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
pro starcraft loser
Jan 23, 2006

Stand back, this could get messy.

Assuming Israel takes enough territory, shouldn't we expect to see completely solid proof of these tunnels in areas they've claimed for a while (hospitals, schools, camps)? Sounds like all we've gotten so far is...nothing.

Is the IDF thinking about this or just assuming that if nothing is produced no one will ask?

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Main Paineframe
Oct 27, 2010

Tuna-Fish posted:

The laws of war are actually pretty clear that you are specifically allowed to do that. The basic idea is that targeting civilians on purpose is not allowed, but collateral damage, or civilians killed alongside legitimate military targets you strike, are fine. The thinking is that in those cases, the death of the civilians is the fault of the military personnel who chose to place themselves in the vicinity, not the people doing the shooting, and also to discourage taking human shields.

You might not agree that it is right, but those are the internationally accepted rules.


The exception to this is incendiaries, which you cannot use among civilian populations even to hit military targets, and iirc hospitals with wounded soldiers/personnel in uniform working in care roles inside, so not that it matters because lol Israel is breaking those rules anyway.

That's completely and totally wrong. Under international law, the attacker possesses the responsibility of doing all they reasonably can to minimize civilian casualties and collateral damage. For example, Geneva Conventions Protocol I Article 57:

quote:

Article 57 - Precautions in attack
1. In the conduct of military operations, constant care shall be taken to spare the civilian population, civilians and civilian objects.

2. With respect to attacks, the following precautions shall be taken:

(a) those who plan or decide upon an attack shall:

(i) do everything feasible to verify that the objectives to be attacked are neither civilians nor civilian objects and are not subject to special protection but are military objectives within the meaning of paragraph 2 of Article 52 and that it is not prohibited by the provisions of this Protocol to attack them;

(ii) take all feasible precautions in the choice of means and methods of attack with a view to avoiding, and in any event to minimizing, incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians and damage to civilian objects;

(iii) refrain from deciding to launch any attack which may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof, which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated;

(b) an attack shall be cancelled or suspended if it becomes apparent that the objective is not a military one or is subject to special protection or that the attack may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof, which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated;

(c) effective advance warning shall be given of attacks which may affect the civilian population, unless circumstances do not permit.

3. When a choice is possible between several military objectives for obtaining a similar military advantage, the objective to be selected shall be that the attack on which may be expected to cause the least danger to civilian lives and to civilian objects.

4. In the conduct of military operations at sea or in the air, each Party to the conflict shall, in conformity with its rights and duties under the rules of international law applicable in armed conflict, take all reasonable precautions to avoid losses of civilian lives and damage to civilian objects.

5. No provision of this Article may be construed as authorizing any attacks against the civilian population, civilians or civilian objects.

As you can see, even when the target is a purely military objective, the attacker is still obligated to do what they reasonably can to reduce the risk to civilians. Collateral damage isn't totally banned, but they have to intentionally act to minimize it as much as is reasonably possible. And yes, that can include choosing a less destructive method of attack, or even intentionally not carrying out a strike where the military gain is small and the risk to civilians is large.

BrutalistMcDonalds
Oct 4, 2012


Lipstick Apathy

punishedkissinger posted:

So weird how Hamas was using entirely encrypted means of communicating before 10/7 but now they just regularly have phone convos about how evil and bad they are
Well villains always like to talk about their evil plans at length to the good guys.

BTW, I was listening to a talk by CSIS which is a U.S. think tank to get a sense of how these people were talking about the war. This was soon after the hospital bombing that was highly contested and protests were generating a lot of energy. One of the panelists was a former (probably still current) CIA analyst who mentioned the phone call for that one, and she dismissed it as not really credible. She didn't say why, of course, but I imagine that privately these intelligence people know what the deal is.

They rarely if ever say "yes" or "no," I noticed. It's all probabilities and degrees, and that one was low probability.

BrutalistMcDonalds fucked around with this message at 00:16 on Nov 9, 2023

Stanley Pain
Jun 16, 2001

by Fluffdaddy
Israel really doubling down on the genocide thing eh?

:frogsiren: DO NO CLICK IF YOU VALUE ANY PART OF YOUR SOUL. :frogsiren:

ik edit: yeah no thanks, take your liveleaks war porn poo poo elsewhere

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

(USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST)

Somebody fucked around with this message at 00:26 on Nov 9, 2023

Groovelord Neato
Dec 6, 2014


Stanley Pain posted:

Israel really doubling down on the genocide thing eh?

:frogsiren: DO NO CLICK IF YOU VALUE ANY PART OF YOUR SOUL. :frogsiren:

Initial thread is fine but don't click on any "this video is unavailable" ones.

One of the videos is of a girl pulled from the rubble alive and she asks "are you taking me to the cemetery?" and the translation isn't there but one of the rescuers says "No my dearest - you are alive and as beautiful as the moon." I'm not a guy who cries often but that one gets me every time.

Groovelord Neato fucked around with this message at 00:31 on Nov 9, 2023

Rubellavator
Aug 16, 2007

e: posted in the wrong thread

Rubellavator fucked around with this message at 00:35 on Nov 9, 2023

HootTheOwl
May 13, 2012

Hootin and shootin

So I've seen this floating around and also this reply
https://twitter.com/adamjohnsonCHI/status/1722344313844109347?t=D-lIlSz6Z7Lfbnm1dEkqLg&s=19
And as a former signals guy I gotta say: yes that's how it'd work. Now that Israel is just bombing everything you can't really maintain the same comint discipline you could before.

