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

That is defending it's use! Again are Palestinians the enemy or Hamas? Because it was specifically said about Palestinians

I’m not really defending it. Just pointing out there is a difference between the dehumanising language used against an enemy during war, and actual ideological hatred manifesting in a specific commitment to wipe out a group of people.

Also some Israeli politicians have said “animals” but specifically about Hamas (but which has been twisted into them meaning all Palestinians).

Once again blaming people for misinterpreting not the people saying it!

Ok so you're continuing to defend it.
I've made my point I don't agree with that language being used to describe any group of people I also wasn't talking about the victims of the terrorist attack (neither were you when you first referenced it). I have no issue with them using every word under the sun to describe the evil monsters that carried out that attack.

I think “animal” is dehumanising language. I can understand why someone - anyone, Israeli or Palestinian - whose family was killed would use it about the people who did it. I’m saying it isn’t evidence of genocidal intent. It is, actually, mundane. Political leaders should exercise greater responsibility in their language I agree.

Also some Israeli politicians have said “animals” but specifically about Hamas (but which has been twisted into them meaning all Palestinians). But describing Hamas as animals is fair enough. Actually, it is an insult to animals.

Israel has dismissed from their roles BUT not from the military, 2 officers in charge of the missile attack on the World central kitchen attack... wow - that'll deter future "mistakes"

It also depends on the context. Describing Hamas as animals seems reasonable to me.

The context was given Netanyahu described the Palestinian people (not Hamas specifically) as animals after Oct 7th.

But sometimes people will claim that any description of Hamas is what the Israelis think about the Palestinian people.
But he said Palestinians not Hamas did he mispeak? And I like the way you are blaming people for picking it up wrong not the person that said it in the first place

It also depends on the context. Describing Hamas as animals seems reasonable to me. But sometimes people will claim that any description of Hamas is what the Israelis think about the Palestinian people

Do you think the sole survivor of an IDF attack on a residential block that kills his or hers entire extended family, including several children, is justified to call Israelis "animals" ?

Or does your argument only extend to one side?

I do think there is a significant number of Israelis who do not see any distinction between Hamas and non combatant Gazans, a minister recent said on the death of a Palestinian child, that the boy wasn't a child but a terrorist in waiting..

It also depends on the context. Describing Hamas as animals seems reasonable to me. But sometimes people will claim that any description of Hamas is what the Israelis think about the Palestinian people.

Another example is when Netanyahu referred to the Amalekites, which is used as evidence of genocidal intent because Saul (I think?) ordered the killing of all the Amalekites in the Bible. But it was actually just a call to remember an Amalekite atrocity against the Israelites. I believe Jews have a duty to remember this. So he was just saying “remember Oct 7th”. Shows you how words are manipulated to suit an agenda.

Precisely pretty disappointing and worrying to think that someone thinks it's ok

@Dulra it's easier to kill people if you don't see them as human, just as it's easier to not care about other people killing people if you don't see their victims as human. As a world, we need to do better than this. That kind of dehumanising is part of why oppression and killing go on around the world.

Ok so I interpreted you right thanks for clarifying.

Don't agree though that it is prevalent or acceptable in modern societies whether at war or not especially not from the leaders of a country I would have thought they could be a bit more restrained. Palestinians also include those in the West bank and the enemy is Hamas not innocent Palestinians, just comes across as racist to me and dehumanising which is maybe the point makes it easier to kill them.

I’m saying that in wartime people will use dehumanising terms to describe the enemy. There’s also a lot of lies and propaganda about the enemy. War hardens the heart. This has happened in every war in history. We used to refer to Germans as the Hun - as savages. It isn’t particularly pleasant. But it’s ordinary during a war. The use of these terms should not be used as evidence of genocidal intent, or of hatred borne out of ideological commitment.

Calling Palestinians animals is not something one can support, but there is a difference - a universe of difference - between everyday language used about enemies that happens in every war, and actual genocidal war objectives.

@CaterhamReconstituted can I just check I haven't misinterpreted what you've said. Are you suggesting calling Palestinians animals isn't ideal but understandable in the context of them being an enemy?

