New War In Israel / Gaza

[Something Funny]

10 minutes ago, DawnC said:

Don't reduce my point to the lowest level you can perceive it, wrap it with the most immoral quote you can come up with, and then attack me on it

You say that while you are the one coming up with imaginary, disingenious scenarios.

Like how you added that those 80 people are Hamas supporters.

Edited November 2, 2023 by Something Funny

[DawnC]

7 minutes ago, Something Funny said:

From time stamp 3:23 on discusses this very predicament - if Hamas / terrorists were in Israel, would 80 civilian causalities be killed as collateral damage to target 1 terrorist

@DawnC answer this question.

Clearly not. This was exactly my third point. Throughout world history, no country or military has been held to a standard where it would be considered immoral to prioritize their own casualties over those of the opponent. It's an unrealistic standard that no country in the world can meet, and none will in the foreseeable future. Are the Israelis less careful about civilian casualties than other countries? Perhaps, but even that is open to debate.

Edited November 2, 2023 by DawnC

[Something Funny]

7 minutes ago, DawnC said:

Clearly not. This was exactly my third point. Throughout world history, no country or military has been held to a standard where it would be considered immoral to prioritize their own casualties over those of the opponent. It's an unrealistic standard that no country in the world can meet, and none will in the foreseeable future. Are the Israelis less careful about civilian casualties than other countries? Perhaps, but even that is open to debate.

This is not an equal war. While Palestinians have bombs dropped on them, Israelis eat ice cream in a park.

Attacks on Israel are done using guerilla tactics by a terrorist organization

It was not an active combat situation with Israeli lives at stake, so it's not an unrealistic standard to expect Israel to be more considerate of civilian lives when conducting pre-planned, strategic strikes on specific individuals. 

Calling Palestinian deaths "casualities of an opponent" is fucked up in itself. They were refugees, in a refugee camp.

It is called a war crime.

Edited November 2, 2023 by Something Funny

[DawnC]

Just now, Something Funny said:

You say that while you are the one coming up with imaginary, disingenious scenarios.

Yes, it was simplistically put. But I don't think it's so far-fetched from reality as you might believe. Hamas operates in a very very problematic military manner (to say the least). Their tactics involve things that are sickening and very difficult to address. I'm not sure people fully grasp how deep this goes.

[Vercingetorix]

11 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Today the IDF admitted to killing 80+ civilians to kill 1 Hamas person.

What's the source to that?

 

2 hours ago, Twentyfirst said:

What a tragedy and outrage! Why would Hamas do this!? Maybe because Jewish people invaded Palestinian land in 1948?

If you adhere to this kind of logic of "my actions are justified by the past", you must also think that Israel's Response to the massacre is justified. Otherwise you are holding double standards.

[Lila9]

44 minutes ago, Twentyfirst said:

Do you see? Do you see how your mind works?

No, how my mind works?

[Twentyfirst]

12 minutes ago, DawnC said:

Yes, it was simplistically put. But I don't think it's so far-fetched from reality as you might believe. Hamas operates in a very very problematic military manner (to say the least). Their tactics involve things that are sickening and very difficult to address. I'm not sure people fully grasp how deep this goes.

Why don't you tell us how deep it goes rather than making vague suggestions of how the world simply doesn't understand you 

Edited November 2, 2023 by Twentyfirst

[DawnC]

5 minutes ago, Something Funny said:

This is not an equal war. While Palestinians have bombs dropped on them, Israelis eat ice cream in a park.

Attacks on Israel are done using guerilla tactics by a terrorist organization

It was not an active combat situation with Israeli lives at stake, so it's not an unrealistic standard to expect Israel to be more considerate of civilian lives when conducting pre-planned, strategic strikes on specific individuals. 

Calling Palestinian deaths "casualities of an opponent" is fucked up in itself. They were refugees, in a refugee camp.

It is called a war crime.

You may not be considering the regional situation fully. Currently, the Israeli army is spread across the Syrian and Lebanese borders, with significant resources directed towards Iran, the Houthis, and also dealing with Hamas militants in the West Bank. From an Israeli perspective, this is a highly threatening and dangerous situation, which I believe is a reasonable perception.

Referring to Palestinian deaths as "casualties of an opponent" is not an attempt to disregard their significance, but rather an attempt to gain insight into the experiences of those involved in the conflict. When a regime initiates war, it plunges the entire country into the throes of conflict, which unfortunately includes refugee camps. I'm not suggesting Israelis are without fault, but it's crucial to acknowledge the harsh realities of war. Are Israelis any less conscientious about minimizing civilian casualties compared to other nations facing similar wartime conditions? I genuinely don't believe so.

