How is forced starvation allowed?

[Tinycatnoise]

The top story in the BBC right now is the starvation of Gazans by Israel. The images are horrifying and not dissimilar to seeing those images of concentration camps in Nazi Germany. I cried seeing those and am crying now. I am sure someone will claim antisemitism because of this statement, but anyone looking at these images of starving children would agree.

How is this still going on? I feel like we are watching a genocide take place that the world has turning a blind eye to. The daily shooting by Israel of people trying to get aid too is just barbaric. If nothing is being done to stop this, what is the next horror that will unfold in the world that people will just accept?

www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce9xkx7vnmxo

Come on, Sharon. I’ve spent days debating with them- using verified evidence and reputable sources. My post clearly lays out the key points that repeatedly get twisted or ignored.

I’m not criticising people for “posting too much.” I’m questioning why the same few posters are active for upwards of 6 hours a day while repeatedly shutting down criticism, distorting reports, and dominating the thread. That’s not debate.

I personally look for evidence of things before I formulate whether or not they are factual.

Very odd that the MSM printed this person’s story without first fact checking why he was dismissed and requesting evidence.

That’s not investigative journalism that’s journalism with an agenda

Rather like the pictures of the poor disabled children in Gaza who were exploited to press an agenda

Perhaps they did and no reasons were given, request ignored? Do you know for sure they did not ask?

However, anyone coming forward with such claims should be questioned, no argument there but the rubbishing of their claims also shouldn't be taken at face value either.

Discrediting whistle-blowers by their former employer is very common, e.g the NHS are past masters at it.

Getting absolute proof in a war zone where the IDF control the output of "evidence" is going to be very difficult but that doesn't mean that claims either way should be accepted as "Facts"

You are basically criticising people for firstly, posting too much (in your opinion) and secondly, posting stuff you don't like. You don't like it when they argue back and you don't like it when they ignore you.

Again, take it to MNHQ and see if that breaks talk guidelines.

I’ve spent days debating with them- using verified evidence and reputable sources.
This is a debating forum, its what happens.sometimes they question your evidence, sources and argument. That's how it goes
I’m not criticising people for “posting too much

That's exactly what you are suggesting here
I’m increasingly concerned about the volume and tone of posts from certain users who seem to be on this thread for 6+ hours daily.
i dont think your concern is for their health, but the impact on this board? And we are all grownups so I think if your concern is for them its misplaced.

you say these posters are 'shutting down debate' How exactly? Debate looks pretty robust, if at times shallow, childish and repetitive. There is no way of stopping people posting unless they break talk guidelines.

I don't really know what dominating the thread even means really. I don't think there are rules about that? Don't like it, walk away? I think people have learnt quite a lot from some well argued, well evidenced posts.

Oh dear @twiglets, looks like our handler let us both post the same argument at the same time! Must be more careful!

I would like for someone to explain to keep why Hamas cannot be held accountable, and are constantly infantilised, saying they cannot be expected to operate inside normal values.

They are men. Human men. Same as BN. Same as Zamir. Same as KS. Same as any other person in power anywhere. They should absolutely be held accountable for their actions. They should be expected more of. As long as they are the power source in Gaza, the ones being negotiated with fgs- why are they to be dismissed in the way you've done here.

Theyre absolutely central to the whole war, and central to the ending of the war, and i don't understand why theyre constantly excused on here- because they're terrorists. They're still people
They still have agency.
They still make choices.

And they are still choosing to continue the war that they started.

Why excuse them?

Me too. I totally agree. This is so fundamental to the whole debate. There is always an excuse to let Hamas off the hook. Sometimes people genuinely support them, sometimes its the racism of low expectations, sometimes its because its just easier to bash Israel. I just don't see a credible reason for it.

The GHF spokesperson also accuses Aguilar of falsifying a memo sent to his superiors in which he raised concerns about UG Solutions’ policies in Gaza.
While Aguilar claimed to have sent the memo on May 28, Fay shares metadata showing that he only sent it on June 21, after he was fired, and then backdated it to the previous month. The metadata also shows that he sent the memo to UG Solutions’ senior staff and to the press at the same time.
“Notably, on May 29, one day after Mr. Aguilar claims to have sent this memo to UG leadership, he sent a flurry of messages to the team, praising them for their work,” Fay says, sharing screenshots of these messages.
“It’s a privilege and an honor to see America’s best doing America’s most important work in places most Americans will only ever see on TV or read about,” one such message reads.
“Your efforts have brought families back together and have severely weakened the image of Hamas,” reads another.
Fay wraps up the briefing by noting that Aguilar worked for UG Solutions for just 27 days, “and more than half of that time he spent in a hotel in Israel instead of on the ground at distribution sites.”
“Not only did the events that he recounted never happen, but he wasn’t even in the right place or at the right time to have seen the things that he claims to have seen,” he says.
Along with the evidence presented in the briefing, GHF publishes a signed affidavit from UG Solutions staff members who worked with Aguilar and who contradict his claims.

