Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Viller
Jun 3, 2005

Proud opponent of Israeli terror and Jewish fascism!

CuddleCryptid posted:

There's no moral high ground here. It's a question of whether it is reasonable to match atrocity with atrocity, and the answer is no. Bombing hospitals isn't a strategic decision to prevent future attacks, it's just an expression of blind rage.

If you werent governed by your feelings, youd know that to be factually wrong.

Theres so many layers in this conflict that reducing it to "feelings" is disingenuous at best.

Whats the definition of insanity again?

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

frajaq
Jan 30, 2009

#acolyte GM of 2014


Kagrenak posted:

This is loving disgusting

Why did they lie about that detail then?

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

CuddleCryptid
Jan 11, 2013

Things could be going better

Kagrenak posted:

They've definitely repeatedly mentioned dismantling Hamas, which I'm sure they'll attempt to do by killing more civilians than they ever have before.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.timesofisrael.com/idf-chief-admits-failures-and-promises-investigation-vows-to-dismantle-hamas/amp/

I just keep thinking about the US leading a decade long manhunt for Osama Bin Laden, finally shooting the guy, and then how nothing actually changed. If you are talking about the eradication of a terrorist group as a requirement for peace then you can start at the top and start working your way down but that ladder has no bottom.

Viller posted:

If you werent governed by your feelings, youd know that to be factually wrong.

Theres so many layers in this conflict that reducing it to "feelings" is disingenuous at best.

Whats the definition of insanity again?

I don't know what you're trying to say here.

Terebus
Feb 17, 2007

Pillbug

kolby posted:

I believe Szarrukin knew that but he took issue with the fact that they only showed burned/murdered babies that still had heads?

Correct me if I'm wrong

It's cool that people are pushing propaganda for a terrorist organization because babies were just murdered and burnt, and only some were beheaded.

These dead babies do not make it morally right for the IDF to genocide civilians and kill other babies. The disgusting justification and dismissal of violence against civilians by both sides is atrocious and it feels like a lot of people aren't far off from justifying violence against all Jews or Palestinians everywhere.

Terebus fucked around with this message at 18:16 on Oct 12, 2023

Kagrenak
Sep 8, 2010

frajaq posted:

Why did they lie about that detail then?

I'll say the same thing I did to the other poster:

Take a minute to reflect if drawing a moral distinction between beheading babies and mutilating/burning babies is really an avenue you want to pursue. I sure don't draw a moral distinction between what Israel is doing to the babies they're targeting in Gaza and these now corroborated acts of Hamas, other than the fact the IDF is worse because of scale.

Main Paineframe
Oct 27, 2010

Szarrukin posted:

so not "beheaded" anymore?

uh, hmm. ok, well. um. yeah.

I've been ignoring these IK buttons because I didn't want to be an IK and I didn't want Koos dumping responsibility for this poo poo on me. but it turns out that as much as I hate the idea of using IK buttons, I hate reading people being insufferable pedants about dead babies even more

:siren:let's please bring the "were the babies decapitated or merely shot and burned" talk to a close right here, and keep it that way:siren:

:siren:same goes for the "were the women raped or merely murdered" talk. it's been a while since it came up, yeah, but i never want to see it again. no more:siren:

yeah, maybe the IDF are exaggerating a bit. i don't loving care. these are not appropriate subjects for this level of pedantry

for gently caress's sake people

if you don't like this go complain to Koos, i am so far past giving a poo poo

Crazy Joe Wilson
Jul 4, 2007

Justifiably Mad!
EDITED: Took out stuff by mod request.

CuddleCryptid posted:

I just keep thinking about the US leading a decade long manhunt for Osama Bin Laden, finally shooting the guy, and then how nothing actually changed. If you are talking about the eradication of a terrorist group as a requirement for peace then you can start at the top and start working your way down but that ladder has no bottom.


Mission Creep is a real thing, that causes a lot of problems.

mannerup
Jan 11, 2004

♬ I Know You're Dying Trying To Figure Me Out♬

♬My Name's On The Tip Of Your Tongue Keep Running Your Mouth♬

♬You Want The Recipe But Can't Handle My Sound My Sound My Sound♬

♬No Matter What You Do Im Gonna Get It Without Ya♬

♬ I Know You Ain't Used To A Female Alpha♬
.

mannerup fucked around with this message at 18:20 on Nov 5, 2023

Party In My Diapee
Jan 24, 2014
I hear Israel are using nail bombs when bombing hospitals just to injure as many people as possible... but i guess it doesn't really matter if its true since they are bombing hospitals anyway.

