• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

How is Israel Going to Retaliate Against Hamas?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Roboramma said:
Israel's actions are happening in the context of the actions of the enemy they are fighting against. Failing to acknowledge that their strategy is in part based on the a response to the war crimes of their enemy is at best extremely misleading.

They aren't destroying buildings because they want to destroy building for it's own sake. They're doing so because Hamas is fighting out of those buildings. The responsibility for their destruction lies with Hamas.
Click to expand...

I previously pointed out that almost the same number of Palestinians were murdered by agents of Israel in the Shatila and Shaba refugee camps as were murdered by Hamas on 07/10. It all depends when you start the date of the conflict. No one was held to account for the massacre of Palestinians. Mossad assassinated witnesses that could have testified against Dayan.
 
Planigale said:
Often running away, never armed.
Click to expand...

Never? I doubt that.

See video of eight year old shot in the back of the head.
Click to expand...

And what happened immediately before that moment? Was the kid throwing rocks? He certainly could have been, and if he had been, then he was armed. We've got basically no context for what was going on.

That's by design.
 
Hercules56 said:
Doesn't justify lying about my comments and beliefs.
Click to expand...

I didn't. Hell, the comment you objected to wasn't even directed at you. But you objected precisely because it did, in fact, fit you too, and you don't like being called out with the truth. It's too close for comfort even when it's in response to someone else.

You told on yourself.
 
Ziggurat said:
I didn't. Hell, the comment you objected to wasn't even directed at you. But you objected precisely because it did, in fact, fit you too, and you don't like being called out with the truth. It's too close for comfort even when it's in response to someone else.
Click to expand...

I believe Hamas should be dismantled and destroyed. But unlike you, I dont think Gaza needs to be destroyed in order to do it.

My solution would spare the lives of many innocent civilians, but put more soldiers at risk. You prefer to protect the soldiers at the expense of civilians.

Its a clear difference in values.
 
Hercules56 said:
I believe Hamas should be dismantled and destroyed. But unlike you, I dont think Gaza needs to be destroyed in order to do it.

My solution would spare the lives of many innocent civilians, but put more soldiers at risk. You prefer to protect the soldiers at the expense of civilians.

Its a clear difference in values.
Click to expand...

You don't want heavy weaponry used, and that might indeed spare a few buildings. But given that Hamas fights from within civilian groups, you have no evidence that such fighting would actually spare civilians. Civilians can die just as easily from gunfire as from a bomb.

You have no actual idea of how urban combat works. You just don't care about Israeli soldiers dying. That's not a solution, and that's not a value worth respecting.
 
Ziggurat said:
And what happened immediately before that moment? Was the kid throwing rocks? He certainly could have been, and if he had been, then he was armed. We've got basically no context for what was going on.

That's by design.
Click to expand...
I feel like I should quote this for posterity. Out of curiosity is there anyone here besides Ziggurat who wants to argue that child casualties are justified because they were potentially throwing rocks?
 
Beelzebuddy said:
I feel like I should quote this for posterity. Out of curiosity is there anyone here besides Ziggurat who wants to argue that child casualties are justified because they were potentially throwing rocks?
Click to expand...

I'm not justifying it. My primary point is that we don't even have enough information to properly evaluate it. But it's not the same as walking into someone's house and shooting a baby in a crib. Let's not pretend these are equivalent, because they aren't.
 
Last edited:
Beelzebuddy said:
I feel like I should quote this for posterity. Out of curiosity is there anyone here besides Ziggurat who wants to argue that child casualties are justified because they were potentially throwing rocks?
Click to expand...
Rocks are deadly weapons. Not as deadly as bullets and bombs, but you don't get a pass for not having the most lethal weaponry. If they were throwing them then yes, they were legitimate targets.

But what about if they were only potentially throwing them? In a war you don't wait for the enemy to kill you first.

"But they were only children", you cry, "how were they a threat?". A weapon doesn't become non-lethal just because the wielder is a 'child'. Many of these 'children' were teenagers who were practically adults. The average age of US soldiers sent to Vietnam was 18, with some as young as 15 (and yes, they got killed too).

And what if the 'rocks' weren't rocks? Could you tell the difference between a large stone and a grenade? Israeli soldiers in fear of their lives aren't in a position to calmly assess the situation - if they get it wrong they're dead.

Finally you have to consider that these 'children' are the Hamas terrorists of tomorrow. Better to neutralize them now before they kill thousands of innocent Israelis.
 
Roger Ramjets said:
Rocks are deadly weapons. Not as deadly as bullets and bombs, but you don't get a pass for not having the most lethal weaponry. If they were throwing them then yes, they were legitimate targets.

But what about if they were only potentially throwing them? In a war you don't wait for the enemy to kill you first.

"But they were only children", you cry, "how were they a threat?". A weapon doesn't become non-lethal just because the wielder is a 'child'. Many of these 'children' were teenagers who were practically adults. The average age of US soldiers sent to Vietnam was 18, with some as young as 15 (and yes, they got killed too).

And what if the 'rocks' weren't rocks? Could you tell the difference between a large stone and a grenade? Israeli soldiers in fear of their lives aren't in a position to calmly assess the situation - if they get it wrong they're dead.

Finally you have to consider that these 'children' are the Hamas terrorists of tomorrow. Better to neutralize them now before they kill thousands of innocent Israelis.
Click to expand...
All good points. Plus these children were shot from behind. Who knows what they may have been holding in front of them.
 
