New War In Israel / Gaza

[Karmadhi]

3 hours ago, DawnC said:

In relative terms, I believe Israel is acting reasonably

https://www.commondreams.org/news/israel-gaza-bombing

Focusing on destruction not precision is the issue here. If they focused on precision and not destruction then I would understand. But if your official spokeperson of the army says this then how can I argue with him? They admit it. 

[Karmadhi]

 

Beautiful video.

 

[MuadDib]

1 hour ago, Karmadhi said:

 

Beautiful video.

 

 

[Willie]

[DawnC]

7 hours ago, Karmadhi said:

Killing 50 civilians for 1 Hamas fighter death is not acceptable and is barbaric. It reminds me of Stalin who said once: "If we kill 50 people and 1 of them is an enemy of the state then we did a good job". That is the level Israel has fallen into. Sad.

You need to think why the support for Palestine is so big and growing especially among educated western liberals. Why UN said that Israel is commiting a ton of war crimes. Why many governments even in the West (Ireland, Spain, even Belgium today) are saying Israel is going too far and they should be punished. 

Say whatever you want but if half the people you kill are kids, 10000% innocent kids, you are doing a shit job.

Israel is basically devolving into Russia level of warfare conducting. Mass shelling civilians, cutting out electricity, water etc.

They will for sure become the most hated country in the world by the end of the year. I wonder how will that actually make Jews around the world feel safe (quoting Leo here).

 

But you see, I don't think your perception here is accurate at all. Comparing Israel to Russia is simply absurd. Doesn't it bother you that this is exactly what Hamas wants? They want people in the West to pressure Israel so they can get away with what they are doing. See what I wrote here a few days ago:

The numbers you are taking seriously originate from Hamas (which had no problem lying to you about the hospital bombing). You don't take into account the fact that Hamas uses teenagers as militants and later regards them as children casualties. You forget that there are hundreds of misfired rockets, like the one fired at the hospital. You don't take into account that Hamas dresses its militants in regular clothes to later classify them as civilians. You also don't address the fact that Hamas pays civilians to participate in war efforts and then counts them as civilians (as seen 7/10).

From a strategic perspective, you misunderstand the fact that Hamas has a strategic goal of having the most children and civilian casualties possible and doesn't place much value on civilian's lives, while Israel is genuinely concerned about their image as they need European and US support. So, even if they were to desire such actions, they are aware that it would be a major strategic mistake. You also fail to consider the fact that Hamas uses children as human shields to protect its militants when they are targeting civilians (for example, shooting rockets from schools or civilian houses) and that is a very difficult situation to deal with militarily.

So, in your view, the right thing for Israel is to provide electricity and water to enemy bunkers during war (where their civilians are being targeted by intentional rocket attacks) and to put their own soldiers' lives in incredible danger because Hamas tactics involve placing civilians in the crossfire. Do you think that's a reasonable criterion to set? Should Israel also avoid shooting at any location where there are civilians? This is not how conflicts operate. If Israel were to adopt such measures, any Hamas militant could take advantage of the situation, and they will not be able to get even to one of them. Should Hamas be granted immunity because of their horrific tactics? Should the Israelis be more receptive to Western critics influenced by Hamas propaganda? 

What do you think?

Anyway, I can still have criticism about an attack here or there. But I believe the important thing here is that I'm not conflating criticism of the accepted level of collateral damage (with people who actually care about that) in some specific attacks with moral equivalence. The fact that I have criticism about the Allies bombing Dresden doesn't make them morally equivalent to the Nazis. It's not solely about examining individual tragedies (which can be heartbreaking). The broader picture is more important.

 

[Nivsch]

55 minutes ago, DawnC said:

But you see, I don't think your perception here is accurate at all. Comparing Israel to Russia is simply absurd. Doesn't it bother you that this is exactly what Hamas wants? They want people in the West to pressure Israel so they can get away with what they are doing. See what I wrote here a few days ago:

The numbers you are taking seriously originate from Hamas (which had no problem lying to you about the hospital bombing). You don't take into account the fact that Hamas uses teenagers as militants and later regards them as children casualties. You forget that there are hundreds of misfired rockets, like the one fired at the hospital. You don't take into account that Hamas dresses its militants in regular clothes to later classify them as civilians. You also don't address the fact that Hamas pays civilians to participate in war efforts and then counts them as civilians (as seen 7/10).

From a strategic perspective, you misunderstand the fact that Hamas has a strategic goal of having the most children and civilian casualties possible and doesn't place much value on civilian's lives, while Israel is genuinely concerned about their image as they need European and US support. So, even if they were to desire such actions, they are aware that it would be a major strategic mistake. You also fail to consider the fact that Hamas uses children as human shields to protect its militants when they are targeting civilians (for example, shooting rockets from schools or civilian houses) and that is a very difficult situation to deal with militarily.