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

Zulily Zoetrope
Jun 1, 2011

Muldoon

CuddleCryptid posted:

I just keep thinking about the US leading a decade long manhunt for Osama Bin Laden, finally shooting the guy, and then how nothing actually changed. If you are talking about the eradication of a terrorist group as a requirement for peace then you can start at the top and start working your way down but that ladder has no bottom.

I mean, yes. That's the point. They're committing war crimes with the stated goal of eliminating dissidents, knowing full well that the act of doing so will only generate more dissidence.

TGLT
Aug 14, 2009

Main Paineframe posted:

yeah, maybe the IDF are exaggerating a bit. i don't loving care. these are not appropriate subjects for this level of pedantry

Actually gently caress it, probe me, but it is in fact irresponsible of journalists to repeat unverified rumors as if they were absolutely proven true - even if those rumors are later verified. Claims of spectacular atrocities, true or not, are used to justify further horrific reprisals like we're seeing now. gently caress anyone being glib about murdered babies but we should expect people to at least provide evidence for claims of things happening beyond that there was a rumor somewhere, especially in a situation like this.

Look at the purported drone incursions from Lebanon, or claims about Iran having direct involvement in this, and see how those two claims have been used to argue for expanding this into some sort of regional war.

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

Terebus
Feb 17, 2007

Pillbug

Party In My Diapee posted:

I hear Israel are using nail bombs when bombing hospitals just to injure as many people as possible... but i guess it doesn't really matter if its true since they are bombing hospitals anyway.

Bombing hospitals is atrocious and Israel should be stopped and condemned for it. Can you source your claim about the nails?

Zzulu
May 15, 2009

(▰˘v˘▰)
Just from a "war rules" perspective as long as Israel can point to somewhere and say "Hamas is there" they can bomb that area without technically doing war crimes.

Civilians are basically fair game as collateral as long as they are not the primary target, including hospitals and schools...

So yeah, international humanitarian laws are completely meaningless because you can just point at a school and go "the enemy is using it as a storage/bunker/whatever!" and then you can level it to the ground. Not that there's anyone enforcing these rules in the first place so they have always been very toothless.

quote:

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.

Kagrenak
Sep 8, 2010

Zzulu posted:

Just from a "war rules" perspective as long as Israel can point to somewhere and say "Hamas is there" they can bomb that area without technically doing war crimes.

Civilians are basically fair game as collateral as long as they are not the primary target, including hospitals and schools...

So yeah, international humanitarian laws are completely meaningless because you can just point at a school and go "the enemy is using it as a storage/bunker/whatever!" and then you can level it to the ground. Not that there's anyone enforcing these rules in the first place so they have always been very toothless.

This is a deliberate bad faith misreading of international law which repeatedly mentions that military actions involving dual use civilian infrastructure/buildings have to be proportionate to the importance of the target and risk to civilian life. Which absolutely does not characterize Israel's targeting of the strip.

mannerup
Jan 11, 2004

♬ I Know You're Dying Trying To Figure Me Out♬

♬My Name's On The Tip Of Your Tongue Keep Running Your Mouth♬

♬You Want The Recipe But Can't Handle My Sound My Sound My Sound♬

♬No Matter What You Do Im Gonna Get It Without Ya♬

♬ I Know You Ain't Used To A Female Alpha♬
.

mannerup fucked around with this message at 18:20 on Nov 5, 2023

Shaocaholica
Oct 29, 2002

Fig. 5E
Iran with international support could do a thing. Syria? Russia? Did everyone take on too many hobbies?

Halloween Jack
Sep 12, 2003
I WILL CUT OFF BOTH OF MY ARMS BEFORE I VOTE FOR ANYONE THAT IS MORE POPULAR THAN BERNIE!!!!!
"This was inevitable because of Israel's actions."
"So you condone the torture and murder of civilians?"
"No, but this was inevitable because..."

This has just been going back and forth for dozens of pages, and much of it is essentially an argument about tone. I don't see the point, especially considering that current and former Israeli officials have openly framed the conflict as a total war against the Palestinian population.

