly making excuses for terrorism and the use of human shields.

Hamas cannot be defeated militarily.

This is an article of faith, not a reasoned conclusion.

Even if this action greatly weakens them, it will have also served to recruit a new set of fighters.

You want to know what the most effective recruitment strategy is for any organization? Success. You want to know what makes recruitment harder for any organization? Failure.

Killing Jews is a success for Hamas. Getting killed is a failure.

So the circle of violence will continue.

The circle continues as long as Hamas isn't destroyed.

 

[Dr.Sid]

No. Intentionally targeting civilians is murder. Intentionally targeting military personnel, knowing that some civilians will be killed by your attack, may or may not be murder, depending on several important details about that specific target and attack.

We know that Hamas intentionally targets civilians as a policy. This makes it very easy to judge as murder, their killing of civilians. We know they're doing it on purpose. They say as much.

We don't know of any such Israeli policy to intentionally target civilians. I'm sure some individual Israeli soldiers and units are doing it, and in those specific instances it is murder. But we cannot judge all civilian deaths arising from Israeli attacks in the same simple way we can judge Hamas's attacks on civilians.

The problem is we only have Israel word on that. We want to believe Israel is doing that. But is it ? With the amount of explosives dropped ?
Site actively launching missiles is certainly valid target, even if civilians are present. But what about storage of missiles ? What about suspected storage of missiles ? How good Israel intel is ? Sorry, but what they are showing looks more like a simple revenge. Which is not only a war crime, but it also won't work. It will weaken Israel's position and make Hamas stronger.
And again I'm not talking about Hamas committing war crimes. They don't even deserve to be judged. Israel, so far, does. So we are judging it.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

Right after the Hamas attack, Israel had the goodwill of most of the world, especially the Western.

Now, there is not much left of that, and that is 100% the fault of the Israeli leadership

 

[Ziggurat]

The problem is we only have Israel word on that. We want to believe Israel is doing that. But is it ?

We know for a fact that Israel frequently takes actions to minimize civilian casualties. We don't have to take their word for it, even Hamas acknowledges it. For example, they would routinely warn occupants of a building that they were going to bomb so that they could leave before it got hit. Again, that's not just their word for it, Hamas says they would do that too.

Hamas has never made any efforts to reduce civilian casualties. We know that civilians are intended targets of Hamas violence. Hamas tells us so themselves.

We do not have to rely on Israel's word to recognize how much better they are than Hamas.

And again I'm not talking about Hamas committing war crimes. They don't even deserve to be judged. Israel, so far, does. So we are judging it.

Do you realize the perverse moral incentive you're creating here?

No, probably not. But it is indeed perverse. You are rewarding actors for acting sufficiently badly, and punishing actors who don't act badly enough. I think you won't like the results.

 

[Paul2]

The problem is we only have Israel word on that. We want to believe Israel is doing that. But is it ? With the amount of explosives dropped ?
Site actively launching missiles is certainly valid target, even if civilians are present. But what about storage of missiles ? What about suspected storage of missiles ? How good Israel intel is ? Sorry, but what they are showing looks more like a simple revenge. Which is not only a war crime, but it also won't work. It will weaken Israel's position and make Hamas stronger.
And again I'm not talking about Hamas committing war crimes. They don't even deserve to be judged. Israel, so far, does. So we are judging it.

Ziggy already replied to the highlight, but I want to focus on it a bit more.

I’m having trouble understanding what that could possibly mean. What does an actor have to do to not deserve to be judged (and sign me up!)? Apparently they have to be so bad or evil that we give them a pass? What?! What moral sense does that make?

Can you explain your thinking here?

 

[theprestige]

"If I could tell the rabid dog to calm down and stop biting people, I would. But it's a rabid dog. Trying to reason with it, trying to appeal to its humanity would be madness. That's why I focus my efforts on trying to dissuade the man with the rifle who intends to put it down. Because he's a rational human being that might actually stop and listen to what I'm saying."

 

[Ziggurat]

Right after the Hamas attack, Israel had the goodwill of most of the world, especially the Western.

Now, there is not much left of that, and that is 100% the fault of the Israeli leadership

The "goodwill of most of the world" is worthless. It cannot bring back the dead, it cannot prevent further attacks, and it cannot bring any of the perpetrators to justice. Having this goodwill provides no help, losing it does no harm.

 

[Dr.Sid]

We know for a fact that Israel frequently takes actions to minimize civilian casualties. We don't have to take their word for it, even Hamas acknowledges it. For example, they would routinely warn occupants of a building that they were going to bomb so that they could leave before it got hit. Again, that's not just their word for it, Hamas says they would do that too.

Hamas has never made any efforts to reduce civilian casualties. We know that civilians are intended targets of Hamas violence. Hamas tells us so themselves.

We do not have to rely on Israel's word to recognize how much better they are than Hamas.

We know they are saying they are not targeting civilians. That doesn't make them better. As for if they really are, we don't know.

Do you realize the perverse moral incentive you're creating here?

No, probably not. But it is indeed perverse. You are rewarding actors for acting sufficiently badly, and punishing actors who don't act badly enough. I think you won't like the results.

How am I rewarding anyone ? I'm saying Hamas deserves death on sight. Israel does not. Yet. The jury is still out.

 

[Nessie]

What would you have Israel do. Tell Hamas to come out, form a battle line and have it out at noon on a battleground of their choosing? Like this is frickin warped. A nation state must let a terrorist group fight back by means other than terrorism or its "not fair"

I posted previously about what they could do, improve security, very targetted attacks on Hamas fighters and leaders and negotiations towards a long term peace.

They left Gaza to its own devices after they elected a terrorist group that wants to kill all Jews to represent them. And now, that decision has bitten them squarely in the ass. OR they could've maintained the occupation. OR they could've let terrorists walk among them. All of those decisions would've bitten them squarely in the ass.



An assertion not in evidence. We don't hear a whole lot out of ISIS since Mosul unless I'm mistaken.

ISIS found themselves under attack from many sides, overstretched and with little international support.

 

[Ziggurat]

We know they are saying they are not targeting civilians. That doesn't make them better.

Yes, actually it does.

As for if they really are, we don't know.

We know they have a history of trying to reduce civilian casualties. That's not an open question, it's not something we have to take their word for.

How am I rewarding anyone ? I'm saying Hamas deserves death on sight.

But you want to prevent actually killing them, which makes them deserving it rather pointless.

 

[JoeMorgue]

People really are forming this weird, counter-productive "morality" were you get to win by being impossible to reason with and it is so bizarre.

"Hamas can't be reasoned with but Israel can so Hamas gets to keep killing civilians" is stupid and yes that IS what people are functionally saying.

 

[Dr.Sid]

But you want to prevent actually killing them, which makes them deserving it rather pointless.

No. I'm absolutely for killing them. I'm against killing civilians on vague intelligence Hamas might be near. And that's IMHO happening.