Israel - Palestine Discussion | Post Respectfully | Discuss more, tweet less

[2cents]

So you tell me, since you are so sure about what is reasonable, if it is reasonable for Israel to defend itself (you say it is), and if in that defence children are killed, was the death of those children reasonable? Yes or no?

Does Israel have a legal and moral responsibility to try to minimise that? Yes of course they do. Does anyone really know what "minimise" actually means in an urban environment where the enemy has 200 miles of tunnels dug under civilian areas? Or where the enemy is deliberately firing rockets from schoolyards? How can you not feel outrage at the methods Hamas is using?

I don't like any of it but war is utterly terrible. At least I'm being honest about it and not just shoving it off onto the politicians so I can feel pure about myself, which you seem to think is an option.

This is not a “reasonable” Israel we’re discussing right now. There is an element of this government - representing a small (but unfortunately growing) section of Israel’s population - for whom there are essentially no limits to the violence they’re willing to inflict on the Palestinians. October 7th didn’t change anything for them, they were the same on October 6th. They have the current criminal PM - who for all his many many faults has historically demonstrated some degree of restraint in conducting military operations - pandering to their wishes due to his own fundamental weakness. And it seems that the much broader section of the population for whom October 7th did change things remain in a state of raw and cruel vengefulness.

This is the worst, most incompetent, extreme, and instinctively violent government in Israel’s history, and possibly in the Middle East right now. Anyone who has read my posts on the region on here over the years will know I don’t say that lightly. Given this state of affairs, and the reality of a death toll currently on track to surpass that of Hafiz al-Assad’s Worst Massacre in Modern Middle Eastern History award, is it reasonable to grant Israel the benefit of the doubt here?

 

[berbatrick]

Can you provide context to that tweet, when has israel suggested that the journalists killed were Hamas partisans?

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

and some other tweets from "honestreporting" basically saying cnn and AJ journalists are hamas

 

[Iker Quesadillas]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

I thought this thread was interesting given the "Honest Reporting" thing someone posted earlier.

Seems to me pretty clear that the Israeli government wants to kill even more journalists.

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[JPRouve]

It’s something @calodo2003 posted last night from HonestReporting (another Israeli Memri regen) about these reporters being embedded in Hamas. I doubt the veracity or reliability of anything posted from such bias sources personally, and one that has a track record of embellishing claim. I’m yet to see another news site run the same story.

That's why I asked. I have seen some wild claims from dubious anti-Israeli and pro-Palestinians(that reads more like pro-Hamas) but nothing else.

 

[JPRouve]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

and some other tweets from "honestreporting" basically saying cnn and AJ journalists are hamas

Thanks, I didn't see that.

 

[JPRouve]

This is not a “reasonable” Israel we’re discussing right now. There is an element of this government - representing a small (but unfortunately growing) section of Israel’s population - for whom there are essentially no limits to the violence they’re willing to inflict on the Palestinians. October 7th didn’t change anything for them, they were the same on October 6th. They have the current criminal PM - who for all his many many faults has historically demonstrated some degree of restraint in conducting military operations - pandering to their wishes due to his own fundamental weakness. And it seems that the much broader section of the population for whom October 7th did change things remain in a state of raw and cruel vengefulness.

This is the worst, most incompetent, extreme, and instinctively violent government in Israel’s history, and possibly in the Middle East right now. Anyone who has read my posts on the region on here over the years will know I don’t say that lightly. Given this state of affairs, and the reality of a death toll currently on track to surpass that of Hafiz al-Assad’s Worst Massacre in Modern Middle Eastern History award, is it reasonable to grant Israel the benefit of the doubt here?

I shared this the other day but didn't quote it so hopefully, some read this conversation, it explains the general dynamic within Israel and how it affects palestinians and also peaceful settlers.

https://www.hartman.org.il/the-hilltop-youth-and-jewish-terrorism-transcript/

This quote represents the entirety of my point which some interpret as hate against Israel and it comes from an Israeli.

Yehuda: Right. I mean, and in this respect, it reminds me of other major episodes of both Palestinian terror against Israeli civilians and these cases as well, where extremist forces use this kind of terror to continue to polarize the Israeli and Palestinian people from one another. That so long as there is continued kind of violence and hate, that’s directed by Palestinians towards Israelis and Israelis and Palestinians that prevents any transformation of the political status quo.

The problem though, right? The problem is, and here, I’m genuinely curious for the coalition side of this. If you’re a right of center politician in Israel as Naftali Bennett is and you have explicitly indicated that you will not change the status quo. Right. What, you will not change the status quo. You, you will not preside over a Palestinian state on your watch.

