Israeli cleric Rabbi Ronen Shaulov calls for the starvation of all civilians in Gaza

I posted this on the other thread, but it’s relevant here too:

https://theconversation.com/gaza-we-analysed-a-year-of-satellite-images-to-map-the-scale-of-agricultural-destruction-248796

Satellite imagery shows that over two-thirds of Gaza’s cropland and almost 70% of greenhouses have been destroyed (and this was back in February).

This isn’t isolated ‘collateral damage’ - it’s widespread destruction of civilian infrastructure and food sources, which undermines the claim that blanket bombing is just targeting Hamas hiding in civilian buildings.

No it isn’t, they are at war with Hamas.

When logic flies out of the window, it’s time to take a break from MN as no point arguing with those who want to villainise Israel against all reason.

So on that note, I’m out.

The logical explanation is she was killed by accident like other civilians getting killed in wars. Living in a war zone, civilians will get killed but you insist they are “targeted” killings because they happen in Gaza.

Are none of the civilian deaths in other wars accidental in your view? Are they all targeted?

No 'logical reason' for targeting a little girl unless your aim is to kill civilians - which is clearly the aim of the Israeli government and military.

Exactly: there would have been no logical reason for the IDF to target this little girl, yet she was targeted and killed by one of their drones. And this is not an isolated case.

Why do you think that is?

Combined with statements from Netanyahu and other officials, what logical conclusion should we draw?

Sure, ‘civilians get killed in every war’- but we’re not talking about the unfortunate inevitability of conflict here. We’re talking about systematic, documented patterns of targeting, starvation, and destruction.

When thousands of children are killed, hospitals bombed, and aid blocked, it’s not an ‘unfortunate accident’ - it’s policy.

Sorry if the targeted killing of children and babies is ‘boring’ for you or for others, but this is the central reason why so many people are apoplectic about this crisis-

and one of the key reasons it will later be scrutinised as a war crime and crime against humanity.

This has all been discussed multiple times about civilians getting killed in every war, including children. There would have been no logical reason for the IDF to target this little girl though she was very unfortunately killed by one of their drones.

I'm not going to rehash old arguments over and over again as I know you like to do. It will be boring for me and for others reading this thread.

If Israel is truly only at war with Hamas, why are civilians being killed? Why was that little girl targeted and killed by a drone while collecting water for her family? Why are essential supplies like baby formula and medical aid being blocked from entering Gaza? These are real, documented impacts on non-combatants- how does that square with being ‘at war with Hamas’ only?

And we’re not talking about isolated incidents or ‘technical errors’- this is mass evidence of indiscriminate targeting of civilians, including many children and babies.

As already stated it's impossible for the IDF to do precision strikes in Gaza due to the way Hamas operate. Possible in Iran though.

the precision strike in Iran vs. Gaza

I disagree. I would say that this persons views very much represent the views of those in power in Israel. Who do you think he felt comfortable sharing those views with?

A quick search comes up with several documented instances where Israeli public figures have made statements that have been widely interpreted as incitement to genocide or ethnic cleansing.

One can only imagine what they say behind closed doors if they’re comfortable sharing this with the public:

1. Bezalel Smotrich (Finance Minister): In April 2024, Smotrich stated, “There are no half measures… Rafah, Deir al-Balah, Nuseirat – total annihilation. ‘Thou shalt blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven.’ There is no place for them under heaven.” The Israeli newspaper Haaretz described his comments as a call to genocide.
2. Nissim Vaturi (Deputy Speaker of the Knesset): In January 2024, Vaturi reaffirmed his calls to “wipe Gaza off the face of the earth,” stating, “Gaza must be burned.” He added, “I stand behind my words.”
3. Statements by Israeli Officials, Soldiers, and Civil Society: A report by Al-Haq in January 2024 documented various statements by Israeli officials and soldiers that have been interpreted as incitement to genocide.
4. Yitzhak Kroizer (Otzma Yehudit Party): In a radio interview, Kroizer stated, “The Gaza Strip should be flattened, and for all of them there is but one sentence, and that is death.”
5. Tally Gotliv (Likud Party): Gotliv demanded that Prime Minister Netanyahu use a nuclear bomb on Gaza for “strategic deterrence,” saying, “Before we consider inserting ground troops, doomsday weapon.”
6. Boaz Bismuth (Likud Party): Bismuth evoked the biblical massacre of the Amalek nation, stating, “It is forbidden to take mercy on the cruel, there’s no place for any humanitarian gestures,” referring to Gaza and adding, “The memory of Amalek must be erased.”
7. Zvi Yehezkeli (Journalist): Yehezkeli suggested on Channel 13 that Israel should have killed “many times 20,000 people,” stating, “[We] should have begun with a blow of 100,000.”
8. Yoav Gallant (Former Defence Minister): Gallant, in October 2023, stated, “Gaza won’t return to what it was before. We will eliminate everything.”
9. Amit Halevi (Likud Party): Halevi, in October 2023, suggested that Gaza should be left as a monument, like Sodom, and questioned the desire to treat every child and woman in Gaza, implying that distinctions between civilians and combatants should not exist.
10. Simcha Rothman (National Religious Party): Rothman, in response to a question about whether children are enemies, stated, “They [the children] are our enemies.”

