To be horrified that Israel is slaughtering children at a rate not seen for ober

[ThisNattyTurtle]

Israel killed more children in 15 months than were killed in all the conflicts of the world in the last 4 years combined. Israel is killing children again now at an unprecedented rate and the UK is supporting it with weapons, money and intelligence.
Israel is committing genocide according to the UN, Amnesty and Human Rights Watch. Israel killed 159 Palestinians, including children, during the ceasefire - only 1 Israeli was killed in that time and that was a soldier in a friendly fire event.

Mumsnet HQ there are at least 3 threads about Ukraine still on AIBU, and many other political ones. Please do not hide this topic away in the other section again without at least explaining why UK involvement in the mass slaughter of children is not worthy of the front page. We are supporting a regime much worse than Russia, as much as Russia's regime is awful.

@LilacPeer The realities of war is that part of prosecuting them is trying to deny the enemy access to food, water, power. This is happening in Ukraine as well as Gaza - power stations are bombed, as are railways, bridges etc. Disruption of the food supply too - war in itself will do that (and has in Ukraine). In WWII (I know, a long time ago) the UK spent ships and lives and treasure blockading Germany so that their forces could not get out and food supply was disrupted. Germany attempted the same with the UK and so ships carrying food and supplies to the UK had to be escorted by warships. The Bengal famine was made much worse because of enemy action in Burma (the Japanese) disrupting the rice harvest and exports of rice to India, meanwhile action elsewhere made getting aid ships to Bengal (from Australia) very difficult. It's war. Sadly, people die, even when non-combatants and civilians are not supposed to be targeted.
As to Gaza, it's electricity and water supplies come free from Israel. A warning to all nations (the UK included) that to rely on imports of energy or the ownership of the infrastructure that produces electricity (and gas) and water being owned by foreign governments or companies allied to foreign governments is dangerous (and private companies will use this disruption to profiteer, which is one result of the Ukraine war). Remember Jersey and the French threatening to cut off electricity because the islands would not give fishing licences to fishermen who had been illegally fishing their waters? That's the reality of war - and France is supposed to be an ally.

They prevented food, water and aid 17 months ago. There have been periods of time when the blockades were lifted, but there have been more periods of time with no access to these things, than with during the war.

Hind Rajab was killed over a year ago. A 5 year old, who was alone, surrounded by dead relatives, when her car was shot 335 times by the IDF. I would argue that 'going too far' is not a recent series of events.

trying to deny the enemy access to food, water, power

Civilians are not the enemy and preventing civilian access to these things is a war crime.

This! I look at the pictures of those little kids, before smiling and happy just like my kid and her friends, after lifeless or missing limbs. It honestly stops my heart for a second, just imagine that was your child. I can’t imagine what their families are going through.

Home videos of kids mucking about, laughing, playing - exactly like my child, like British, American and Israeli children - kids being kids.

The fallout from conflicts like World War 2 and the war crimes committed made it necessary for the world to agree on rules for wars. It is now against international law to bomb civilian areas. It is against international law to bomb hospitals and schools. It is against international law to shoot doctors, medics and journalists. It is against international law to displace an entire population. It is against international law to shoot children in the head. Civilised people should not need to be told this.

I think people who defend the murder of children are broken inside, only sociopathic or brainwashed people could defend the murder of any child! We have to share this world, there are lots of different religions and different ethnicities, the only way it works is if we all work together.

You feel the Israeli government went too far. We see that this was their plan to start with. They want the 'greater israel' (whatever that is) on the lands that are not Israel. They want palestinian destruction. So, the prevention of food, medical supplies, destraction of all life supporting structure, of culture, etc - this is the plan, not an overreaction. This did not start with Hamas, this movement started at the end of the 19th century. Now they can act with impunity, and we (many citizens of the UK, US, Europe) do not understand why our countries not only do not stop, but actively support this.