[DawnC]

11 minutes ago, Twentyfirst said:

Why don't you tell us how deep it goes rather than making vague suggestions of how the world simply doesn't understand you 

Do your own research. Just off the top of my head: locating military bases under hospitals, locating military bases under civilian residences and mosques, constructing tunnels beneath civilian residences with tunnel exits inside those homes, building tunnels under refugee camps, diverting gas from hospitals for military use, launching rockets at civilian populations from proximity to mosques, launching rockets at civilian populations from proximity to hospitals, launching rockets at civilian populations from proximity to refugee camps.

[Twentyfirst]

All the Nazi criminals that were found were punished after the Holocaust. If the world really does hate Jews then why punish the people who committed those crimes?

 

[DawnC]

1 minute ago, Twentyfirst said:

All the Nazi criminals that were found were punished after the Holocaust. If the world really does hate Jews then why punish the people who committed those crimes?

This is not a serious claim. It is not the sole cause of all problems in the world, nor the root of all criticism about Israel. But there is a serious problem of antisemitism in many regions and communities worldwide and it can also influence policies. Don't overlook this.

[PurpleTree]

25 minutes ago, Twentyfirst said:

All the Nazi criminals that were found were punished after the Holocaust. If the world really does hate Jews then why punish the people who committed those crimes?

 

Do you think israel has the right to exist? Because your posts say otherwise 

[Nivsch]

3 hours ago, Lila9 said:

Of course, every crime against Jews is justified. Let's eliminate them and kill all of them because they dared to build a country to save themselves from Nazis.

Antisemitism is on raise. It never really disappeared.

Exactly

[zazen]

If the Amish started to get prosecuted savagely for their unorthodox way of life, and they were then sent to modern day Israel (their prophets birth place - Jesus) as a safe haven, they then started to grow in number and fight against and eventually subjugate the Jewish Israelis and put them into ghettos and into an apartheid like system - then the Jews would revolt, as they did in the Warsaw ghetto uprising against the Nazi's, would that revolt be justified?

 

The Warsaw Ghetto Uprising was a heroic but ultimately tragic event during World War II, in which Jewish residents of the Warsaw Ghetto in Nazi-occupied Poland rebelled against the German forces.

[Vrubel]

8 minutes ago, zazen said:

Jewish Israelis and put them into ghettos and into an apartheid like system - then the Jews would revolt, as they did in the Warsaw ghetto uprising against the Nazi's, would that revolt be justified?

Don't compare the Warsaw Ghetto with Gaza.

If Nazis put the Jews in Gaza (like conditions), it would be a Singapore and the Jews there would thrive.

Edited November 2, 2023 by Vrubel

[Breakingthewall]

Bombing civilians like Israel is doing is horrible, but it is worth remembering that all states do it. US in Iraq, for economic and strategic reasons, Russia in Chechnya, France in Algeria... basically all of them, but it's just different to see it live.

The reality is that if a state is to survive, moral concerns must be put aside. This does not mean that I support Israel bombing Gaza, I think it is a mistake and a evilness, but the level of evil that they are demonstrating is a normal level.

Edited November 2, 2023 by Breakingthewall

[zazen]

17 minutes ago, Vrubel said:

Don't compare the Warsaw Ghetto with Gaza.

If Nazis put the Jews in Gaza (like conditions), it would be a Singapore and the Jews there would thrive.

It takes going to the extreme end of the spectrum to make a point clear. Yes, maybe the Jews would make a Singapore out of Gaza, but that would be despite their conditions, not because of them. That doesn't make the dire conditions they would have to work through right legally or morally.

 

If one kind of people have higher IQ and are able to create something greater than those with less IQ, does that mean its just to provide that group with lesser opportunity? The West fights for equality of opportunity, not necessarily outcome, and basic human rights, whether the use of those rights results in a Singapore or a mid level Arabian town is up to the people those rights are bestowed upon.

 

And yes, there are parts of the world where basic needs such as food, water and electricity don't exist, but that exists more so as a natural state of their impoverished circumstance and geography - not a nurtured state of affairs at the hands of men imposed on them.

Edited November 2, 2023 by zazen

[DawnC]

Just now, zazen said:

It takes going to the extreme end of the spectrum to make a point clear. Yes, maybe the Jews would make a Singapore out of Gaza, but that would be despite their conditions, not because of them. That doesn't make the dire conditions they would have to work through right legally or morally.

 

If one kind of people have higher IQ and are able to create something greater than those with less IQ, does that mean its just to provide that group with lesser opportunity? The West fights for equality of opportunity, not necessarily outcome, and basic human rights, whether the use of those rights results in a Singapore or a mid level Arabian town is up to the people those rights are bestowed upon. 

But you are addressing this as if the pure condition situation is merely an injustice done to them and don't recognize that a major part of it is self-induced.

[zazen]

35 minutes ago, DawnC said:

But you are addressing this as if the pure condition situation is merely an injustice done to them and don't recognize that a major part of it is self-induced.