Discendo Vox
Mar 21, 2013

This does not make sense when, again, aggregate indicia also indicate improvements. The belief that things are worse is false. It remains false.
Predictably, the US and Qatar are now halting the process of opening the $6 billion in funds from the earlier deal with Iran. I'm not actually certain of the legalities here.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/12/world/middleeast/us-qatar-iran-prisoner-deal.html

Crazy Joe Wilson
Jul 4, 2007

Justifiably Mad!
Syria is claiming Israel launched attacks against 2 of their airports, according to Al Jazeera. No fatalities, but runways damaged.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/worl...6263950ae&ei=11

Majorian
Jul 1, 2009
The U.S. political scene continues to feel very "immediately post-9/11":

https://twitter.com/ryangrim/status/1712263842678321359

quote:

At a Dem meeting today, Susan Wild said that she was working to organize interfaith gatherings, but worried that Muslims in the Lehigh Valley may not feel comfortable coming.

“Because they’re guilty!!” shouted @JoshGottheimer, sparking a tense exchange

\/\/\/yup, that tweet feels depressingly familiar! I sometimes wish I could go back to my college days, but not like this.:smith:\/\/\/

Majorian fucked around with this message at 19:11 on Oct 12, 2023

mannerup
Jan 11, 2004

♬ I Know You're Dying Trying To Figure Me Out♬

♬My Name's On The Tip Of Your Tongue Keep Running Your Mouth♬

♬You Want The Recipe But Can't Handle My Sound My Sound My Sound♬

♬No Matter What You Do Im Gonna Get It Without Ya♬

♬ I Know You Ain't Used To A Female Alpha♬
.

mannerup fucked around with this message at 18:20 on Nov 5, 2023

His Divine Shadow
Aug 7, 2000

I'm not a fascist. I'm a priest. Fascists dress up in black and tell people what to do.
loving nazis

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

Nenonen
Oct 22, 2009

Mulla on aina kolkyt donaa taskussa

You either
stand with Israel
or
you stand
with error

Very much "graphic design is my passion"

NovemberMike
Dec 28, 2008

https://twitter.com/shaniloukk/status/1712261369204990383

EDIT: Deacon is right, could be bullshit. I think the photo is publicly available.

NovemberMike fucked around with this message at 19:27 on Oct 12, 2023

Decon
Nov 22, 2015



I believe she's dead (not based on actual evidence, just seems like the likeliest explanation) but this post doesn't pass the sniff test imo.

Right out the gate, bio says 30, but Shani was 22 (according to Wikipedia, born Feb, 2001).

Decon fucked around with this message at 19:28 on Oct 12, 2023

mannerup
Jan 11, 2004

♬ I Know You're Dying Trying To Figure Me Out♬

♬My Name's On The Tip Of Your Tongue Keep Running Your Mouth♬

♬You Want The Recipe But Can't Handle My Sound My Sound My Sound♬

♬No Matter What You Do Im Gonna Get It Without Ya♬

♬ I Know You Ain't Used To A Female Alpha♬
.

mannerup fucked around with this message at 18:20 on Nov 5, 2023

Terebus
Feb 17, 2007

Pillbug

Halloween Jack posted:

"This was inevitable because of Israel's actions."
"So you condone the torture and murder of civilians?"
"No, but this was inevitable because..."

This has just been going back and forth for dozens of pages, and much of it is essentially an argument about tone. I don't see the point, especially considering that current and former Israeli officials have openly framed the conflict as a total war against the Palestinian population.

A more accurate portrayal of what people here and in other left spaces are fighting against is:

"Hamas was justified in their attack on Israel and all actions in support of a rebellion against Israeli occupation are morally defensible".
"No, murdering innocent civilians is never morally defensible, regardless of whether Israel or Palestine does it."
"Those teenagers shouldn't have been raving near Gaza, what a bunch of dumbfucks. That clearly deserved being raped and murdered!"

For example:

https://x.com/fr0gan/status/1710587819385614829?t=RWKlaiY9lwYNTOcriMVtLA&s=08

It's gross that people are justifying violence against civilians on both sides and it doesn't help the Palestinians' cause to have completely unaffected western idiots champion terrorist actions. But here we are, with the IDF committing more war crimes and the online left dying on the absolutely worst hill possible.

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

Majorian
Jul 1, 2009

Terebus posted:

A more accurate portrayal of what people here and in other left spaces are fighting against is:

"Hamas was justified in their attack on Israel and all actions in support of a rebellion against Israeli occupation are morally defensible".
"No, murdering innocent civilians is never morally defensible, regardless of whether Israel or Palestine does it."
"Those teenagers shouldn't have been raving near Gaza, what a bunch of dumbfucks. That clearly deserved being raped and murdered!"

