Hamas attacks southern Israel

[Muizer]

Do Palestinians not have the right to strike back? Are you defending their right to lash out of Gaza as well?

Even if you were to interpret the conflict as an 80 year old war, there was nothing about 7/10 that can be described as legitimate warfare. There were no military targets where Hamas attacked and it was not an attempt to recover disputed territory. Capturing hostages is also not permitted under the rules of war. It was just a terrorist attack.

That's why proportionality is an issue. At some point, if you react to the killing of 1000 people by killing (what is it by now) 34.000, it should become obvious you are just using the death of the 1000 as a pretext while always wanting to butcher as many of the other side as you can.

Yeah we discussed that kind of arithmetic before. I don't think it works like that. Or should the US have stopped fighting the Japanese the moment they cancelled out the casualties of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor?

[PointOfViewGun]

Even if you were to interpret the conflict as an 80 year old war, there was nothing about 7/10 that can be described as legitimate warfare. There were no military targets where Hamas attacked and it was not an attempt to recover disputed territory. Capturing hostages is also not permitted under the rules of war. It was just a terrorist attack.

For starters, what you're claiming there is objectively false. Hamas did target multiple Israeli military sites for which they have been known to be training for. You can condemn terrorism tactics of Hamas righthfully but why you lie to do that is something I do not understand. You seem to be closed to any facts that goes against your preconceived narrative... When you set sensationalism aside, most, if not all, settlements Hamas targeted was established in 1940s. Many as late as the 70s or 80s. Some were built on top of previous Palestinian settlements that Israeli forces kicked out the inhabitants of and never allowed them to come back. I pointed this out before to you. Before that you told me that if Hamas targeted illegal West Bank settlements your reaction would be different.

[sumskilz]

Hamas did target multiple Israeli military sites for which they have been known to be training for.

They attacked one military base, one military observation post (that had mostly unarmed female soldiers in it), two border crossing checkpoints, a music festival, a city, and eleven towns/kibbutzim. Civilian targets were clearly their priority.

[PointOfViewGun]

They attacked one military base, one military observation post (that had mostly unarmed female soldiers in it), two border crossing checkpoints, a music festival, a city, and eleven towns/kibbutzim. Civilian targets were clearly their priority.

Thank you for acknowledging that there were military targets. Can you tell me why you chose not to respond to Muizer instead who claimed that there were no military targets?

On the other hand, while it is known that Israelis knew the threat to the festival and stayed silent about it, Hamas likely stumbled upon the festival by chance. Not sure why you would mention an observation point containing female soldiers. Freudian slip? The lack of intelligent thought concerning your suggestion that unarmed soldiers manned the military observation point has little value as well.

By city you're referring to Sderot, right?

[sumskilz]

Not sure why you would mention an observation point containing female soldiers. Freudian slip? The lack of intelligent thought concerning your suggestion that unarmed soldiers manned the military observation point has little value as well.

If their goal was to capture as many soldiers as possible, it's odd that out of nearly 250 hostages, only 26 were soldiers, most of them female. In the interrogation videos, Hamas militants said their orders were to kill anyone who was difficult and capture those who were easy to control - women, children, elderly. Although, they still killed more of the aforementioned than they captured anyway. The observation post was itself a legitimate military target, and it made sense to capture it because it was where the border fence was monitored from. Of course, it would have helped to blind the Israeli response, so that they could have their way with their civilian targets. Since it was 24 mostly unarmed soldiers, it was also a soft target. They generally avoided anywhere where they encountered serious resistance. In other words, they only attacked military targets to the extent that doing so was necessary to facilitate their operation against the civilian population.

[PointOfViewGun]

If their goal was to capture as many soldiers as possible, it's odd that out of nearly 250 hostages, only 26 were soldiers, most of them female. In the interrogation videos, Hamas militants said their orders were to kill anyone who was difficult and capture those who were easy to control - women, children, elderly. Although, they still killed more of the aforementioned than they captured anyway. The observation post was itself a legitimate military target, and it made sense to capture it because it was where the border fence was monitored from. Of course, it would have helped to blind the Israeli response, so that they could have their way with their civilian targets. Since it was 24 mostly unarmed soldiers, it was also a soft target. They mostly avoided places where they encountered serious resistance.

Hamas is no more honourable than the Israeli army. I wouldn't expect that to focus solely on getting Israeli soldiers as hostages. Can't find a comprehensive report but there doesn't seem to be the trend you're selling here that most of the hostages are women. Perhaps you are mistaken about it since Hamas has been releasing hostages based on the Palestinian hostages Israel release which tends to be children and women.