The ICJ say that it plausible Israel are committing genocide. Today the UN Rights Council have voted on a arms embargo to Israel citing risk of genocide. Genocide isn't 'unintentional civillian death' and I'm not sure why you are attempting to downplay something that is clearly being taken very seriously by both the ICJ and the UN Rights Council amongst many others. It's in really bad taste.

Hamas have never done a damn thing other oppress everyone, kill people and steal things from the needs.
Substitute Hamas with successive Israeli governments and voila, it also makes sense because both are terrorists; one an organisation, the other a state.

How do you kill over 13000 children unintentionally? Come off it. If they did all of that accidentally they should be decommissioned due to outrageous incompetence and being a danger to the world at large.

I suppose I took the human animals comment seriously because they then proceeded to commit genocide in the following 6 months. Context. Maybe if they hadn't done that your excuses for them wouldn't sound so ridiculous.

Thanks for the laugh!

I had been under the impression that WW2 comparisons were generally considered inappropriate, lazy and disrespectful. Apparently that doesn't apply when they can be used to try to take cheap shots at other posters.
Only if you care about the fate of your fellow human beings, who happen to be Palestinians.

This is a badly motivated response.

IDF killings of civilians in Gaza is completely regrettable. But yes, unintentional civilian deaths as a consequence of a just war IS more morally justifiable than the deliberate slaughter of innocent civilians because of who they are as a people. The is no moral equivalence between the actions of Israel and the actions of Hamas on 7 October. We are slipping into something very sinister here. Hamas are the reasonable actors, the defence against genocide is genocide, unintentional civilian deaths are morally worse than the deliberate murders of Jews…

Calling Palestinians animals is not something one can support, but there is a difference - a universe of difference - between everyday language used about enemies that happens in every war, and actual genocidal war objectives.

"Hamas is outwardly more reasonable" - did you seriously just say this???? Hamas have never done a damn thing other oppress everyone, kill people and steal things from the needs. This comment is an absolute joke

No one can really suggest that Hamas is more reasonable or even close to it, what they did on 7/10 was evil personified but add in the word "outwardly" and the sentence takes on a completely different meaning.

Hamas are winning the PR battle, the IDF by targeting aid workers/restricting aid and shooting their own hostages as they surrender, are not, whether this is rogue elements or deliberate Israeli policy only time will tell but atm it looks more like policy from the top of Govt, esp given some of the speeches from leading right wing ministers.

As i said, the danger for Israel is longer term, lose the backing of the US and they will be be easier pickings for the terrorists.

Does anyone really think that Hamas will lead the post conflict administration of Gaza?

I can't believe you're defending the killings of tens of thousands of civilians as somehow more morally acceptable than the killings carried out by Hamas. It's not "inadvertent". It's mass slaughter. It's genocide.

And calling a plan for ethnic cleansing/annihilation a "faux pas" is a new level of minimisation on these boards.

Calling Palestinians animals - is it unsupportable or normal? Both can't be true, though I understand that you're tying yourself up in knots in an effort to defend the indefensible.

"Hamas is outwardly more reasonable" - did you seriously just say this???? Hamas have never done a damn thing other oppress everyone, kill people and steal things from the needs. This comment is an absolute joke.

Not rot, trying to be objective here. The fact that your can't see that in any direct comparison the 'bad guys' don't have to lose on every single metric is telling of how little objectivity you have with this.

I'm generally pro Palestine, but that doesn't mean I think Israel, their government or even their military are bad on every metric. That would be silly.

There is more accountability for prisoners, better training of soldiers, better treatment for injured soldiers and a more transparent chain if command with the IDF. That doesn't make me an IDF fan.

Me saying that Hamas on paper are more willing to pursue a 2 state solution than Likud doesn't mean I'm some kind of Hamas fan. It means I can read 😂.

It's actually really concerning when someone is so single minded in their opinions that they separate anything into 100% good or bad.

Hamas is outwardly more reasonable

At this point, the thread has descended into gaslighting.

Also that terrorism is “just what happens when you forcibly displace people or subjugate them”. We know for a fact that this is not true given that displacement and subjugation is basically the history of Europe up right up until the present day. The terrorist problem that exists in Europe has nothing to do with displacement or subjugation of Europeans.

Terrorism is fuelled by ideology, so let’s stop trying to gaslight people into accepting that terrorism is something as natural as a “flood risk”. It’s disgusting.