That said this sounds like some posthoc make believe because if Israel is already bombing ambulances why do you think they'll be safe and if they had this when they bombed the ambulance why did they wait to release it

Charliegrs
Aug 10, 2009

pro starcraft loser posted:

Assuming Israel takes enough territory, shouldn't we expect to see completely solid proof of these tunnels in areas they've claimed for a while (hospitals, schools, camps)? Sounds like all we've gotten so far is...nothing.

Is the IDF thinking about this or just assuming that if nothing is produced no one will ask?

I mean if they showed you the proof, would you even believe it? It's not like they don't fabricate enough poo poo as it is.

I said come in!
Jun 22, 2004

the claims of tunnels have been well documented by 3rd parties since before October 7. I don't see it as something that needs proof. The IDF shouldn't be bombing Gaza or sending troops into it to begin with. Everything they are doing is morally wrong.

Stanley Pain
Jun 16, 2001

by Fluffdaddy

Groovelord Neato posted:

One of the videos is of a girl pulled from the rubble alive and she asks "are you taking me to the cemetery?" and the translation isn't there but one of the rescuers says "No my dearest - you are alive and as beautiful as the moon." I'm not a guy who cries often but that one gets me every time.

Truth be told I've had to heavily limit my social media browsing because of this and at the same time the least I can do is witness what is happening, and try to push politicians and community to act.

Neurolimal
Nov 3, 2012
A facet that doesn't get touched upon often is also the fact that, from my limited understanding, (feel free to correct me on this) surface bombs, even 'bunker busters'....are actually pretty bad at destroying underground infrastructure, especially fortified (as the Hamas tunnels appear to be) structures. There's a lot of issues with getting the blast energy to disperse down into the earth instead of....all the other directions that are much more willing to accept it. There's a reason explosions tend to not cause perfectly spherical damage.

Even the mythical bunker busters are pretty poo poo at their jobs, as was discussed extensively from 2004-2006 when Bush flirted with research on how effective nuclear bunker busters would be. Any bomb explosion capable of traveling hundred/hundreds of feet underground is also going to end up being catastrophically devastating on the surface.

So how deep are Hamas tunnels? Well, IDF-disseminated factoidsExperts Say that they drop as far down as 200 feet into the ground. And I honestly believe it; digging is perhaps the one facet of construction Israel simply cannot stop Gaza from performing. And Hamas has had nearly twenty years to work on this. These are tunnels that have traveled all the way into both Egypt and West Bank territory; Hamas is pretty good at digging.

As Reuters reported, Israel themselves seem to be aware of this:

quote:

Israeli security sources say Israel's heavy aerial bombardments have caused little damage to the tunnel infrastructure with Hamas naval commandos able to launch a seaborne attack targeting coastal communities near Gaza this week.
"Although we have been attacking massively for days and days, the (Hamas) leadership is pretty much intact, as is the ability to command and control, the ability even to try and launch counter attacks," said Amir Avivi, a former brigadier general whose positions in the Israeli military included deputy commander of the Gaza division, tasked with tackling tunnels.
"There is a whole city all over Gaza underneath with depths of 40-50 metres. There are bunkers and headquarters and storage and of course they are connected to more than a thousand rocket launching positions."
Other sources estimated depths of up to 80 metres.

So what does bombing a building-any building-do against this? Iunno, I guess you might fill a single entrance with rubble for a day?

So why does Israel do it? Because the alternative, more effective approach involves sending soldiers into Gaza, into the tunnels. Something they have basically no experience doing (and continue to have next to no experience doing, in favor of safe [for them] bombs), and would end up with dead IDF soldiers, which Israel is typically unwilling to accept; the deal is that you vote Netanyahu in, Israelis don't die.

Bombs are politically safe to use, flashy, devastating, exciting, terrifying, and does basically nothing to Hamas. Prior to the invasion they boasted of killing 13 "Hamas Officials", and from what I could gather the majority of them were bureaucrats living above-ground, sleeping in their homes.

All this is to say, even if Hamas was deliberately using hospitals to hide tunnels, even if an entire command center is underneath Al-Shifa, even if every international war crimes monitoring agency said "yeah this is cool", even if every civillian was evacuated from the hospital beforehand...It would still be senseless and pointless.

Neurolimal fucked around with this message at 02:18 on Nov 9, 2023

HonorableTB
Dec 22, 2006
IDK what was posted here

Stanley Pain posted:

Israel really doubling down on the genocide thing eh?

:frogsiren: DO NO CLICK IF YOU VALUE ANY PART OF YOUR SOUL. :frogsiren:

ik edit: yeah no thanks, take your liveleaks war porn poo poo elsewhere

before the IK edit, but this:

Groovelord Neato posted:

One of the videos is of a girl pulled from the rubble alive and she asks "are you taking me to the cemetery?" and the translation isn't there but one of the rescuers says "No my dearest - you are alive and as beautiful as the moon." I'm not a guy who cries often but that one gets me every time.

what rule does this break other than the victim being a girl pulled from rubble? People are continuously challenged to provide sources and post proof of their claims but a lot of poo poo you just straight up aren't allowed to post without being accused of posting liveleak war porn freak poo poo and if things are edited out by IKs but we have no idea WHAT was edited out (something more descriptive than 'liveleak war porn poo poo' would be great), then how can someone reliably back up their claims with source material? At the least we need to know what content was in links that were edited out because right now it is ambiguous.

Is there any way at all we can get clarification on what sources can and cannot be posted? Obviously, no gore. No death, no injuries, no obvious awful poo poo like that. That's beyond dispute and should be punished heavily. However, there is no way for people coming in late to the thread to tell (beyond these basic rules everyone should be okay with because wtf if you want to see gore??), and if we're being told to post sources for claims then we should have a better idea of what we can and cannot post within the limits of "no death, no goreposting", etc. It would help the thread substantially.

