Israelo-Palestinian Conflict: 2023 Edition

[AlexL]

19 minutes ago, necrovore said:

I will agree that ad hominem statements don't add any value [...]

Only ad hominem? This is such an understatement !

Edited December 16, 2023 by AlexL

[stansfield123]

 

[stansfield123]

On 11/7/2023 at 8:01 PM, Easy Truth said:

However, some would argue that the current conflict is a minimal conflict, as only 1400 Israelis were murdered out of a country of 8 million. Or 1400 in the last ten years etc. Assuming the minimum is based on Body count. Then hasn't the strategy worked in keeping it at a minimum? Why is there such an overreaction?

There's no overreaction. The reaction, in response to the invasion of Southern Israel, by forces from Gaza, on October 7, is quite appropriate. Israel was attacked militarily, and it is therefor waging war against the political entity which attacked it: Gaza.

As for the war crimes which were committed during the attack ... for that, there is a definite under-reaction. The reaction should've been much stronger, both on Israel's part, and on the part of western countries who's citizens were murdered, and are STILL being held hostage.

The reaction should've been twofold: full blown war against Iran, led by the US (and fully backed by Europe, Japan, Australia, Canada etc.), and a demand that nations who harbor Hamas leadership (most notably, Qatar) arrest them, and put them on trial for war crimes. Because the only point of the concept of "war crimes" is to have a deterrent against them. War crimes warrant a response that's by an order of magnitude stronger than the response to a mere invasion, using tactics within the laws which govern war.

Quote

To make it minimal Israel could get rid of all Palestinians. As in Kill them all. Why is that not a solution openly advocated?

Mainly because "Palestinians" aren't a separate ethnicity or religious group. They're Arabs by ethnicity, and Muslim by religion. They're "Palestinians" the way someone living in NY is a New-Yorker. It's a non-essential attribute. Makes no real difference whether an American is from NY or NJ, and it makes no real difference whether an Arab Muslim is from Gaza, the West Bank, or Kuweit.

So killing all the so-called Palestinians wouldn't help at all.

If they were a small, separate nation and religion, without external support, then, obviously, all this would be a moot point ... because none of this would be happening. There would be no war. Palestinians would've long been assimilated into western civilization. Just another western nation, living in peace, next to Israel.

Israel, along with all the rest of western civilization, isn't at war with "Palestinians", it's at war with totalitarian Islam ... who, in turn, make up a large chunk of Muslims. In the Arab world, in particular, they make up a MAJORITY.

Edited December 16, 2023 by stansfield123

[SpookyKitty]

Israel is definitely engaging in a racist and genocidal war of extermination against Palestinians. It is not in any real sense opposed to totalitarian Islam, though one wishes it were.

To oppose Islamic totalitarianism effectively, naked brutality is both insufficient and ineffective. Instead, one must attack totalitarian ideologies at their very core by rejecting the very premises on which they base their conflicts. Concretely, this is accomplished through the building of a secular alternative to radical Islam that actually respects the rights of all individuals.

Israel implicitly supports radical Islam by accepting its premises but in reverse. Islamists want to create a Muslim state and eradicate all other modes of worship and thought and their supporters. Israel does the same in the name of an undefined and ever expanding need for "security".

If Israel wants to be a ray of hope for the Middle East, then it will have to absolutely and unequivocally reject the "It's us or them," mode of thinking that is at the root of all the violence today.

Addendum: Recently, three of the Hamas hostages managed to escape their captivity. The three men were shirtless and waving white flags when they encountered the IDF. An IDF soldier, who apparently thought they were Palestinian civilians, opened fire on them, killing two of them. The third one ran away into a building. Then, a second soldier followed him inside and killed him, too. They only found out that the three men were Israeli hostages because they decided to check out who they were because one of them had a "western appearance".

Absolute madness. The very people who were supposedly sent in to rescue these men ended up murdering them out of their own racist fears. What a perfect microcosm of the whole situation that racist irrationality breeds.

