Why did they take hostages? Because it was a terror attack?
And no, of course there is no threat if suoerior military starts levelling the city around you, why would that be dangerous in anyway...
By the way, the IDF already killed three hostages waving white flags. Nice rescue operation, I have to admit. At least now those hostages are safe from both, Hamas and the IDF.
Like when they said there’s no tunnels. Then tunnels were found. So everyone’s like no it’s an elevator. Turns out it’s not an elevator. But it wasn’t used. Full of chairs and bed. But there’s no guns. Tunnels are blocked. But they aren’t in use…
Or when they said Israel bombed a hospital and 500 were dead. Then the photos and videos came out and it was Hamas missile and it was in the parking lot with a tiny crater.
Or when they said Israel bombed the Egypt trucks bringing supplies to civilians. Then the videos and photos came out and it was the civilians intercepting the trucks for food because Hamas steals it all.
Yeah let’s believe everything Hamas tells us haha. Brainwashed by the media to believe conspiracy theories. You probably support Russia too.
If Russia is attacked and defends itself, respexting international law and not commiting war crimes, yes I absolutely support them. They din't, so I don't.
I don't believe Hamas, nor the IDF. I tend to believe UN investigations of past conflicts around that very question, and those didn't find evidence.
And the Hamas stealing food is such a twisted take, it almost is lying.
What I do not support is war xcimes, ethnic cleanising and the suffering of civilians. Regardless of who is doing or causing it. You on the other hand, I'm not so sure.
Thousands of Palestinian hostages? What are you talking about? Please clarify, as I assume you are not talking about prisoners convicted of terror activities.
I think OP osbreferring to the 160 children and over a thousand Palestinians held without charges in Israeli prisons as of April 2022. Just a guess so.
Not that it justifies the Hamas attack, but it goes a long way explaining it.
Yes, such as "throwing stones" at armoured vehicles - truly despicable! Many are held without charge too. And many are held under "administrative detention", which means they can be held in a dungeon, without charge, forever. These are not the actions of a modern, progressive, democratic country.
I'm sure that some are imprisoned for good reason, buy many are there for spurious reasons - and none of them should be tortured or subject to sexual abuse, regardless of their supposed crimes.
You are moving the goalposts and reaching. Administrative detention is used on Israelis too, this is not the argument here.
Those released in the latest exchange and in the Gilad Shalit exchange were convicted, many of which had innocent blood on their hands.
Hamas isn't looking to correct the Israeli justice system, and you are calling actual and attempted murderers hostages...
> Those released in the latest exchange and in the Gilad Shalit exchange were convicted
Yes, and the list of crimes was made public. Many of them were indeed "throwing stones".
As I said, some are definitely held because of terrible crimes they actually committed; however, it must be noted that Palestinians are tried under an apartheid system, by a military court. Furthermore, it seems that many are held for no good reason, and many are tortured or sexually abused - confirmed by human rights groups.
BTW, if a convicted prisoner dies before they complete their sentence, they keep the body on ice until the sentence expires - that is just... evil.
Way, way back there was an IDF officer who said, in TV, after having a Palestinian boys arm broken something along the lines of "he wont throw a stone with that arm any time soon".
I hope that this is not the standard we hold, because if it is, there is no moral ground anymore to stand on when it comes to denouncing terrorism.
Police brutality isn't something specific to this region (IDF is policing in the west bank), or to Palestinians in the region. Hamas murdered and kidnapped hundreds of civilians to protest this?
I think it's pretty clear that Hamas would prioritize the release of a high ranking terrorist with civilian blood on their hands over someone that may be wrongfully detained.
Yes, Hamas attacked, killed and kidnapped people in a terror attack to protest this. Also to have hostages to exchange for some of their own. And yes, these "own" are Hamas members and not the innocent bystanders. Was there ever any doubt about this?
None of that justifies, again, the levelling of Gaza, the starving of around 500,000 people and the deliberate targeting of civilians who have nothing to do with any of that.
You what works? Identifying the purpetrators, prosecuting and convicting them. If you want to go ultra tough, use Mossad to go after Hamas leadership. Heck, even using precision strikes at Hamas leadership in Gaza wouod be better, regardless of the related colleteral damage and casualties. Israel is not doing any of that, Israel started levelling Gaza right south of the border and continue southwards, hoping people flee to Egypt which would allow Israel to close the doors behind them. There is a term for this: ethnic cleansing. That is undefensible, period.
No, the term is ethinic cleansing. In war there are rules regarding civilians, rules Israel ignoring. And no, (in)actions by the enemy do not give the otherside a justification to do whatever they want. Rules and laws still apply during war.
I tired so tryong to get that point across to people. And worried what that attitude might mean for the future.
Israel gave civilians weeks to leave areas of fighting and warns them ahead of time before attacking. This is not ethnic cleansing no matter how many times you repeat the phrase.
