Hamas Attacks Israel

[Fuzzy Necromancer]

Clearspira, did you perhaps miss the part where Israel was bombing civilian targets, thus killing far more babies then HAMAS? Did you not notice how Israel openly admits to cutting all supplies to the Gaza Strip thus starving innocent people and requiring hospital personnel to scavenge for gas in order to keep generators running so they don't lose patients in the ICU? Innocent people are dying and Israel is taking active steps to prevent humanitarian aid from getting to those who need it. Surely you realize these are war crimes that Israel is comitting right?

Israel is not the "good guy" in this situation, I don't know if there even is a good guy in this situation due to how complicated it is.

No he doesn't forget that. He's merely posing a question to you: Does Israel not have a right to defend themselves? Or, rather: How the hell is Israel supposed to defend itself, when their only choice is to attack civilian targets, because Hamas uses them to shield themselves from retaliation? I'll answer that question for you: If a military uses a civilian structure, it becomes a legitimate military target. That's acknowledged, international law.

So is Hamas using those hospitals they bomb as a base of operations or something?

[MightyDavidson]

Clearspira, did you perhaps miss the part where Israel was bombing civilian targets, thus killing far more babies then HAMAS? Did you not notice how Israel openly admits to cutting all supplies to the Gaza Strip thus starving innocent people and requiring hospital personnel to scavenge for gas in order to keep generators running so they don't lose patients in the ICU? Innocent people are dying and Israel is taking active steps to prevent humanitarian aid from getting to those who need it. Surely you realize these are war crimes that Israel is comitting right?

Israel is not the "good guy" in this situation, I don't know if there even is a good guy in this situation due to how complicated it is.

No he doesn't forget that. He's merely posing a question to you: Does Israel not have a right to defend themselves? Or, rather: How the hell is Israel supposed to defend itself, when their only choice is to attack civilian targets, because Hamas uses them to shield themselves from retaliation? I'll answer that question for you: If a military uses a civilian structure, it becomes a legitimate military target. That's acknowledged, international law.

And on that note: There are no "good guys" left in the Levant. Just a lot of mislead, rightfully distrustful and angry people, who're being ground to dust between the interests of extremists with opposing views.

Well gee, perhaps if the IDF had gotten off their butts and apprehended HAMAS while they were practicing for the assault right where the IDF could see them perhaps they'd have prevented the attack in the first place hmm? Or maybe if they'd listened when Egyptian intelligence warned them that HAMAS was up to something they could've apprehended the terrorists before people died or at least been on alert so HAMAS could be fought off. Do innocent people on either side deserve to die because of their incompetence?

Sure they have the right to defend themselves, but they fluffed it so now they're entitled to use their resources and the resources of their allies to find and punish the culprits and only the culprits but that's not what they're doing is it? Massacring innocent civilians after the fact is not defending themselves.

[Madner Kami]

Well gee, perhaps if the IDF had gotten off their butts and apprehended HAMAS while they were practicing for the assault right where the IDF could see them perhaps they'd have prevented the attack in the first place hmm? Or maybe if they'd listened when Egyptian intelligence warned them that HAMAS was up to something they could've apprehended the terrorists before people died or at least been on alert so HAMAS could be fought off. Do innocent people on either side deserve to die because of their incompetence?

Sure they have the right to defend themselves, but they fluffed it so now they're entitled to use their resources and the resources of their allies to find and punish the culprits and only the culprits but that's not what they're doing is it? Massacring innocent civilians after the fact is not defending themselves.

Tell me how you haven't read my second paragraph, without saying you didn't read my second paragraph...

So is Hamas using those hospitals they bomb as a base of operations or something?

They do, yes. The way some of those civilian structures blow up (colour of the smoke or explosion, size of explosion compared to the bomb/rocket payload potential and so on), is telling in regards to what was inside. It's a little known secret, that amoral terrorists use civilian infrastructure and civilians, to deter attacks on themselves ruthlessly. That's nothing new.