Tldr: IKs please put something more descriptive in place of the links you edit out so that there's no confusion between deathposting and a girl being rescued from rubble


Edit: I'm also of the opinion that if anyone is to post anything that would fall under this kind of umbrella to think twice before posting it and think whether or not it really adds to the conversation. Does a little girl being pulled from rubble meaningfully advance the conversation or is it just ammunition for your arguments? Do we really NEED to see a girl being pulled from rubble to understand the IDF attacked that location? Anyways, that's all

Edit 2:

Stanley Pain posted:

There were some dead bodies further down in the Twitter thread I posted. I thought most of them weren't inline posted, but some were.

:cheers: for the response. I would recommend screenshotting such tweets in the future to avoid being dinged by bodies later down the thread. I speak from experience having come off a 30er for that reason lol. I learned my lesson and now post tweet screenshots which can't be retroactive rule breaks hours later

HonorableTB fucked around with this message at 02:34 on Nov 9, 2023

Stanley Pain
Jun 16, 2001

by Fluffdaddy

HonorableTB posted:

IDK what was posted here

before the IK edit, but this:

what rule does this break other than the victim being a girl pulled from rubble? People are continuously challenged to provide sources and post proof of their claims but a lot of poo poo you just straight up aren't allowed to post without being accused of posting liveleak war porn freak poo poo.

Is there any way at all we can get clarification on what sources can and cannot be posted? There is no way for people coming in late to the thread to tell, and if we're being told to post sources for claims then we should have a better idea of what we can and cannot post within the limits of "no death, no goreposting", etc. It would help the thread substantially.

There were some dead bodies further down in the Twitter thread I posted. I thought most of them weren't inline posted, but some were.

Herstory Begins Now
Aug 5, 2003
SOME REALLY TEDIOUS DUMB SHIT THAT SUCKS ASS TO READ ->>

I said come in! posted:

the claims of tunnels have been well documented by 3rd parties since before October 7. I don't see it as something that needs proof. The IDF shouldn't be bombing Gaza or sending troops into it to begin with. Everything they are doing is morally wrong.

If you're going to blow up a building you better have actual, good evidence that the building was used for whatever you're alleging it was used for.

Main Paineframe
Oct 27, 2010

HonorableTB posted:

IDK what was posted here

before the IK edit, but this:

what rule does this break other than the victim being a girl pulled from rubble? People are continuously challenged to provide sources and post proof of their claims but a lot of poo poo you just straight up aren't allowed to post without being accused of posting liveleak war porn freak poo poo and if things are edited out by IKs but we have no idea WHAT was edited out (something more descriptive than 'liveleak war porn poo poo' would be great), then how can someone reliably back up their claims with source material? At the least we need to know what content was in links that were edited out because right now it is ambiguous.

Is there any way at all we can get clarification on what sources can and cannot be posted? Obviously, no gore. No death, no injuries, no obvious awful poo poo like that. That's beyond dispute and should be punished heavily. However, there is no way for people coming in late to the thread to tell (beyond these basic rules everyone should be okay with because wtf if you want to see gore??), and if we're being told to post sources for claims then we should have a better idea of what we can and cannot post within the limits of "no death, no goreposting", etc. It would help the thread substantially.

Tldr: IKs please put something more descriptive in place of the links you edit out so that there's no confusion between deathposting and a girl being rescued from rubble


Edit: I'm also of the opinion that if anyone is to post anything that would fall under this kind of umbrella to think twice before posting it and think whether or not it really adds to the conversation. Does a little girl being pulled from rubble meaningfully advance the conversation or is it just ammunition for your arguments? Do we really NEED to see a girl being pulled from rubble to understand the IDF attacked that location? Anyways, that's all

Edit 2:

:cheers: for the response. I would recommend screenshotting such tweets in the future to avoid being dinged by bodies later down the thread. I speak from experience having come off a 30er for that reason lol. I learned my lesson and now post tweet screenshots which can't be retroactive rule breaks hours later

It was a Twitter thread containing maybe forty embedded videos. The first one was an embedded close-up shot of a kid who'd had half their face very badly burned. The second was a video of a bunch of completely naked people being brutally beaten. The third one was just a video of people carrying around the bodies of dead kids. And so on. It wasn't used to support any kind of argument or claims, it's just some random loving podcaster who apparently decided to spend his Wednesday collecting every horrible, bloody, or gory video he could find and compile it into one handy tweet thread for everyone's atrocity porn needs. I wasn't kidding at all when I called it "liveleaks war porn poo poo".

HonorableTB
Dec 22, 2006

Main Paineframe posted:

It was a Twitter thread containing maybe forty embedded videos. The first one was an embedded close-up shot of a kid who'd had half their face very badly burned. The second was a video of a bunch of completely naked people being brutally beaten. The third one was just a video of people carrying around the bodies of dead kids. And so on. It wasn't used to support any kind of argument or claims, it's just some random loving podcaster who apparently decided to spend his Wednesday collecting every horrible, bloody, or gory video he could find and compile it into one handy tweet thread for everyone's atrocity porn needs. I wasn't kidding at all when I called it "liveleaks war porn poo poo".

:stare:

Good shoot, paineframe

E2M2
Mar 2, 2007

Ain't No Thang.

HootTheOwl posted:

That said this sounds like some posthoc make believe because if Israel is already bombing ambulances why do you think they'll be safe and if they had this when they bombed the ambulance why did they wait to release it

And why would Hamas use abulances when the tunnels seem like they're working perfectly?