Precision strikes were an option in Iran because their military don't hide amongst civilians and underneath civilian buildings like Hamas do. They don't have miles of underground tunnels. But you know this.

No I'm not going down a rabbit hole about that. When I write posts it is for everyone to read and consider not just you.

There are many examples on MN, such as the "but Hamas" crew who mock attempts to bring Hamas back into discussions. Some people prefer to pretend Israel are at war with Gazans than acknowledge they are at war with a terrorist group. Outside of MN we see protestors whose placards are almost exclusively aimed at blaming Israel rather than apportioning any blame to Hamas.

But ultimately, people can believe what they want to believe about whether they agree with me or not that there's a reluctance to blame Hamas, I'm not going to waste time digging out examples which won't change anyone's opinion anyway.

“But I've yet to see a viable suggestion for how else Israel could rid Gaza of Hamas”

Even if Israel wants to remove Hamas, the idea that this requires bombing civilians, starving children, and destroying hospitals is not only morally indefensible but also legally a war crime.

There are alternatives that could neutralise Hamas without harming innocent people: targeted arrests of leaders and fighters, intercepting weapons smuggling, cyber operations to disrupt militant networks, and negotiation or international pressure. Collective punishment of 2 million people cannot be justified as a strategy to “rid Gaza of Hamas.”

Precision strikes in other contexts- like Iran- show that indiscriminate bombing is a choice, not a necessity.

I do wholeheartedly acknowledge how awful his comments are.

You know what a stickler I am for facts though. Just wanted to point out he had already resigned from post when he made those comments and it does not seem like he made them publicly but more in a private group. It doesn't excuse his opinions - and yes I imagine he privately held them since 7/10/23.

But this person's views don't represent the views of "Israel." And the wrath he expressed may have been partly influenced by the guilt he felt at the intelligence failings he took personally.

Sorry, could you point me to evidence on MN that there’s “reluctance to blame Hamas”? I’ve consistently condemned Hamas and hold them accountable proportionally.

At the same time, I also hold Israel proportionally accountable for indiscriminate bombing, actively killing children and civilians, blocking essential aid including baby formula, cutting electricity to incubators, and bombing hospitals and ambulances. Both sets of actions deserve scrutiny.

Removing Hamas doesn't seem to be the main focus of many people. There has been a reluctance (on MN as well as elsewhere) to blame Hamas as much as Israel.

How do people who disagree with Israel's war against Hamas think they will get rid of them? (swap war for genocide if you prefer, don't want to get mired in that debate again).

It's not that I like groups being at war, I very much don't. But I've yet to see a viable suggestion for how else Israel could rid Gaza of Hamas.

Personally, I hope Netanyahu accepts the latest ceasefire proposal and that as part of that deal, Hamas leaders agree to leave Gaza. But they definitely wouldn't have agreed those terms before the war escalated to this awful point, in fact they had rejected the same terms just last month.

I read the start of your comment and thought, “Ah, great, Twiglets is acknowledging how awful those comments are…” then came the ‘but’.

Even if he didn’t say it as Chief of Israeli Military Security, do you not think his personal opinion that Palestinians “need a Nakba every now and again” would have influenced his decision-making while he was in that role?

These aren’t beliefs someone develops overnight. If my child’s teacher privately said that all children are inherently evil and that physical punishment is a proportionate response to any misbehaviour, would it matter that they only voiced it after they’d taught my child? The underlying views still reflect on how they acted while in their position.

Lots of voices are supporting the removal of Hamas though. The initial arab proposal, the New York declaration…the previous US administration, the ex security staff. They are all supporting Hamas being removed but they don’t think Israel is going to achieve that by their current actions.

If someone says who they are, shouldn't we believe them?

If you use these same standards against Hamas then surely everyone should be supporting Israel in their quest to completely destroy Hamas, since they have pledged to kill all Jews in Israel (some leaders have publicly stated they want to kill all Jews worldwide).

