Was: Israel is at War; Now: Scoopers diagnose your anti-Semitism

[Not all scoop users are created equal apparently]

Hey I finally figured out the ignore function at least!

[tower912]

May it bring you serenity.

[Pakuni]

Like I mentioned earlier, Qatar is already fighting in Syria against Islamists, the allies of Hamas.

I believe you're mistaken on two fronts here.
I don't think Qatar's military is not fighting in the Syrian Civil War (correct me if I'm mistaken). They are giving tons of support and funding to moderate rebel forces, but they are not a direct participant.
Second, they're not fighting Islamists, they're fighting the Assad regime.

[Skatastrophy]

I believe you're mistaken on two fronts here.
I don't think Qatar's military is not fighting in the Syrian Civil War (correct me if I'm mistaken). They are giving tons of support and funding to moderate rebel forces, but they are not a direct participant.
Second, they're not fighting Islamists, they're fighting the Assad regime.

All I know is from Wikipedia, honestly. Qatar had (has) direct military involvement against ISIL in Syria for a conflict that's not over, but also is largely undefined - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_against_the_Islamic_State

> Starting on 22 September 2014, the U.S., Bahrain, Jordan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates began numerous large-scale airstrikes against ISIL targets in Syria[175] with fighters, bombers, and sea-based Tomahawk cruise missiles.[176] The strikes were the largest aerial bombing operations launched against IS targets since US launched its military campaign against IS in August 2014

As far as I know, the bombings have continued and Qatari aircraft have been involved (with the big Qatar air base coordinating stuff https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Udeid_Air_Base)

[Heisenberg]

You clearly put in absolutely zero effort into those claims of no comment. Literally googling "IDF" shows a large spectrum of articles reporting that they confirmed the strike on the refugee camp. But here's some help since you seem to need it for anything not narrowly in the crosshairs of confirming your delusions.

https://abcnews.go.com/International/live-updates/israel-gaza-egypt-russia-airport/?id=104468652

You really are not a serious person

CNN's Wolf Blitzer: You knew that there were innocent civilians in that refugee camp, right?

IDF spox: This is the tragedy of war. We told them to move south.

Blitzer: So you decided to drop the bomb anyway.

IDF spox: We're doing everything we can to minimize civilian deaths.

----

They bombed the camp as a Hamas commander was hiding among the refugees. That is a war crime by Hamas, a violation of Article 29 of the Geneva Convention.


Isreal have been very clear about this, and I have said for many weeks this was coming.

Israel views this as a war for their survival.

Israel gave a warning. No one moved, so they died. Israel is no longer f**king around. Hamas has 30,000 to 40,000 fighters, so Isreal has the goal of killing 30,000 to 40,000 Hamas fighters, and everyone else better get out of the way.

Where are they going to go? That is Hamas's problem; Hamas started this, and as the Government of Gaza, it is their job to protect their citizens. Israel's job is to kill Hamas and keep civilian casualties to a minimum, but, again, the presence of civilians is no longer stopping Israel from its mission. Warning: if you do not move, you die.

The Allies firebombed Dresden.


A tragedy and within the rules of war. And unfortunately, this will happen again until Hamas is destroyed.

The is why war is ugly, and Hamas should have thought about this before they provoked this response.

[Heisenberg]

International Red Cross Rules of war

https://www.icrc.org/en/document/ihl-rules-of-war-faq-geneva-conventions

The laws of war prohibit direct attacks on civilian objects, like schools. They also prohibit direct attacks against hospitals and medical staff, which are specially protected under IHL. That said, a hospital or school may become a legitimate military target if it contributes to specific military operations of the enemy and if its destruction offers a definite military advantage for the attacking side.

Hamas was hiding commanders and weapons in the Jabalya refugee camp. Per the rules of war, that made it a legitimate target and a war crime by Hamas.

Israel was not required to give a warning to the civilians in the camp. They did. The civilians did not move. They are dead. It is terrible, but war is terrible.

