It's not about genocide but about winning

[Mikkymik]

Further to my reply in the (now full) famine thread: www.mumsnet.com/talk/conflict-in-the-middle-east/5396637-a-famine-has-been-declared-in-gaza-city?page=40&reply=146639624

I should point out that in my above post I've accepted - for argument's sake - that Israel is committing war crimes in its mission to win.

What Israel is absolutely not doing nor is it intent on doing, is genocide. Israel's aim is to win, which means disarming of Gaza and the return of the hostages. Once that happens not one more Palestinian has to die. It's not about killing a people (genocide) but about winning at all costs.

And frankly, as I said, the onus is on Gaza to surrender, seeing as they started this futile war.

Were you alive during WW2? You know the ins and outs of how the British army conducted their assault on Germany? You realise Britain had several prisoner of war camps where they held German and Italian soldiers, who were not treated particularly nicely…

Yes Ive been in a war zone.
Ive also spent years working in international humanitarian organisations reviewing situation reports from across the conflicts around the world which detail strikes and risks against humanitarian infrastructure.
No ive not been to Gaza.
I provided a long list of examples and evidence showing that Israel is not acting as other countries in war normally do, certainly not democratic and civilised ones.

Point put what you find hyperbole and i will provide multiple sources to evidence it.

The UN is not apolitical.

Can’t be bothered to debate anymore with people that think it is. You are completely ignoring that 15% of the countries that make up the UN don’t even recognise Israel’s right to exist.

So....kill them all, right?

Nobody is suggesting that hamas were right to commit the atrocities on 7/10. But those horrors do not justify the Israeli response. The decisions being made by the Israeli authorities are disgraceful.

The history is complex, there is hatred and radicalisation on both sides. The intractablity on both sides is so similar to the troubles in NI and that required significant external influence to change. But the very very basic foundation is to see the other side as - at the very least - as human and therefore inherently worthy of dignity and respect.

I hear and appreciate the argument that it is hatred for Jews that means that Israel will always be under attack from neighbours and that Israel should be able to defend itself from this. But also there is a denial that Israeli policies have treated Palestinian people unfairly and any criticism of this leads to cries of anti-semitism.

Respect for your profession.
However, you admit you have not been to Gaza. So any information you are getting is via news reports, social media, organisations on the ground. You must acknowledge that some of this information will be incorrect, and the sources biased? The supposedly un-biased BBC for instance has had to issue multiple corrections for its reporting. See one example here: https://www.politico.eu/article/bbc-says-sorry-to-israel-after-reporting-it-targeted-medical-staff/

I’m obviously not going to respond to every single point in your post, but yes many are incorrect. Your assertion that during no other war have foreign journalists been banned from reporting. This is false. Journalists have been heavily restricted on reporting in Ukraine.

While I agree that Israel should allow international reporters in, can you see why it might not want this when 99% of the coverage is heavily biased? See link above.

Spot on ,I'd say!

“BBC says sorry to Israel” isn’t really the point you think it is when Netanyahu will pop up any time anyone criticises him and say they’re siding with terrorists and anti semitic.

Isrsel just bombed a hospital in Gaza, killing and injuring Palestinians. They then bombed it a second time whilst rescue workers were trying to help the injured, murdering them too.

Fuck the IDF. Genocidal psychopaths.

Yes some reports will be incorrect or biased but when you look at the entire picture and triangulate across multiple sources to ensure you are not relying on one source alone the evidence is irrefutable.

https://www.bmj.com/content/384/bmj.q203.full
This is a report from the British Medical Journal back in January 2024 highlighting that more medical staff and aid workers had been killed than any over conflict this century.

This isnt how normal war looks.

Here is Retired Major General Charlie Kirk who served in Iraq, Afghanistan and worked in Somalia saying that this is not how normal war is conducted

There's actual footage of Israel bombing the rescue workers in the second strike of the hospital. Sick, sick bastards!

https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/footage-shows-second-israeli-strike-hitting-rescue-workers-at-nasser-hospital-after-initial-blast/

I don’t know how people can see this and deny that it’s a genocide

This is beyond awful. And yet some people will try and justify it.

It's so helpful to get your input @TulipLavender

I was a bit surprised by the pp who suggested you get your news from the BBC when obviously with your work and experience you will have far more sources.

In summary, I am anti all forms of extremism. Whether it’s terrorists or men in suits who get other people to do their dirty work. I will always be anti extremism.

If you’ve read previous posts of mine, you’ll quickly see one of my main points/concerns in all of this is what happens not only to the people in Gaza but also the people of Israel. I fully support the removal of Hamas from Gaza for both groups’ sakes. I also fully support the removal of right wing extremism from the Israel government for the same reason. They are hurting Palestinians directly and Israelis indirectly.

If Israel doesn’t accept that it needs to make some changes too, the people who get hurt are normal Israelis. If 2m+ displaced, angry people aren’t treated like humans and if the Israeli govt continues some of its practices, it is Israeli people who will be hurt again.

I’m happy to repeat this as many times as necessary: if Israel don’t deal with the actual issue (why people turn to extremism/terrorism), then getting rid of Hamas is absolutely pointless. A new group will appear (including angry Gazans who have lost everything and have nothing to live for), attack Israeli people and it carries on. To protect Israeli people, you have to protect Gazans.

The vote by the member nations of the U.N. is slightly different to the work done by UN humanitarian agencies. They would literally never be able to do/write/criticise anything if they had to placate all the members. In recent years, it’s criticised many, many member states for various issues.

I genuinely don't understand your perspective here.