HootTheOwl
May 13, 2012

Hootin and shootin

Neurolimal posted:

A facet that doesn't get touched upon often is also the fact that, from my limited understanding, (feel free to correct me on this) surface bombs, even 'bunker busters'....are actually pretty bad at destroying underground infrastructure, especially fortified (as the Hamas tunnels appear to be) structures. There's a lot of issues with getting the blast energy to disperse down into the earth instead of....all the other directions that are much more willing to accept it. There's a reason explosions tend to not cause perfectly spherical damage.

Even the mythical bunker busters are pretty poo poo at their jobs, as was discussed extensively from 2004-2006 when Bush flirted with research on how effective nuclear bunker busters would be. Any bomb explosion capable of traveling hundred/hundreds of feet underground is also going to end up being catastrophically devastating on the surface.

A bunker buster works by not exploding.
The bomb is so heavy it gets stuck in the ground and then explodes allowing for as much force as possible to be applied directly to the ground, there's actually some interesting physics here about their effectiveness against sand vs dirt because sand is so much looser that the blastwaves go further like they would in a liquid.

Imo bunker buster aren't good vs tunnels because a tunnel is long. Let's say you make 300 feet of tunnel unusable, ok they'll dig up and walk s few feet and get back into the tunnel.

HonorableTB
Dec 22, 2006
Did you know the United States developed a nuclear bunker buster? Technically they're called earth penetrating weapons but they are designed to deliver a nuclear warhead into the ground of a hardened target to explode. You might wonder why they would bother because nuke is a big boom, yeah? Why would they need to worry about bunkers if you're nuking the area?

The answer is because concrete and dozens and dozens of meters of earth are an extremely good protective shield and if you're in a sufficiently hardened installation like Raven Rock or Cheyenne Mountain or [insert nuclear C2 center here] then the only thing that will be able to take you out is a bunker busting nuke that explodes deep enough to minimize the wasted energy and force of the detonation itself. This would technically be called a groundburst.

The point of this post is that bunker busters come in a wide variety of shapes and forms and Israel has one that doesn't have any explosives but instead contains a load of white phosphorus that floods the tunnel instead and I'm kind of shocked they haven't used it against Hamas tunnels in Gaza yet. It's not like they're shy about using WP in Gaza, they did it in 2008 and 2009.

I guess my overall point is that the "threat" of these tunnels to the IDF is minimal at best. They have the ability to destroy them in a ton of different ways, yet they don't despite claiming to know where they are (by publishing maps of such). The only conclusion I, and reasonable observers, can draw from this is that the tunnels in whatever form are more useful to the IDF as a boogeyman to help push their narratives rather than a real threat

Discendo Vox
Mar 21, 2013

We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.
Another good article taking an angle not commonly direct reported from the New Yorker:

Inside the Israeli Crackdown on Speech
Since the October 7th attack, Palestinians and peace activists in Israel have increasingly been targeted by employers, universities, government authorities, and right-wing mobs.

quote:

A week after the October 7th Hamas attack in the south of Israel, Israel Frey, a thirty-six-year-old Haredi journalist who focusses on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, had just returned to his apartment on the outskirts of Bnei Brak, a predominantly ultra-Orthodox town east of Tel Aviv, when he began to hear noise outside. It was after 10 p.m., a few hours past the end of Shabbat. Someone—he doesn’t remember who—messaged him to say that his address was circulating online, along with calls to join La Familia, a far-right group that started as a fan club for Jerusalem’s largest premier-league soccer team, in an attack on Frey’s home. When Frey tried to check if there was anyone outside his apartment door, he discovered that someone had blocked the viewfinder. The sounds in the street were getting louder. He could hear people shouting “traitor.” They seemed to be hurling firecrackers at the building. He rushed his wife and two children, aged eight and thirteen, out of the living room, which has a large window, and frantically texted friends: “People are attacking my house. Please come and do something.”

A neighbor approached the crowd to negotiate safe passage for Frey’s family. Before the children left the apartment, Frey covered their faces with scarves so the crowd could not see them. He stayed inside, listening to the sounds of the gathering grow more frantic and rowdy, until the police approached his door at around three in the morning and told him he needed to leave. A firecracker hit the window of Frey’s downstairs neighbor, shattering the glass. As three policemen escorted Frey out, one of them grabbed Frey’s arm and spat at him.

Frey was driven out of Bnei Brak in a police vehicle, then continued on in his own car, which another officer had driven. But, Frey soon realized, two other cars were still trailing him. He drove to Ichilov, a large hospital in Tel Aviv, and took cover. Eventually he was able to go to a friend’s apartment, where he was still staying when we spoke by video a couple of weeks later, with an acquaintance acting as an interpreter. As far as Frey knew, no arrests had been made in the attack on his building. “The police protected my life only in the sense that they prevented people from entering the building, and escorted me out,” he said. “I don’t know when I’ll be able to go home, if I can go home at all.”

Frey, who is slight of build and bespectacled, with the traditional beard and sidelocks of the ultra-Orthodox, believes that the latest round of violence in Israel and Gaza stemmed from what he called, in a message to me, Israel’s “comprehensive plan to crush half of the inhabitants between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River.” Expressing such views on Twitter appears to have cost Frey two jobs. Last year, he was picked up by police for questioning. The event that seems to have led to last month’s attack was a candlelight vigil, held in Tel Aviv a few days after October 7th. At the gathering, Frey was asked to say the Kaddish, the mourner’s prayer. He prayed for the fourteen hundred murdered Israelis and the hundreds of Palestinian children and women who by then had been killed in Israel’s retaliatory attacks on Gaza. A video fragment of Frey praying, edited to make it look like he had mentioned solely the Palestinian children, was posted along with his home address.