[Pakuni]

All I know is from Wikipedia, honestly. Qatar had (has) direct military involvement against ISIL in Syria for a conflict that's not over, but also is largely undefined - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_against_the_Islamic_State

> Starting on 22 September 2014, the U.S., Bahrain, Jordan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates began numerous large-scale airstrikes against ISIL targets in Syria[175] with fighters, bombers, and sea-based Tomahawk cruise missiles.[176] The strikes were the largest aerial bombing operations launched against IS targets since US launched its military campaign against IS in August 2014

As far as I know, the bombings have continued and Qatari aircraft have been involved (with the big Qatar air base coordinating stuff https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Udeid_Air_Base)

OK, I think we're talking about separate but related things.
When you said the Qataris are fighting in Syria, I took it to mean they're presently fighting in the current iteration of the Syrian Civil War. I've found no evidence of that, just  that they're supplying weapons and money to the anti-Assad rebels.
You're talking about past military action against ISIS, which largely has been out of the picture for 5+ years now.

[21Jumpstreet]

International Red Cross Rules of war

https://www.icrc.org/en/document/ihl-rules-of-war-faq-geneva-conventions

The laws of war prohibit direct attacks on civilian objects, like schools. They also prohibit direct attacks against hospitals and medical staff, which are specially protected under IHL. That said, a hospital or school may become a legitimate military target if it contributes to specific military operations of the enemy and if its destruction offers a definite military advantage for the attacking side.

Hamas was hiding commanders and weapons in the Jabalya refugee camp. Per the rules of war, that made it a legitimate target and a war crime by Hamas.

Israel was not required to give a warning to the civilians in the camp. They did. The civilians did not move. They are dead. It is terrible, but war is terrible.

I think your bolded part makes it very clear why this is a legitimate and complicated discussion. Lots of subjective words that lead to a subjective bombing.

That being said, I do understand that war is brutal, deadly, unwavering, and unapologetic. That's why I prefer not to go to war and pacifism. Not ignoring or dealing with threats, just minimal violence. After listening to a Sam Harris podcast yesterday, I can understand your feelings. He was very clear of radical Islam's threat to the world and that radical Islam thinks and believes differently than the rest of the world. This sort of harkens back to your point of western progressive arrogance.

That also being said, you say Hamas is responsible for the protection of the Gazans as they are in power. We both know they have no desire to protect the populace, so where does the responsibility then lie? Do the Israelis have any responsibility to open its borders, bomb the hell out of Gaza, then move them back? Or, does that fall under Israeli "occupation" or control? I'm not sure.

That's why I think the response is tricky. We know Hamas will not protect the innocent Gazans. We know Israel needs to respond with force. Why don't we do everything we can to keep innocent civilians alive?

[jesmu84]

It's "western progressive conceit" to not want civilians to be murdered during war?

I don't know, and neither does anyone else, whether Israel is intentionally targeting innocent civilians.

But it's not ridiculous to ask if they are and then condemn they if they do.

As above, there's apparent evidence that there were Hamas among the refugees camp. That's evidence of military and somewhat supports bombing there.

Asking for evidence of all the other seemingly innocent sites isn't an absurd notion

[Skatastrophy]

OK, I think we're talking about separate but related things.
When you said the Qataris are fighting in Syria, I took it to mean they're presently fighting in the current iteration of the Syrian Civil War. I've found no evidence of that, just  that they're supplying weapons and money to the anti-Assad rebels.
You're talking about past military action against ISIS, which largely has been out of the picture for 5+ years now.

Got it, understood.

Point still stands that Qatar has joind coalitions against Islamic terror groups with our NATO allies and likely will again. NATO has taken sides in the conflict, and so I think we know which side Qatar will fall to when pushed.

On the other hand, I'm surprised more people aren't assassinated. Maybe the documentary NCIS lied to me about the frequency of unsanctioned actions on foreign soil.

[Heisenberg]

I think your bolded part makes it very clear why this is a legitimate and complicated discussion. Lots of subjective words that lead to a subjective bombing.

That being said, I do understand that war is brutal, deadly, unwavering, and unapologetic. That's why I prefer not to go to war and pacifism. Not ignoring or dealing with threats, just minimal violence. After listening to a Sam Harris podcast yesterday, I can understand your feelings. He was very clear of radical Islam's threat to the world and that radical Islam thinks and believes differently than the rest of the world. This sort of harkens back to your point of western progressive arrogance.

That also being said, you say Hamas is responsible for the protection of the Gazans as they are in power. We both know they have no desire to protect the populace, so where does the responsibility then lie? Do the Israelis have any responsibility to open its borders, bomb the hell out of Gaza, then move them back? Or, does that fall under Israeli "occupation" or control? I'm not sure.

That's why I think the response is tricky. We know Hamas will not protect the innocent Gazans. We know Israel needs to respond with force. Why don't we do everything we can to keep innocent civilians alive?

Good post, and you're right. Sam Harris indeed had an excellent essay on the sin of Moral Equivalence.

https://www.samharris.org/podcasts/making-sense-episodes/338-the-sin-of-moral-equivalence

He drives home the point that incompatible worldviews will never be compatible. And the worst thing we can do is make a moral equivalence of the two.

---
My add

And these views will be in perpetual conflict, constantly killing each other until the end of time, until one side prevails over the other.

And since these two sides cannot co-exist, I've asked which side you are on. You have to pick one. There is no middle ground, or the middle ground is constant war and death, and that is untenable. 

[Pakuni]

Good post, and you're right. Sam Harris indeed had an excellent essay on the sin of Moral Equivalence.

https://www.samharris.org/podcasts/making-sense-episodes/338-the-sin-of-moral-equivalence

He drives home the point that incompatible worldviews will never be compatible. And the worst thing we can do is make a moral equivalence of the two.

---
My add

And these views will be in perpetual conflict, constantly killing each other until the end of time, until one side prevails over the other.

And since these two sides cannot co-exist, I've asked which side you are on. You have to pick one. There is no middle ground, or the middle ground is constant war and death, and that is untenable.

Sam Harris preaching about sin? Did. Not. Expect.
Anyhow, you're offering a false choice here. Logically and literally.

[Not all scoop users are created equal apparently]

It's "western progressive conceit" to not want civilians to be murdered during war?

I don't know, and neither does anyone else, whether Israel is intentionally targeting innocent civilians.

But it's not ridiculous to ask if they are and then condemn they if they do.

As above, there's apparent evidence that there were Hamas among the refugees camp. That's evidence of military and somewhat supports bombing there.

Asking for evidence of all the other seemingly innocent sites isn't an absurd notion

I just don't think you can convince me that evidence of an adversarial presence in a refugee camp is justification for vaporizing the entirety of it, civilians and all. But as you might have seen by earlier posts, I tend to be on the side of no collective punishment is acceptable in current modern warfare.

But we can agree to disagree there.

[forgetful]

CNN's Wolf Blitzer: You knew that there were innocent civilians in that refugee camp, right?

IDF spox: This is the tragedy of war. We told them to move south.

Blitzer: So you decided to drop the bomb anyway.

IDF spox: We're doing everything we can to minimize civilian deaths.

It is called a war crime.

And saying they told them to move south. Forced mass relocation of people, is also a war crime.

And they are bombing the south too. They also have blocked the only road south, and have fired on any vehicles going down the road.

So how do they leave? And where to?

Regarding Hamas leaders being in the refugee camp. Israel has bombed leaders in their homes, despite them being in civilian centers. It is not a violation of the Geneva Convention for people to be in their own homes.

[MuggsyB]

How considerate of Yale to censor a pro Israel editorial in their student newspaper. 

[Skatastrophy]

I just don't think you can convince me that evidence of an adversarial presence in a refugee camp is justification for vaporizing the entirety of it, civilians and all. But as you might have seen by earlier posts, I tend to be on the side of no collective punishment is acceptable in current modern warfare.

But we can agree to disagree there.

According to Reuters Israel killed 50 Palestinians and a Hamas commander at Jabalia Camp, Palestine said another 150 wounded.

Israel did not vaporize the entirety of a refugee camp. Jabalia Camp houses over 116,000.

Bombing a target and hitting civilians isn't collective punishment. That's just war.

[Pakuni]

According to Reuters Israel killed 50 Palestinians and a Hamas commander at Jabalia Camp, Palestine said another 150 wounded.

Israel did not vaporize the entirety of a refugee camp. Jabalia Camp houses over 116,000.

Bombing a target and hitting civilians isn't collective punishment. That's just war.

Killing 50 civilians to get one Hamas leader seems to fit the definition.