I also didn't ask about your further thoughts on the observation post being a legitimate target. I pointed out your use of language concerning female soldiers and the idea that they were somehow unarmed (as well as your failure to correct Muizer directly) which you are not really addressing. I understand that you're attempting to trivialize Hamas actually targeting military targets. They breached the fences in over 30 locations, attacked remote controlled machine gun locations (yes, its a thing), sieged military installations (Nahal Oz and Re'im among the ones we know given the severity of the fighting occurred within their limits) and moved into a number of kibbutz to grab hostages that they could trade with Palestinians being held by Israeli forces. They didn't really avoid places where they encountered serious resistance. They simply failed in those locations which is why we don't hear much about the other bases they attacked (especially in the north). Over 1,500 Hamas fighters didn't disappear into thin during the raid.

By the way, can you tell how many Israelis live near the Gaza Strip?

[Kyriakos]

Yeah we discussed that kind of arithmetic before. I don't think it works like that. Or should the US have stopped fighting the Japanese the moment they cancelled out the casualties of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor?

If that was so, then I expect you'd have no issue if all 2 million palestinians in Gaza died? And if not, why does it work now and not then, when it's not about arithmetic?
Trying to allow you to think yourself of why such glaringly inconsistent statements are made.

[Muizer]

If that was so, then I expect you'd have no issue if all 2 million palestinians in Gaza died? And if not, why does it work now and not then, when it's not about arithmetic?
Trying to allow you to think yourself of why such glaringly inconsistent statements are made.

To revisit something I said just a few posts back:

The best effort expected of combatants to avoid harm to civilians exists within a context where legitimate military targets exist and can be pursued.

So of course I'd have issues if 2 million palestinians in Gaza died. That would mean large scale attacks on non-military targets. Call me a cynic, but I do not think that can be deduced from the civilian death toll we're seeing. The use of high explosives in urban warfare and disruption of critical infrastructure is quite enough.

[Ludicus]

Yeah we discussed that kind of arithmetic before. I don't think it works like that. Or should the US have stopped fighting the Japanese the moment they cancelled out the casualties of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor?

I think I have already answered that question. Israel hits Gaza Strip with the equivalent of two nuclear bombs
Isnt that enough for you?
Around 20,000 children have been left orphaned due to the war.Isn't that enough for you?
WHO says Rafah's largest hospital has ceased operations, and the remaining facilities have three days of fuel left. Isn't that enough for you?
--
Can I share with you what the world thinks?

Israeli assault on Gaza city of Rafah: what we know so far

Saudi Arabia reacted furiously to Israel’s Rafah evacuation order, describing Israel’s war in Gaza as a “genocide”. A Saudi foreign ministry statement warned of the “dangers of the Israeli occupation forces targeting the city of Rafah as part of its systematic bloody campaign to storm all areas of the Gaza Strip and displace its residents towards the unknown”.

Netanyahu, say goodbye to a map without a Palestinian state. Say goodbye to the “blessing of a new Middle East, between Israel, Saudi Arabia and our other neighbors.”

A few months ago, according to Intelligence Minister Gila Gamliel, “voluntary migration is the best and most realistic program for the day after the fighting ends. At the end of the war, Hamas rule will collapse. There are no municipal authorities; the civilian population will be entirely dependent on humanitarian aid. There will be no work, and 60% of Gaza’s agricultural land will become security buffer zones.” At the time, Netanyahu said that “Our problem is finding countries that are willing to absorb Gazans, and we are working on it.”

Well, they could ask Sunak to intercede on their behalf with the Rwandan government to send them there.Today in the British Parliament, in exchange over war crimes in Gaza, in a day when a tory MP defected to Labour, Sunak clashed with Starmer, saying” Labour Mayor of London suggested there must be equally strong criticism of Hamas and Israeli prime minister. Sadiq Khan’s Gaza comments show Labour hasn’t changed. The Labour Mayor of London believes that there is an equivalent between the brutal terrorist attacks of Hamas, and Israel defending itself. There is absolutely no equivalence between a terrorist group and a democratic state”.