Edited December 17, 2023 by SpookyKitty

[Eiuol]

7 hours ago, stansfield123 said:

it's at war with totalitarian Islam

The more I think about it, the more evident it is that Israel has consistently failed at fighting it. Strictly on the pragmatic side, Israel sucks at fighting totalitarian Islam. Ideological failure if you ask me. I prefer Israel over Hamas, but I'd much rather something over both of them. An unequivocal defender of liberty, not someone just barely good enough. 

 

[AlexL]

4 hours ago, SpookyKitty said:

Israel is definitely engaging in a racist and genocidal war of extermination against Palestinians.

"Definitely" means you are in possession of conclusive evidence that:

1. it is a war of extermination
2. of Palestinians (or is it of Gazans only?)
3. for racist reasons and with genocidal intentions.

I would like to see that conclusive evidence. If you think you have gone too far, you may still amend your claim.

Edited December 17, 2023 by AlexL

[Easy Truth]

10 hours ago, stansfield123 said:

The reaction should've been twofold: full blown war against Iran, led by the US (and fully backed by Europe, Japan, Australia, Canada etc.), and a demand that nations who harbor Hamas leadership (most notably, Qatar) arrest them, and put them on trial for war crimes. Because the only point of the concept of "war crimes" is to have a deterrent against them. War crimes warrant a response that's by an order of magnitude stronger than the response to a mere invasion, using tactics within the laws which govern war.

Go to war with Iran, while financing the war in Ukraine. Of course, we should also eradicate North Korea while we are at it. Get rid of all of the evil in the world. As if all of this is free and without any regretful consequence. 

The potential for World War Three is being ignored. 1400 innocent Israelis have been killed, but part of it is due to Israeli negligence which one could argue: is still going on. The future animosity being created is not to the advantage of Israel. Relations with Israel and Arab countries were being normalized. Not anymore with the kind of massive killing that is going on in Gaza.

We have fought the Taliban, trying to eradicate them with a giant coalition, Afghanistan is a far more backward country than Iran and now, after 20 years of fighting them and 2 trillion dollars spent, we are supporting the Taliban government's existence. Has the experience in Vietnam been already forgotten? That's an example of what the "eradication mindset" gets you. Hamas is staying in some form or another because they are the only Palestinian voice that Israel has heard and reacted to. It may or may not be dominant moving forward but it won't go away as long as they need to have a resistance movement. With all the revenge policy at work, the only solution is to better the lives of the Palestinians. It is a very bitter medicine but it is the only one that will work. Subjugation or ethnic cleansing won't work in this day and age.

Getting rid of Iran is not as simple as you seem to think or it would have been done by now.

Iran has 80 million people and most of the population can read and write because it is compulsory. Recall how they caused oil prices to spike with one cruise missile into Saudi Arabian oil fields. Their drone technology is advanced enough that they supply Russia with its war in Ukraine. Meanwhile, do you think that Russia and China will just watch their financial interests in Iran disappear without putting up some resistance?

 

[whYNOT]

1 hour ago, Easy Truth said:

Go to war with Iran, while financing the war in Ukraine. Of course, we should also eradicate North Korea while we are...

Relations with Israel and Arab countries were being normalized. Not anymore with the kind of massive killing that is going on in Gaza.

 

 

"Relations were... being normalized. Not with the kind of killing... in Gaza".

But what do you think was ~one~  motive of the Hamas attack on Israel?

This: To disrupt Israel's and Saudi Arabia's talks for an accord.

Some value was growing out of the Abraham Accords. Who do you think feared that?

Gaza attacks Israel; and not any doubt - Israel attacks Gaza; there is intensive conflict against underground terrorists - and so on.

I don't know how anyone can miss it, this was not just some crazy, brutal attack without motive on Israel.

E.g. Because the poor Gazans were "under siege" - bla bla, (from the Hamas apologists and propagandists)

I have constantly stressed that Hamas KNEW what would happen-- many Gazans (terrrorists and civilians) would be killed by Israel...etc.etc., the fallout would be an outpouring of support for poor Gazans, Israel gets vilified as "the genocider" ... AND -  talks would end, and relations be strained with Israel's moderate Accords partners. The threat to Iran's regional dominance is nullified.

