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
Lovely Joe Stalin
Jun 12, 2007

Our Lovely Wang
I'm not sure your pithy one liner is as clever as you think it is. We had a perfect example of just how well surrendering to the IDF goes for Israelis, let alone Palestinians, just the other day. Not to mention evidence of them summarily executing unarmed prisoners on the day itself.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Main Paineframe
Oct 27, 2010
I think a big problem here is that people keep jumping to large sweeping claims about things that we don't have a lot of clear evidence about yet. It's perfectly fine to just reserve judgement about things until later! There is evidence arriving that Israeli notary action killed a non-trivial number of civilian hostages...but there's also no particular reason to doubt the extensive evidence that Hamas also killed a lot of civilians on Oct 7.

Main Paineframe fucked around with this message at 16:45 on Dec 25, 2023

skipmyseashells
Nov 14, 2020

zoxnox posted:

So glad we have the Stormfront brigade here to continually remind us that no crimes have ever been perpetrated against Jews (at least that they didn't deserve).

I thought this bullshit would have ended after the death toll hit 10k in gaza but boy who cried antisemitism is just too much of a classic to give up

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

The Sean
Apr 17, 2005

Am I handsome now?


zoxnox posted:

So glad we have the Stormfront brigade here to continually remind us that no crimes have ever been perpetrated against Jews (at least that they didn't deserve).

Can you quote where this is being said?

Lovely Joe Stalin
Jun 12, 2007

Our Lovely Wang

Main Paineframe posted:

I think a big problem here is that people keep jumping to large sweeping claims about things that we don't have a lot of clear evidence about yet. It's perfectly fine to just reserve judgement about things until later! There is evidence arriving that Israeli notary action killed a non-trivial number of civilian hostages...but there's also no particular reason to doubt the extensive evidence that Hamas also killed a lot of civilians on Oct 7.

I think you've hit the nail on the head. For various reasons people are falling into what are essentially jingoistic camps on it. When the reality is that you can acknowledge that yes, Hamas & Co. did kill a lot of people that day and not all were military targets, but that the IDF and Israel are not telling the truth about who killed who, or how.
Taking a more nuanced position doesn't hurt your argument, it can only strengthen it. All this black and white cheer leading poo poo does is muddy the water and continue to pull us back into a narrative which, deliberately or not, distracts from the superseding atrocities Israel has committed since.

skipmyseashells posted:

I thought this bullshit would have ended after the death toll hit 10k in gaza but boy who cried antisemitism is just too much of a classic to give up

It's their first post in the thread. Coincidentally, accusing anti-Semitism is the first page of the traditional play book for disrupting discussions critical of Israel.

Lovely Joe Stalin fucked around with this message at 17:04 on Dec 25, 2023

Jakabite
Jul 31, 2010
I agree that the details haven’t settled and a bit of nuance is always good but I also feel comfortable classing myself as someone who is on the side of the Palestinian resistance, and firmly against the far-right ethnostate built on the ruins of another people who they continue to ethnically cleanse and appear to now be genociding. Atrocities have been committed by both sides but I still feel confident in saying one side will be looked upon as a resistance against an extremely violent occupation, and the other as sick oppressors akin to any other fascist ethnostate.

Stringent
Dec 22, 2004


image text goes here

Main Paineframe posted:

I think a big problem here is that people keep jumping to large sweeping claims about things that we don't have a lot of clear evidence about yet. It's perfectly fine to just reserve judgement about things until later! There is evidence arriving that Israeli notary action killed a non-trivial number of civilian hostages...but there's also no particular reason to doubt the extensive evidence that Hamas also killed a lot of civilians on Oct 7.

I think a big problem here is that everyone would just prefer that the slaughter in Gaza had never happened in the first place, and failing that had ended yesterday. But that's not the world we live in, and it's just going to continue despite our wishes.

XYZAB
Jun 29, 2003

HNNNNNGG!!
Say what you will about X but there is no other platform where you can reply directly to a post from Benjamin Netanyahu with the most famous image of a man stretching his gaping anus that has ever existed and is indeed likely to exist in the entire history of the world.

Kalit
Nov 6, 2006

The great thing about the thousands of slaughtered Palestinian children is that they can't pull away when you fondle them or sniff their hair.

That's a Biden success story.

Stringent posted:

So the Hamas fighters that were sent there to take hostages got trapped, and an Israeli general officer wound up saying gently caress it, flatten the place is what I got from the NYT piece.

Is that how you read it as well?