I think it would have quite easy to come to the conclusion that this guy may have had an ulterior motive, and was presumably paid, for his claims if any journalists had bothered to check before making it a top story.

I don’t see any MSM outlets printing that side of it.

What are you thoughts? Do you think he’s a credible source?

Fact 1: Hamas / Gaza is under military blocked because it's engaged in a decades long campaign of annihilation against it's neighbouring state.
Gaza has been occupied since the early 90s long before Hamas. It is considered an illegal occupation by international law.

Fact 2: The Gaza government is a terrorist organisation.
Australia, Canada, Paraguay, Israel, Japan, New Zealand, the UK, the US, and the EU. So I guess that fact is dependent on what country you live in

Fact 3: Hamas doesn't want to look after it's civilians and has openly said it is the UNs responsibility.
They don't look after their civilians I'm unaware of them declaring the UN are responsible have you a reference?

Fact 6: Israel has offered to provide them with security so they can deliver aid safely but they have refused that offer.
I'm not sure this is a fact it is disputed by the UN, have you a reference?

Fact 7: Hamas will not surrender, or give back the hostages.
They have offered to in the past if Israel agreed to stop occupying Gaza and negotiations are ongoing

Or Israel made them do it, because having to put security measures in place to try to prevent a terrorist government next door from carrying out their vow of destroying your country and killing your citizens, is just not fair!

It's not letting Hamas off the hook, no one supports them, no one wants them in control of Gaza but trying to overthrow them by force has proved a disaster for innocent civilians in Gaza and achieved very little other than destruction and death.

There is always an excuse to let Hamas off the hook.
Can you expand on this? How have people been letting Hamas off the hook?

is just not fair!
It is illegal under international law and hasn't worked anyway

You're accusing others of exactly what you are doing. I don't find it concerning though. It's a common tactic if people who can't debate in good faith.

1. Misrepresenting UN data on aid truck interceptions
“According to the UN2720 Monitoring & Tracking Report… 85% of UN aid trucks were intercepted… either peacefully by hungry people or forcefully by Hamas-affiliated looters.”

Quote marks imply you are quoting someone. You are not quoting though, you are writing something different. What I said was "armed actors, including Hamas", which is completely accurate.

2. Shifting blame from the Israeli military blockade to the UN and Hamas
“There are many reasons why children are starving… A key one is that the UN reported 80% of [aid] was stolen or intercepted. Another is that the UN can’t or won’t operate unless there’s a ceasefire… which Hamas could grant.”
UN agencies (WFP, OCHA, UNRWA) have consistently stated that Israeli obstruction, bombardment, and lack of security guarantees are the main causes of aid delays. The UN has not “refused” to deliver aid- they’ve repeatedly called for safe humanitarian corridors and ceasefires, which Israel has blocked.

Also not what I said, what I said is that they say it is not safe to deliver the aid and when Israel offers protection they have refused it. Also completely accurate.

3. Accusing international media of “exploiting” disabled children for propaganda
“They exploited the image of a child with cerebral palsy to push a famine story in order to demonise Israel… why not share medical needs so the child could get help?”

They did exploit a child with a disease to pass him off as simply starving.

4. Dismissing concern for Palestinian suffering as performative
“Let’s be honest: a lot of people here aren’t driven by compassion. They’re here to bash Israel and get very cross when anyone interferes.”

Yes, they are - you are a great example.

5. Claiming the war is due to people denying “Jewish rights to ancestral land”
“This entire war exists because some people don’t believe Jews have the right to live, let alone live freely in their ancestral homeland.”
This is a dangerous conflation of criticism of Israeli government actions with antisemitism.

No it isn't. What you are doing it a dangerous conflation between "criticism of Israel" and denying Jews the right to live freely in their ancestral homeland.

So you are aware, on literally every definition of antisemitism that exists in the mainstream, denying Jews the right to live and flourish in Israel is explicitly agreed to be antisemitic (which should be obvious without you even being told that) but also, perhaps reflect that the group Israel are fighting to get their people back from are the charming bunch whose founding charter literally cites The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, calls for the murder of every Jew on earth, and insists Israel must be wiped off the map. When they attacked Israel on 7 October and raped, tortured, murdered and kidnapped as many innocent people as they could - they were not criticising Israel.

I appreciate you would prefer to be here bashing Israel unchallenged (particularly given how easy it is to dismantle your nonsense) and I do understand the indignance - I mean, how very dare I and other posters state the truth that doesn't align with your prejudice, but I am afraid it's a public forum and we will continue doing that.

Just in:
The Israeli human rights groups B'Tselem and Physicians for Human Rights Israel have labelled Israel's war in Gaza as genocide.

They are the first Israel-based groups to do so.
Speaking at a conference in Jerusalem, B'Tselem executive director Yulia Novak described their report as “Our genocide, because that's what it is: a genocide committed against people who live here by the people who live here."

Members from the Physicians for Human Rights Israel went on to describe a "deliberate, cumulative dismantling of Gaza's health system", attacking the people of Gaza's ability to survive.