It goes on to discuss the broader pattern, the politician behind it, and several additional cases with direct interviews of those being targeted.

Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 07:21 on Nov 9, 2023

DeadlyMuffin
Jul 3, 2007

Discendo Vox posted:

Another good article taking an angle not commonly direct reported from the New Yorker:

Inside the Israeli Crackdown on Speech
Since the October 7th attack, Palestinians and peace activists in Israel have increasingly been targeted by employers, universities, government authorities, and right-wing mobs.

It goes on to discuss the broader pattern, the politician behind it, and several additional cases with direct interviews of those being targeted.

Excellent article. I'm not surprised to see Itamar Ben-Gvir show up. His presence as Minister of National Security is a good example of how right wing the current Israeli government is.

For folks who aren't familiar, his Wikipedia page is worth a skim: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Itamar_Ben-Gvir
He's essentially a fascist.

WhiskeyWhiskers
Oct 14, 2013


"هذا ليس عادلاً."
"هذا ليس عادلاً على الإطلاق."
"كان هناك وقت الآن."
(السياق الخفي: للقراءة)

HonorableTB posted:

Did you know the United States developed a nuclear bunker buster? Technically they're called earth penetrating weapons but they are designed to deliver a nuclear warhead into the ground of a hardened target to explode. You might wonder why they would bother because nuke is a big boom, yeah? Why would they need to worry about bunkers if you're nuking the area?

The answer is because concrete and dozens and dozens of meters of earth are an extremely good protective shield and if you're in a sufficiently hardened installation like Raven Rock or Cheyenne Mountain or [insert nuclear C2 center here] then the only thing that will be able to take you out is a bunker busting nuke that explodes deep enough to minimize the wasted energy and force of the detonation itself. This would technically be called a groundburst.

The point of this post is that bunker busters come in a wide variety of shapes and forms and Israel has one that doesn't have any explosives but instead contains a load of white phosphorus that floods the tunnel instead and I'm kind of shocked they haven't used it against Hamas tunnels in Gaza yet. It's not like they're shy about using WP in Gaza, they did it in 2008 and 2009.

I guess my overall point is that the "threat" of these tunnels to the IDF is minimal at best. They have the ability to destroy them in a ton of different ways, yet they don't despite claiming to know where they are (by publishing maps of such). The only conclusion I, and reasonable observers, can draw from this is that the tunnels in whatever form are more useful to the IDF as a boogeyman to help push their narratives rather than a real threat

I'd say it's pretty obvious they have no idea where the tunnels are accurately enough to deliver payloads directly into them. They're just dumb firing high explosives into the ground and hoping something shakes loose.

The tunnels are literally an existential threat to any attempt to occupy Gaza, there is no way they could hold the place with the tunnel system intact, as we are seeing currently.

Hong XiuQuan
Feb 19, 2008

"Without justice for the Palestinians there will be no peace in the Middle East."

HootTheOwl posted:

So I've seen this floating around and also this reply
https://twitter.com/adamjohnsonCHI/status/1722344313844109347?t=D-lIlSz6Z7Lfbnm1dEkqLg&s=19
And as a former signals guy I gotta say: yes that's how it'd work. Now that Israel is just bombing everything you can't really maintain the same comint discipline you could before.

That said this sounds like some posthoc make believe because if Israel is already bombing ambulances why do you think they'll be safe and if they had this when they bombed the ambulance why did they wait to release it


Maybe it's possible they're picking up convenient unencrypted comms like this with Hamas operatives just coming out and saying "Oh yes I like travelling in ambulances", "Which one will you take this time?", "I dunno man, I can take all of them. Hope Israel doesn't send a missile on the one I pick lol, that'd serve me right for my warcrimes". It's possible but stretches belief already. It'd be much, much easier to believe this kind of thing if Israel doesn't have a long history of obviously faking audio or presenting patently false audio as fact.

See: Mavi Marmara (Israel murders 9; releases this audio intercept suggesting someone with a peculiarly Israeli accent trying to imitate an American accent saying "Go back to Auschwitz" and "Don't forget 9/11?") - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mSw3pjfBXS4 - there's a two or three minute long clip with actual responses from the ship. The generous interpretation here is someone was radioing from a nearby Israeli boat or the shore but there's absolutely no chance the Israeli armed forces thought this was real.

See: The Second Nakba - audio released concerning missile debris from Al-Ahli. The Arabic speakers are obviously not native levantine speakers. The tone throughout makes no sense and the script is execrable https://x.com/leslibless/status/1714546040492151151?s=20

See: The Second Nakba - audio released after Israel bombs bunch of hospitals of two Hamas operatives talking about where all the bases are. Guess where they're saying all the bases are? Oh yes, under hospitals. The accents are also not right here. Nor is the conversation flow. People just don't talk like this. https://x.com/SkyNews/status/1717954369914614091?s=20

nb: that twitter account above is some right-wing bot but the video is authentic. Couldn't find a high-quality Tw source posting it quickly because of all the noise around the al-Ahli massacre.

Marenghi
Oct 16, 2008

Don't trust the liberals,
they will betray you
https://x.com/JalalAK_jojo/status/1722376328760947143?s=20

Looks like Israel is enforcing the controversial new law criminalizing the consumption of 'terrorist materials' i.e. news from Hamas or similar sources.