Your framing is really weird here with the words "got trapped". They "got trapped" because they were among fighters who were murdering and abducting civilians long enough for the IDF to show up. After the IDF was there, of course they weren't going to allow them to leave for Gaza with said hostages. But those fighters could have left before then. Hell, they could have just never shown up to commit those atrocities.

But, to your point, I would frame it as the Israeli general officer was negotiating for a couple hours (from 4 PM to dusk). During those couple of hours, one of the hostages was released alongside a Hamas fighter surrendering. Then, at the end of those attempted negotiations, a Hamas fighter shot an RPG at them. Which is when the officer said gently caress it, had a light shell shot at the structure, and they all had a shoot out.

Kalit fucked around with this message at 17:48 on Dec 25, 2023

Stringent
Dec 22, 2004


image text goes here
nevermind.

Stringent fucked around with this message at 17:52 on Dec 25, 2023

Kalit
Nov 6, 2006

The great thing about the thousands of slaughtered Palestinian children is that they can't pull away when you fondle them or sniff their hair.

That's a Biden success story.

Stringent posted:

So my framing is weird, and you go off on a tear about Hamas was murdering and abducting citizens until the IDF shows up, except they weren't doing any of that according to the article you posted. Then the IDF shows up and shells the whole place because a general officer couldn't be hosed for staying around past his dinner time or whatever. Is that about right?

I only quoted the part that was specifically about the standoff/negotiations, since that was the immediate situation being discussed. If you read the entire article, you would know that's what it said. Here is one excerpt that easily fits the murdering/abducting part:

quote:

Hamas gunmen and their allies focused their attack on the western parts of the village, the area closest to Gaza. They ransacked those neighborhoods house by house, systematically setting fire to scores of homes, killing many of those they found inside and abducting others.

In the center of the village, the gunmen slaughtered most of the people hiding inside a besieged health clinic. On the eastern flank of Be’eri, another squad of attackers gathered 14 hostages inside a ransacked home and used them as human shields during a standoff with Israeli forces; some of the hostages were killed in the crossfire, during a delayed and chaotic military response.

socialsecurity
Aug 30, 2003

Main Paineframe posted:

I think a big problem here is that people keep jumping to large sweeping claims about things that we don't have a lot of clear evidence about yet. It's perfectly fine to just reserve judgement about things until later! There is evidence arriving that Israeli notary action killed a non-trivial number of civilian hostages...but there's also no particular reason to doubt the extensive evidence that Hamas also killed a lot of civilians on Oct 7.

Yeah, not even Hamas themselves claim IDF killed most of the civilians. It really feels like making up a conspiracy theory to make their "side" feel impossibly clean which just feels unneeded. An article in which a tank kills a single civilian does not work as proof that IDF killed most of the people. There is tons of video and eyewitnesses from that day and while Israel oppresses the Palenstinains it does not do nearly as much to it's own people where they would be afraid to speak out if their family was murdered by the IDF.

It seems like in general there is way too much jumping to conclusions based on biases. I got dogpiled by people earlier in the thread when the hospital bombing happened because I was told Hamas did not have a bomb powerful enough of leveling an entire hospital in one explosion, but the hospital wasn't leveled people were just reading random twitter hot takes and using that as facts to go attack their enemies with.

Jakabite
Jul 31, 2010

Kalit posted:

Your framing is really weird here with the words "got trapped". They "got trapped" because they were among fighters who were murdering and abducting civilians long enough for the IDF to show up. After the IDF was there, of course they weren't going to allow them to leave for Gaza with said hostages. But those fighters could have left before then. Hell, they could have just never shown up to commit those atrocities.

But, to your point, I would frame it as the Israeli general officer was negotiating for a couple hours (from 4 PM to dusk). During those couple of hours, one of the hostages was released alongside a Hamas fighter surrendering. Then, at the end of those attempted negotiations, a Hamas fighter shot an RPG at them. Which is when the officer said gently caress it, had a light shell shot at the structure, and they all had a shoot out.

And the Israelis could’ve not spent the last 70 years ethnically cleansing and murdering Hamas’ people but here we are, eh? Dirty old game, politics.

Grip it and rip it
Apr 28, 2020

Jakabite posted:

You just can’t stop moving them goalposts can you?