For example:

https://x.com/fr0gan/status/1710587819385614829?t=RWKlaiY9lwYNTOcriMVtLA&s=08

It's gross that people are justifying violence against civilians on both sides and it doesn't help the Palestinians' cause to have completely unaffected western idiots champion terrorist actions. But here we are, with the IDF committing more war crimes and the online left dying on the absolutely worst hill possible.

The person you cited there is an obscure twitch streamer who posted cringe in the early hours of the attacks; I'm not sure she's particularly representative of the left as a whole or even the twitter left.

I haven't seen anyone here saying that Hamas' attack was justified at all.

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

pro starcraft loser
Jan 23, 2006

Stand back, this could get messy.

mannerup posted:

regardless of the legalities (you can read the Supreme Court case and the subsequent ICJ case for the details), it will be seen as a breech of the hostage deal and only paint the US as a bad faith negotiator in subsequent deals

It was a super bad deal but yeah, why would Iran (or anyone really) trust a deal with the US between this and Trump ripping up the nuke deal?

Zzulu
May 15, 2009

(▰˘v˘▰)

Majorian posted:



I haven't seen anyone here saying that Hamas' attack was justified at all.
This thread a had a loooot of variations of "well, what else are they supposed to do?" in regards to Hamas terror attack that killed a thousand people. Also multiple posters saying the people at the festival were stupid for... existing in that area at the time.

emanresu tnuocca
Sep 2, 2011

by Athanatos
Israeli channel 13 reporters doxxing Netanyahu's parachute account:
https://twitter.com/shaulig/status/1712536978854654025

the reporter attributes some reports to a "senior state official" and the anchor says "perhaps it's time we start naming these senior state officials, as they make statements without identifying themselves" and the reporter, in an statement which she seems to regret almost a nanosecond after the words leave her mouth answers "we know who this senior state official is, there's only one senior state official who makes decisions and issues statements to the media, and Binyamin Netanyahu wasn't the first prime minister to do this".

e; I guess I'm posting this both because it's funny and a bit bizarre but also because when you look back at the past decade or so there were many ominous communications coming from 'a senior isareli state official', I believe many such ones were even posted itt.

Failed Imagineer
Sep 22, 2018
Probation
Can't post for 3 hours!
https://twitter.com/richimedhurst/status/1712541240317936067?t=EZ7YnZDP53mXAhDze6sWMQ&s=19

Christ

Majorian
Jul 1, 2009

Zzulu posted:

This thread a had a loooot of variations of "well, what else are they supposed to do?" in regards to Hamas terror attack that killed a thousand people.

From what I've seen, the "what else are they supposed to do?" posts have been referring to Palestinians resorting to violence to achieve liberation - not committing atrocities against civilians.

CuddleCryptid
Jan 11, 2013

Things could be going better

emanresu tnuocca posted:

Israeli channel 13 reporters doxxing Netanyahu's parachute account:

I have to admit, I have been very impressed by Israel's journalists the last few days. I'm sure the hard right ones are walking in line but there's some big outlets that have been pushing boundaries a lot harder than I expected under a government like Netanyahu's.

Halloween Jack
Sep 12, 2003
I WILL CUT OFF BOTH OF MY ARMS BEFORE I VOTE FOR ANYONE THAT IS MORE POPULAR THAN BERNIE!!!!!

Terebus posted:

A more accurate portrayal of what people here and in other left spaces are fighting against is:
You're not fighting against it by arguing in this thread, though. If you're angry about what people are posting on Twitter, why not go argue with them, on Twitter? Same if you have a beef with another subforum. I've never understood this need to argue about what an undefined mass of other people on another forum/site are doing, instead of just engaging with those people.

I don't see people ITT arguing that the ravers had it coming, though some people are aghast at the optics of the celebration. The Breitbart method of cherry-picking random tweets as evidence of what "the Online Left" are up to is so wearying at this point (and still would be if the group in question was Presbyterians or whoever). I don't want to post about posting, but per the updated OP, it's supposed to be a source of information and "interesting arguments" and I've waded through like 30 pages of people just repeating the same irreconcilable arguments.

Main Paineframe
Oct 27, 2010

Zzulu posted:

Just from a "war rules" perspective as long as Israel can point to somewhere and say "Hamas is there" they can bomb that area without technically doing war crimes.

Civilians are basically fair game as collateral as long as they are not the primary target, including hospitals and schools...

So yeah, international humanitarian laws are completely meaningless because you can just point at a school and go "the enemy is using it as a storage/bunker/whatever!" and then you can level it to the ground. Not that there's anyone enforcing these rules in the first place so they have always been very toothless.

