International Hamas launches surprise attack on Israel; Israel has declared a state of war. Vol. II

[cincymma79]

No it isn't. Collateral damage happens in literally every war. Hiding among the civilian population isn't some ingenious kill switch to make the other side stop attacking you.

But what if they used magic bullets

 

[shockaholic12]

No, the public would not have been cool with Bush Jr, if he just sat back and did nothing. His response made him extremely popular(for a time), because he gave them what they wanted. Revenge. Even the Iraq war, which was highly questionable in it's relation to 9/11, even at that time, had something like 70% public approval at the time of the invasion.

He had to completely fabricate WMDs to convince the public of a threat that doesn’t exist to garner support for an invasion. If he had it all before they wouldn’t have felt the need to do that. And then the mission utterly failed. So the argument the Israel government should follow that example is ridiculous.

 

[HereticBD]

But what if they used magic bullets

James Bond, bro. They should just send him into the tunnels to minimize the civilian casualties.

 

[Rematch]

No it isn't. Collateral damage happens in literally every war. Hiding among the civilian population isn't some ingenious kill switch to make the other side stop attacking you.

Collateral damage? What specific targets did Israel choose that just so coincidentally resulted in such mass destruction?

 

[Andy Capp]

They were low on the rape desirability scale… I wouldn’t get any hopes up..

One of them said they were being held in a group of about 25 and implied they were of all ages. But yeah, I can see truly evil people keeping one group aside totally unharmed for this specific purpose, but I choose to hope that's not the case here.

 

[sangreporsangre]

 

[fishNjits]

Apartheid refers to the implementation and maintenance of a system of legalized racial segregation in which one racial group is deprived of political and civil rights.

That's exactly what Israel is doing in the West Bank. The Israeli settlers can use roads that Palestinians can't who are forced to go through checkpoints everywhere. They have no freedom of movement, no control over their water supply, no control over their airspace, no control period. That's apartheid.

No. Israel occupies the West Bank. It's policies may be repressive but by definition these are Occupation policies.

South African apartheid was characterized by racially based legal inequality and exploitation of Black Africans by the dominant Whites within one common society. The Israeli occupation societies reflects "separate nationalisms". Israel doesn't exploit Palestinians in the West Bank or Gaza. The Israeli policies are meant to foster separation from Palestinians for legitimate self-defense reasons.

I know you didn't do it...but the idea of ethnic cleansing doesn't mesh with the idea of an apartheid state. For example, nobody considers Nazi Germany an apartheid state.

 

[fishNjits]

I am not asserting I know what yu learned, rather I was trying to understand the previous post.

My bad then...

 

[KnightTemplar]

Just like America was successful in taking out the generation of ISIS right? Oh wait, that approach utterly fails its goal and just causes civilians to suffer and breeds more militants.

Yes, America would have been ok without invading Afghanistan and Iraq after 9/11 and that’s why politicians had to cook up WMD lies to get the public to support it.

There is no way the American public would have settled for anything less than an invasion of Afghanistan in the first weeks following 9/11. You're naive if you think otherwise.

ISIS used to control so much territory they could declare their own Caliphate. Now they are reduced to low-level terror attacks like the one in Africa that killed two Western tourists. Al Qaeda hasn't managed a mass casualty attack in the West for years. Like ISIS, they are reduced to hoping freaks who watch too much jihadi porn will buy a kitchen knife and stab someone at random.

Iraq I will give you. Saddam was a piece of shit, but he wasn't connected to Al Qaeda, much less had any part in 9/11.

 

[fishNjits]

No. It won't be easy. However, attacking civilians to get to the enemy is both evil and a war crime.

This is absolutely wrong.

Civilian deaths in war is not a war crime. Civilian deaths are legal in time of war if "proportional" to the military objective to be achieved. So, if Israel actually did bomb the Baptist Hospital (and the preponderance of evidence says it didn't), but there was a huge cache of weapons underneath it, this may not be a war crime even if hundreds of civilians died.

On the other hand, if Israel bombed that hospital because every once in a while rockets were fired from its roof top and hundreds of people died due to the bombing, that may be a war crime as the military objective doesn't really seem to be worth the cost.

Of course, proportionality is in the eye of the beholder, but killing civilians while attacking enemies is not ipso facto, a war crime.

What proportionality isn't is this idea that civilian deaths are supposed to be somewhat equal on both sides.

 

[Rational Poster]

No. It won't be easy. However, attacking civilians to get to the enemy is both evil and a war crime.

