• @galloog1@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      32 years ago

      How do you suggest they take out Hamas otherwise? Just saying so doesn’t solve the problem that simultaneously forces Palistinians under leadership they did not vote for and ensures future and sustained terror attacks directed against the civilian population of Israel as they’ve experienced the last 17 years.

      Inaction is not a viable option anymore. Urban fighting favors the defender so sending in light infantry is suicide. Sending in light infantry supported by indirect fire is less suicide but worse for the civilians because it is slower and ensures the city is destroyed block by block a la Aleppo or Mosul.

      I’m getting really tired of these reactionary responses by people who have never had to plan urban combat before. Literally every army on earth would do the same as Israel right now and it is overall legal.

      • @xenomor@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        232 years ago

        How about they take meaningful action legitimize Palestinian existence within Israel, end the apartheid and work out a plan for restitution? That would evaporate any shreds of support for Hamas nearly overnight and make it significantly easier to locate, and bring the terrorists to justice. Oh, and they could try to not actively promote and fund Hamas. That method would also have the side benefit of a lot fewer dead babies.

        • @galloog1@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -52 years ago

          I agree on many points but it’s also important to consider that 18% of Israel’s population is Palistinian. If Palistinian statehood is the goal, apartheid implies that they should be fully integrated. I don’t see either side ever fully accepting a minority solution. Inability to come to a full agreement on this situation is the issue. There’s a lot more nuisance in terms of resources and access that definitely lean more to the Palistinian narrative but most of the responses and perverse incentives center around violence.

          If Israel attempts to work with Palistinians, they inherently have to work with their government as it is not an occupation. Any funding or humanitarian aid for Palestine is funding for Hamas until they are fully removed. I think the Israel’s agree with you on this one.

      • @interceder270@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        19
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        Boots on the ground.

        Soldiers should risk their lives to save children.

        Or if that’s too much to ask, maybe negotiate? Try to talk with the people they’ve been blockading since 2007. See how they can make gaza less of a shithole so the people there have better things to do than lash out at the people who keep them there.

        It’ll cost money, but Israel has plenty.

        • @galloog1@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -72 years ago

          It’ll cost lives and they won’t succeed. They’ll fall back on indirect fire talking out entire buildings but now unable to be more selective.

          Negotiating was what they were doing and it seemed to be working. All they were doing was use the time to build up resources for their massive terror attack. Prior to 2007 they were on the way to peace and then Hamas was elected.

          There is literally no other option to remove Hamas. Prior to the current weapon set armies would simply level the city. That is so very much worse and also legal.

          • NoneOfUrBusiness
            link
            fedilink
            72 years ago

            All they were doing was use the time to build up resources for their massive terror attack. Prior to 2007 they were on the way to peace and then Hamas was elected.

            This is bullshit. First, Hamas was elected in 2006, not 2007. And second, the blockade started in 2005, not in 2007. There’s more, but yeah this is bullshit.

            • @galloog1@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              -12 years ago

              Yes, Israel and Egypt set up borders after they left the occupation of Gaza as they moved towards sovereignty. That’s how international borders work. It’s not an apartheid state unless you don’t defacto recognize Palistinian independence if not statehood.

              The Israeli side won’t say as much because they don’t want to legitimate Hamas but it really is that simple to me.

              • NoneOfUrBusiness
                link
                fedilink
                12 years ago

                Gaza has never been sovereign. After 2005 the occupation continued in the form of the Gaza blockade. We’re not talking just borders here; the blockade extends to the air and sea (Gaza has its own coast on the Mediterranean).

        • @galloog1@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          02 years ago

          Legal, ethical, and moral within the laws and context of armed conflict, both in the moment and as policy.

          • @conditional_soup@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            52 years ago

            Nobody ever thinks that they’re the bad guy. Any damn fool can cook up a justification to themselves for doing the wrong thing.

            “You just don’t understand, this time it’s different” -every single time.

            • @galloog1@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              02 years ago

              Even when you do the right thing, it only matters if people know you did it truth or no truth. I’m over trusting that doing the right thing matters anymore in my life. It never did because disinformers will always take advantage of your silence and delay in telling the whole story.

              Ever notice how quick Hamas is to have a narrative concerning events and Israel waits until they have evidence and simply provides a policy narrative otherwise? This is how trust is gained.

              • TheDankHold
                link
                fedilink
                12 years ago

                Idk Israel is pretty quick to blame Hamas when they snipe journalists.

      • @ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        6
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        There’s a disconnect between inevitable military reality and many people’s views of the situation which I don’t understand.

        Hamas has to be embedded among the civilian population of Gaza or Israel would have already destroyed them with bombs and artillery. The rockets that Hamas has are purely a terror weapon and they would be completely ineffective in an artillery duel.

        Israel has to use bombs and artillery anyway because, as you say, attacking light infantry would be torn apart against an entrenched enemy in an urban environment. Urban warfare always involves large numbers of civilians dead no matter who is fighting whom.

        Israel must seek to minimize civilian casualties (and Hamas must not) because unless Iran and Hezbollah decide to get involved after all, the only way this war ends without the destruction of Hamas is if international pressure forces Israel to stop fighting. In this context, the narrative that Israel’s policy is to deliberately target civilians isn’t just false but nonsensical - such a policy would be the most direct way for them to lose the war!

        • NoneOfUrBusiness
          link
          fedilink
          42 years ago

          In this context, the narrative that Israel’s policy is to deliberately target civilians isn’t just false but nonsensical - such a policy would be the most direct way for them to lose the war!

          Yet they’re doing it anyway. There are many examples, but the most egregious has to be literally killing civilians using sniper fire in Al-Shifa hospital and using white phosphorus.

      • @LotrOrc@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        62 years ago

        Ah yes because bombing thousands of innocent civilians has ALWAYS worked to make the opposing force more secure. It totally has not radicalized even more people and brought about more terrorists.

        We have zero evidence of more terrorists being created and an ideology growing stronger from the US fucking about and indiscriminately bombing half the Middle East.

        Why would this take Hamas out? Can ideas be murdered by dropping bombs on babies? Last time I checked the Nazis got destroyed. Are you telling me Nazis don’t exist anymore?

        • @ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          2
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          Hundreds of thousands of German and Japanese civilians were killed by American bombs during WW2, and now Nazis don’t exist anymore as a political or military power. Germany is a liberal democracy and a firm ally of the USA. The same is true about Japan.

          More recent efforts at occupation and nation-building in the Middle East have not worked as well, but they have also involved much, much less indiscriminate bombing. Israel is going to face a very difficult challenge once they successfully occupy Gaza and the time comes to build it up into a neighbor that will not be a threat to Israeli security. I don’t know what they’ll need to do in order to succeed, but although I recognize that radicalization is a real phenomenon, I still think the claim that inflicting civilian casualties during war dooms them to failure is not strongly supported by historical precedent.

          • NoneOfUrBusiness
            link
            fedilink
            12 years ago

            Hundreds of thousands of German and Japanese civilians were killed by American bombs during WW2, and now Nazis don’t exist anymore as a political or military power. Germany is a liberal democracy and a firm ally of the USA. The same is true about Japan.

            That’s because of post-war reconstruction of those countries. Like hell Israel intends to reconstruct anything in Gaza except Israeli settlements.

            I recognize that radicalization is a real phenomenon, I still think the claim that inflicting civilian casualties during war dooms them to failure is not strongly supported by historical precedent.

            It does depending on the number of casualties. People with grudges tend to want vengeance, which is how you get more Hamas.

            • @ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              2
              edit-2
              2 years ago

              The USA rebuilt West Germany but the Soviet Union subjugated East Germany. In both cases the Germans didn’t resist - their will to fight had been broken. Note that I’m not saying that Gaza will be or ought to be treated the way Germany was, just that a society’s reaction to occupation is complicated and the prediction that casualties lead to vengeance is not always correct.

              • NoneOfUrBusiness
                link
                fedilink
                0
                edit-2
                2 years ago

                I guess that’s true, but taking other examples like Vietnam, Iraq, North Ireland and Afghanistan, which are all closer to what Israel is doing, definitely led to vengeance. I guess it’s the difference between a proper fight, if you get what I mean, and just getting bombed/shot/whatever by a random guy you did nothing to.

        • @galloog1@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          0
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          Do the Nazis have a power structure anymore? I actually agree with you that the justifications are similar to the Allied coalition against fascism. Go take a look at how many civilians died in that conflict.

      • NoneOfUrBusiness
        link
        fedilink
        42 years ago

        How do you suggest they take out Hamas otherwise?

        By stopping their occupation of Gaza.

        Literally every army on earth would do the same as Israel right now and it is overall legal.

        Then why did the UN condemn it as a war crime? And why are they using white phosphorus and deliberately leading civilians to bombing targets?

        • @galloog1@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -22 years ago

          Gaza has not been occupied for over 15 years. Please get informed. This is not counter insurgency.

          White phosphorous is used for illumination and obscuration and Israel is not signatory to the conventions banning its use wholesale. Nor is Russia or the United States. Offensive use is considered illegal to use in densely populated areas but so far there is only evidence for the offensive use in less dense areas to my knowledge.

          Proving intent on deliberately leading civilians to bombing targets is going to be a high bar. Israel urged civilians to go south to avoid the heavy combat operations entering Gaza City. That doesn’t mean they are not going to strike targets in the south and pointing in that general vicinity and shouting “SEE” does not mean they deliberately misled civilians. Their goal is to minimize civilian casualties. They will be taking both the north and the south before the end. That still requires shaping operations as Hamas is moving supplies through that area and still occupies it.

          Again, literally every army on earth would do this. Some wouldn’t even warn civilians to move like we saw with Russia in Ukraine.

          • NoneOfUrBusiness
            link
            fedilink
            32 years ago

            Gaza has not been occupied for over 15 years. Please get informed. This is not counter insurgency.

            Okay, explain why almost all human rights NGOs (including the UN) say that Gaza is still occupied. This is a counter insurgency.

            Proving intent on deliberately leading civilians to bombing targets is going to be a high bar. Israel urged civilians to go south to avoid the heavy combat operations entering Gaza City

            That’s not what I’m talking about. There have been multiple incidents of Israel saying “go to this location to avoid being bombed” then bombing the location they specified. And they did the same with escape routes they specified for Gazans. I can provide links.

              • NoneOfUrBusiness
                link
                fedilink
                3
                edit-2
                2 years ago

                They do it a lot before bombing specific targets. It used to be the norm for them, but in this ethnic cleansing war they dropped it as a policy. Like “we’ll bomb the area, go to XX square to avoid being bombed”. They also announced “safe” routes for fleeing to the south so people don’t get bombed, then bombed them.

                • @galloog1@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  -12 years ago

                  I’m tired of arguing without a source. I’m still waiting on literally anyone to provide the source for when the IDF cited specific locations to go other than south.

      • @Jakeroxs@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        12 years ago

        Let me put this in perspective for you, if there was a school with an armed gunman holding a bunch of children captive, do you think the best course of action is to bomb the entire school?

        • BaroqueInMind
          link
          fedilink
          -2
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          For an edgy internet retard you make a very good and convincing argument in support of using nukes.

          You want to run for president in the USA?

      • @SirToxicAvenger@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -82 years ago

        for this and many other reasons we need autonomous robots with machine guns/grenade launchers/weapons platforms. those boston dynamics robots or something very similar. flood the streets with them - no boots on the ground, no worries. it’s more granular than saturation bombing & platoons of killer robots just sounds badass!

        • @galloog1@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          22 years ago

          I agree that it could bring about less civilian casualties but I’m mixed on the public perception. Air strikes are impersonal enough when it comes to winning the narrative and they save an order of magnitude more civilian lives in the end. A fully robotic army would turn a lot of folks against you while maybe saving more civilian and military lives. If all war is an extension of politics, perceptions are what win. The perception of who remain anyways.

  • @LotrOrc@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    252 years ago

    I keep seeing both Israel and the US say they have evidence but neither of them seem to be able or willing to show such evidence.

    That by itself should make every single person concerned, because if they actually had evidence, they would put it right out there for everyone to see. What do they gain by hiding it?

  • @UnspecificGravity@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    182 years ago

    Good thing Biden is here to be the spokesperson for Israel for some reason. Show us the evidence or fuck off, and stop buying bullets to kill children while you’re at it.

  • be_excellent_to_each_other
    link
    fedilink
    162 years ago

    Ok that’s great. Where’s the evidence that’s going to convince me it’s OK to bomb a hospital full of sick and wounded because of what Hamas is doing in their vicinity?

  • @febra@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    142 years ago

    Either show us or shut up. The White House also had evidence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. We all know how that turned out.

  • NoneOfUrBusiness
    link
    fedilink
    142 years ago

    Well then show us the evidence. And not videos of random calendars-I mean guard shift lists.

  • ShroOmeric
    link
    fedilink
    English
    132 years ago

    Cool, so they’re gonna show us… and the evidence for bombing refugee camps, and the those for bombing trucks bringing aids, they must have enough evidence to keep us busy for a couple of months with what Israel did the last month… otherwise they can fuck right off.

    • @Madison420@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      72 years ago

      Neither of those articles say that, and in fact your first article mentions Hamas firing on the hospital, not firing from.

      • pewter
        link
        fedilink
        English
        02 years ago

        That’s not true. That’s not what the article says.

        Fatah gunmen began firing mortars and rocket-propelled grenades at Shifa Hospital in Gaza City, drawing Hamas fire from inside the building, killing one Hamas and one Fatah fighter.

        According to the article, Fatah was firing on the hospital and Hamas was firing from the hospital.

        • @Madison420@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          12 years ago

          “These attacks by both Hamas and Fatah constitute brutal assaults on the most fundamental humanitarian principles,”

          It says both. They fired at hamas, hamas fled to a safe zone and the Fatah fired on the hospital… And hamas returned fire.

          • pewter
            link
            fedilink
            English
            0
            edit-2
            2 years ago

            Yes, they returned fire from the hospital.

            EDIT: the part you quoted doesn’t say who was firing from where.

            • @Madison420@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              12 years ago

              Aside from third party articles that dispute most if not all of the claims therein specifically the doctors and nurses they reference are a. Not known to be workers there, b. At least one of those doctors was under isreali detention only to be executed later.

              If you choose to believe that by all means do but don’t expect everyone else to.

              • pewter
                link
                fedilink
                English
                0
                edit-2
                2 years ago

                I can’t independently verify if the source is accurate since I wasn’t on the ground in Gaza when this happened. I’m just telling you what the article said. I don’t think it’s a good practice to lie to people about the claims that sources make.