Whilst its good to not take on the identity of victimhood and embrace responsibility, there definitely are victims of circumstance that exist. Like Leo always talks about Holism and the connectivity of things, the web of life affects things and spills over to affect other areas. Gen Z who have mental health problems amounting to half of them for example, is that self induced or a product of their environment - the atomisation, loneliness and lifestyle modernity provides.

It's good to embrace agency but the extreme is to take the stance of hyper agency - to believe despite any situation its all on the individual to make something of himself. The right embrace responsibility and claim to be more rational then the left, yet using rationality and the logic of cause and effect - one can establish a chain of cause and affects that leads people to dire conditions that can fracture them and cripple their development to the point that everything in their life is their responsibility is absurd, inconsiderate and inhumane.

 

''Critics argue that these policies have hindered the economic, social, and infrastructural development of Gaza. Some of the key ways in which Israel is accused of hindering Gaza's development include:

1. Blockade: Israel has imposed a naval and land blockade on Gaza since 2007, following the Hamas takeover of the territory. This blockade restricts the movement of people and goods in and out of Gaza, severely limiting its access to essential supplies, including building materials, medical equipment, and fuel.

2. Restricted Access: The blockade and restrictions on movement make it difficult for Gazans to access markets, job opportunities, and medical care in Israel and the West Bank.

3. Military Operations: Periodic Israeli military operations in Gaza have caused significant damage to infrastructure, homes, and public services, making reconstruction and development challenging.

4. Limitations on Exports: Restrictions on Gaza's ability to export goods have hampered economic development and job creation.

5. Electricity and Water: Gaza experiences frequent electricity shortages due to its dependence on Israel for a significant portion of its electricity supply. Access to clean water is also limited.

6.Settlements and Land Seizures: The construction of Israeli settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, which are considered illegal under international law, is viewed as an obstacle to peace and a hindrance to the development of a future Palestinian state.

It's important to note that these issues are deeply intertwined with the broader Israeli-Palestinian conflict and security concerns. Supporters of Israeli policies argue that they are implemented to ensure Israel's security and protect its citizens from threats emanating from Gaza.''

 

 

Edited November 2, 2023 by zazen

[lina]

Resignation letter from the Director of New York Office of the UN High Commissioner of Human Rights + his view as a lawyer and specialist in international human rights law on how to move forward:

https://aurdip.org/en/resignation-letter-from-the-director-of-new-york-office-of-un-high-commissioner-of-human-rights/

1. Legitimate action: First, we in the UN must abandon the failed (and largely disingenuous) Oslo paradigm, its illusory two-state solution, its impotent and complicit Quartet, and its subjugation of international law to the dictates of presumed political expediency. Our positions must be unapologetically based on international human rights and international law.
2. Clarity of Vision: We must stop the pretense that this is simply a conflict over land or religion between two warring parties and admit the reality of the situation in which a disproportionately powerful state is colonizing, persecuting, and dispossessing an indigenous population on the basis of their ethnicity.
3. One State based on human rights: We must support the establishment of a single, democratic, secular state in all of historic Palestine, with equal rights for Christians, Muslims, and Jews, and, therefore, the dismantling of the deeply racist, settler-colonial project and an end to apartheid across the land.
4. Fighting Apartheid: We must redirect all UN efforts and resources to the struggle against apartheid, just as we did for South Africa in the 1970s, 80s, and early 90s.
5. Return and Compensation: We must reaffirm and insist on the right to return and full compensation for all Palestinians and their families currently living in the occupied territories, in Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, and in the diaspora across the globe.
6. Truth and Justice: We must call for a transitional justice process, making full use of decades of accumulated UN investigations, enquiries, and reports, to document the truth, and to ensure accountability for all perpetrators, redress for all victims, and remedies for documented injustices.
7. Protection: We must press for the deployment of a well-resourced and strongly mandated UN protection force with a sustained mandate to protect civilians from the river to the sea.
8. Disarmament: We must advocate for the removal and destruction of Israel’s massive stockpiles of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons, lest the conflict lead to the total destruction of the region and, possibly, beyond.
9. Mediation: We must recognize that the US and other western powers are in fact not credible mediators, but rather actual parties to the conflict who are complicit with Israel in the violation of Palestinian rights, and we must engage them as such.
10. Solidarity: We must open our doors (and the doors of the SG) wide to the legions of Palestinian, Israeli, Jewish, Muslim, and Christian human rights defenders who are standing in solidarity with the people of Palestine and their human rights and stop the unconstrained flow of Israel lobbyists to the offices of UN leaders, where they advocate for continued war, persecution, apartheid, and impunity, and smear our human rights defenders for their principled defense of Palestinian rights.

Edited November 2, 2023 by lina