That's not really true at all, at least in theory. "Specific military operations" and "definite military advantage" require something more concrete than that, and the principle of proportionality must be observed at all times. From the same page you got that quote from:

quote:

The IHL rules on conduct of hostilities aim to strike a balance between military necessity and humanity, seeking mainly to protect civilians from attacks and the effects of hostilities. Principle of distinction: Parties to an armed conflict must "at all times distinguish between the civilian population and combatants and between civilian objects and military objectives and accordingly shall direct their operations only against military objectives".

IHL prohibits attacks directed against civilians, as well as indiscriminate attacks, namely those that strike military objectives and civilians or civilian objects without distinction. Principle of proportionality: IHL prohibits attacks that may be expected to cause excessive incidental civilian harm in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated. In the conduct of hostilities, causing incidental harm to civilians and civilian objects is often unavoidable.

However, IHL places a limit on the extent of incidental harm that is permissible by spelling out how military necessity and considerations of humanity must be balanced in such situations. Principle of precaution: In the conduct of military operations, constant care must be taken to spare the civilian population, civilians and civilian objects. All feasible precautions must be taken to avoid, and in any event to minimize, incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians and damage to civilian objects.

To sum it up simply, the risk of civilian harm must be balanced against the military necessity of carrying out the strike. Even if there is a military storage room in a building, it's necessary to gauge the actual military benefits of blowing up the entire building, and then weigh that against the damage to civilian property and the likely risk to civilian life. As an extreme example, the attacker wouldn't be able to use a broom closet with a couple of rifles in it as an excuse to level a hospital with airstrikes. That's especially true when the attacking power doesn't even have troops on the ground in the combat area.

Though in practice, these rules don't tend be observed very well, especially when it comes to airstrikes. The US and Western Europe are big fans of using airstrikes to maximize the amount of damage they do while minimizing the risk to their own troops, and no one's really in a position to call them on it if they exaggerate the military benefit and discount the collateral damage.

Bel Shazar
Sep 14, 2012

Main Paineframe posted:

That's not really true at all, at least in theory. "Specific military operations" and "definite military advantage" require something more concrete than that, and the principle of proportionality must be observed at all times. From the same page you got that quote from:

To sum it up simply, the risk of civilian harm must be balanced against the military necessity of carrying out the strike. Even if there is a military storage room in a building, it's necessary to gauge the actual military benefits of blowing up the entire building, and then weigh that against the damage to civilian property and the likely risk to civilian life. As an extreme example, the attacker wouldn't be able to use a broom closet with a couple of rifles in it as an excuse to level a hospital with airstrikes. That's especially true when the attacking power doesn't even have troops on the ground in the combat area.

Though in practice, these rules don't tend be observed very well, especially when it comes to airstrikes. The US and Western Europe are big fans of using airstrikes to maximize the amount of damage they do while minimizing the risk to their own troops, and no one's really in a position to call them on it if they exaggerate the military benefit and discount the collateral damage.

In theory, though, the committers of genocide and aren't supposed to have massively armed and resourced allies with permanent veto power in the United Nations providing literal and figurative air cover for the furtherance of the genocide... so in practice Israeli military leadership is going to point at a location and give the equivalent of "they're coming right for us", just like they've been doing before the most recent massacres.

Elias_Maluco
Aug 23, 2007
I need to sleep

Whats the official justification for that?

Maera Sior
Jan 5, 2012

Elias_Maluco posted:

Whats the official justification for that?

According to https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20231012-syria-s-two-main-airports-out-of-service-after-israel-strikes-state-media, it's to prevent weapons from coming to Iran.

quote:

Israel's ambassador to Germany, Ron Prosor, confirmed the strike on Damascus airport, saying it was intended to thwart “weapons deliveries from Iran".

"These missiles, these drones are used against Israel," he said in an interview with German broadcaster Die Welt.

Whether these are theoretical or actual weapons isn't clear from the above.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

mannerup
Jan 11, 2004

♬ I Know You're Dying Trying To Figure Me Out♬

♬My Name's On The Tip Of Your Tongue Keep Running Your Mouth♬

♬You Want The Recipe But Can't Handle My Sound My Sound My Sound♬

♬No Matter What You Do Im Gonna Get It Without Ya♬

♬ I Know You Ain't Used To A Female Alpha♬
.

mannerup fucked around with this message at 18:19 on Nov 5, 2023

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply