10 ms·

It's the IDF soldiers singing about genocide while they're committing ethnic cleansing, as high ranking officials condone genocide and/or ethnic cleansing, that

It's the IDF soldiers singing about genocide while they're committing ethnic cleansing, as high ranking officials condone genocide and/or ethnic cleansing, that is the issue. 80% of the currently catastrophic hungry in the world are in Gaza, right now. Every hour of time that can be played for causes death, predictably so. Those hospitals that haven't been damaged or destroyed have no fuel or electricity to operate. Just turning off water and enforcing mass starvation isn't "fighting Hamas". It's committing atrocities, if not genocide, while betting that people will simply shrug and blame it on Hamas after the people were murdered, directly or indirectly in even larger numbers. Calling that the playbook isn't just an idle accusation, this has predictive power, since every mention of Israeli crimes against civilians is hardly even looked at before deflecting at Hamas, time and time again.

vasilipupkin 3y ago
there is no doubt that the situation in Gaza is tragic, no argument there But you have to engage with a simplest of facts: two sides are fighting a war in Gaza, right now, two armies. You can't put all the blame on suffering of civilians on Israel because it's a war that Israel didn't start. Israel can't easily stop this war because Hamas has publicly vowed to repeat October 7th again and again and again, a million times if necessary. But Hamas can stop this war and suffering of civilians literally any time by surrendering. I keep hearing the water argument. The water was turned back on first of all, but secondly it's absolutely astonishing to me that people take it as given that Israel has full responsibility to provide water to Palestininans, but Hamas, their own government, does not. I think it's absurd to treat Palestinians and Hamas specifically as if they are children, as if they are unable to make choices and bear responsibility for those choices.
- runarberg 3y ago
  Gaza is not an autonomous region, but an occupied territory. This is not a war like the Russian invasion into Ukraine but a military operation which the Israel Army is conducting inside territory it controls. This was made abundantly clear at the public hearings in the Hague last Thursday. The IDF does not have any claims to self defense nor acts of war when it is fighting against Hamas. So, yes, you can indeed put all the blame on the suffering of civilians on Israel, because they controlled this territory before, during, and after oct. 7. The conduct of the Israel army should not be compared to an army that is fighting a war, like the Russian or the Ukrainian armies. Rather it should be compared to armies which act to maintain an occupation, like that of the British army in Northern Ireland during the Troubles.
  - vasilipupkin 3y ago
    It's an absurd claim because Israel completely pulled out of Gaza in 2005 but was subsequently forced to take measures to defend itself when Hamas started firing rockets at Israel. Egypt is also blockading Gaza, why do you think that is? Your claim that Hamas should be able to attack Israel with impunity and kill Israelis at will and Israel has no right to self defense is completely absurd. No sovereign state would leave such an attack unanswered and Israel is no different. Regardless of what you think, of course Israel will defend itself. As to whether it was "made abundantly clear" just because this is your interpretation it doesn't follow that it's abundantly clear. In fact the opposite is abundantly clear, that every state has inherent rights to defend its own citizens from being murdered by hostile armed groups.
    - runarberg 3y ago
      There was a debate on another thread whether Gaza can correctly be categorized as occupied territory, and I’ve seen multiple denials of that fact elsewhere (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38985147 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38985147). > Your claim that Hamas should be able to attack Israel with impunity and kill Israelis at will and Israel has no right to self defense I never claimed that. It is just that any action Israel takes as a result is not war, but rather counter terrorism or counter insurgency. The British army also had to deal with terrorist groups from their occupied territory during the troubles, when they responded by firing live ammo into unarmed demonstrator, there were consequences. Ultimately the British failed to land a military victory over the terrorists, and finally ended their occupation over Northern Ireland with an agreement. Israel’s conduct here is as if the British army would have doubled down after Bloody Sunday, say by imposing a blockade, conducting bombing campaigns, and as the IRA’s terror would respond in kind, invade the territory with mass civilian casualties. What I’m saying is that Israel cannot act as if it has no control over what goes on in Gaza. Their conduct has to match their possibilities. And ending the occupation is one option which they have, but aren’t exploring.
      - vasilipupkin 3y ago
        British Army and the IRA is not a relevant example. At no point did IRA want to destroy all of Britain and kill all British people. IRA phoned in bomb threats. It's a totally different situation. Hamas has 30 thousand fighters and its goal is actual destruction of Israel. Again, Israel ended the occupation of Gaza in 2005, it withdrew from Gaza and removed all settlements. The only thing that accomplished is worsen Israeli security, provided Hamas with a base to fire thousands of rockets from and ultimately culminated in October 7th. So, Israel is left with no options other than a full war against Hamas and yes, it is a war. Since Hamas is the official government in control of Gaza it is most definitely a war. If you prefer to call it armed conflict instead of war, that's fine, it doesn't change the reality of what's happening.