1 Collective punishment is a form of sanction imposed on persons or a group of persons in response to a crime committed by one of them or a member of the group

https://opil.ouplaw.com/display/10.1093/law:epil/9780199231690/law-9780199231690-e269#law-9780199231690-e269-div1-1

[Not all scoop users are created equal apparently]

According to Reuters Israel killed 50 Palestinians and a Hamas commander at Jabalia Camp, Palestine said another 150 wounded.

Israel did not vaporize the entirety of a refugee camp. Jabalia Camp houses over 116,000.

Bombing a target and hitting civilians isn't collective punishment. That's just war.

"They didn't kill everyone, just dozens. Ends justify the means". Still a war crime brotha

[Not all scoop users are created equal apparently]

Killing 50 civilians to get one Hamas leader seems to fit the definition.

1 Collective punishment is a form of sanction imposed on persons or a group of persons in response to a crime committed by one of them or a member of the group

https://opil.ouplaw.com/display/10.1093/law:epil/9780199231690/law-9780199231690-e269#law-9780199231690-e269-div1-1

I mean in their defense we used "that's just war" for similar body to combatant counts in Afghanistan/Iraq.

[Heisenberg]

It is called a war crime.

And saying they told them to move south. Forced mass relocation of people, is also a war crime.

And they are bombing the south too. They also have blocked the only road south, and have fired on any vehicles going down the road.

So how do they leave? And where to?

Regarding Hamas leaders being in the refugee camp. Israel has bombed leaders in their homes, despite them being in civilian centers. It is not a violation of the Geneva Convention for people to be in their own homes.

Do you believe Hamas uses human shields? 

[4everwarriors]

Killing 50 civilians to get one Hamas leader seems to fit the definition.

1 Collective punishment is a form of sanction imposed on persons or a group of persons in response to a crime committed by one of them or a member of the group

https://opil.ouplaw.com/display/10.1093/law:epil/9780199231690/law-9780199231690-e269#law-9780199231690-e269-div1-1

To be fair da IDF failed to ax, "captain may I."  More mushy, stinky, brown matta between da ears of those who don't understand its fookin' war. Its not a video game, hey?

[Skatastrophy]

Killing 50 civilians to get one Hamas leader seems to fit the definition.

1 Collective punishment is a form of sanction imposed on persons or a group of persons in response to a crime committed by one of them or a member of the group

https://opil.ouplaw.com/display/10.1093/law:epil/9780199231690/law-9780199231690-e269#law-9780199231690-e269-div1-1

It doesn't fit the definition (I am not a lawyer)

https://casebook.icrc.org/a_to_z/glossary/collective-punishments

> The term refers not only to criminal punishment, but also to other types of sanctions, harassment or administrative action taken against a group in retaliation for an act committed by an individual/s who are considered to form part of the group.

It's not referring to bombing during a war. Bombing is not a judicial or administrative action. Civilians are just collateral damage, always have been.

"They didn't kill everyone, just dozens. Ends justify the means". Still a war crime brotha

Plaque Lives Matter (you) mentioned they vaporized the camp. I was pointing out that it's hyperbole for the casual war fan

> I just don't think you can convince me that evidence of an adversarial presence in a refugee camp is justification for vaporizing the entirety of it

Make better points I guess

[Pakuni]

To be fair da IDF failed to ax, "captain may I."  More mushy, stinky, brown matta between da ears of those who don't understand its fookin' war. Its not a video game, hey?

Same rationalization as the perpetrators of Oct. 7.
Mediocre minds think alike, aina?

[Pakuni]

It doesn't fit the definition (I am not a lawyer)

https://casebook.icrc.org/a_to_z/glossary/collective-punishments

> The term refers not only to criminal punishment, but also to other types of sanctions, harassment or administrative action taken against a group in retaliation for an act committed by an individual/s who are considered to form part of the group.

It's not referring to bombing during a war. Bombing is not a judicial or administrative action. Civilians are just collateral damage, always have been.

Killing isn't a form of sanction?
Seriously? Any actual support for this belief?

Pakuni mentioned they vaporized the camp. I was pointing out that it's hyperbole for the casual war fan

I said nothing of the sort.

[Skatastrophy]

Killing isn't a form of sanction?
Seriously? Any actual support for this belief?

Bombing in a war has never been prosecuted as collective punishment.

I said nothing of the sort.

Plaque lives matter said it, I'll edit above. That's pretty funny that they're arguing around their own point, made me think someone else must have said it.