A flawed argument, which seems to be aimed at allowing Israel to do whatever it wants. In fact, Sadiq Khan has won a third term as London’s mayor. Sadiq Khan's win 'bucks trend' of Muslim voters rejecting Labour over Gaza, say party figures

The 53-year-old won a third term as the capital’s mayor on Saturday, without seeming to have lost the support of large numbers of Muslim voters – unlike Labour candidates elsewhere in England last week.
Khan was among the earliest Labour figures to call for a ceasefire in Gaza, in contrast to the Labour leader, who was hit by several defections and resignations after he said last October that Israel had “the right” to withhold power and water from Gaza.
Sadiq is bucking the trend and there’s a reason for that. He was very early in calling for a ceasefire. He is now supporting a suspension of arms sales, as long as it’s clear that international law has been breached. So he did what we should have done and reaped the electoral rewards for that.

The UK government now reluctantly admits, Israeli offensive on Rafah would break international law, UK ...

Elsewhere in Europe, the EU foreign affairs chief, Josep Borrell, said: “The offensive on Rafah has resumed, despite all the demands of the international community, the United States, the member states of the European Union and all those who have asked Mr Netanyahu not to attack. Despite warnings and requests, the attack began at night. I fear that this is going to cause many civilian deaths again, whatever they say … because there are no safe areas in Gaza.” Borrell added: “There are 600,000 children in Gaza.”

He said he was still working on a proposal to pass sanctions or to curb the EU’s trade agreement with Israel. The Belgian prime minister, Alexander De Croo, said in a newspaper interview: “Can we continue with Israel as a trading partner? I don’t think so"

Meanwhile in Israel,"The blood is in your hands"



On a final note. Finally, Biden did the right thing,and honestly admits,

Biden says he will cut off offensive weapons

“Civilians have been killed in Gaza as a consequence of those bombs and other ways in which they go after population centers,” Biden said in the interview, referring to 2,000-pound bombs supplied by the U.S.
“I made it clear that if they go into Rafah…I’m not supplying the weapons that have been used historically to deal with Rafah, to deal with the cities — that deal with that problem.”

[flo463]

I think I have already answered that question. Israel hits Gaza Strip with the equivalent of two nuclear bombs
Isnt that enough for you?
Around 20,000 children have been left orphaned due to the war.Isn't that enough for you?
WHO says Rafah's largest hospital has ceased operations, and the remaining facilities have three days of fuel left. Isn't that enough for you?
--
Can I share with you what the world thinks?

Israeli assault on Gaza city of Rafah: what we know so far


Netanyahu, say goodbye to a map without a Palestinian state. Say goodbye to the “blessing of a new Middle East, between Israel, Saudi Arabia and our other neighbors.”

A few months ago, according to Intelligence Minister Gila Gamliel, “voluntary migration is the best and most realistic program for the day after the fighting ends. At the end of the war, Hamas rule will collapse. There are no municipal authorities; the civilian population will be entirely dependent on humanitarian aid. There will be no work, and 60% of Gaza’s agricultural land will become security buffer zones.” At the time, Netanyahu said that “Our problem is finding countries that are willing to absorb Gazans, and we are working on it.”

Well, they could ask Sunak to intercede on their behalf with the Rwandan government to send them there.Today in the British Parliament, in exchange over war crimes in Gaza, in a day when a tory MP defected to Labour, Sunak clashed with Starmer, saying” Labour Mayor of London suggested there must be equally strong criticism of Hamas and Israeli prime minister. Sadiq Khan’s Gaza comments show Labour hasn’t changed. The Labour Mayor of London believes that there is an equivalent between the brutal terrorist attacks of Hamas, and Israel defending itself. There is absolutely no equivalence between a terrorist group and a democratic state”.

A flawed argument, which seems to be aimed at allowing Israel to do whatever it wants. In fact, Sadiq Khan has won a third term as LondonÂ’s mayor. Sadiq Khan's win 'bucks trend' of Muslim voters rejecting Labour over Gaza, say party figures



The UK government now reluctantly admits, Israeli offensive on Rafah would break international law, UK ...



Meanwhile in Israel,"The blood is in your hands"


Biden says he will cut off offensive weapons

Hamas official vows to 'repeat' Oct 7 attack repeatedly to teach Israel a lesson - The Economic Times (indiatimes.com)



Israel is a country that has no place on our land. We must remove it because it constitutes a security, military and political catastrophe to the Arab and Islamic nations. We are not ashamed to say this," he said.

Incitement to Genocide and ethnic cleansing does not seem to bother anyone.




Will we have to pay a price? Yes, and we are ready to pay it. We are called a nation of martyrs, and we are proud to sacrifice martyrs," the terror group member said.


hamas sacryifing their own people neither.


