To wonder how anyone thought what was happening in Gaza was ok?

@CaterhamReconstituted
Please do not portray this conflict in the terms of an existential threat to Israel.

From 2008 until 6 October 2023, 1245 Israelis died as a result of the conflict. During the same period , Israel killed more than 2300 Palestinian children

In 2022 there were 351 road deaths in Israel.

Road traffic accidents kill more Israelis than terrorists.

On 7 October 2023, there was a single violent pogram resulting in the deaths of approximately 1200 Israeli residents, many of whom but not all that were civilians. This occurred against a background of security failures at numerous levels, the majority of which were unlikely to recu.

Israel is not facing an existential threat from Hamas.

You are as entitled to your opinion as anyone but most of the world thinks that Israel is wrong in what it is doing.

@CaterhamReconstituted
I remember someone’s appalled righteousness about an Israeli soldier who shot dead an injured man while he was lying in hospital. It turned out that he was a member of Hamas, and do you know what, people still said Israel were in the wrong! International law, actually, gives Israel the right to utterly destroy Hamas.

This incident was headline news throughout the whole world and the general concensus was not well done the IDF for murdering a paralysed patient in his bed quite the reverse

International law, actually, gives Israel the right to utterly destroy Hamas.

You're just making up any old nonsense now

You justified IDF tactics and compared to WW2, where the allies faced an enemy with the capability to over run all of europe, Israel do not, in terms of Hamas, face that threat.

You re the only one defending Israel to the n th degree, even the Americans are fed up with their behaviours, its not a rogue soldier or even a group of them, its v clearly policy.

Yes executing an enemy combatant whilst they are incapacitated is against the rules of war, check UK soldiers being prosecuted for this in both NI and Afghan.

Please engage with what people are actually saying. I was not comparing Hamas with the Third Reich, I was pointing out that the logical consequence of pacifism (that particular poster was a pacifist) was enslavement, and if we were pacifists during the Second World War then we could not have resisted Nazism.

Ok, that one dealt with. The second part of your post is the more sensible bit. This gets into questions around strategy and tactics. Are Israel waging a textbook military campaign? No. Do individual soldiers behave badly? Yes. By the way, there is a lot of propaganda to wade through here too. I remember someone’s appalled righteousness about an Israeli soldier who shot dead an injured man while he was lying in hospital. It turned out that he was a member of Hamas, and do you know what, people still said Israel were in the wrong! International law, actually, gives Israel the right to utterly destroy Hamas.

Israel suffered their worst atrocity since the Holocaust on Oct 7th. And people were talking about the supposed barbarism of Israel on Oct 8th.

Have to disagree on that. The core of the problem is one side displacing people and stealing their land.

Comparing Hamas to the Third Reich? thats a stretch, Hamas have zero chance of defeating Israel militarily let alone take out most of Western Europe.

This is why, despite when the IRA were killing, torturing and executing UK Government cabinet ministers, British soldiers and citizens, Thatcher did not order the indiscriminate bombing of West Belfast.

Israel could have chosen to flood areas of Gaza with troops, intel led special forces raids, targeted overseas operations against Hamas leaders, instead it went for the mass movement of 2m people, mass bombings and who cares about civilian casualties.

Law applies to everybody. Terrorists might not accept them but that doesn’t matter. There aren’t special rules for terrorists.

I wont rise to your deliberate lying.

Terrorist subject themselves to legal frameworks?? what fucking planet are you on???

That's not what you typed, but thank you for clarifying what you meant.

I'm curious as to what leads you to consider the current casualty rates, infrastructure destruction and behaviours of military personnel as acceptable - most of my contacts in related fields (including frontline combat, military strategy, engineers, etc) share my view that the strategic approaches, weapons choices, conduct, etc are unacceptable?

Not at all. I was asking why the Palestinian people have to accept a lower moral standard for the governance of their people i.e. Hamas. Why shouldn’t we hold Hamas to the same standard as any other group or government? Human rights are universal.

You conflated Hamas and Palestinians above, as quoted previously.

The core of this problem is jihadism. Jihadism is a global problem that exists in other countries that have nothing to do with Israel and Palestine.

Of course there is a history to this, which further complicates the picture. But I don’t think it is one-sided - Israel have legitimate security concerns and have been attacked even since the state of Israel was created.

I support the right of self-determination for the Palestinian people. But there needs to be a constructive path to statehood, and it is impossible to negotiate with a group like Hamas.

I also think that international organisations are hopelessly biased against Israel.

What about the Biden administration - Israel's closest allies who have also variously said

• killing far too many civilians
• not using enough targeted weapons
• need to increase humanitarian aid partic food aid
• are air-dropping food aid as people are starving

Is the Biden administration also 'hopelessly biased against Israel' too?

@CaterhamReconstituted

,

I'm talking about your take in general. You were speaking as though Hamas existed in a vacuum. I'm glad you recognise the situation in Israel and the OPT before this latest escalation.

It’s still a free country (just).

I don’t agree that Hamas and the Palestinian people are the same, and have never said it.

That response doesn’t match the question. I’ve never said the Palestinian Territories are not occupied. I asked whether that poster recognised that Hamas would murder all the Jews if Israel did not fight at all? That the logical consequence of pacifism would be the attempted extermination of an entire people?

Yes a mixture of all the above.

Im not sure what is meant by a “firm” opinion - isn’t your opinion also “firm”? There are many facts we can all agree on. I’m not disputing that there are very high casualty figures (we can quibble about the exact numbers but can agree it is appallingly high). I just disagree about why this is happening.

There are many commentators out there who take different positions. I’m not an outlier (perhaps on MN). I also think that international organisations are hopelessly biased against Israel. More UN resolutions have been about Israel than any other country, inc. Sudan, Syria, North Korea etc., which is ludicrous and shows what their agenda is.

Hopefully she can come back and clarify where I've misunderstood.

You're ignoring the highly relevant fact that Palestinians live under Israeli occupation and large numbers of them have been subject to terror and mistreatment by the state of Israel for decades. I know it's easier to pretend that this isn't the case but that's just a lie.

No it’s my opinion that war is never justified. And if Israelis were pacifists, then maybe this conflict, that has been going on for decades, would not have ended up this way, and there would be no Hamas for them to fight. Anyway, it’s clear that your position is entrenched. I’m not going to change your opinion and you’re certainly not going to change mine, so let’s just leave it there. Have a nice day.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

People's opinions are usually based on something.

That may be qualifications, professional experience, lived experience, having read academic papers, having read newspaper articles, having seen TikTok videos or whatever.

When someone states that their opinion is that multiple international organisations and experts in a particular field are wrong about something in that field, that's quite a firm position to take, and it's relevant to ask on what basis someone has reached that conclusion.