If the ultimate goal is to be able to live in peace without ongoing threats from the neighbour - which seems a very reasonable goal - how on earth is committing war crimes against that neighbour - which I note you have acknowledged - going to help with that? Surely, the injustices perpetrated against the Palestinian people will merely fuel anger, hatred and the desire for revenge amongst the next generation of the Palestinian people? How could starving the Palestinians and bombing the shit out of them possibly make Israel safer in the longer term?

Unless, that is, the plan is to try to exterminate the next generation so that there are no Palestinians left to seek vengeance. At which point, we come back to genocide.

What happened on October 7th in Israel was truly horrific and abhorrent, but the Israeli government's actions since that time will certainly not have made Israel any safer in the future... quite the contrary, I'm afraid.

I don't want any more innocent people to die on either side. Sadly, I can only see things getting worse for all concerned.

In recent years, it’s criticised many, many member states for various issues.

UN Condemns Israel 17 Times, Rest of World Combined 6 Times

NEW YORK, Dec. 19, 2024 — The UN General Assembly rebuked Israel today in three separate resolutions, concluding the world body’s 2024 activity with a total of 17 resolutions that single out the Jewish state, compared to a total of 6 on the rest of the world combined.

On Tuesday, the UNGA adopted one resolution each on the regimes of North Korea, Iran, Syria and Myanmar, and one on Russia’s violations in Ukraine. In October, there was also one resolution condemning the U.S. for its embargo of Cuba. (Click here for texts and voting sheets.)

“The UN’s latest assault on Israel with a torrent of one-sided resolutions is surreal,” said Hillel Neuer, Executive Director of UN Watch, an independent non-governmental watchdog organization in Geneva.

“It’s absurd that in the year 2024, out of a total of 23 UN General Assembly resolutions that criticize countries, 17 of them—nearly three quarters—were focused on a single country, Israel. Make no mistake, the purpose of the lopsided condemnations is to delegitimize Israel and to demonize and dehumanize Israelis,” said Neuer.

“This demonization fuels the pro-Hamas agitators in America and around the world who today are targeting Jews with hate and violence on campus, at synagogues and community centers, and at their businesses.”

https://unwatch.org/un-condemns-israel-17-times-6-on-rest-of-world-combined/

Those Israeli individuals/families also need to be focused on - supported, provided with therapy, listened to. It appears many don’t feel like that is the case at the moment. They would be vulnerable to extremism but it appears the right wing extremists in their country aren’t particularly concerned about them/their views.

It’s interesting though that you appear more able to understand those individuals feelings of hate or embitterment but perhaps not someone in Gaza who has lost the same or more.

I think it’s clear that Hamas wanted to kill as many Israelis as possible. They weren’t conducting a quick poll of political views before slaughtering people. They are terrorist, they committed horrendous acts, they need to go.

From 2015 through 2023, the UN General Assembly has adopted 154 resolutions against Israel and 71 against other countries. For texts and voting sheets, see the UN Watch Database, which will be updated to include the 2024 UNGA resolutions after they are published by the UN in January 2025.

The UN Watch Database also documents that from 2006 through 2024, the UN Human Rights Council has adopted 108 resolutions against Israel, 45 against Syria, 15 against Iran, 10 against Russia, and 4 against Venezuela.

https://unwatch.org/2024-unga-resolutions-on-israel-vs-rest-of-the-world/

The US vetoes most of the resolutions against Israel which is the reason for the repeated number. Resolutions against other countries have far fewer vetoes and passes through hence no need for repeating it.

This is what I mean - the general assembly is clearly biased/heavily politicised because it’s just the member states getting together and exposing their allegiances/hatred for certain other countries/inability to take any public stance.

The UNRWA is made up of specialists in humanitarian aid. They are multinational in their make up but they don’t represent or look to appease all the states. They regularly speak out against different states because their focus is on humanitarian law/aid/rights. You can still question their bias based on their experience and background but they are not the same as the general assembly.

Well, that’s an entirely biased view of the actual situation which is way more nuanced than that. But, in any event, the U.K. government abstained, how does that make them any less trustworthy?

And their supporters and apologists

I don't speak for Israel nor am I privy to their internal war plans, but the way I see it is thus:

Israel has been implementing ceasefires since its inception, to the detriment of both sides. All ceasefires have ever done is kick the can further along the line, allowing the enemy to regroup and re-arm, which lead to more bloodshed.

For 18 years Israel tried to ignore Gaza and the attacks against civilians coming out from there, rationalising that it would be worse and more costly to deal with it than to mainly ignore. The events of 7 October put paid to that delusion, and now Israel has changed tactic.

It now understands that this is a war which it must win, and crucially Hamas/Gaza must lose. The only way forward ever, with any war, is for one side to be unequivocally defeated, and from there on rebuilding is possible.

As soon as Hamas/Gaza accepts defeat, lays down its weapons and releases the hostages, the acute stage of the war is over. From then, my assumption is that Israel would have some kind of long term plan of (a) deradicalisation, probably by re-education, (b) rebuilding, but with full oversight, making sure there are no tunnels, and (c) handing over the governance to a neutral Arab state.

This broad plan isn't different to how we dealt with Nazi Germany or fascist Japan post war. First there was a clear winner, then rehabilitation of the enemy.

The quicker Gaza/Hamas realises Israel is here to stay, and the most beneficial and prosperous way forward for them is to focus on their own flourishing rather than the destruction of Israel, the fewer lives will be lost.

This is a war that was foisted upon Israel, but now it has a moral duty - to its own citizens, but in the long term, also to the Gazans - to win. Hamas/Gaza can end their misery immediately by surrendering.