Come on. You people should be too intelligent and cognizant of the causal sequence to be fooled by these shrewd ploys. You underestimate the enemy's cleverness and falsity.

How the US  was taken in by Iran's glib assurances, last time round by Obama/Kerry.

 

Jerusalem Post

"Intelligence reports show that Hamas’s assault on Israel on October 7 was prepared over several years, with active support and guidance from Iran. The timing of the attack was motivated, to some extent, by the rapid advances in the US-led normalization process between Israel and Saudi Arabia in the weeks preceding the attack. Such a normalization could undermine the goals of both Hamas and the Iranian regime, who realized that a normalization pact would stymie their efforts to delegitimize and ultimately destroy Israel. For now, it seems their plot has partially succeeded; the normalization process came to a screeching halt and there are growing signs of tension and irritation among the Arab signatories of the Abraham Accords (the UAE, Bahrain, and Morocco) that may lead to the collapse of these agreements or their deterioration to the “cold peace” that describes relations between Israel and two of its other peace partners – Egypt and Jordan".

Edited December 17, 2023 by whYNOT

[SpookyKitty]

1 hour ago, AlexL said:

"Definitely" means you are in possession of conclusive evidence that:

1. it is a war of extermination
2. of Palestinians (or is it of Gazans only?)
3. for racist reasons and with genocidal intentions.

I would like to see that conclusive evidence. If you think you have gone too far, you may still amend your claim.

I have not gone too far.

Genocide is defined as:

"In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts
committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical,
racial or religious group, as such :

(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to
bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group."

Source:

The UN resolution in 1948 that defined the crime of Genocide: https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume 78/volume-78-I-1021-English.pdf

That Israel is guilty of at least (a), (b), and (c) is beyond question at this point. The difficult part in cases such as this is proving intent. Thanks to Benjamin Netanyahu, this is now easy.

In a recent speech, Netanyahu said "You must remember what Amalek has done to you," quoting the Bible. For those that don't know, the full quote is
 

Quote

 

On Saturday, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that Israelis were united in their fight against Hamas, whom he described as an enemy of incomparable cruelty. “They are committed to completely eliminating this evil from the world,” Netanyahu said in Hebrew. He then added: “You must remember what Amalek has done to you, says our Holy Bible. And we do remember.”

There are more than 23,000 verses in the Old Testament. The ones Netanyahu turned to, as Israeli forces launched their ground invasion in Gaza, are among its most violent—and have a long history of being used by Jews on the far right to justify killing Palestinians.

As others quickly pointed out, God commands King Saul in the first Book of Samuel to kill every person in Amalek, a rival nation to ancient Israel. “This is what the Lord Almighty says,” the prophet Samuel tells Saul. “‘I will punish the Amalekites for what they did to Israel when they waylaid them as they came up from Egypt. Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.

 

Source: https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2023/11/benjamin-netanyahu-amalek-israel-palestine-gaza-saul-samuel-old-testament/

Netanyahu is neither unusual for an Israeli politician and government official, nor as this even new for him. There is a long-standing pattern of genocidal rhetoric within the Israeli government:

Quote

Finally, prominent Israeli politicians have publicly called for action against the Palestinian people that unequivocally meets the definition of genocide under the 1948 Convention. For instance, in February 2008, Matan Vilnai, Israel’s deputy defense minister, declared that increasing tensions between the Israelis and Palestinians in the Gaza Strip could bring on themselves what he called a shoah, or holocaust,

“The more Qassam [rocket] fire intensifies and the rockets reach a longer range, they will bring upon themselves a bigger shoah because we will use all our might to defend ourselves.”

Israeli Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked posted a statement on Facebook in June 2014 claiming that “the entire Palestinian people is the enemy” and called for the destruction of Palestine, “including its elderly and its women, its cities and its villages, its property and its infrastructure.” Her post also called for the killing of Palestinian mothers who give birth to “little snakes.”