It's actually the other way around. Hiding military assets and launching attacks in or around a civilian population is a war crime. Striking back at your attackers, even if there are civilian casualties, is not a war crime.

 

[fishNjits]

She looks like she could have walked out of the West Bank. Dark hair, dark eyes, olive skin, bushy eyebrows...

I'd give odds she's Mizrahi.

 

[shockaholic12]

There is no way the American public would have settled for anything less than an invasion of Afghanistan in the first weeks following 9/11. You're naive if you think otherwise.

ISIS used to control so much territory they could declare their own Caliphate. Now they are reduced to low-level terror attacks like the one in Africa that killed two Western tourists. Al Qaeda hasn't managed a mass casualty attack in the West for years. Like ISIS, they are reduced to hoping freaks who watch too much jihadi porn will buy a kitchen knife and stab someone at random.

Iraq I will give you. Saddam was a piece of shit, but he wasn't connected to Al Qaeda, much less had any part in 9/11.

the government clearly lied to garner support for the invasions and then they utterly failed its mission and ISIS is still in complete control of Afghanistan. So using it as example of what Israel should do with HAMAS is ridiculous. It’s a clear example of why this approach will fail it’s goal and cause mass civilian causalities.

 

[KnightTemplar]

the government clearly lied to garner support for the invasions and then they utterly failed its mission and ISIS is still in complete control of Afghanistan. So using it as example of what Israel should do with HAMAS is ridiculous. It’s a clear example of why this approach will fail it’s goal and cause mass civilian causalities.

If you're going to claim that other people's examples are ridiculous, maybe don't confuse Al Qaeda with ISIS.

 

[Rational Poster]

If you're going to claim that other people's examples are ridiculous, maybe don't confuse Al Qaeda with ISIS.

You mean the Taliban

 

[William Munny]

the government clearly lied to garner support for the invasions and then they utterly failed its mission and ISIS is still in complete control of Afghanistan. So using it as example of what Israel should do with HAMAS is ridiculous. It’s a clear example of why this approach will fail it’s goal and cause mass civilian causalities.

I was under the impression that the ruling authority in Afghanistan were the Taliban, not ISIS.

 

[Rematch]

It's actually the other way around. Hiding military assets and launching attacks in or around a civilian population is a war crime. Striking back at your attackers, even if there are civilian casualties, is not a war crime.

And is that still true even if it is know that the attackers are not even in those areas but underground or elsewhere?

 

[Rational Poster]

And is that still true even if it is know that the attackers are not even in those areas but underground or elsewhere?

Why wouldn't it be?

This is some fantasy you guys have that Israel isn't operating with the greatest level of battlefield intelligence that has ever been fielded from literally every advanced warfaring nation on earth.

There has never been a period in military history that we've been more certain of the targets we're striking at. There has never been period where our munitions have been this accurate. We are getting the point where are munitions are accurate within centimeters. No strike is indiscriminate or without deliberation. Every strike requires incredible amounts of intelligence gathering and coordination, and even human assets on the ground confirming things.

Is it perfect? No. Nothing will ever be perfect ever. Literally nothing, especially in war.

But to pretend they're not doing their due diligence is pretty fucking dumb.

 

[Sir Punchalot]

Apartheid refers to the implementation and maintenance of a system of legalized racial segregation in which one racial group is deprived of political and civil rights.

That's exactly what Israel is doing in the West Bank. The Israeli settlers can use roads that Palestinians can't who are forced to go through checkpoints everywhere. They have no freedom of movement, no control over their water supply, no control over their airspace, no control period. That's apartheid.

First, we Norwegians consider ourselves a peaceloving people, and I guarantee you that we would do exactly what the Israelis have done. Cosseted western kids seem to be living in some kind of cartoon world where Israel is a kind of evil empire that torments and oppresses others for fun, as if they are the ones who are the actual aggressors here and as if we wouldn't have needed to take the exact same measures (and also been equally fed up with people trying to wipe us off the map decade after decade - I think they've been pretty patient).

Second, I'll repost this and let an Arab living in Israel explain the "Apartheid" situation to you like he did to the genius expert member the University of Auckland's "Free Palestine" club:

 

[iwannabeadored]

No. Because we know how international investigations spear headed buy the UN or the International Courts go vis a vis Israel and Jews.

Anyway what's to investigate? According to Hamas, there's no shrapnel, "It vanished like salt in the sea..." Everybody who investigates stuff like this is calling bullshit.

Canada, England, France and Australia have all said the preponderance of the evidence supports a fuck up by Hamas or PIJ.

Ah gotcha, only my guys can investigate….

Idiot