The other thing people haven’t mentioned but is so incredibly important for all of us to consider is that these 2,000lb bombs have a really devastating effect on our environment. The fallout from bombs in World War 2 still has an effect on the world today, the chemicals and devastation caused by wars is rapidly hurrying along climate change which will bring more natural disasters and make the world uninhabitable for all of us. Israel (and Russia for that matter) is literally killing all of our futures. It is wrong, any country supplying them with weapons should be found complicit!

I don't agree with you that so many civilian deaths was the plan of the Israeli government to start with or that they seek Palestinian destruction.

And I feel like I do understand why many Western countries have criticised the Israel government but not stopped them but when I say it's Hamas (which it is, in my opinion) that gets criticised as changing the subject or being pro killing babies or something.

A most eloquent response. I salute the integrity and thought that must have been extended on it. Ok, let me explain it a little more simply. Just because you disagree with a documented fact does not stop it being a documented fact. It was a fact before and will still be a fact afterwards, regardless what you agree.

When I say that there are illegal occupations in the West Bank, I am basing that assertion on proven documented fact supported by multiple sources. Fact that is known to have been proven beyond doubt.

When you say 'I don't give a #### what anyone says. There are no illegal occupations. Full stop!', what exactly are you basing that on?

I'm just trying to understand the mindset of disagreeing with something that is established to be a known and proven documented fact. So how does that work then? Is it like when you stick your fingers in your ears and go 'lalalalalala'? Do proven facts mysteriously disappear into thin air if you just say you don't agree with them?

I'm guessing by that logic Russia didn't invade Ukraine if I say they didn't. I mean what does documented fact have to do with anything? Hell, there wasn't even a 9/11 if I say there wasn't. This is great, I'm off to see my mortgage advisor forthwith because there is not ten years left on my mortgage full stop either, yay! This is genius! Why didn't I think of this before??

Civilians on the opposing side are the enemy - they are the 'home front', supporting the war effort by their actions and work. They will be producing armaments, growing food, providing all the unpaid labour that keeps an economy going (that's mainly women), running hospitals, tending the wounded from battlefields. It is really, really difficult to decide who is a non-combatant. Is a woman working in munitions a non-combatant? Is a farmer growing food for the troops and to sustain the people at home? Armament factories, power stations, railways, food supplies, barracks, airfields etc are all legitimate targets in a war. Only if none of those things is present can one say an area cannot be targeted. Israel is targeting buildings which their intelligence tells them house Hamas - because Hamas is committing the war crime of hiding within the civilian population, not wearing uniforms etc.
Preventing access to food may be a war crime but it is indubitably one of the weapons of war and always has been - unlikely it will ever stop being, I am afraid.
Do you imagine in WWII, had Germans captured British civilians in an area they were occupying, that they would have regarded them as not being the enemy?

And yet people keep on repeating that Hamas are the enemy? This isn't two countries at war. This is one country at war with a terrorist group, within an occupied state.

If the IDF find it difficult to ascertain who the enemies are, the answer isn't just to send out dumb bombs in the hope that there are some enemies in there. For the fiftieth time, I ask if anyone here would be OK with that approach being taken in London?

I'd also be as bold to assert that they could be entirely certain that a 5 year old sheltering in a car amongst dead bodies, wasn't a threat.

it is indubitably one of the weapons of war and always has been - unlikely it will ever stop being, I am afraid

Actually it isn't one of the weapons of war, its a war crime...forbidden in war.

@LilacPeer I thought it was a hypothetical question but No, I would not be ok with that approach being taken in London.

I'm not ok with dumb bombs being dropped in Gaza either - not that I have any power to do anything about it & virtue signalling my opposition to wars in the world won't help anyone.

I do see why Israel had to retaliate and fight back strongly against Hamas though.

Yes, we all understand why Hamas need to be fought against.

Where we seem to be divided is whether it's OK to slaughter thousands of civilians in the pursuit of this. Which seems to be OK in Gaza if it means eliminating Hamas, but wouldn't be OK anywhere else in the world.