In August 2014, Moshe Feiglin, then-deputy speaker of the Israeli Knesset and member of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s ruling Likud Party, called for the destruction of Palestinian life in Gaza and offered a detailed plan for shipping Palestinians living in Gaza across the world. Specifically, he envisioned a scenario where the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) would find areas on the Sinai border to establish “tent encampments...until relevant emigration destinations are determined.” He further suggested that the IDF would then “exterminate nests of resistance, in the event that any
should remain.” He subsequently wrote in an op-ed, “After the IDF completes the ‘softening’ of the targets with its fire-power, the IDF will conquer the entire Gaza, using  all the means necessary to minimize any harm to our soldiers, with no other considerations." He continued, “Gaza is part of our Land and we will remain there forever. Liberation of parts of our land forever is the only thing that justifies endangering our soldiers in battle to capture land. Subsequent to the elimination of terror from Gaza, it will become part of sovereign Israel and will be populated by Jews. This will also serve
to ease the housing crisis in Israel. The coastal train line will be extended, as soon as possible, to reach the entire length of Gaza."

Source: https://ccrjustice.org/sites/default/files/attach/2016/10/Background on the term genocide in Israel Palestine Context.pdf

Edited December 17, 2023 by SpookyKitty

[whYNOT]

I agree completely that the USA must be extremely careful about supporting/entering/creating a future war.

It's not overlooked by its foes that America has been overextending itself with Ukraine. To open up new fronts would be folly. I argued forcefully against the US neo-cons and neo-libs dangerous obsession to take down Russia via NATO, via Ukraine.

That's not over yet. A new wave of Western mobilizations about to ratchet tensions up.

So the same people are - for now -  in support of Israel and 'on my side', I remain consistent. I do not trust neocons' enthusiasm for wars.

"Self-defense" and preemptive defense is the principle to go by, avoiding 'geopolitical' and other ambitions.

 

Edited December 17, 2023 by whYNOT

[whYNOT]

Iraqi genocide.

Not in the least a self-defensive war. But Israel, defending its own people after a barbaric invasion and promises of repeats by Hamas - must be judged by a different set of standards, say the subjective evaders.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwiYhsHIhJaDAxW3SkEAHV7qAmIQFnoECCYQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nbcnews.com%2Fmeet-the-press%2Fmeetthepressblog%2Firaq-war-numbers-rcna75762&usg=AOvVaw2w3ZqkPfcbZ9ji8gZdmnXz&opi=89978449

Edited December 17, 2023 by whYNOT

[whYNOT]

22 hours ago, necrovore said:

If I had neighbors who were firing rockets into a foreign country, that's an act of war, and I would expect to run the risk of being killed by the foreign country's retaliation, even though I didn't do anything, and even if I ran an orphanage full of children or something.

I would also expect my own government to protect me (and the children) by either stopping the neighbors and possibly extraditing them, or incarcerating them locally, which might be an option -- or formally attacking the foreign country to prevent them from retaliating. (This latter is unlikely. A government would probably prefer to start a war itself rather than let my neighbors drag it into one.)

It doesn't make any sense to claim that the other country is "monstrous" in some way for defending itself but that one's own country is not "monstrous" for provoking it by attacking them (or refusing to stop attacks upon them) in the first place.

The initiation of force is wrong, but retaliation is not.

Yes. The 'right' of (national) self-defense entails a Gvt. which must and will protect its citizens to any extent they see fit to end the danger, no arbitrary options about it.

It is after all, "delegated" to do so - by every citizen's individual right of self defense.

"A nation doesn't have rights"- (if I quoted Rand correctly)

I often suspect that the foreign politicians, etc., who concur "Israel has the right to defend itself" are vague about how a nation came by that "right" and might not know defense-retaliation is unquestionable and obligatory by Gvts. And pols may rescind that country's 'right' whenever it suits them personally or politically.

Edited December 17, 2023 by whYNOT

[Doug Morris]

On 12/14/2023 at 5:23 PM, SpookyKitty said:

And if this hypothetical US was also subjecting Jews in occupied territories to arbitrary arrest, indefinite detention, and military tribunals with no recourse to legal defense, I imagine that wouldn't go too well either?

If we're going to do a hypothetical like that, we should also have our hypothetical US being constantly attacked by Israeli terrorists with support from the government of Israel.

 

[whYNOT]

9 hours ago, whYNOT said:

Iraqi genocide.