‘Israel didn’t kill the hostages’

‘Okay they did but they had no choice’

‘Okay they had a choice but it was a hard one’

‘Okay they could’ve done almost anything but just blow up the room with the hostages in but would it be better to let them be taken to Gaza’

‘Ok it would be better but they’d not even have been hostages if the residents of the concentration camp hadn’t had the temerity to fight back against their captors’

If you think that oppressed people should just lay down and die slowly then just say that dude.

How do I get people that post like.this to lay down and die slowly?

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

Kalit
Nov 6, 2006

The great thing about the thousands of slaughtered Palestinian children is that they can't pull away when you fondle them or sniff their hair.

That's a Biden success story.

Jakabite posted:

And the Israelis could’ve not spent the last 70 years ethnically cleansing and murdering Hamas’ people but here we are, eh? Dirty old game, politics.

I never stated Israel has no blame. But Hamas certainly shares a lot of blame on those hostage deaths too.

ummel
Jun 17, 2002

<3 Lowtax

Fun Shoe

Main Paineframe posted:

I think a big problem here is that people keep jumping to large sweeping claims about things that we don't have a lot of clear evidence about yet. It's perfectly fine to just reserve judgement about things until later! There is evidence arriving that Israeli notary action killed a non-trivial number of civilian hostages...but there's also no particular reason to doubt the extensive evidence that Hamas also killed a lot of civilians on Oct 7.

The point isn't to have a reasonable read on the events, quite the opposite really. The point is to hurt your (posting) enemies. If you have to lie, so be it. If you have to post @socialisthamster69420 hot takes, so be it. If you have to cite grayzone, so be it. It's the alt-right posting playbook but for leftists. It's exhausting, but that's the point.

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

Caros
May 14, 2008

Lovely Joe Stalin posted:

I'm not sure your pithy one liner is as clever as you think it is. We had a perfect example of just how well surrendering to the IDF goes for Israelis, let alone Palestinians, just the other day. Not to mention evidence of them summarily executing unarmed prisoners on the day itself.

On the other hand one of the Hamas commanders successfully surrendered in that encounter without issue.

Jakabite
Jul 31, 2010

Kalit posted:

I never stated Israel has no blame. But Hamas certainly shares a lot of blame on those hostage deaths too.

I guess it’s a question of where you draw the line of culpability. In my eyes if you herd a group of people into a concentration camp, then you’re responsible for whatever happens as a result of that - including them people becoming violent towards your civilians.

Also it’s not about hurting your posting enemies, it’s about not giving a Western backed fascist state cover for their genocide of an indigenous population.

Vanadium
Jan 8, 2005

Hey can y'all recommend somewhere I can read about how armed forces traditionally handle situations where the other guys' armed forces have a bunch of their civilians as hostages?

Argas
Jan 13, 2008
SRW Fanatic




Well usually hostages are taken to gain some leverage over the other party. It's up to the other party to determine what they consider more important. Do they care about the hostages' lives? How far would concessions go to get the hostages to safety? Or will they disregard people's lives and just tell everyone they won't negotiate with terrorists? The hardline stance does intend to discourage more hostage taking but it also just means the lives of the hostages matters less than the integrity/sanctity of the state, or whatever.

Neurolimal
Nov 3, 2012

Kalit posted:

But, to your point, I would frame it as the Israeli general officer was negotiating for a couple hours (from 4 PM to dusk). During those couple of hours, one of the hostages was released alongside a Hamas fighter surrendering. Then, at the end of those attempted negotiations, a Hamas fighter shot an RPG at them. Which is when the officer said gently caress it, had a light shell shot at the structure, and they all had a shoot out.

I mean, while this is entirely understandable for the IDF soldiers along the lines of "I don't want to get blown up", it stands to reason that if you already got one hostage released & one soldier surrendered then you could get more out with some patience. 8 hours is a lot of time in general but maybe cruelly short when the alternative is "85% of the hostages die."

I think intent and instigation are important for allocating blame; the Hamas soldiers took the hostages for the purpose of trading to release other hostages. This isn't to deny that Gaza militants killed civilians that day, but those 15 were specifically taken without intent to kill; if they escape then they still survive (but Israel is embarassed), if you start a firefight they most certainly die to shelling or crossfire. I doubt the IDF general didn't understand any of this.

Kalit
Nov 6, 2006

The great thing about the thousands of slaughtered Palestinian children is that they can't pull away when you fondle them or sniff their hair.

That's a Biden success story.

Neurolimal posted:

I mean, while this is entirely understandable for the IDF soldiers along the lines of "I don't want to get blown up", it stands to reason that if you already got one hostage released & one soldier surrendered then you could get more out with some patience. 8 hours is a lot of time in general but maybe cruelly short when the alternative is "85% of the hostages die."