Hamas is a genocidal movement whose sole purpose is the total destruction of Israel and the eradication of the Israeli people.


Hamas leaders have repeatedly said that they will resume their October 7-style attacks to the last Israeli.


If you were in the place of Israeli leaders, what would you do?


which leader would remain unmoved in this situation, not an easy decision to make. This does not excuse the war crimes committed by Israel either


on the other hand, when Hamas calls for the eradication of Israel, hiding among civilians, no one mobilizes.





take al-jazeerah which quatar was recently host to the political branch of Hamas (strange that no one protests), banned in several Muslim countries: Egypt, Saudi Arabia,... and Israel recently. very credible. 🙄




Saudi Arabia reacted furiously to Israel’s Rafah evacuation order, describing Israel’s war in Gaza as a “genocide”. A Saudi foreign ministry statement warned of the “dangers of the Israeli occupation forces targeting the city of Rafah as part of its systematic bloody campaign to storm all areas of the Gaza Strip and displace its residents towards the unknown”.



Saudi Arabia is a joke, the 400,000 deaths, including 84,000 from starvation, from their war in Yemen do not seem to bother them, Israel calls for residents to evacuate to avoid as many civilian casualties as possible and they dare call that a "Genocide"? So what are 400,000 deaths?

this even saudi Arabia which was ready to normalize its relations with Israel BEFORE October 7 and which under pressure was forced to cancel the normalization of relations.

[Mithradates]

Yeah we discussed that kind of arithmetic before. I don't think it works like that. Or should the US have stopped fighting the Japanese the moment they cancelled out the casualties of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor?

I think I have already answered that question. Israel hits Gaza Strip with the equivalent of two nuclear bombs
Isnt that enough for you?
Around 20,000 children have been left orphaned due to the war.Isn't that enough for you?
WHO says Rafah's largest hospital has ceased operations, and the remaining facilities have three days of fuel left. Isn't that enough for you?

Just to clarify, both you and Kyriakos are saying that it should have been enough for the US to kill only as many Japanese as many the US casualties were during the Pearl Harbor attack, just like Israel should have stopped their war after the Palestinian casualties reached the same number of the casualties of the october 7 attack?

[Muizer]

Just to clarify, both you and Kyriakos are saying that it should have been enough for the US to kill only as many Japanese as many the US casualties were during the Pearl Harbor attack, just like Israel should have stopped their war after the Palestinian casualties reached the same number of the casualties of the october 7 attack?

It seems to be based on the misunderstanding that there are rules that dictate that war itself has to be 'proportional'. But the proportionality we're discussing exists within the context of a war and concerns its conduct. It concerns the amount of collateral damage vs the military value of the target. There is for sure a lot that can be said about that looking at the way Israel is conducting the war. But it shouldn't be conflated with considerations of whether war is 'justified'. The very fact that there is a war indicates that there is an insurmountable disagreement between two sides about what 'justified' means in the first place.
Mind you, that does not mean that whichever side decides it's time to stop talking and start fighting does not have an awful lot to answer for. Basically the moment Hamas launched its attack on Israel they accepted the death of (tens of) thousands. Based on other recent cases of urban warfare there's really no reason to believe war would mean anything else. And those people were in Hamas' care. That's the difference between being a terrorist organization and a terrorist regime. The question is how much Israel gratuitously added on top of that by their conduct of the war. I suspect quite a lot, but it's going to be a factor 2 or 3 at most, not 10 or 100 as is implied by inferring there is a genocide going on.

[Ludicus]

r. Basically the moment Hamas launched its attack on Israel they accepted the death of (tens of) thousands.

That's not what the western society is saying these days.
This highly polarized discussion occurs in societies where it is demanded that we turn a blind eye to abuses on one side because surely the other side has committed even more reprehensible acts. But all those who seek a lasting solution to this conflict have the obligation, in my view, to stand firm in advocating for a two-state solution.
It is not enough for the Western world to say that it was Hamas who initiated this war on October 7; it also has the obligation to weigh the unjust, iniquitous regime to which the Palestinian populations have been subjected for so many years, and particularly the extremist nature of the current Israeli government. Is there any other possible way out for Netanyahu in this conflict other than the total destruction of Hamas, with complete disregard for the number of human lives that this impossible objective entails?
Today, we see that it is the actions of the Israeli government that deserve the total disapproval of its international allies, such as the US, who have gradually but decisively realized that only through such pressure can a solution be achieved.