Silver2195
Apr 4, 2012
https://twitter.com/shashj/status/1722295168533975113

I’m skeptical that this will change much, but we’ll see.

punishedkissinger
Sep 20, 2017

Silver2195 posted:

https://twitter.com/shashj/status/1722295168533975113

I’m skeptical that this will change much, but we’ll see.

they're been doing several things on this list for more than a decade

Paladinus
Jan 11, 2014

heyHEYYYY!!!

Marenghi posted:

https://x.com/JalalAK_jojo/status/1722376328760947143?s=20

Looks like Israel is enforcing the controversial new law criminalizing the consumption of 'terrorist materials' i.e. news from Hamas or similar sources.

If I read the law correctly, it somehow aims to distinguish between consumption for the purpose of being informed and consumption for the purpose of support. So Israeli media obviously can quote Hamas when they say they want to destroy Israel or whatever to show how bad they are, but there is always a possibility of a thoughtcrime occurring when you read the words 'death to Israel', I guess.

Groovelord Neato
Dec 6, 2014


punishedkissinger posted:

they're been doing several things on this list for more than a decade

Yeah what the gently caress the blockade has been going on for almost twenty years now. And I can't imagine Israel not directly reoccupying Gaza after this.

Groovelord Neato fucked around with this message at 14:56 on Nov 9, 2023

BUUNNI
Jun 23, 2023

by Pragmatica

Silver2195 posted:

https://twitter.com/shashj/status/1722295168533975113

I’m skeptical that this will change much, but we’ll see.

I’m sure Blinken is also totally going to enforce the red line when Israel inevitably crosses it, right?

Hong XiuQuan
Feb 19, 2008

"Without justice for the Palestinians there will be no peace in the Middle East."

Paladinus posted:

If I read the law correctly, it somehow aims to distinguish between consumption for the purpose of being informed and consumption for the purpose of support. So Israeli media obviously can quote Hamas when they say they want to destroy Israel or whatever to show how bad they are, but there is always a possibility of a thoughtcrime occurring when you read the words 'death to Israel', I guess.

It's one of those laws that exists in the totally not apartheid state that seems neutral but is obviously only going to be enforced (or with perhaps very few exceptions) for the ethnic minority that is totally free and equal. So, for example, I highly doubt anybody's going to be going to prison for seeing a video praising Meir Kahane or any number of Jewish terrorists. Scroll past an autoplay of a PIJ video blowing up a Merkava? Watch a clip of Ghassan Kanafani? Read a Wikipedia article about PFLP? AND you're a Palestinian citizen of Israel? Time for gloves off.

While I'm here, this thread on Saleh Al-Jafarawi (subject to just the most obscene racist memeing, including by official Israel channels) is great. It explains the lies behind the repeatedly shared viral meme about him and also contextualises him as a content creator - ie the guy is just a TikToker in a warzone:

https://twitter.com/NordsSims/status/1720941514023456905

Nail Rat
Dec 29, 2000

You maniacs! You blew it up! God damn you! God damn you all to hell!!

BUUNNI posted:

I’m sure Blinken is also totally going to enforce the red line when Israel inevitably crosses it, right?

They already said they're not setting red lines for israel so this all amounts to nothing either way

BUUNNI
Jun 23, 2023

by Pragmatica

Hong XiuQuan posted:

It's one of those laws that exists in the totally not apartheid state that seems neutral but is obviously only going to be enforced (or with perhaps very few exceptions) for the ethnic minority that is totally free and equal. So, for example, I highly doubt anybody's going to be going to prison for seeing a video praising Meir Kahane or any number of Jewish terrorists. Scroll past an autoplay of a PIJ video blowing up a Merkava? Watch a clip of Ghassan Kanafani? Read a Wikipedia article about PFLP? AND you're a Palestinian citizen of Israel? Time for gloves off.

While I'm here, this thread on Saleh Al-Jafarawi (subject to just the most obscene racist memeing, including by official Israel channels) is great. It explains the lies behind the repeatedly shared viral meme about him and also contextualises him as a content creator - ie the guy is just a TikToker in a warzone:

https://twitter.com/NordsSims/status/1720941514023456905

It just seems like Zionists are white supremacists

https://twitter.com/bin_account2/status/1721544708705403315

Hong XiuQuan
Feb 19, 2008

"Without justice for the Palestinians there will be no peace in the Middle East."

BUUNNI posted:

It just seems like Zionists are white supremacists

https://twitter.com/bin_account2/status/1721544708705403315

Certainly the extreme wing of Zionism shares a lot in common with white supremacy and has been making big inroads in Israel (the last six or so governments of Israel are perfect evidence of this trend).

Main Paineframe
Oct 27, 2010

Silver2195 posted:

https://twitter.com/shashj/status/1722295168533975113

I’m skeptical that this will change much, but we’ll see.

The tweet takes him out of context a fair bit, I think. In his actual comments (and in many of the full articles covering them), it's pretty clear that he's talking about an idealistic long-term vision, not immediate demands for what things are going to look like right after Israel's occupation. He openly admits later in the same press conference that there will be a "transition period" in which Israel is in full control of Gaza before handing it off to some peaceful Palestinian faction, and he doesn't set any time limits on the length of that period. He also seems to be conditioning the return of Gaza to Palestinian control on an end to Palestinian terrorism in Gaza, so it'll be easy for Israel to drag out that occupation period by saying there's still violence that needs to be stomped out.

Here's an actual transcript, and I'll quote the parts that are relevant to Gaza:

https://www.state.gov/secretary-antony-j-blinken-at-a-press-availability-41/

quote:

The G7 ministers reaffirmed our staunch support for Israel’s right and obligation to defend itself and seek to ensure the attacks of October 7th can never happen again, in accordance with international humanitarian law.