I think intent and instigation are important for allocating blame; the Hamas soldiers took the hostages for the purpose of trading to release other hostages. This isn't to deny that Gaza militants killed civilians that day, but those 15 were specifically taken without intent to kill; if they escape then they still survive (but Israel is embarassed), if you start a firefight they most certainly die to shelling or crossfire. I doubt the IDF general didn't understand any of this.

Obviously, hostage taking usually doesn't involve immediately killing of said hostages. But there was absolutely zero explanation on them taking hostages on that day. The IDF soldiers, Israel government, or families of said hostages had no way of knowing what Hamas' plan was in that moment. They just knew there was a lot of murder and some abductions.

I don't think allowing Hamas to take the hostages back to Gaza in hopes that they may someday escape would be an acceptable option. It sounds like a fairy tale. If it was one of my relatives, I would still want IDF to attempt to at least free some of the hostages, even if it meant my relative died.

Also, I haven't heard that the plan for Hamas soldiers taking hostages was to get Palestinian hostages released. Do you have a source for that? Obviously, it was an outcome that happened, but that's much different than being a planned outcome.

Hell, you're making me realize that I'm still unaware if the overall goal was just to sow fear into the Israeli population, to get Israel to release illegally detained Palestinians, and/or something else. Is a master plan even known for that day yet?

punishedkissinger
Sep 20, 2017

Kalit posted:


Also, I haven't heard that the plan for Hamas soldiers taking hostages was to get Palestinian hostages released. Do you have a source for that? Obviously, it was an outcome that happened, but that's much different than being a planned outcome.


it's what theyve done multiple times before and exactly what has happened this time in terms of their demands

Neurolimal
Nov 3, 2012

Kalit posted:

Hell, you're making me realize that I'm still unaware if the overall goal was just to sow fear into the Israeli population, to get Israel to release illegally detained Palestinians, and/or something else. Is a master plan even known for that day yet?

Hamas has released some statements, it seems the goal was:

- Cross the border
- Engage the forces guarding the border
- Hopefully take some hostages and retreat

Just crossing the border would have been Mission Accomplished for making clear that the border does not insulate Israel's apartheid, regardless of how the other two went.

Hamas didn't expect:
- A last-minute relocated rave nearby
- For the forces guarding the border to be anemic
- For the forces guarding the border to barely put up a fight

They likely would have used more soldiers if they knew this was going to be a historic moment to take advantage of, but it is what it is. 'Terror' (muddying normalization, breaking the illusion of security) and hostage negotiations were the goal.

Kalit
Nov 6, 2006

The great thing about the thousands of slaughtered Palestinian children is that they can't pull away when you fondle them or sniff their hair.

That's a Biden success story.

Neurolimal posted:

Hamas has released some statements, it seems the goal was:

- Cross the border
- Engage the forces guarding the border
- Hopefully take some hostages and retreat

Just crossing the border would have been Mission Accomplished for making clear that the border does not insulate Israel's apartheid, regardless of how the other two went.

Hamas didn't expect:
- A last-minute relocated rave nearby
- For the forces guarding the border to be anemic
- For the forces guarding the border to barely put up a fight

They likely would have used more soldiers if they knew this was going to be a historic moment to take advantage of, but it is what it is. 'Terror' (muddying normalization, breaking the illusion of security) and hostage negotiations were the goal.

Thanks for the summary, can you please link these statements too? I just want to see it myself and don't know the best way to search for those things.

Neurolimal
Nov 3, 2012
Busy with family right now, but Middle East Eye has some takes from anonymous Hamas sources on Oct 7.

CSM
Jan 29, 2014

56th Motorized Infantry 'Mariupol' Brigade
Seh' die Welt in Trummern liegen

Neurolimal posted:

Hamas has released some statements, it seems the goal was:

- Cross the border
- Engage the forces guarding the border
- Hopefully take some hostages and retreat

Just crossing the border would have been Mission Accomplished for making clear that the border does not insulate Israel's apartheid, regardless of how the other two went.

Hamas didn't expect:
- A last-minute relocated rave nearby
- For the forces guarding the border to be anemic
- For the forces guarding the border to barely put up a fight

They likely would have used more soldiers if they knew this was going to be a historic moment to take advantage of, but it is what it is. 'Terror' (muddying normalization, breaking the illusion of security) and hostage negotiations were the goal.
In addition to that and what they won't admit to, is that they probably wanted to murder as many Israeli civilians as possible and provoke a (genocidal) Israeli retalation.