That depends on a continued belief in the general public, inside Israel and outside Israel, that the Palestinians are incompatible as peace partners, that Israel’s hands are clean in terms of how it governs the occupation and that it’s powerless to fix it. These incidents and episodes really damage the story of a right wing position, which sees itself as morally superior to the left-wing alternatives.

The thing I can’t fully wrap my head around is the people you indicated most settlers are scandalized by these actions, they feel that it embarrasses them. It puts them, it makes them look bad. I would think that that would be the case for anybody on the credible Israeli. Right. I don’t mean the extreme right.

But anyone on the credible Israeli right. Who wants to depict themselves as, we’re not an apartheid state, we are doing the best that we can under circumstances beyond our control. Why not use this as a kind of example of how we crack down on, on betrayals of the kind of benevolent occupation that we hope to sustain?

 

[The Corinthian]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

I thought this thread was interesting given the "Honest Reporting" thing someone posted earlier.

Seems to me pretty clear that the Israeli government wants to kill even more journalists.

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Thanks for posting that thread - it debunks some of the claims. The tweets I posted above are pretty clear.

 

[The Corinthian]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[VorZakone]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[2cents]

I shared this the other day but didn't quote it so hopefully, some read this conversation, it explains the general dynamic within Israel and how it affects palestinians and also peaceful settlers.

https://www.hartman.org.il/the-hilltop-youth-and-jewish-terrorism-transcript/

This quote represent the entirety of my point which some interpret hate against Israel and it comes from an Israeli.

Thanks, good interview that echoes some themes I’ve touched on here before. I would say among the Israeli journalists who regularly write in English that I’m familiar with, Haviv Rettig Gur probably comes closest to representing the disillusionment and apathy of the broad, post-Oslo/Second Intifada centre on the Israeli political spectrum.

 

[VorZakone]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[VorZakone]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[stevoc]

The term "hiding behind civilians" is simply an umbrella term that lays out what is obvious and logical - that Hamas, as a paramilitary, insurgent organization, use their surrounding environment to their advantage by blending in with the public, because they knew previous Israeli ROE prevented them from going after them there. This includes things like what Hamas operatives are themselves describing below at 3:00.

Spoiler

For example, they use civilian ambulances to avoid detection by the IDF. From a Hamas perspective, this would be a logical countermeasure to avoid danger, but to most on the outside, it easily qualifies as using civilian infrastructure to their advantage, because that is by definition, what insurgent groups do. Ambulances can therefore be used to transport the likes of weapons, explosives and so on. At 5:30, the next guy talks about the deliberate storage of weapons and rockets below a school for the very same reasons. The next guy talks about tunnels connecting through hospitals, medical clinics, schools etc.

But its not just the low level guys who get caught that admit it. Senior Hamas members like Mousa Abu Marzouk have also conceded they use tunnels for military purposes. This should surprise no one, because insurgencies, by definition, tend to use all available nearby infrastructure to protect themselves after they launch their attacks and need to protect themselves. What is quite telling about the testimony of the ground level Hamas guys is that they all clearly believe the use of hospitals, ambulances, schools, mosques etc., are great hiding places for weapons, ammo, and rockets, because they genuinely believe the Israelis don't attack those locations.

Well they were wrong there, I get what you are saying and I understand it is logical.

But let me ask you this, has the phrase been used by Israel as a justification for the deaths of civilians over the last month?

 

[JagUTD]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

and some other tweets from "honestreporting" basically saying cnn and AJ journalists are hamas

Eh? Actual journalists went along with Hamas to document the event?

 

[VorZakone]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[JagUTD]

The term "hiding behind civilians" is simply an umbrella term that lays out what is obvious and logical - that Hamas, as a paramilitary, insurgent organization, use their surrounding environment to their advantage by blending in with the public, because they knew previous Israeli ROE prevented them from going after them there. This includes things like what Hamas operatives are themselves describing below at 3:00.

Spoiler

For example, they use civilian ambulances to avoid detection by the IDF. From a Hamas perspective, this would be a logical countermeasure to avoid danger, but to most on the outside, it easily qualifies as using civilian infrastructure to their advantage, because that is by definition, what insurgent groups do. Ambulances can therefore be used to transport the likes of weapons, explosives and so on. At 5:30, the next guy talks about the deliberate storage of weapons and rockets below a school for the very same reasons. The next guy talks about tunnels connecting through hospitals, medical clinics, schools etc.