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DMsmnb3IM13/?igsh=MWw2cmp0ZmVydzFqaw==

'Only one side can facilitate this ( the end of the war- brackets mine ) and thats the Israeli Govt, not Hamas, as they are a terrorist organisation and do not operate inside normal democratic values.. to put it mildly."

This is what I'm asking about. Why can only one side facilitate it? Why are Hamas off the hook because they are terrorists? Is being a terrorist a way to get out of accountability?
They are one side of the negotiations. Why are they thus not accountable for the war continuing?

It might have worked better for Israel than the alternative (getting all their citizens killed by Hamas)

How do you get a ceasefire if only one side has to commit to it?

I agree btw but I’m wondering what Labour are thinking in just demanding a ceasefire as a condition from one side.

I’ll repeat myself- though if you want to completely miss the point, that’s your prerogative.

As I outlined clearly, my concern is not about people “posting too much” or “posting things I don’t like.” It’s about the repeated dismissal of credible evidence, misrepresentation of sources, and a pattern of twisting facts that undermines meaningful, fact-based discussion- especially on a topic with such devastating human consequences.

This isn’t about “balance.” It’s about ensuring that debate isn’t derailed by bad-faith tactics or misinformation that obscures the lived reality of Palestinians on the ground.

Sorry, I dont understand your question. Also, my preference wouldn't be a ceasefire which could be broken by either side at any time. Id prefer a total surrender, disarming, dissolve of Hamas. As in, a total end to the war, with a new government in Gaza that is interested in a future for Palestine rather than just eliminating Israel.

Im asking why the previous poster was saying the only party that can facilitate the end of the war is Israel, why can't Hamas also end it? As one side of negotiators? Why are they not required to act with humanity for their people just because theyre terrorists?

Gaza has been under military blockade since 2007, imposed by Israel and Egypt after Hamas violently seized control of the territory from the Palestinian Authority in a coup.

The Gaza government is a terrorist organisation in this country, if you'd like to go to Qatar to debate, please try that.

Here is a video of the UN explaining that they will not accept security assistance from Israel, but simultaneously saying that Israel is responsible for ensuring they are safe. Quite the contradiction from the UN.

https://x.com/EYakoby/status/1948846975677276252?t=zl8_-CWXVQ3B0JS6VSE6CA&s=19

Hamas has made it repeatedly clear - in its statements, actions, and leadership declarations - that it will not surrender, and it has consistently used hostages as leverage, refusing to release them unconditionally.

Your first point.

I’ll repeat what I said in a previous post and remind you that you claimed that the UN blamed “Hamas affiliated looters”. This was not what was written in their report.

You said:
“There are many reasons why children are starving while food sits there. A key one is that the UN reported that 80% of it is stolen or intercepted.”

When I asked for a link to that UN report, you pointed to info.un2720.org and cited a figure of 1,404 trucks and 19,000 tonnes intercepted — supposedly amounting to 85% of all UN aid — and claimed the UN blamed “Hamas-affiliated looters.”

I’ve gone through the official UN2720 reports for May and June 2025, and here’s what they actually show:

• From May–June, around 1,420 UN aid trucks were delivered into Gaza.
• Of those, 1,255 trucks (≈88%) were either “looted or self-distributed” — meaning they didn’t reach their intended civilian delivery points.
• But crucially, the UN does not say 80% of food was stolen, and they definitely don’t say it was taken specifically by “Hamas-affiliated looters.”
• In fact, the language used is neutral: “looted or self-distributed,” and includes cases where desperate civilians offloaded food themselves due to collapse of state structures and ongoing siege.

So yes, delivery breakdown is a huge issue — but your original claim that “the UN said 80% of food was stolen” is not backed by the documents you cited. The UN doesn’t frame it in those political terms and certainly doesn’t pin blame in the way you’re suggesting.

The UN does not blame Hamas-affiliated looters in any official capacity. In fact, no actors are named. The claim that looting was done by “Hamas-affiliated looters” comes from third-party commentary (e.g. Chuck Holton, OSINT Telegram channels, or highly partisan interpretations), not from the UN itself.

I was a bit left field apologies, I’m trying to understand the thinking behind Starmer’s decision to only put the condition for a state onto Israel.

If Hamas know they are more likely to get state recognition if there is no ceasefire doesn’t that give them an incentive to prolong the situation?

Not really based on your quotes, but just wondering what you and others think

Yes, why??

Why can only one side facilitate it?
I don't agree that only one side can facilitate this so you may have mixed me up with another poster

Why are Hamas off the hook because they are terrorists?
I don't agree that Hamas are off the hook their leaders are dead and the rest have targets on their backs and international arrest warrants out for them

Is being a terrorist a way to get out of accountability? No but how do you make them accountable? bombing them out of existence does not work

They are one side of the negotiations. Why are they thus not accountable for the war continuing? They are accountable for the war continuing they need to release the hostages what they're not responsible for is how Israel have conducted this war and that is what the majority of the criticism of Israel is based on.