 

I meant to write -

Iraqi "genocide"?

One has about 3 mins for edits

Edited December 17, 2023 by whYNOT

[AlexL]

13 hours ago, SpookyKitty said:

I have not gone too far. Genocide is defined as: [...]

Thank you for the detailed answer, augmented by references. However, your answer is incomplete: you are only trying to justify your genocide claim, but neglect your claim about the racist motivation.

OK, let’s deal with what is available. You correctly identify the main, and an extraordinary complex difficulty, of justifying an accusation of genocide, which necessitates proving the intention to destroy, “in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such”. In our case it is about the – still unspecified! – Palestinians; to alleviate your task, I will assume that you refer to Gazans only (you chose not to take advantage of the possibility to amend your claim in order to specify this).

Now, on the formal side: who is authorized to qualify an action as genocide? Is it you or me? It is the political commentators or experts? Is it NGOs, ICRC or other international organizations?

According to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide from which you extracted the definition of genocide, it works in the following way: the signatories commit themselves to (a) enact, in their countries, the necessary legislation and (b) to try the persons charged by a competent tribunal (art. V and VI). Therefore, although the guilt of IDF/government is, in your view, “beyond question”, it is, in fact, not for me, or for you, or for … to make such a complex determination, but for a tribunal.

However, let’s consider your argumentation, to see if it supports at least the plausibility of a genocide verdict. 

In support of your genocide claim you quote three or four Israeli politicians who threatened Hamas, or the Palestinians, at different times, with belligerent rhetoric containing the most terrifying, god-supported, punishments. But these are words, Politicians’ words ! Were they translated into military tactic, policy, field orders? You have still to prove it, but the reality suggest otherwise – see below. 

If the objective is genocidal extermination, that is the killing of as many people as possible, any prior evacuation order, establishment of evacuation routes, issuing warning messages, leaflets, maps indicating safe areas etc. are simply absurd. Instead, if the objective were to kill all Gazans, a surprise attack, by night, with all IDF’s means simultaneously – all bombers, cannons, tanks - should have been enacted for carpet bombing of Gaza. And a repeat in the next hours in order to finish off the survivors, including the wounded. 

Is this what Israel did? No, but the usual pro-Hamas propagandists had no other choice but to say it did. But what do the facts suggest? 

With about 15-20’000 dead (just assuming, generously, that Hamas numbers are true and that all dead are civilian), after the above described carpet bombing of Gaza, allegedly the most densely populated, 2.4 million city in the world, there should have been at least 1-200’000 dead and 300’00 to 800’000 wounded. After the first day of a carpet bombing... Even Hamas’ total numbers are orders of magnitude lower. 

Your evidence is far from being conclusive. I am afraid your genocide arguments fell flat on its face. However, you may improve on it, but don’t forget about the racism argument.

But first of all, try to get some solid facts. Don’t do like @whYNOT in the Russian Aggression Against Ukraine thread, where he showed to be blatantly unaware of real facts and was following instead the opinions of, mostly notorious, pro-Putin propagandists.

Edited December 17, 2023 by AlexL

[AlexL]

4 hours ago, whYNOT said:

One has about 3 mins for edits

A comment is accessible for editing for 60 minutes after being posted. Experimental result 😁

Edited December 17, 2023 by AlexL

[SpookyKitty]

3 hours ago, AlexL said:

Thank you for the detailed answer, augmented by references. However, your answer is incomplete: you are only trying to justify your genocide claim, but neglect your claim about the racist motivation.

 

Did I? I thought the quotes I provide were very clearly racist in nature. Do you claim otherwise?

 

Quote

OK, let’s deal with what is available. You correctly identify the main, and an extraordinary complex difficulty, of justifying an accusation of genocide, which necessitates proving the intention to destroy, “in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such”. In our case it is about the – still unspecified! – Palestinians; to alleviate your task, I will assume that you refer to Gazans only (you chose not to take advantage of the possibility to amend your claim in order to specify this).

No. I refer to all Palestinians. Those in Gaza as well as those in the West Bank. I believe that a very strong case can be made for the claim that Israel is guilty of genocide in both cases.

To be clear, in the case of Gaza, I believe that Israel is guilty of (a) (b) (c) and (d) listed above, and that it is guilty of (a) (b) (c) and (e) in the West Bank but to a much less extreme extent.

 

Quote

Now, on the formal side: who is authorized to qualify an action as genocide? Is it you or me? It is the political commentators or experts? Is it NGOs, ICRC or other international organizations?

According to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide from which you extracted the definition of genocide, it works in the following way: the signatories commit themselves to (a) enact, in their countries, the necessary legislation and (b) to try the persons charged by a competent tribunal (art. V and VI). Therefore, although the guilt of IDF/government is, in your view, “beyond question”, it is, in fact, not for me, or for you, or for … to make such a complex determination, but for a tribunal.

 

A legally actionable guilty verdict can only be given by some court of law. However, it is absolutely our epistemological and moral responsibility, as individuals, to determine for ourselves whether or not Israel is committing a genocide against the Palestinians. This responsibility is inescapable. Even if a court were to rule on this one way or the other, we would still have to determine for ourselves whether or not we can trust its rulings.

 

Quote

However, let’s consider your argumentation, to see if it supports at least the plausibility of a genocide verdict. 

In support of your genocide claim you quote three or four Israeli politicians who threatened Hamas, or the Palestinians, at different times, with belligerent rhetoric containing the most terrifying, god-supported, punishments. But these are words, Politicians’ words ! Were they translated into military tactic, policy, field orders? You have still to prove it, but the reality suggest otherwise – see below. 

If the objective is genocidal extermination, that is the killing of as many people as possible, any prior evacuation order, establishment of evacuation routes, issuing warning messages, leaflets, maps indicating safe areas etc. are simply absurd. Instead, if the objective were to kill all Gazans, a surprise attack, by night, with all IDF’s means simultaneously – all bombers, cannons, tanks - should have been enacted for carpet bombing of Gaza. And a repeat in the next hours in order to finish off the survivors, including the wounded. 

Is this what Israel did? No, but the usual pro-Hamas propagandists had no other choice but to say it did. But what do the facts suggest? 

With about 15-20’000 dead (just assuming, generously, that Hamas numbers are true and that all dead are civilian), after the above described carpet bombing of Gaza, allegedly the most densely populated, 2.4 million city in the world, there should have been at least 1-200’000 dead and 300’00 to 800’000 wounded. After the first day of a carpet bombing... Even Hamas’ total numbers are orders of magnitude lower.

 

The giving of warnings, specification of evacuation routes, etc. is not at all inconsistent with the objective of genocide. First, we must take into account the possibility that Israel is using these practices only as a means of maintaining plausible deniability without regard to civilian casualties. Israel believes that international moral support is necessary for the success of its mission in Gaza. This support could be jeopardized if they don't at the very least create the appearance of trying to minimize civilian casualties.

Second, even though Israel has given evacuation orders, indicated safe zones, and so on, it has continuously attacked those same safe zones, convoys of evacuating civilians, hospitals, schools, churches, mosques, you name it. Any place that civilians might be reasonably expected to take shelter, Israel has attacked.

Most egregiously, at the beginning of Israel's attack on Gaza, they ordered Gazans to evacuate to the south. Then, when Gazans were all concentrated in the south, they started bombing the south as well without allowing the civilians to evacuate to any safe zone in the north.

Israeli snipers have also targeted journalists who were clearly marked as "Press". Further, they have deliberately and repeatedly targeted civilians who presented no threat whatsoever and who were very clearly and unmistakably attempting to surrender to the IDF, including, most recently, three Israelis who tried to surrender to the IDF after escaping from Hamas captivity.

All of these actions point to the obvious conclusion that Israel is deliberately targeting civilians in Gaza and is merely using evacuation orders and the like as a cover for its true goal of exterminating the Palestinians.

 

 

 

[whYNOT]

It's complete ignorance or evasion of the full destructive capacity of the modern (conventional) weapons and methods of warfare, by which the 'genocide of Palestinian' alarmists observe the battlegrounds.

They show ignorance of the huge distinction between "collateral damage" and deliberate civilian attacks.

Civilians en masse being the easiest of targets to locate and hit.

IF it is/was "genocide" being intended, the Israelis are terrible at it.

You have to do better, IDF !! Too few civilians killed ! There are millions living yet.

Those many pretend ~humanitarians- (who are anti-human-value) demand it.

Because, AS IT IS APPARENT, many screeching against Gazan 'genocide' desire nothing less than Jewish/Israeli genocide.

"See, we pick and choose whom we'd like annihilated"...

These are cowardly accomplices to mass-murderers.

Edited December 18, 2023 by whYNOT

[whYNOT]

7 hours ago, AlexL said:

 but don’t forget about the racism argument.

 

 

At root, easily explained. By and large, the fundamentalist Muslims are and were racist against Jews.

Their religious texts and newfound Islamic nationalism, the basic sources.

From pre-1948 until '48 when five surrounding Arab nations attacked the new state, the predominant sentiment was - We will never share this territory with Jews. Into the next aggressive war and the next... and to the present.

It was those wars that caused a mass displacement of the people, naturally, - and created the "Palestinian problem".

The problem then, a direct responsibility of Arab nations which initiated force on Jews.

Earlier on, the Jewish contingent were evidently amenable to partition, nor had strong feelings against Arabs. 

Fast forward, and with the unremitting attacks on and hatred shown to the Israelis for decades, it is unsurprising that many in turn, from fears for their existence, have reciprocated racial prejudice against Palestinians, they are human too.

Edited December 18, 2023 by whYNOT

[SpookyKitty]

Horror. It is as if the IDF is determined to make my arguments for me. Only a few hours after David Azoulai, head of the Metula Council, claimed that Israel should make Gaza resemble the Auschwitz concentration camp (source: https://www.jpost.com/israel-hamas-war/article-778367), the IDF blew up the maternity ward in Nasser Children's Hospital. Source:

Dear reader, ask yourself what sort of person considers the horrors of the Auschwitz concentration camp an ideal to aspire to? Do not let such monsters shame you into silence for calling out evil when you see it.

[AlexL]

7 hours ago, SpookyKitty said:

Did I? I thought the quotes I provide were very clearly racist [...]

Before addressing your objections, I draw your attention to the fact that you missed my main factual point - the implausibility of the alleged Israeli intention to kill all the residents of Gaza (=genocide) - the one based on the number of killed.

[whYNOT]

I worry also for America's future. 18-24, the up and coming age group, has partially bought into cultural Marxism, the horrors of "neo-colonialism", Islamicism and the rest. "Israel to be ended".

Sacrificed as a sop to their delicate feelings.

https://www.jpost.com/diaspora/antisemitism/article-778327

 

 

Edited December 18, 2023 by whYNOT

[whYNOT]

One Gazan resident at least, knows with whom the moral condemnation lies. With them who started it, Hamas terrorists. Who cowardly still hold the hostages for their protection/leverage.

https://www.jpost.com/arab-israeli-conflict/gaza-news/article-777031

Edited December 18, 2023 by whYNOT

[whYNOT]

17 hours ago, AlexL said:

But first of all, try to get some solid facts. Don’t do like @whYNOT in the Russian Aggression Against Ukraine thread, where he showed to be blatantly unaware of real facts and was following instead the opinions of, mostly notorious, pro-Putin propagandists.

12 hours ago, whYNOT said:

 

 

And how's that working out for ya? Those "solid facts" - detached from reality?

Can you see what's happened to Ukraine, resulting from the arrogant Western refusals to talk turkey with Putin who was (FACT) ready and willing to do so, at the - much lesser - cost of some concessions?

The war which NATO/the West provoked and/or anticipated that never had to occur. The biggest lie of all: that Satan, "Putin" was on his way into Europe, next.

So cling to your 'facts' in the face of this (most predictable) outcome.

 

Edited December 18, 2023 by whYNOT

[AlexL]

37 minutes ago, whYNOT said:

And how's that working out for ya? Those "solid facts" - detached from reality?

It is working perfectly: none of my claims were disproved.