It's a terrible opinion for him to hold privately, but just as bad, definitely worse have been said publicly by members of Netanyahu's government, and Netenyahu himself.

Why are so many people choosing to ignore clearly genocidal statements by people in power in Israel? Especially when those statements are made at the heart of the government and not an infrequent basis.

If someone says who they are, shouldn't we believe them?

It's a terrible thing for him to have said and a terrible opinion for anyone to hold even privately. But he didn't say it as part of his role as Chief of Israeli military security so it seems that it was more his personal opinion.

We know that he wasn't the Chief of Israeli military security when he made these comments as they refer to "50,000 dead in Gaza" which didn't happen until March 2025 according to Hamas figures. He resigned in April 2024, saying he took responsibility for the failures before Hamas's attack on Israel on 7th October.

He acknowledged in a letter that his intelligence directorate "did not live up to the task we were entrusted to".

www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-68873227

Just read your update OP 😢
It's extremely distressing that some extremists in Israel think that, and don't recognise Palestinians as their fellow human beings with the equal worth they have. All people, whatever their race, nationality or religion have absolutely equal priceless worth, and all human life is equally sacred. It's obvious to most of us, but sadly some people (hopefully a tiny minority) haven't learnt that simple life lesson 😔

I'm flummoxed that you're making this argument. You're trying to obscure

"It would also be mistaken to assume that democratic structures within a state (like Israel) within UN structures would be seen as justifying actions that, to much of the world, are perceived through the lens of occupation, violence, and colonialism".

Translation: “Even if a country is a democracy, it doesn’t matter if a majority of the world calls it colonialist and decides the people whove been there 3000 years have no connection to it.”

That’s not a worldview; it’s a propaganda win. This argument rests on perception, not evidence. Jews presence is Israel long before Muslims is historical fact. Israel’s presence the West Bank is the result of a war started by Arab states who refused any Jewish state whatsoever - including the UN partition plan. Labeling it "colonialism" erases history, legal nuance, and the fact that Jews are indigenous to the land. A democracy acting in self-defence doesn’t lose its legitimacy just because dictatorships with appalling human rights records decide to call it names.

Someone who's literally killing hundred of thousands of people including using chemical weapons on their civilians is perceived through what lens exactly? The "lens" available that makes any horrific actions just fine as long as youre a Muslim?

"This gap in worldview makes much of the UN’s behavior look 'crazy' to Westerners, when in fact it is entirely consistent with ... just a diversity of worldviews."

Translation: “What looks like obsession or hypocrisy is really just cultural differences.”

Hypocrisy is hypocrisy, not a cultural nuance. When Israel is condemned more than Syria, North Korea, or Iran combined, and serial abusers of human rights sit on the Human Rights Council and vote en masse against Israel, this isn’t "diversity of worldviews." It’s bloc-voting by nations with zero moral authority. Dressing it up as "perspective" is a weak attempt to legitimise mob rule.

"Both Israel and Assad's Syria are actually good examples of how this works in practice..."

Equating Israel with Assad's Syria, which has bombed, gassed, and massacred hundreds of thousands of civilians deliberately, unprovoked and for no legal cause, is obscene. Israel - with its Arab Supreme Court justices, LGBTQ+ rights, and free press - is not remotely comparable to a dictatorship that drops barrel bombs on children. This is moral relativism at its most bankrupt.

"Ultimately, the UN was set up... to resolve disputes between great powers."

That’s a dodge. Yes, the Security Council is largely about great power diplomacy. But we’re not talking about the UNSC - we’re talking about the General Assembly and Human Rights Council, where a voting bloc of 56 Muslim-majority states, many of them autocracies with deeply antisemitic idelogies repeatedly push anti-Israel resolutions regardless of merit, fact, or legal context.

"Failing to push a certain worldview is actually one of the things it does reasonably successfully."

The UN does push a worldview - repeatedly and obsessively - against Israel. There’s no comparable flood of resolutions against China for Uyghur camps, or against Iran for the execution of minors. And Israel gets singled out with permanent agenda items - nobody else does.

"Israel can table and motion against Sweden at the UNHRC — and that is very much by design."

Yes, Israel could technically table something - but in practice it wouldn’t pass. Why? Because people will vote it down. Saying “well, they could try” is like saying a lone protestor in a dictatorship technically has freedom of speech. It’s nonsense on paper - and irrelevant in reality. The point here is that a huge bloc of Jew hating states, many of whom seek the annihilation of Israel entirely, gang up on this tiny Jewish country and use the UN as a weapon against it.