So, in your view, the right thing for Israel is to provide electricity and water to enemy bunkers during war (where their civilians are being targeted by intentional rocket attacks) and to put their own soldiers' lives in incredible danger because Hamas tactics involve placing civilians in the crossfire. Do you think that's a reasonable criterion to set? Should Israel also avoid shooting at any location where there are civilians? This is not how conflicts operate. If Israel were to adopt such measures, any Hamas militant could take advantage of the situation, and they will not be able to get even to one of them. Should Hamas be granted immunity because of their horrific tactics? Should the Israelis be more receptive to Western critics influenced by Hamas propaganda? 

What do you think?

Anyway, I can still have criticism about an attack here or there. But I believe the important thing here is that I'm not conflating criticism of the accepted level of collateral damage (with people who actually care about that) in some specific attacks with moral equivalence. The fact that I have criticism about the Allies bombing Dresden doesn't make them morally equivalent to the Nazis. It's not solely about examining individual tragedies (which can be heartbreaking). The broader picture is more important.

 

🎯🥇

Edited November 10, 2023 by Nivsch

[Merkabah Star]

8 hours ago, Karmadhi said:

 

Beautiful video.

 

Such a beautiful, peaceful man and story! He is love. 

[Karmadhi]

5 hours ago, DawnC said:

What do you think?

I think that Israel s issue here is this: 

Focusing on destruction not precision is the issue here. If they focused on precision and not destruction then I would understand. But if your official spokeperson of the army says this then how can I argue with him? They admit it. 

https://www.commondreams.org/news/israel-gaza-bombing.

This is not acceptable. I am not denying some civilians would die but when you focus on precision the number is reduced. They are admittingly not doing it. The 80 civilians for 1 Hamas is direct proof of it. Leo, most liberals, UN, many governments are very critical of this policy. 

 

[zazen]

 

 

Edited November 10, 2023 by zazen

[DawnC]

2 hours ago, Karmadhi said:

I think that Israel s issue here is this: 

Focusing on destruction not precision is the issue here. If they focused on precision and not destruction then I would understand. But if your official spokeperson of the army says this then how can I argue with him? They admit it. 

https://www.commondreams.org/news/israel-gaza-bombing.

This is not acceptable. I am not denying some civilians would die but when you focus on precision the number is reduced. They are admittingly not doing it. The 80 civilians for 1 Hamas is direct proof of it. Leo, most liberals, UN, many governments are very critical of this policy. 

 

The link is broken. 

Note that there are more than two options - this isn't precision vs. destruction. Disabling Hamas involves disrupting their ability to rule, govern, initiate attacks, control the Gaza strip, set traps for ground forces, manage the battlefield and many other abilities. This requires more than just precision and cannot be labeled as merely unjustified destruction.

If the ratio they aimed for was 1-80, the percentage of civilian casualties would be 99%. This extreme ratio is not supported even by the most biased anti-Israeli sources, which often fail to address any of the complexities I mentioned earlier (Hamas deceptions). I didn't observe any attacks resulting in 80 to 1 ratios. Even if such incidents occurred, don't mistake isolated cases for a continual policy. I think this is an exaggeration that again fails to see the big picture. Btw, if an IDF spokesperson actually admitted to an attack with such a ratio, I think it's actually making them more reliable. Consider whether nations like Russia, would openly admit to similar actions. A country with a deliberate intention to indiscriminately kill civilians (or even with a 1 to 80 ratio policy) wouldn't likely publicize this.

I think you should also address the very difficult dilemma and genuinely ask yourself questions about it, as it's easy to simply suggest they should be more precise. Ask yourself: What would Hamas do if they knew that surrounding themselves with 50 civilians would grant immunity? Wouldn't they exploit it to protect themselves? When facing adversaries who exploit civilian shields, what alternative strategies can be employed? Can a strict policy of never attacking, regardless of circumstances, be a sustainable approach in such warfare? To what extent should military forces prioritize the protection of civilians over achieving strategic objectives? Can there be effective military deterrence without causing significant civilian harm when you are fighting an organization that uses civilians like Hamas? Are there historical examples of successful military campaigns that minimized civilian casualties in the way you suggest? How would you respond if adopting a policy to never attack (regardless of the circumstances) in situations with such ratios meant that every Hamas militant, particularly those in high-ranking positions, would consistently surround themselves with as many civilians as possible? What would you do if avoiding those attacks meant putting your soldiers in life-threatening situations by the thousands? What would you do if the precision tactic you were advocating made it impossible to carry out any attacks at all? I can go on and on. These are not abstract philosophical questions, these are the actual dilemmas the Israelis are confronting. I think It's important to understand the militant situation, to understand what Hamas is, and then to contemplate those questions seriously. I'm not sure people actually do that before suggesting their simplistic solutions.