Presence of civilians does not render an area illegal to attack. Using civilian cover to initiate attacks is a war crime, not wearing uniforms is also a war crime - both things Hamas does. Using civilian buildings for military purposes makes attacking those areas legal and within the rules of war. You don't get to change the definition of words or invent laws of war when convenient to attack Israel.
>You what works? Identifying the purpetrators, prosecuting and convicting them. If you want to go ultra tough, use Mossad to go after Hamas leadership. Heck, even using precision strikes at Hamas leadership in Gaza wouod be better, regardless of the related colleteral damage and casualties. Israel is not doing any of that
ah, yes, it's that simple, just press the magic button that makes all Hamas disappear and all uninvolved civilians live well and prosper...
To me it seems that if those who care about innocent civilians were more focused on demanding Hamas to surrender and release the hostages promptly would be do more to save lives than constantly criticizing Israel, which gives Hamas hope they can survive this (and do what they did again later on)
Right now only one side is doing the blowing things up stuff: Israel.
You know what makes, maybe, Hamas go away? Open and free election, a cease fire followed by a peace treaty followed by international recognition of Palestine as a nation with free access to the sea and everything else that entails. With a neutral, demilitarized zone between Israel and Palestine, a zone save guarded by an international force with a very robust mandate. Because by know, both side need to be seperated to avoid future conflict. That would also mean a full review by an international court of all sentences by Israeli military courts against Palestinians, in cases a general amnesty is not applicable.
Oh, I almost forgot: A rebuilding plan for Gaza and other Palestinian territories. A massive one, comparable to the Marshall Plan after WW2. A plan in which Israel would have a keen interest in paeticipating if peace is the goal. Oh, yes, and a complete abandonnent of Israels illegal settlement policy and the settlements.
In exchange for Israel recognizing all of the above, and international support of that, the new Palestinian nation agrees to recognize Israel as well.
How does that sound? Not magic, I know, but something that worked in principle in Northern Ireland for example.
the point here is that stone throwing kills people, it’s not a joke. so the policy of it being illegal and punishable is not a "crushing" or "hate crime" and definitely is not "hostage taking".
If peopel are properly, as in a proper, fair and unbiased trial, based on equally fair and balanced laws, convicted, sure, you are right.
Holding people without charges is defenitely not that. If it were, whatever Russia is doing with people opposing the war Ukraine would totally swell as well. And it isn't.
You onw what else kills people, and is illegal by international law? Throwing bombs on civilians. Espesially if said civilians didn't do anything.
Restraint is the word and appriach that would allow Israel to project strength and maintain support. What Israel is doing now is a) butthurt and pathetic and b) a despicable disregard of human rights. No amount of stone throwing justifies, or explains, any of that. At best using stome throwing as a justification is excusing conduct that amounts to war crimes. And I hope we can agree those are unacceptable, regardless of whom and which conflict. They happen as it is way too often, if we accept them as justified onxe, we risk opening a door to a place everyone is ok with conducting war in a criminal way. Infor one don't want a world like that, the last time rules of warfare were systematically ignored by everyone, it was incredibly ugly.
> Those who embrace this view fail, however, to explain how it aligns with the inherent right of self-defense
That's quite a rich comment in light of the Dahiya doctrine. It's times like these that I'm glad HN won't let you delete comments for posterity's purpose.
> what scope of military action is necessary to secure the safety of the Israeli population from the Hamas (and Palestinian Islamic Jihad) threat emanating from Gaza?
When you define it like that, literally any military action, up to and including the destruction of all of Israel and it's inhabitants (a-la Samson option) is excusable. The "we have to go to their country and kill them all to protect our way of life" mindset is the fascistic seed of genocide.
Nobody is going to play by that definition. You're delusional if you think the scope of a perceived threat justifies the intensity of an actualized retaliation - it's a misunderstanding of strike warfare. The laser-focus on total war has impaired the IDF's ability to respond to precision threats in a dignified way. It's impossible to argue that Hamas hasn't exploited this obsession, and it's destroying foreign support at an unprecedented rate. You can only massacre so many Qibyas before your government's long-term strategy comes into question.
> Indeed, it is likely that historians will question whether Israel exercised unnecessary restraint up to this point
Here's a thought-exercise for you; how does the world look at America for developing the nuclear bomb? Do you think they love us, for subjugating the world under the ironclad-rule of a nuclear age? Do you think historians criticize America for showing too much restraint in Nagasaki?
Food for thought, may it nourish your starving soul.
> Sometimes I wished HN had an "ignore user" button
FWIW, there is a "mute" button, but it still allows Hasbara drones to harass you, claim you're a terrorist supporter, antisemite etc - you know, the usual slander they resort to once facts are in the way. The level of denial and falsehoods coming from pro-Israeli accounts is awful, especially here, a place renowned for inspiring curiosity and research.
Today is the first day I've wished for an HN block button too :(