Civilized Fishbot
Apr 3, 2011
I think a civilian kidnapped was worth a lot more than a civilian killed for Hamas' purposes. But a civilian killed iwas worth more than a civilian left alive and alone.

Both the kidnapping and the murder serve the main goals of getting attention/loving up normalization between Israel and other countries and making the occupation costly for Israel. But kidnapping the civilians gives Hamas a ton of negotiating power, makes it harder for the IDF to kill tons of Palestinians without killing someone who would upset the Israeli public, and creates a PR win to the extent that the hostages can say "yes we were treated as well as we could be without being released, our hardships were due to poverty and indiscriminate bombing in Gaza."

Killing/violently abusing the civilians makes it easier for the IDF to get genocide-permission from its citizens and allies (not that this permission would ever be that tough to get).

I think if the Palestinian fighters had been robots who just did whatever was in Hamas' best interests, and not super-traumatized super-angry super-scared young men who weren't all affiliated with Hamas in the first placez they would've kidnapped even more people and killed fewer.

Civilized Fishbot fucked around with this message at 21:20 on Dec 25, 2023

punishedkissinger
Sep 20, 2017

CSM posted:

In addition to that and what they won't admit to, is that they probably wanted to murder as many Israeli civilians as possible and provoke a (genocidal) Israeli retalation.

this is something the pro-IDF fantasists have fabricated without actual evidence.

FlamingLiberal
Jan 18, 2009

Would you like to play a game?



There are multiple reports that the IDF took out Iran's senior military commander in Syria earlier today with a missile strike. Iran is currently pissed.

https://twitter.com/AbasAslani/status/1739340048607166684?s=20

CSM
Jan 29, 2014

56th Motorized Infantry 'Mariupol' Brigade
Seh' die Welt in Trummern liegen

punishedkissinger posted:

this is something the pro-IDF fantasists have fabricated without actual evidence.
Well the evidence would be that they murdered close to 700 Israeli civilians. So that would tell us quite a lot about the true intentions behind the Hamas attack. Trying to provoke the oppressor into committing violence is a tactic terror groups regularly employ.

It's pretty funny by the way that you're immediately talking about Israeli propaganda, when I was replying to someone who was quoting literal Hamas propaganda.

Earlier in this thread I challenged you to provide sources on the claim that 'a large fraction of civilian casualties' on 10/7 were killed by the IDF'. Are you still planning on sharing this with the thread?

Civilized Fishbot
Apr 3, 2011

punishedkissinger posted:

this is something the pro-IDF fantasists have fabricated without actual evidence.

I can't wrap my head around a pro-IDF person saying "Hamas was trying to provoke Israel into exactly what we're doing right now - that's right, we are making sure that every goal they set on Oct 7 is accomplished." Pretty shameful to admit that you're doing what's in your enemy's best interests.

The pro-IDF people I know basically don't ascribe any kind of political motive to Oct 7, they reckon that Hamas (or Palestinians in general) just lives to kill Israelis because they're hosed up and evil and they'll always be that way until Israel kills every last one of them.

Or in a few cases they say "yeah Hamas is mad we stole the land from them, which is understandable, but this is why we have to drive them off the land completely because otherwise they'll keep doing it."

I once knew an Israeli guy who compared Israel to a hypothetical man who needed a kidney, got a kidney transplant, and the kidney was stolen. "Of course that guy wants his kidney back, but that's tough, because I need it to live, so it's mine now." Much more honest, and directly exposes the rotten idea at the head of Zionism: ethnic communities need territory to survive, and sharing doesn't count.

Civilized Fishbot fucked around with this message at 21:32 on Dec 25, 2023

aBagorn
Aug 26, 2004

CSM posted:

Well the evidence would be that they murdered close to 700 Israeli civilians. So that would tell us quite a lot about the true intentions behind the Hamas attack.

I mean, we're into (to borrow from criminal court proceedings) the difference between first and second degree murder here. I don't know that either of you can prove beyond a reasonable doubt whether mass murder of civilians was part of the strategy or whether they were opportunistic events owing to the lack of resistance and happening upon the music festival.

The other question we have to ask ourselves is does this difference of premeditation matter? is there some arbitrary percentage of the 695 israeli civilians killed being "part of the plan" that makes what came after justified or more understandable? If they were all "oh poo poo the IDF isn't here we don't know what to do we can't take this many hostages" killings does that change anyone's opinion of Hamas' actions that day?