[MightyDavidson]

Nothing Hamas does negates what Israel is doing to maximize civilian deaths and obstruct humanitarian aid. You keep coming up with things about Hamas as if any of this lessens Israel's attempt at ethnic cleansing on a civilian population, most of whom have nothing to do with Hamas. FFS, you're defending hospital bombers.

I'm thinking we're not going to get Madner Kami to argue in good faith at this point.

[CharlesPhipps]

It's a pretty easy take.

HAMAS = Evil

Netanyahu = Awful awful human being

The thing is that he's wanted to carry out unrestricted warfare against Gaza for years so Hamas wanted to take advantage of this. Preventing him is the best way to thwart both. Mind you, Netanyahu's career is done because the people are justifiably blaming him for this massive intelligence failure.

Nothing Hamas does negates what Israel is doing to maximize civilian deaths and obstruct humanitarian aid. You keep coming up with things about Hamas as if any of this lessens Israel's attempt at ethnic cleansing on a civilian population, most of whom have nothing to do with Hamas. FFS, you're defending hospital bombers.

I'm thinking we're not going to get Madner Kami to argue in good faith at this point.

I admit I actually wasn't sure what their rebuttal to me was. I assume they disagreed with me but wasn't sure what their position was.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

I admit I actually wasn't sure what their rebuttal to me was. I assume they disagreed with me but wasn't sure what their position was.

It seems there's two sides of an argument here that are valid positions and/but don't really touch each other in how things work; the obligation to act as in the reasonable defense of your estate and the accountability of your actions in doing so. Arguing for either position doesn't preclude the other.

Also, what you said about getting voted out of office tends to be the recourse. Ideally, hypothetically speaking, the head resigns on their own accord in accordance with their involvement in the matter. But otherwise waiting for the next election is just how the whistle blows.

[phantom000]

I admit I actually wasn't sure what their rebuttal to me was. I assume they disagreed with me but wasn't sure what their position was.

It seems there's two sides of an argument here that are valid positions and/but don't really touch each other in how things work; the obligation to act as in the reasonable defense of your estate and the accountability of your actions in doing so. Arguing for either position doesn't preclude the other.

Of course, you need two sides to have a war, after all.

I agree that Hamas needs to be taken out, I won't dispute that. But what concerns me is that Israel is using Hamas as an excuse to annex Gaza and drive more Palestinians out of their homes, or at least they just don't care who gets caught in the crossfire as they try to wipe out Hamas. In either case Israel can't really claim any moral high ground in this argument.

[clearspira]

Clearspira, did you perhaps miss the part where Israel was bombing civilian targets, thus killing far more babies then HAMAS? Did you not notice how Israel openly admits to cutting all supplies to the Gaza Strip thus starving innocent people and requiring hospital personnel to scavenge for gas in order to keep generators running so they don't lose patients in the ICU? Innocent people are dying and Israel is taking active steps to prevent humanitarian aid from getting to those who need it. Surely you realize these are war crimes that Israel is comitting right?

Israel is not the "good guy" in this situation, I don't know if there even is a good guy in this situation due to how complicated it is.

No he doesn't forget that. He's merely posing a question to you: Does Israel not have a right to defend themselves? Or, rather: How the hell is Israel supposed to defend itself, when their only choice is to attack civilian targets, because Hamas uses them to shield themselves from retaliation? I'll answer that question for you: If a military uses a civilian structure, it becomes a legitimate military target. That's acknowledged, international law.

So is Hamas using those hospitals they bomb as a base of operations or something?

YES!! What part of this do you not understand? Hamas uses the normal Palestinians as shields. They are in the hopsitals, the schools, the businesses, the shops.
''But how?'' I here you cry.
Because they are not only a terrorist cell but also the government. They have the reach to do this.

Stop thinking of these people as civilized. They are not. They care NOTHING for life.

[Madner Kami]

It seems there's two sides of an argument here that are valid positions and/but don't really touch each other in how things work; the obligation to act as in the reasonable defense of your estate and the accountability of your actions in doing so. Arguing for either position doesn't preclude the other.