This photo is from sept 2023. If Israel is not after the Palestinian destruction … then where is Palestine in this map that the president of Israel is holding?

Please could you provide a link to the source of this photo?

Well it's in both the Jerusalem post and the Times of Israel, for a start.
Funny how the same people getting hysterical about "from the river to the sea" were just completely silent when the prime minister of Israel, BEFORE OCT. 7th, just wiped Palestine off the map completely (in defiance of the stated aim of the "2-state-solution" that we, his bankrollers in the West, and Israel are all supposedly committed to).

m.jpost.com/israel-news/politics-and-diplomacy/article-760189

I don't know what you mean by it wouldn't be ok anywhere else in the world.

It was "ok" when the UK was at war with Germany and Russia & Ukraine are currently killing thousands of civilians in their war.

That link doesn't show the same photo that @EasterIssland posted showing a card with the words "The New Middle East".

https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/netanyahu-brandishes-map-of-israel-that-includes-west-bank-and-gaza-at-un-speech/

I can see how the map could be seen as inflammatory but don't agree that Israel want the destruction of Palestine.

Israel being so much more powerful, Netanyahu could have "unleashed hell" long before this conflict had he chosen to. Instead he was keeping an uneasy truce until Hamas instigated October 7th and then provided further provocation in terms of the way they handled the hostages release.

As op has posted it’s not only once he’s giving a speech with a map without Palestine.

Inflammatory yes... I'm not here to defend everything Netanyahu does.

My take from the map would be that there is no Palestine, no Gaza and no West Bank. Only Israel. Surely the only way to arrive at that conclusion is by removing Palestine, Gaza and the West Bank if they are now all suddenly Israel according to the map?

The difference is clear to anyone honest enough to acknowledge it.

The reason “from the river to the sea” is called a genocidal slogan isn’t just because it advocates for the destruction of Israel—it’s because it calls for the elimination of Jews. There are zero Jews living in Palestinian-controlled territories (Gaza and Areas A & B), and very few in the entire Arab/Muslim Middle East.

Palestinians who talk about “freeing Palestine” aren’t merely advocating for an independent state. They want the entire land to be Jew-free. And before anyone accuses me of exaggeration, I’d encourage you to look up the Ask Project on YouTube, where Corey Shuster interviews everyday people on the street. In over 90% of cases, when Palestinians are asked about the “Jewish question,” they openly state that Jews would not be allowed in a future Palestinian state.

Now contrast that with Israel, where 20-25% of the population consists of Arabs who enjoy full citizenship and equal rights. When Netanyahu speaks of “from the river to the sea,” he’s referring to maintaining Israeli sovereignty—a position that poses no threat to peaceful Arabs who want to live as citizens.

It wasn't OK in WW1/2 and it isn't OK in Ukraine now. And you do know what I mean because I've repeated it approximately 800 times. It wouldn't be OK to bomb an entire area in London, in hope of killing some terrorists.

Ukraine has had approximately 12,600 deaths in 3 years. Horrendous. Not on the scale of Gaza, which is currently at around 50,000 in 17 months.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1293492/ukraine-war-casualties/

The Germans gassed Jews in WW2, it's safe to say I don't think that should be repeated. Just because something happened in the past, doesn't mean it should be overlooked today.

I honestly don't understand you and it may be a me problem, but I can't get my brain to excuse murdering innocent people.

CIVILIANS SHOULD NOT DIE. Not at the hands of anyone. Israel should follow international law in their pursuit of controlling Hamas. All civilians should be able to live freely, not be living in constant fear of death whether it be through bomb, sniper, lack of medical care, starvation, dehydration or infectious disease. There are no 'what ifs' or 'what abouts' for me and that is the end of my opinion on it.

Crikey, that's putting things back a bit. Be reasonable! Why not go for the invasion of the Levant by Muslims in the 8th century - it began then.