We had in-depth discussions about the steps that we are taking to address urgent needs on the ground.  We all agreed that humanitarian pauses would advance key objectives to protect Palestinian civilians, to increase the sustained flow of humanitarian assistance, to allow our citizens and foreign nationals to exit, and to facilitate the release of hostages.  I briefed by colleagues about my conversations with Israeli leaders on pauses, and on concrete steps to minimize harm to Palestinian civilians in Gaza and to stop extremist violence in the West Bank.

Israel has repeatedly told us that there’s no going back to October 6th before the barbaric attacks by Hamas.  We fully agree.  As we work with Israel to ensure this, we also are working in the region to deter broader threats to our partners and to our friends.

As the President said, to anyone seeking to take advantage of the crisis in Gaza and spread conflict to other theaters: don’t.

All of us want to end this conflict as soon as possible, and meanwhile, to minimize civilian suffering.  But as I discussed with my G7 colleagues, those calling for an immediate ceasefire have an obligation to explain how to address the unacceptable result it would likely bring about : Hamas left in place, with more than 200 hostages, with the capacity and stated intent to repeat October 7th – again and again and again.

Ultimately, the only way to ensure that this crisis never happens again is to begin setting the conditions for durable peace and security
, and to frame our diplomatic efforts now with that in mind.

The United States believes key elements should include no forcible displacement of Palestinians from Gaza – not now, not after the war.  No use of Gaza as a platform for terrorism or other violent attacks.  No reoccupation of Gaza after the conflict ends.  No attempt to blockade or besiege Gaza.  No reduction in the territory of Gaza.  We must also ensure no terrorist threats can emanate from the West Bank.

We must also work on the affirmative elements to get to a sustained peace.  These must include the Palestinian people’s voices and aspirations at the center of post-crisis governance in Gaza.  It must include Palestinian-led governance and Gaza unified with the West Bank under the Palestinian Authority.

And it must include a sustained mechanism for reconstruction in Gaza, and a pathway to Israelis and Palestinians living side by side in states of their own, with equal measures of security, freedom, opportunity, and dignity.

Even as we focus intensely on addressing these urgent challenges, we believe that the time is now to start the conversation about the future – not tomorrow, not after the war – today – because identifying the longer-term objectives and a pathway to get there will help shape our approach to addressing immediate needs.

I know it’s hard to look ahead in this moment.  It is the aim of terrorists to sow chaos, to destroy hope, to destroy lives, and, through human despair, grow their ranks and hijack the political future of the Palestinians.  We cannot and we will not let them succeed.

quote:

QUESTION:  Good evening, Mr. Secretary.  Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu said that his government would maintain security control of Gaza for, quote, “an indefinite period,” end quote.  How do you reconcile those comments to previous statements by both the U.S. and Israeli governments opposing a reoccupation of Gaza?  And then you address this a bit, but other G7 members have expressed support for a full ceasefire in the Israel-Hamas war, while the U.S. continues to support just these humanitarian pauses.  And I’m just wondering:  Did you convince the other members of the U.S. position, or is this joint statement language just the sort of minimal consensus area?  Thank you.

SECRETARY BLINKEN:  Thanks, Courtney.  So I think we’ve been very clear from day one that when it comes to post-conflict governance in Gaza, a few things are clear and necessary.  One, Gaza cannot be – continue to be run by Hamas.  That simply invites a repetition of October 7th and Gaza used as a place from which to launch terrorist attacks.  It’s also clear that Israel cannot occupy Gaza.

Now, the reality is that there may be a need for some transition period at the end of the conflict, but
it is imperative that the Palestinian people be central to governance in Gaza and in the West Bank as well, and that, again, we don’t see a reoccupation.  And what I’ve heard from Israeli leaders is that they have no intent to reoccupy Gaza and retake control of Gaza.

So the only question is are – is there some transition period that might be necessary, and what might be the mechanisms that you could put in place for that to make sure that there is security?  But we’re very clear on no reoccupation, just as we’re very clear on no displacement of the Palestinian population.  And, as we’ve said before, we need to see and get to, in effect, unity of governance when it comes to Gaza and the West Bank, and ultimately to a Palestinian state.

When it comes to the G7 statement, and particularly with regard to the question of a ceasefire, actually we found real unity in the G7 on – in this moment on that question.  I think the communique very accurately reflects what we discussed and what G7 partners believe.

...

QUESTION:  Thank you for this opportunity and thank you for coming to Japan.  So you met with Prime Minister Kishida yesterday.  What role could Japan play in the conflict in the Middle East, and what is your expectation of Japan in this conflict?  And also, can a ceasefire agreement be reached between Israel and Gaza, and also, what do you think is the final goal of this conflict?

SECRETARY BLINKEN:  Thank you.  First, I was very appreciative of being able to see Prime Minister Kishida, and of course to spend time, extensive time, with the foreign minister.  And I can tell you first we very much appreciate Japan’s engagement in helping to deal with the conflict between Israel and Hamas and the situation in Gaza.  I very much welcome the foreign minister’s trip to the region, which was important, as well as her unequivocal condemnation of terror, the call for the release of hostages, and the announcement by Japan of $75 million in humanitarian assistance.

We had a very productive discussion with – the foreign minister and I – about important, vital issues like what needs to be done to minimize civilian casualties, to increase the flow even more of humanitarian assistance into Gaza, and to prevent the spread of the conflict to other places.  And I think the United States and Japan are very clearly aligned on what needs to be done and what we’re working to do together.