vasilipupkin 3y ago

there is no doubt that the situation in Gaza is tragic, no argument there But you have to engage with a simplest of facts: two sides are fighting a war in Gaza, right now, two armies. You can't put all the blame on suffering of civilians on Israel because it's a war that Israel didn't start. Israel can't easily stop this war because Hamas has publicly vowed to repeat October 7th again and again and again, a million times if necessary. But Hamas can stop this war and suffering of civilians literally any time by surrendering. I keep hearing the water argument. The water was turned back on first of all, but secondly it's absolutely astonishing to me that people take it as given that Israel has full responsibility to provide water to Palestininans, but Hamas, their own government, does not. I think it's absurd to treat Palestinians and Hamas specifically as if they are children, as if they are unable to make choices and bear responsibility for those choices.

runarberg 3y ago
Gaza is not an autonomous region, but an occupied territory. This is not a war like the Russian invasion into Ukraine but a military operation which the Israel Army is conducting inside territory it controls. This was made abundantly clear at the public hearings in the Hague last Thursday. The IDF does not have any claims to self defense nor acts of war when it is fighting against Hamas. So, yes, you can indeed put all the blame on the suffering of civilians on Israel, because they controlled this territory before, during, and after oct. 7. The conduct of the Israel army should not be compared to an army that is fighting a war, like the Russian or the Ukrainian armies. Rather it should be compared to armies which act to maintain an occupation, like that of the British army in Northern Ireland during the Troubles.
- vasilipupkin 3y ago
  It's an absurd claim because Israel completely pulled out of Gaza in 2005 but was subsequently forced to take measures to defend itself when Hamas started firing rockets at Israel. Egypt is also blockading Gaza, why do you think that is? Your claim that Hamas should be able to attack Israel with impunity and kill Israelis at will and Israel has no right to self defense is completely absurd. No sovereign state would leave such an attack unanswered and Israel is no different. Regardless of what you think, of course Israel will defend itself. As to whether it was "made abundantly clear" just because this is your interpretation it doesn't follow that it's abundantly clear. In fact the opposite is abundantly clear, that every state has inherent rights to defend its own citizens from being murdered by hostile armed groups.
  - runarberg 3y ago
    There was a debate on another thread whether Gaza can correctly be categorized as occupied territory, and I’ve seen multiple denials of that fact elsewhere (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38985147 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38985147). > Your claim that Hamas should be able to attack Israel with impunity and kill Israelis at will and Israel has no right to self defense I never claimed that. It is just that any action Israel takes as a result is not war, but rather counter terrorism or counter insurgency. The British army also had to deal with terrorist groups from their occupied territory during the troubles, when they responded by firing live ammo into unarmed demonstrator, there were consequences. Ultimately the British failed to land a military victory over the terrorists, and finally ended their occupation over Northern Ireland with an agreement. Israel’s conduct here is as if the British army would have doubled down after Bloody Sunday, say by imposing a blockade, conducting bombing campaigns, and as the IRA’s terror would respond in kind, invade the territory with mass civilian casualties. What I’m saying is that Israel cannot act as if it has no control over what goes on in Gaza. Their conduct has to match their possibilities. And ending the occupation is one option which they have, but aren’t exploring.
    - vasilipupkin 3y ago
      British Army and the IRA is not a relevant example. At no point did IRA want to destroy all of Britain and kill all British people. IRA phoned in bomb threats. It's a totally different situation. Hamas has 30 thousand fighters and its goal is actual destruction of Israel. Again, Israel ended the occupation of Gaza in 2005, it withdrew from Gaza and removed all settlements. The only thing that accomplished is worsen Israeli security, provided Hamas with a base to fire thousands of rockets from and ultimately culminated in October 7th. So, Israel is left with no options other than a full war against Hamas and yes, it is a war. Since Hamas is the official government in control of Gaza it is most definitely a war. If you prefer to call it armed conflict instead of war, that's fine, it doesn't change the reality of what's happening.