|
Irony Be My Shield posted:Hamas are not 'providing opposition' to anyone's genocidal aims. Rather, by revelling in cruelty against civilians they have handed Israel's government the perfect justification to wipe out Gaza. How exactly is Hamas going to stop the IDF from levelling every building in the strip or starving the entire population with its blockade? The objective is not to forcibly prevent the genocide, but rather to make the genocide more trouble than it's worth. edit: This is assuming a very charitable interpretation of Hamas' intent, I'm just replying to OP's specific question. Aramis fucked around with this message at 02:04 on Oct 10, 2023 |
#
¿
Oct 10, 2023 01:59
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 19:13 |
|
|
nogoodpeople posted:They absolutely shouldn't. But they will because they believe that this is a existential conflict for the state of Israel and protection for the Jews that live there. Given the history of the Jewish people it's understandable if viewed from that lens. You are expecting the Palestinians to find within themselves the wherewithal to not resort to indiscriminate violence while at the same time taking Israel's use of the same as inevitable. It doesn't really matter how much leaning into this would help the Palestinians in the short term, the fact remains that you are accepting/normalizing the subjugator-subjugated relationship, and are getting well-deserved pushback, if only for that alone.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 10, 2023 15:01
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:The vast vast majority of Palestinians aren't resorting to indiscriminate violence. Even other actively violent groups have never hit close to a 1,000 civilians in a day before. It is basically just Hamas, but people keep conflating Hamas with "the Palestinian people," which is definitely not the case. Hamas doesn't even exist in the West Bank. While I agree with this, people advocating for / treating as inevitable the IDF performing collective punishment on the Palestinians as a whole are also operating under that conflation and their position still doesn't hold water under that light. Arguing that point with the poster I was replying to invites moving the discussion towards whether or not Hamas represents the people of Gaza, which is irrelevant to how lopsided the conflict is and who has the most agency over the matter: Israel. Aramis fucked around with this message at 15:48 on Oct 10, 2023 |
|
#
¿
Oct 10, 2023 15:24
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Thank you. This is really interesting and illustrates the point you were trying to make, but with accurate information. You have to keep in mind that someone who has their lodgings blown up, food and water taken away, has no access to healthcare, and dies as a direct result of all that is not even counted as an injury in those statistics. The notion of "accurate information" is incredibly shaky when it comes to harm caused here, and is not much better than "vibes" IMO.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 10, 2023 15:55
|
|
|
fool of sound posted:It’s both sidesism because Palestine is not a functional nation state. They are the victims of a slow rolling genocide. They have no meaningful international supporters to appeal to. They do not have the option or imperative to obey international law that their vastly superior oppressors ignore without consequence. They do not operate on level ethical ground. To be fair, that statement is technically correct. Aggressively punishing every single instance of war crimes and crimes against humanity should, within that context, lead to a lot more punishment being levied against Israel over long periods of time and could eventually lead to peace. It is, however, laughably naïve to entertain the idea that the international community is capable of arriving at such a neutral enforcement consensus, let alone enforce it systematically and consistently on day 1, which would be required for it to work.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 10, 2023 17:11
|
|
|
Madkal posted:So with these relaxed moral guidelines rape and sexual assault and child killing and the killing of fleeing civilians is now justified? No, but these actions shouldn't be treated as a green light to go ham on retaliation like they do in other conflicts, which I believe is the point ultimately being made here.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 10, 2023 17:23
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:[...] I think you are discounting the importance of this point too much. "We can all agree that Hamas is bad and doing atrocities." is a bad take in isolation because it begs the question of what we should be doing about it. In an isolated vacuum, the answer to that question is obviously "a whole lot", which is obviously not correct without equivalent measures taken against Israel. Morality underpins actions. There is no such thing as pointing at something, calling it bad, and leaving it at that. If you give me "Hamas is committing atrocities", I assume you are implying that they should be stopped. And, in a vacuum, I also assume that you are calling for unilateral action, and I just can't abide by that. I know that's not how many people making that point are approaching it, but that's how its coming across. So yeah, both sides are committing atrocities is indeed relevant and important to this conversation.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 10, 2023 18:55
|
|
|
nessin posted:I'm aware of many resolutions calling for Isreal to create a solution that have failed, I'm unaware of any in which the Palestinians provided a alternative option to force Isreal to give them what they want. Could you point to one that I could review which expresses some form of action that could be taken that is different? In 2011, Palestine formally applied for UN membership, attempting to force Israel's hand into accepting a two-state solution. This seems to me like a clear-cut example of what you are asking for. The matter was referred to the security council, which referred it to a committee which concluded that the proposal should be downgraded to bringing in Palestine as an "non-member observer state". That passed the general assembly, but it's mostly meaningless, and you can easily argue that the SC effectively vetoed the application. Aramis fucked around with this message at 21:28 on Oct 10, 2023 |
|
#
¿
Oct 10, 2023 21:07
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 19:13 |
|
|
Charliegrs posted:Targets can be things, and targets can be people. When a warplane bombs an ammunition factory for example, the building itself is the target. The destruction of the building is the goal. When a warplane wants to kill some high ranking military officials unless they are out in the open then they are going to be in a building which is what gets bombed. In both cases a building was destroyed, but in the latter example the goal was to kill the enemy military officials. They shot at the building in order to kill the people who were inside. The building is the thing they shot at. That makes it a target. Aramis fucked around with this message at 03:55 on Apr 15, 2024 |
|
#
¿
Apr 15, 2024 03:52
|
|