Hercules56 said:
My solution would spare the lives of many innocent civilians, but put more soldiers at risk.
Click to expand...
But are they really innocent? According to a recent poll by the Washington Institute, 50% of Gazans believe Hamas should continue calling for Israel’s destruction. The poll found that "Overall, 57% of Gazans express... a... positive opinion of Hamas—along with similar percentages of Palestinians in the West Bank (52%) and East Jerusalem (64%)".

People who support terrorists are just as bad as the terrorists themselves, perhaps even more so since it encourages them.

But what about the others who don't openly support Hamas? Their silence also make them culpable. Which leaves a few who actively oppose Hamas. Unfortunately it's hard to tell who's who so they could become collateral damage if they stick around.

Soldiers shouldn't be expected to put their own lives at risk for the sake of a few theoretical innocents. My message to any actual innocents in Gaza is simple - get out now. Swim for it if necessary - Cyprus is only 350 km away.
 
Beelzebuddy said:
All good points. Plus these children were shot from behind.
Click to expand...

At least in the first case, the kid turned and started running immediately before getting hit. The decision to shoot at him was likely made when he was still facing whoever shot him. That's not exactly "from behind". And again, we aren't shown what happened before that moment. Did he throw a rock or a Molotov cocktail at a soldier, then turn to run when the solder aimed at him? We don't know. We don't have enough information to evaluate what really happened.

And again, that's by design.
 
Roger Ramjets said:
People who support terrorists are just as bad as the terrorists themselves, perhaps even more so since it encourages them.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

All the people who support Hamas are worse than terrorists. All the people who support Israel are worse than terrorists. All the people who voted for those officials are worse than terrorists. And of course the US wars based on BS are terrorism and all the people in the US who supported those wars or voted for those politicians are worse than terrorists. And what about the people who support the people who support terrorists? Surely since the support of terrorism is worse than terrorism, the support of the supporters must be worse still.

Practically everyone is worse than terrorists and therefor everyone is justified in committing terrorist acts to stop the other terrorists and their supporters and their supporters supporters.
 
Last edited:
Also when Israel says Hamas is an asset because they delegitimize any Palestinian government authority such as the PLO and therefor any peace attempt is that considered support of terrorists? What about when they intentionally allow tens of millions of dollars of cash in suitcases to be delivered to Hamas? Does that count as support of terrorism?
 
Is it ssupport for terrorist when you have intelligence of an upcoming attack a year before and repeatedly ignore warnings and reduce your readiness?
 
Planigale said:
Often running away, never armed.

See video of eight year old shot in the back of the head.

https://www.aljazeera.com/program/n...an-children-killed-by-israeli-forces-in-jenin
Click to expand...

Never armed?
Well, apart from the child suicide bombers, perhaps.
Oh, and also apart from brainwashed kids attacking Israelis with knives, slingshots, boulders and burning tyres.

So, yes. They are never armed. Except when they have knives, slings, burning tyres and bombs.
To repeat, yet again, in case of misunderstandings: I do not condone the killing of children, by either side. However, I do condemn the use of child soldiers, which will inevitably put them in harm's way. Israel, by the way, is guilty of this as well.
 
The_Animus said:
Also when Israel says Hamas is an asset because they delegitimize any Palestinian government authority such as the PLO and therefor any peace attempt is that considered support of terrorists? What about when they intentionally allow tens of millions of dollars of cash in suitcases to be delivered to Hamas? Does that count as support of terrorism?
Click to expand...

I don't suppose there's evidence of this to post here?
 
Roger Ramjets said:
But are they really innocent? According to a recent poll by the Washington Institute, 50% of Gazans believe Hamas should continue calling for Israel’s destruction. The poll found that "Overall, 57% of Gazans express... a... positive opinion of Hamas—along with similar percentages of Palestinians in the West Bank (52%) and East Jerusalem (64%)".

People who support terrorists are just as bad as the terrorists themselves, perhaps even more so since it encourages them.

But what about the others who don't openly support Hamas? Their silence also make them culpable. Which leaves a few who actively oppose Hamas. Unfortunately it's hard to tell who's who so they could become collateral damage if they stick around.

Soldiers shouldn't be expected to put their own lives at risk for the sake of a few theoretical innocents. My message to any actual innocents in Gaza is simple - get out now. Swim for it if necessary - Cyprus is only 350 km away.
Click to expand...

This isn't a war (in the West Bank), this is policing by an army of occupation. Police elsewhere in the developed world manage riots (including people throwing rocks, fireworks and molotov cocktails), with CS gas, water cannons, baton rounds and other non-lethal methods without shooting children in the back of the head. Both of the children in the videos were clearly unarmed when they were shot. International law only allows deadly force against civilians when there is an immediate danger to life. Once they were running away that immediate danger ceased. Whatever they may have done prior to the video (playing football according to the story) is not justification for extrajudicial execution.

Still I think it is clear that you believe that political beliefs justify execution. The end of Israel as an apartheid oppressive state is not the same as a belief in genocide. It is not a belief I subscribe to, but arguing for the end of the Jewish Israeli state as a political entity is a legitimate political argument. One many ultra orthodox Jews would agree with*. Agreeing with some elements of Hamas political objectives is not the same as saying that those individuals support terrorism. Many people in the UK and Ireland agreed with the political objective of the IRA to create a united Ireland, but did not support terrorism.

*https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/ultra-orthodox-anti-zionist/
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom