Kolek planning to go pro
Yeah, certainly rape and beheadin' babies is much kinder, aina?
They’re not raping women and beheading infants
A dead kid is still dead. Plus most of what you're talking about was fabricated, and has been debunked.I'm not excusing any behavior, but certainly both sides are very responsible for committing war crimes.
And there’s more and more of them dying with every passing day, with our direct assistance and approval.https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-68881325.amp
Man, that article is tough to parse and a real Rorschach test. I separate the hospital issue and Rafah offensive. Re the hospital piece, if the IDF's numbers on killed and detained Hamas militants are accurate, that's the most important fact for me. As far as I've read, it is widely accepted that Hamas used tunnels under and around Al-Shifa. It sucks that the legitimate medical professionals were subjected to interrogation, but if Hamas militants are using hospitals to shield their operations and trying to blend into a hospital setting, the IDF can't just say "welp, its a hospital, can't go there."
I dunno man. Women and children execution style doesn’t really ever have a “ends justify the means” level does it?
Yet you automatically assume that the IDF is executing the elderly and women/children?The IDF has certainly been reckless and wanton in their bombings and killed many civilians in pursuit of their targets, but the side pointing fingers at the IDF "executing" civilians and dumping them in a mass grave...is the one that executed hundreds of civilians at close range, many while bound and gagged. So Hamas directly accusing the IDF of doing that is amusing.Also, that article literally states the UN didn't have evidence to corroborate the story and it was coming from Hamas...which was also unsubstantiated. There is plenty to criticize Israel about as this continues to drag on without gobbling up Hamas driven hearsay
Yeah, this is where I was coming from and why I thought that article read like a Rorschach test. I had to read it multiple times to understand what had been substantiated and what was just rumor. If the IDF were executing women and children in cold blood, that would obviously be straight up evil. But I haven't seen any reason to believe that is happening, nor, for example, that the IDF intentionally targeted the World Central Kitchen convoy (this is a great article on that - https://apnews.com/article/israel-palestinians-aid-workers-killed-2d08786a9839dfc402632c7ca745acca). Like you said Wags, Israel needs to be criticized on a number of fronts - insufficient discrimination between Hamas and civilian targets, siege-style warfare leading to starvation, and military forays into areas they had themselves previously designated as civilian retreat zones. But this notion that they are tying up and executing civilians and dumping them in mass graves is dangerous misinformation.
Are you suggesting they didn’t find a mass grave by a hospital that had been under siege for weeks full of people bound, in medical clothing, and with medical devices still attached to them?
The existence of these graves are not misinformation. But went with Occam's Razor based on the details of the article.
No one is suggesting the graves aren't real. If you carefully read the article, the IDF says they never buried anyone, except for already-buried bodies they exhumed when searching for dead Israeli hostages. Hamas themselves acknowledges that a "large number of people were buried in makeshift cemetaries" by Palestinians, becuase they accuse the IDF of treating those bodies poorly. Its quite a jump to "the IDF is executing innocents and dumping them in mass graves." That jump isn't Occam's Razor, its confirmation bias.
For you and JWags, at what point does Israel not get the benefit of the doubt. They never provide evidence of their claims, have been caught in numerous lies, and leaks indicate that they have completely disregarded civilian casualties.No other nation in the world would be given this much leeway with so many documented atrocities committed. The only reason there aren't security council resolutions condemning their actions is because the US vetoes them.
I guess I would say first that I disagree with the bolded. Because of the US's relationship with Israel, we think that Israel somehow has a privileged status in the international community - but that isn't true. Israel is the most condemned nation at the UN. Depending on the eye of the beholder, you can take that as either evidence of Israel's consistent wrongdoing or a commentary on the value of UN condemnation, but its not like Israel "gets away" with things other countries don't. And I'm not sure what "getting leeway" would mean, anyway. Like - should the international community levy economic sanctions against Israel for its actions in Gaza? Between paying lip service to "Israel's right to defend itself" and saying that the security counsel should pass condemning resolutions, there is a lot of vague posturing without any real moral clarity on how Israel should be proceeding. For me the question isn't when should Israel stop getting the benefit of the doubt, its - whats the alternative? Take the Gaza hospital situation. We know Hamas siphons aid away from the Gazan people to fund its militant goals and operates in tunnels under hospitals (if not also blending into hospital environments above ground). Its a really weird solution to say "but because its a hospital, that is off limits for Israel, we just have to keep letting Hamas do that." As I mentioned, Israel is absolutely doing a piss poor job defining realistic victory conditions and increasingly at sufficiently minimizing collateral damage. But at the end of the day, you have to default to one of "Israel has a right to defend itself" or "Israel shouldn't get the benefit of the doubt" more than the other. For me, its the former until their modus operandi is morally worse than the vision put forward by their enemies. And we aren't there.
At what point are they no better than Hamas, when they act in that way?
I hate to tell you that using the excuse of, "well they did it also" isn't a great one when you're trying to defend horrible actions. One group involved is a government entity and the other is a terrorist organization. The world should PROBABLY hold one of them to a higher standard. Bombing places into rubble to kill one or two fighters with the knowledge that there are civilians inside is still kinda murderous. Israel can claim that Hamas uses human shields in any building they want to destroy and as long as they say, "well there was a terrorist in there" they're allowed to annihilate it... who cares if women and children are maimed, disfigured, or turned into a red mist as long as they got their guy!
I guess I would say first that I disagree with the bolded. Because of the US's relationship with Israel, we think that Israel somehow has a privileged status in the international community - but that isn't true. Israel is the most condemned nation at the UN. Depending on the eye of the beholder, you can take that as either evidence of Israel's consistent wrongdoing or a commentary on the value of UN condemnation, but its not like Israel "gets away" with things other countries don't.
And I'm not sure what "getting leeway" would mean, anyway. Like - should the international community levy economic sanctions against Israel for its actions in Gaza? Between paying lip service to "Israel's right to defend itself" and saying that the security counsel should pass condemning resolutions, there is a lot of vague posturing without any real moral clarity on how Israel should be proceeding.
For me the question isn't when should Israel stop getting the benefit of the doubt, its - whats the alternative? Take the Gaza hospital situation. We know Hamas siphons aid away from the Gazan people to fund its militant goals and operates in tunnels under hospitals (if not also blending into hospital environments above ground). Its a really weird solution to say "but because its a hospital, that is off limits for Israel, we just have to keep letting Hamas do that." As I mentioned, Israel is absolutely doing a piss poor job defining realistic victory conditions and increasingly at sufficiently minimizing collateral damage. But at the end of the day, you have to default to one of "Israel has a right to defend itself" or "Israel shouldn't get the benefit of the doubt" more than the other. For me, its the former until their modus operandi is morally worse than the vision put forward by their enemies. And we aren't there.
Hamas attacked Israel on Oct. 7. War's a bitch. Sometimes you're the hydrant and sometimes you're the dog. Israel would have squashed Hamas in a NY minute if Blinken and Biden/Obama would STFU, aina?
I'm not using the "well they also did it" as an excuse. I'm using it, as Burrow alluded to, in highlighting the fact that the claims are being made directly by Hamas. And without firm evidence to support the allegations against Israel, the burden of proof is on the accuser and that's literal terrorists.I already said their bombing is reckless and too heavy handed. Even reasonable supporters of Israel can admit that. But thats a far cry from accepting Hamas at their word without substantiating evidence because you think the IDF is horrible. Like Burrow said, its not a soverign nation/government thats reporting from the other side. Its Hamas, and people are just glossing over it cause "Israhell bad!"
Look how well the US accomplished its mission in Iraq and Afghanistan. We pissed all over that fire hydrant and what do we have to show for it. The US spent trillions of dollars, thousands of lives and decades to prove that you can't kill all the extremists. You just create more.But you're not exactly a historian, are you?