Should the US and the world pressure Israel to minimize the ratio? From a global perspective, I think they should. I think it's good to have oversight and prevent getting carried away. But that doesn't change any of the points I mentioned earlier (including the moral stance on this matter and Hamas deceptions). And just to be clear again, I don't think every attack by Israel is moral, and that Israelis are angels. I'm not in the business of searching for angels and devils but rather in choosing the lesser evil. And after contemplating the questions above, in my view, Israel's actions fall within the spectrum of reason. I try not to suggest moral restrictions to others that I believe I wouldn't apply to myself. In this case, I think that's what most people are doing. 

And let's not even delve into the UN . A place where countries like Syria get to condemn Israel for bombing civilians, and nations like Iran and Saudi Arabia get to vote on matters of women's rights. This is not an organization that can be taken seriously in any way.

Edited November 10, 2023 by DawnC

[Karmadhi]

57 minutes ago, DawnC said:

This is not an organization that can be taken seriously in any way

I take it 100 times more seriously than a government caught many times in lying and that is openly racist.

This is how your country treats Ethiopian JEWS because they are not "white enough". Disgusting

Israel Admits Targeting Ethiopian Jews for Compulsory Contraception | Center for Genetics and Society (Link cannot be send, just google it and you will find it).

Are Ethiopian Jews Israel's second-class citizens? – DW – 09/29/2018

You can find many articles showing different treatment of non white jews.

How can I take such a country seriously when it comes to them dealing with other ethnic groups? When they do this to their OWN PEOPLE just because they are not "white enough".

Edited November 10, 2023 by Karmadhi

[bariumly]

this is just wrong in so many ways... 

[DawnC]

8 minutes ago, Karmadhi said:

I take it 100 times more seriously than a government caught many times in lying and that is openly racist.

This is how your country treats Ethiopian JEWS because they are not "white enough". Disgusting

Israel Admits Targeting Ethiopian Jews for Compulsory Contraception | Center for Genetics and Society (Link cannot be send, just google it and you will find it).

Are Ethiopian Jews Israel's second-class citizens? – DW – 09/29/2018

You can find many articles showing different treatment of non white jews.

How can I take such a country seriously when it comes to them dealing with other ethnic groups? When they do this to their OWN PEOPLE just because they are not "white enough".

That is not a serious claim. This is similar to saying you can't take America seriously because there is racism towards African Americans.

[Karmadhi]

4 minutes ago, DawnC said:

This is similar to saying you can't take America seriously because there is racism towards African Americans.

I do not see Americans secretly making black people infertile. If it was discovered it would make a gigantic scandal. 

Only an openly racist country like Israel or Russia  can get away with it.

Edited November 10, 2023 by Karmadhi

[Nivsch]

[DawnC]

@Karmadhi  Consider approaching the study of Israeli society with an open mind. You seem to be delving into areas of absurdity, connecting loosely related things that you may not fully understand.

Edited November 10, 2023 by DawnC

[zazen]

''For every Hamas member you kill how many do you create?  And if you create more than you kill, you've not succeeded.'' - Elon Musk

This video by the Israeli professor Sam Vaknin seems very fair and objective. Unfortunately, it seems a solution barely exists or would be hard to come to fruition. 

 

Edited November 10, 2023 by zazen

[Karmadhi]

2 minutes ago, zazen said:

''For every Hamas member you kill how many do you create?  And if you create more than you kill, you've not succeeded.'' - Elon Musk

Tell this to Israelis. They do not seem to understand simple logic.

38 minutes ago, DawnC said:

Consider approaching the study of Israeli society with an open mind. You seem to be delving into areas of absurdity, connecting loosely related things that you may not fully understand.

I have dont worry. I do not understand what is so weird about that the idea that a democracy can also be racist. USA was racist before the 1960s, Nazis were democratically elected and their anti jew agenda was clear even before they were elected, same with some right wing governments like that of Hungary. Is it so unbelieve that Israel is one of these countries? Non openly racist countries are kind of rare to be honest.

Edited November 10, 2023 by Karmadhi

[DawnC]

50 minutes ago, Karmadhi said:

Tell this to Israelis. They do not seem to understand simple logic.

I have dont worry. I do not understand what is so weird about that the idea that a democracy can also be racist. USA was racist before the 1960s, Nazis were democratically elected and their anti jew agenda was clear even before they were elected, same with some right wing governments like that of Hungary. Is it so unbelieve that Israel is one of these countries? Non openly racist countries are kind of rare to be honest.

It's not that. It's your perception of the situation with the Ethiopian Jews. It suggests you don’t understand the situation and your conclusions based on that are reaching absurdity.

[Vercingetorix]