Basically I think it's a pointless distinction to make from either side.

Darth Walrus
Feb 13, 2012
https://x.com/jerusalem_post/status/1739340510056022107?s=46&t=ARI_L-v32Oind1-d9B3a3Q

We already knew this was the plan, but the Jerusalem Post just coming out and saying it clearly and unambiguously seems significant.

punishedkissinger
Sep 20, 2017

CSM posted:

Earlier in this thread I challenged you to provide sources on the claim that 'a large fraction of civilian casualties' on 10/7 were killed by the IDF'. Are you still planning on sharing this with the thread?

youre putting words in my mouth. i think ive been pretty clear that the IDF killed many people on 10/7, but the actual number is impossible to say as they have refused to investigate and actively censor reporting on the subject.

Irony Be My Shield
Jul 29, 2012

I think Hamas probably had the same (extremely stupid) mindset that a lot of posters in this thread did - that the IDF response would be similar to their previous campaigns and they would stop after a few weeks and negotiate for hostages. They didn't appreciate that the biggest pogrom since WW2 would (very obviously) lead Israel to go insane and brutally kerbstomp Gaza until Hamas is destroyed no matter the consequences. As we are currently witnessing.

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

Caros
May 14, 2008

punishedkissinger posted:

youre putting words in my mouth. i think ive been pretty clear that the IDF killed many people on 10/7, but the actual number is impossible to say as they have refused to investigate and actively censor reporting on the subject.

And you are, of course, basing this on reporting from notorious liars like Blumenthal and a single incident reported in the nyt.

aBagorn
Aug 26, 2004

Irony Be My Shield posted:

I think Hamas probably had the same (extremely stupid) mindset that a lot of posters in this thread did - that the IDF response would be similar to their previous campaigns and they would stop after a few weeks and negotiate for hostages. They didn't appreciate that the biggest pogrom since WW2 would (very obviously) lead Israel to go insane and brutally kerbstomp Gaza until Hamas is destroyed no matter the consequences. As we are currently witnessing.

See now here is a real reason to discuss the "premeditated vs attack of opportunity" of the 7/10 attack.

It would make a lot more sense to envision a smaller planned Hamas incursion with mostly IDF casualties and a similar number of hostages, and the Israeli response being like we've seen before, but the situation on the ground being little resistance and individual fighters (and non Hamas militants that we know went through like PIJ) getting wide eyed and unthinking towards the level of retaliatory action with an increase in their own violence

punishedkissinger
Sep 20, 2017

The IDF themselves are saying 1/5 of their casualties in Gaza are friendly fire, the majority of hostages killed since 10/7 have been killed by the IDF. we have testimony confirming they fired high explosive shells into buildings occupied by their own civilians and they had to revise their death toll by hundreds after realizing hundreds of burnt bodies were Hamas and not their own.

It's fairly well established that they killed at the very least several dozen of their own civilians on 10/7. IMO it was likely much more but theres no definitive answer and likely never will be as Israel refuses to investigate.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Civilized Fishbot
Apr 3, 2011

Irony Be My Shield posted:

I think Hamas probably had the same (extremely stupid) mindset that a lot of posters in this thread did - that the IDF response would be similar to their previous campaigns and they would stop after a few weeks and negotiate for hostages. They didn't appreciate that the biggest pogrom since WW2 would (very obviously) lead Israel to go insane and brutally kerbstomp Gaza until Hamas is destroyed no matter the consequences. As we are currently witnessing.

I really don't think they anticipated, that it would be "the biggest pogrom since WW2" - in fact I don't think they anticipated it would be reminiscent of a pogrom at all. The pogrom was defined by a local mob, often sanctioned or supported by the state, exploiting the vulnerability of diaspora Jewish communities.

I think this was supposed to be a raid on enemy territory, including tearing down a wall, anticipating resistance from a superior military, targeting that military's bases, more reminiscent of the Battle of Trenton than a pogrom. But it ended up having pogrom-reminiscent raids on civilian communities because the IDF offered much less resistance than anyone would've expected and there was also a massive civilian gathering that wouldn't be there on any other day.

Earlier this year in the US there was a Pro-Israel protester who got into a fight with a pro-Palestine protester - the pro-Israel protester fell down, hit his head, and died. I don't think the pro-Palestine protester failed to appreciate the significance of killing another person in broad daylight, they just didn't imagine that the fight would have that outcome.

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