But its not just the low level guys who get caught that admit it. Senior Hamas members like Mousa Abu Marzouk have also conceded they use tunnels for military purposes. This should surprise no one, because insurgencies, by definition, tend to use all available nearby infrastructure to protect themselves after they launch their attacks and need to protect themselves. What is quite telling about the testimony of the ground level Hamas guys is that they all clearly believe the use of hospitals, ambulances, schools, mosques etc., are great hiding places for weapons, ammo, and rockets, because they genuinely believe the Israelis don't attack those locations.

I'm not sure they believe that tbh. If anything, Israel attacking such targets plays into their hands both as a battleground strategy and the PR war going on alongside the war on the ground.

Hamas' best hope of surviving this is for the international community to put enough pressure on Israel to stop. Realistically what is Hamas' best option in achieving this?

When Israel told Gazans to move south, Hamas told them to stay. At that stage could they really claim they believed Israel would not target those locations? So why tell them to stay put?

 

[Sky1981]

That’s why I’m asking those questions. I do not care about preserving the life of any person that wants to kill me (unless such person can be arrested, prosecuted, and imprisoned). However, I do care about preserving the life of any person that hates me but would never have to intention to actually physically harm me. There’s nothing controversial about this. In this particular case we’re talking about Hamas fighters and (civilian) Hamas supporters. My belief is that every single Hamas fighter would want to kill me, given the opportunity. I don’t not care about their lives, in fact I want them gone. This leaves us with the question of civilians who support Hamas. Considering there were so many civilians who, together with Hamas fighters, crossed the border and participated in murder, rape, looting, do I care about preserving their lives? No, I do not (unless they can be arrested, prosecuted, and imprisoned, which would obviously never happen). Does this now mean I do not care about preserving the lives of civilians? Well obviously this depends on what kind of civilian you are. Here’s where I’m trying to understand the difference. Would you care about preserving the lives of 500 civilians who a.) have never engaged in combat, b.) at the same time support an organisation whose declared goal is the destruction of my country, c.) and who would also participate in murder, torture and rape given the opportunity? On any given day there are multitudes of civilians who kill their spouses, kidnap children, set fire to houses, commit mass murder in schools and cinemas… would you care about preserving their lives? Sure, if you have the chance to arrest, prosecute and imprison them, yes. Which is what civilised countries across the world are doing on daily basis. However, what do you do with particular groups of civilians who display all my previously listed characteristics a, b, and c?

Regarding children, of course I care about preserving the lives of all children, even if they’re uttering the most abhorrent nonsense from the age of 5 about how they want to kill the Yehud and die as a martyr. They don’t know any better because that’s what they have been brainwashed with. A five year old boy isn’t able to shoot a gun or fire a rocket and actually physically cause any harm. (Most they can do is throw rocks which, to be honest, my father would give me a beating for as it actually can cause death.)

Maybe that's how Palestinian thinks too when the IDF detain, imprison, torture, and bombed their loved ones.

 

[Sweet Square]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[ExoduS]

Ukraine didn't attack Russia and slaughter 1000s of its citizens?

No, they just killed 15k ethnic Russians in 8-year period.

 

[Karel Podolsky]

To be honest with you. I had also the same thinking why couldn't the 6 millions Jews killed at least 60.000 German Army/SS.

I my mind when I was I child 100 Jews killed 1 Soldier was very doable.

 

[Raoul]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[MDFC Manager]

Start losing the narrative --> move to deliberately target and kill journalists

Only the imbecilic Israeli government and their terrorist army could come up with a genius plan like this.

 

[Raoul]

Well they were wrong there, I get what you are saying and I understand it is logical.

But let me ask you this, has the phrase been used by Israel as a justification for the deaths of civilians over the last month?

Yes, its not just a trendy term on Twitter. The phrase is being invoked because its an actual thing in both International (Geneva) and Israeli law, which they are using as a pretext to suggest places like hospitals, mosques, schools etc. are fair game if Hamas are deliberately using them because they think doing so would shield them from Israeli weapons.

Not that the Israelis necessarily care about international law since they themselves will never be put in a position to answer for any of their indiscretions. They do however care to use the phrase because it allows them to both vilify Hamas for doing it, while also buying themselves a bit of perceived legal leverage to go after Hamas in those places under the excuse that Hamas are violating article 28 of Geneva IV (again, not that the Israelis actually care or are themselves immune from criticism for violating other international norms, but they do find it useful to use it against Hamas).

 

[That_Bloke]

Yes, its not just a trendy term on Twitter. The phrase is being invoked because its an actual thing in both International (Geneva) and Israeli law, which they are using as a pretext to suggest places like hospitals, mosques, schools etc. are fair game if Hamas are deliberately using them because they think doing so would shield them from Israeli weapons.