As I said earlier, in terms of the future, I think there are a few very basic things that everyone would want to achieve.  One is that there can’t be a return to the situation, the status quo before October 7th, where Gaza can be used as a platform to launch the most horrific terrorist attacks that anyone can imagine.  And at the same time, it’s vitally important that Palestinian aspirations for governing themselves, for being the ones to decide their own futures, are realized.  And so we have to work to both of those things at the same time, and that’s what we’re trying to do.

So there's two main tracks here. In the long run, he reaffirms the US commitment to an eventual two-state solution where a peaceful PA controls both the West Bank and Gaza and lives in total peace and harmony with Israel. In the short run, though, it calls for the complete destruction of Hamas, an end to Palestinian terrorism, a full reaffirmation of Israel's right to exist, and an endorsement of whatever's needed to establish Israeli security and comfort. Things like lifting the blockade and not further displacing Palestinians will come after those basic short-term requirements are met.

I said come in!
Jun 22, 2004

People that live in Gaza and still have access to Twitter, are reporting that Israeli soldiers and snipers are intentionally targeting civilians and killing them. The one tweet I would like to share unfortunately has video / pictures of gore and dead people.


Blinken's plan is complete horseshit. So Israel, who created the conditions for all of this in the first place, on purpose, gets all of the power still over Palestinians, and gets to implement a puppet government that will be pro-Israeli and leave the Palestinians likely worst off than they are even now. Israel has committed horrific war crimes, and carried out ruthless genocide against Palestinians for decades, they don't get a say in this, and letting them control Gaza in any capacity is completely unacceptable.

I said come in! fucked around with this message at 15:48 on Nov 9, 2023

Silver2195
Apr 4, 2012

Main Paineframe posted:

The tweet takes him out of context a fair bit, I think. In his actual comments (and in many of the full articles covering them), it's pretty clear that he's talking about an idealistic long-term vision, not immediate demands for what things are going to look like right after Israel's occupation. He openly admits later in the same press conference that there will be a "transition period" in which Israel is in full control of Gaza before handing it off to some peaceful Palestinian faction, and he doesn't set any time limits on the length of that period. He also seems to be conditioning the return of Gaza to Palestinian control on an end to Palestinian terrorism in Gaza, so it'll be easy for Israel to drag out that occupation period by saying there's still violence that needs to be stomped out.

Here's an actual transcript, and I'll quote the parts that are relevant to Gaza:

https://www.state.gov/secretary-antony-j-blinken-at-a-press-availability-41/



So there's two main tracks here. In the long run, he reaffirms the US commitment to an eventual two-state solution where a peaceful PA controls both the West Bank and Gaza and lives in total peace and harmony with Israel. In the short run, though, it calls for the complete destruction of Hamas, an end to Palestinian terrorism, a full reaffirmation of Israel's right to exist, and an endorsement of whatever's needed to establish Israeli security and comfort. Things like lifting the blockade and not further displacing Palestinians will come after those basic short-term requirements are met.

Thanks. I should have read the context more before posting the tweet; sorry.

Main Paineframe
Oct 27, 2010

I said come in! posted:

Blinken's plan is complete horseshit. So Israel, who created the conditions for all of this in the first place, on purpose, gets all of the power still over Palestinians, and gets to implement a puppet government that will be pro-Israeli and leave the Palestinians likely worst off than they are even now. Israel has committed horrific war crimes, and carried out ruthless genocide against Palestinians for decades, they don't get a say in this, and letting them control Gaza in any capacity is completely unacceptable.

That's par for the course, unfortunately. The US position since the 90s has been a two-state solution where a completely peaceful PA with zero Hamas involvement offers Israel any and all "security assurances" Israel feels it needs, in return for being eventually allowed a measure of nominal independence.

That's why the Camp David talks failed, for instance. Israeli and American negotiators like to talk about how much Palestinian land they'd generously offered to allow the Palestinians to keep, but they also demanded a completely demilitarized Palestine, the right to send troops into Palestinian territory whenever they judged it necessary, several IDF radar stations on Palestinian soil, a permanent IDF presence at the Palestine-Jordan border, Israeli inspectors and observers at all Palestinian border crossings, full control over Palestinian airspace, Israeli veto power over Palestinian foreign policy, Israeli control over West Bank water resources, and more.

That list of demands hasn't changed very much in the 23 years since then, and the general line of thinking has remained the same. Of course, no consideration is given to Palestinian security against Israeli aggression. With a wishlist like that it's no wonder that the US and Israel refuse to even allow Hamas at the negotiating table. Even Abbas would struggle to accept those conditions, but there's no way Hamas would, and Hamas fully intends to use violence as a bargaining chip to negotiate Israel down to lesser demands.

ummel
Jun 17, 2002

<3 Lowtax

Fun Shoe

BUUNNI posted:

It just seems like Zionists are white supremacists

https://twitter.com/bin_account2/status/1721544708705403315

Why are you posting a lovely racist tweet from a 6 month old account with 51 followers?

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

HonorableTB posted:

Ironically the Sartres quote is applicable to the Israeli government's use of language.
An Israeli diplomat, Ofir Gendelman, just posted a tweet complaining that Hamas is using crisis actors in makeup to exaggerate the death toll. As evidence of "Pallywood" he posted a clip from a pro-Palestinian video by a Lebanese artist.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

PT6A
Jan 5, 2006

Public school teachers are callous dictators who won't lift a finger to stop children from peeing in my plane
It’s funny how infringements of sovereignty under the guise of “security guarantees” are the new hotness in terms of casus belli. Whether in Ukraine or Gaza, “you must do what I say or I’ll just feel so darn unsafe I’ll have no choice but to bomb you” is some bullshit, and a lot of it traces back to the pre-emptive strike rhetoric of the post-9/11 period.

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