this post was submitted on 17 Nov 2023
1256 points (87.8% liked)
A Boring Dystopia
9410 readers
331 users here now
Pictures, Videos, Articles showing just how boring it is to live in a dystopic society, or with signs of a dystopic society.
Rules (Subject to Change)
--Be a Decent Human Being
--Posting news articles: include the source name and exact title from article in your post title
--Posts must have something to do with the topic
--Zero tolerance for Racism/Sexism/Ableism/etc.
--No NSFW content
--Abide by the rules of lemmy.world
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
That's because apparently someone decided, without discussion, that setting military headquarters in a hospital - where babies are born - is absolutely fine and moral move.
Killing a building full of women and children to go after a group of people who may or may not be in said building after they killed women and children...
Two unscrupulous groups are willing to murder innocent civilians. Sounds like two groups of terrorists.
Fuck Hammas, fuck the IDF. I'm absolutely fine with them killing each other. I'm not okay with the fact that they're both using innocent civilians as pawns.
The difference being the IDF has consistently gone to pretty significant lengths to warn civilians and give them time to evacuate. Hamas has not and in fact specifically targets civilians. These groups are not the same.
True, but then to bombard from the air destroying whole buildings and killing many civilians to get to a few combatants under the building is not an ethical or moral move either. You don't get a get out of jail free card for notifying up front, you have to follow through.
Telling someone to evacuate is not enough, you have to verify they have evacuated. If they have not, you should be instead sending in ground troops, and yes with a larger cost in lives and political turmoil, but that is the ethical way.
Non-combatants are not supposed to be involved in combat.
Bullshit. There's evidence of some warnings but with literally thousands of air strikes a week there literally isn't the resources to warn everyone like they did during the "cease fire". And you don't get 10,000 civilians dead in a month by warning them.
That's a point of view I am willing to accept
He said, believing the IOF, who has killed Palestinians with absolute impunity, and lying through the teeth about it
Has there even been any evidence of that?
Putting aside the lack of evidence of this, and the Israeli government's history of being caught lying about this kind of thing, how many civilians is it defensible to kill per Hamas militant, and does the calculus change if they're children?
...or are we taking the super credible IDF line and saying the infants are Hamas militants?
Putting aside existing evidence for it
There isn't a specific count. Just like there is no count for "how many Russian civilians has to die for each Ukrainian soldier". Israel didn't ask this war, Hamas did. Hamas is in charge of Gaza, not Israel.
You understand that the Israeli government funded Hamas over the PLO, don't you? Netanyahu signed the death warrant on his own citizens to create the pretext for the genocide he's now accelerating - Netanyahu and the Israeli government did ask for this war.
Okey that is a valid argument! Second one in a dozen of comments or so
Yes i know this mofo funded hamas and hope he ll pay for it. However, the attack on 7 October happened on Israeli territory, not the opposite. That's still a "defensive operation" in my understanding.
I really don't like this argument (defensive genocide? Come on.), but it's one for Palestine in any case - look at the Israeli operation of Palestine as an open air concentration camp, and look at the casualty stats - between a dozen and five hundred Palestinian casualties per Israeli casualty, depending on your datasource and the way you slice it. This would justify the 7 October attack as defensive - which they weren't.
Again, if you combine all that with the fact what Israel have backed the IDF, and the fact that Israel are a nuclear power with an advanced military, and f35s (compared to a paraglider and small-arms) how do you conclude that this is defensive?
up to 2005 UN, EU, America, Russia, Israel and a host of middle east intermediates like Qatar: provide aid to Gaza to encourage economic growth, is inevitably siphoned off by Hamas and others for military purposes
2006: UN, EU, America, Russia, Israel: "dear Hamas totes congrats on winning an election, wonder if you could abandon your pledge to genocide Israel and pick up the two state solution discussions where Fatah got up to? Else..y'know.. we'll have to cut aid and stuff coz that's a bit terroristy"
Hamas: "Fuck you infidel! We look forward to strangling your children in their bed" incoherent yelling
UN, EU, America, Russia: deep sigh
Israel: cuts aid, blockades Gaza
Egypt: also blockades Gaza Yo you Hamas bois are batshit insane, no way we're having an open border with you "Muslim brothers"...
Western social science students: why would Israel do this?
I'll keep this simple.
You have a bunch of genocidal dipshits welding small arms embedded in a civilian population, propped up by a genocidal nuclear power with a modern military and F-35s.
Which has the ability to deliver on that genocidal intent, and has been wiping out the other at a rate of between a dozen and five hundred to one over the past few decades?
Why did Israel prop up Hamas over the moderate, secular PLO, who wouldn't murder Israelis?
It's interesting how this leaves out 17 years of choking supplies of food and water to the civilian population of Gaza, the Israeli occupation and settlements in Gaza prior to 2005, the fact that that illegal occupation had been ongoing for 38 years despite international outcry, the naval blockade amounting to an act of war of its own, and really the whole broader context of the population of Gaza being displaced by ethnic cleansing by Israel since 1948.
I must have missed the part of the Geneva Conventions that says, "unless they started it."
Oh wait, no I didn't. Because it's not fucking there.
Tactical placement and all haha
We need a hell of a lot more evidence to support that than we've seen, it would still run into major problems with proportionality/distinction standards regarding all the civilians they killed in and around the hospital, and it wouldn't make a scratch with regard to the other civilian infrastructure they've targeted.