Dingdingdingdingding. You understood it. Way too many people presume that calling out Israel for it's flaws or bad behaviour is automatically anti-semitic and anti-Israel. I was literally called out on a forum a few days ago, for not condemning Hamas for their actions, when I was pointing out that Israel is doing a lot of shit itself, which helped facilitate what happened. Just because I do that, it doesn't mean I condone the actions of Hamas or ignore their actions and the impetus their actions create. And calling out Hamas for doing terroristic shit in every post, is like pointing out that rain is wet, whenever I talk about the weather. They're fucking terrorists. That's what they do. If they wouldn't do that shit, they wouldn't be terrorists and so we call them terrorists, because their actions are solely based on using violence to achieve their political goals. It's called TERRORISM. It's bad, hmkay? Why do I have to say that in every post, when I talk about Israel doing shit? A state that is explicitly not a terroristic state by nature and a partner and ally of my own country. I don't want them to stoop to the level Hamas drags them down to and then beats them with their experience. I want them to be better and there's a chance someone might actually listen, when we or our politicians say something. When I try to tell Hamas to not do terror attacks, they'd feel encouraged to do that... BECAUSE IT'S WHAT THEY FUCKING DO.

I agree that Hamas needs to be taken out, I won't dispute that. But what concerns me is that Israel is using Hamas as an excuse to annex Gaza and drive more Palestinians out of their homes, or at least they just don't care who gets caught in the crossfire as they try to wipe out Hamas. In either case Israel can't really claim any moral high ground in this argument.

Exactly. Was the current situation solely caused by Israel? Gods no. The current situation is the result of several wars, which were started by Israel's arab neighbours and a series of terroristic warlords taking charge in the Palestinian areas, preventing a democratic or at least civil government from establishing itself. But! Israel's actions in regard to the annexed or nominally temporarilly occupied territories (primarilly Westbank and Gaza) didn't exactly improve the situation. Instead their actions directly lead to an, albeit a ~largely~ non-violent, displacement of Palestinians and the creation of a highly urbanized and concentrated Ghetto, where, in conjunction with actions taken by Israel's neighbours and Israel itself, no civil government could establish itself, which directly lead to the Hamas taking over and creating a de facto warlord state, which now terrorizes Israel.

What could Israel have done? Well, I feel it's fairly simple. Abandon the illegal settlements and kicking the arses of the illegal settlers, rather than covertly supporting their illegal actions, in order to allow Palestinians to create their own state with their own territory. Also, Israel shouldn't have just left Gaza alone after occupying it. This wasn't a gesture of good will in the aftermath of the takeover, it was an abandonment and it's only logical, that the most radical elements would take over in the power-vacuum Israel's retreat created. Of course there's the slight issue of, whether the Palestinian population would've accepted an israeli-backed government, but maybe something would've been possible in conjunction with the UN, rather than just dropping Gaza like a hot potatoe.
Alternatively, if Israel can't or doesn't want to accept the two-state solution and insists on a Greater Israel, then they need to integrate the Palestinian population into that new state, which then necessarily ceases to be an explicit State for the Jews. The only other outcome is an ethnic cleansing, which I feel they are kinda undertaking since now over 20 years. Slowly and definitly not to a scale we know from elsewhere, but there's clear displacement of Palestinians from the Westbank going on and I refuse to call it anything else, but an ethnic cleansing, because that's what it is. Anyways, I kinda think most can agree, that ethnic cleansing is kind of a shitty practise and that a modern civil state, shouldn't engage in this practise...

[CharlesPhipps]

YES!! What part of this do you not understand? Hamas uses the normal Palestinians as shields. They are in the hopsitals, the schools, the businesses, the shops.
''But how?'' I here you cry.
Because they are not only a terrorist cell but also the government. They have the reach to do this.

Stop thinking of these people as civilized. They are not. They care NOTHING for life.

Yes and bombing them anyway is not really a great solution or less of a war crime.

It's no different than someone taking a hostage and then shooting the hostage to get at the person behind them.