Not that the Israelis necessarily care about international law since they themselves will never be put in a position to answer for any of their indiscretions. They do however care to use the phrase because it allows them to both vilify Hamas for doing it, while also buying themselves a bit of perceived legal leverage to go after Hamas in those places under the excuse that Hamas are violating article 28 of Geneva IV (again, not that the Israelis actually care or are themselves immune from criticism for violating other international norms, but they do find it useful to use it against Hamas).

Spot on.

 

[That_Bloke]

I really don't like to resort to Piers Morgan, but there's another interviewee one should listen to.

He's a Palestinian doctor who not only lost 25 members of his family since 7/10 but also three daughters and a niece in the 2009 Gaza War, when an Israeli tank shelled his home. Even then, he's still an advocate of peace and reconciliation, and an example of what it means to live as a Palestinian in Gaza.

"Listen to us, don't hear about us".

 

[Brown Toothpick]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

...

 

[Dirty Schwein]

I really don't like to resort to Piers Morgan, but there's another interviewee one should listen to.

He's a Palestinian doctor who lost lost 22 members of his family since 2009, but still an advocate of peace and reconciliation, and an example of what it means to live as a Palestinian in Gaza.

I came in to post this. Genuinely broke my heart that interview.

 

[Iker Quesadillas]

Spot on.

The "human shield" defense also plays into the image of Israel as the true victim in the conflict. "It is my tragedy that you have forced me to kill your civilians. What a burden I must bear." Hence why every other defense of the IDF includes a comment about being "heartbroken."

It is in line with the old quote attributed to Golda Meir, "we will perhaps in time be able to forgive the Arabs for killing our sons, but it will be harder for us to forgive them for having forced us to kill their sons."

 

[That_Bloke]

I came in to post this. Genuinely broke my heart that interview.

I actually messed up and had to edit my post.

He lost 25 members of his family since 10/7. In 2009, he "only" lost 3 daughters and a niece, but still firmly believes in peace to this day. Yet you have here people (to stay polite) full of it, dishing out death and judgment from the comfort of their armchair, thousands of miles away.

I have to restrain myself from replying and regularly take a break from this thread to not lose my sanity. What happened on 10/7 was a human tragedy and a war crime. What happened since then is a human tragedy and a war crime. What happened in the past decades in Gaza and in the West Bank is a human tragedy and a war crime.

So either the world starts to listen to the plight of the Wretched of the Earth and see what's unfolding there, or we will see even bigger tragedies and war crimes in the coming years.

 

[Mihajlovic]

Just out of curiosity, what do you guys think about people tearing down posters of kidnapped Israeli children? Do you think the posters are a political stunt? Would you personally tear down those posters on the street or at your university? Would you condemn those who do?

 

[Shez]

Just out of curiosity, what do you guys think about people tearing down posters of kidnapped Israeli children? Do you think the posters are a political stunt? Would you personally tear down those posters on the street or at your university? Would you condemn those who do?

Think it’s a heartless thing to do. But on a scale of condemnation it’s not going come anywhere near the reaction to Hamas’s actions on 7th or Israel/IDFs actions now. The first is a misdemeanor - the latter two are about as criminal as things get. IDF’s butchery and wanton destruction is beyond the pale and far eclipsed the horrors of Oct 7 a long time ago.

Emotions are running high, there is genuine frustration on the political narrative so it’s understandable that some people make the idiotic decision to tear down hostage release photos. Personally think they’d be much better off using the same walls and covering them with the tens of thousands of pictures of IDFs victims (not over the pictures but on the same area) for perspective

 

[stevoc]

Yes, its not just a trendy term on Twitter. The phrase is being invoked because its an actual thing in both International (Geneva) and Israeli law, which they are using as a pretext to suggest places like hospitals, mosques, schools etc. are fair game if Hamas are deliberately using them because they think doing so would shield them from Israeli weapons.

Not that the Israelis necessarily care about international law since they themselves will never be put in a position to answer for any of their indiscretions. They do however care to use the phrase because it allows them to both vilify Hamas for doing it, while also buying themselves a bit of perceived legal leverage to go after Hamas in those places under the excuse that Hamas are violating article 28 of Geneva IV (again, not that the Israelis actually care or are themselves immune from criticism for violating other international norms, but they do find it useful to use it against Hamas).

Fair enough, which was my initial point. Oppressive regimes will always play the ''they're hiding behind civilians'' card to justify civilian deaths. Even when as has no doubt happened in Gaza and elsewhere, there doesn't happen to be anyone actually hiding behind the civilians at the time they are killed.

They bombed a refugee camp and killed 400+ innocent people to get one Hamas leader. Not sure if they got him or are even able to confirm if they got him.

 

[Mihajlovic]

Think it’s a heartless thing to do. But on a scale of condemnation it’s not going come anywhere near the reaction to Hamas’s actions on 7th or Israel/IDFs actions now. The first is a misdemeanor - the latter two are about as criminal as things get. IDF’s butchery and wanton destruction is beyond the pale and far eclipsed the horrors of Oct 7 a long time ago.

Emotions are running high, there is genuine frustration on the political narrative so it’s understandable that some people make the idiotic decision to tear down hostage release photos. Personally think they’d be much better off using the same walls and covering them with the tens of thousands of pictures of IDFs victims (not over the pictures but on the same area) for perspective

Agreed. Wasted opportunity for a meaningful, civilised discussion. I'm not so shocked about the general public doing it on the streets, massively disappointed that it's happening at universities, however.

 

[Iker Quesadillas]

They bombed a refugee camp and killed 400+ innocent people to get one Hamas leader. Not sure if they got him or are even able to confirm if they got him.

That was the specific incident that the Post article about "Israel's threshold for civilian casualties" focused on.

It's clear that when you go past a certain point, "having a high threshold of acceptable civilian deaths" is not very different than "intentionally killing civilians."

 

[That_Bloke]

The "human shield" defense also plays into the image of Israel as the true victim in the conflict. "It is my tragedy that you have forced me to kill your civilians. What a burden I must bear." Hence why every other defense of the IDF includes a comment about being "heartbroken."

It is in line with the old quote attributed to Golda Meir, "we will perhaps in time be able to forgive the Arabs for killing our sons, but it will be harder for us to forgive them for having forced us to kill their sons."

I know the quote and how much weight it holds for those trying to take the moral high ground and justify Israel's doing in Palestine.

It happens in every single asymmetric conflict. Mao's "On Asymmetric Warfare" gives an insightful view about its mechanisms. The best examples that come to my mind post WWII are Vietnam and Algeria. There are many others though.

Blend in and make it harder for the occupier to identify and neutralize the enemy. No one in their right mind who would wage war against an overwhelmingly superior opponent on an open field. It's not a war between two conventional armies that could be decided on a battlefield and there's no concept of frontline. Even less when the "insurgents" are confined to a 360 km² territory which is blocked on an all sides. What Hamas banks on is not a military victory which can't be achieved, but a war of opinions where they have a much bigger chance to win. Everybody forgot about Palestine and its people, which were about to become a footnote in History, with the whole world (not) watching... Until 10/7.

Is it moral? Hell, no. Is it respectful of human life? Hell, no. Does it mean that Hamas could ever be a dialogue partner for a long-term peace in the region? Hell, no. Does it justify what happened on 10/7? Hell the feck no. But it did change things, whether we like it or not, and we now are at a crossroads. For the better or the worse, we shall see.

It's a trick as old as the world which gained even more traction since WWII. Israel will never win by only using its military, unless the world agrees to a Palestinian extermination and I'm not throwing it out lightly. They won't even get rid of Hamas, and the best they've achieved until now is to create even more radicalized people they'll have to fight in 5-10 years. We talk about the dead but what about the survivors who have been scarred for life?

I'm absolutely flabbergasted that people keep falling for it and then wonder, decades or centuries later, why they lost and looked like the bad guys. But then again, History tends to repeat itself.

 

[Badunk]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Comical Ali vibes.

 

[OldTrevil]

I think many people here realize that the incredibly repetitive refrain of "Israel has the right to defend itself" is exactly what is meant to end discussion. It's a slogan, not an argument.

It's a dystopian trope that perfectly encapsulates today's popular and mainstream narratives that have no basis in fact. Israel is an occupying force and has no right to self defence under international law. Palestinians on the other hand are an occupied people and have the right to resist. Yet the mainstream propaganda presents Israel as the victim and Palestinian resistance fighters as terrorists. An up is down, slavery is freedom type of narrative that fits in perfectly with the times.

 

[Murder on Zidane's Floor]

It's a dystopian trope that perfectly encapsulates today's popular and mainstream narratives that have no basis in fact. Israel is an occupying force and has no right to self defence under international law. Palestinians on the other hand are an occupied people and have the right to resist. Yet the mainstream propaganda presents Israel as the victim and Palestinian resistance fighters as terrorists. An up is down, slavery is freedom type of narrative that fits in perfectly with the times.

Same kind of quote said by men who hit their wives.

"You're making me so angry, this is your fault"

 

[Murder on Zidane's Floor]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[That_Bloke]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

One of the few voices on the other side who can see reason and how suicidal the currently Israeli policy is. There are, thank god, many others.

Interestingly labelled as self-hating Jew(s).