15 minutes ago, Gannan said:

Is Hamas in the room with us now?

The UN also has plenty of workers that are Israeli. And they hire thousands of relief workers that are often refugees themselves, so a lot of displaced Palestinians.

1 hour ago, Gannan said:

The mental gymnastics on display here are stunning. You could have simply said "Whatever Israeli propaganda on why they are murdering children is justification enough" and been done with it. The "UN is all Hamas" and "We haven't exterminated enough children violently enough for this to reach my personal threshold of genocide" are among some of the most retarded talking points I've read in CVON. Look @Phillyterp85 just because Procus, KZ, and WV Mike aren't here to defend absolute heinousness and brutality with retarded nonsense, doesn't mean it's up to you to fill the void.

No, I just don't think that this war is a genocide. I think it's urban warfare which unfortunately comes with civilian casualties, and that is true for any armed conflict, but especially true when talking about conflicts in densely populated urban areas. And even more the case when one of the combatants purposefully uses civilians and civilian infrastructure as human shields. Why would Hamas even use the strategy of human shields if Israel had blatant disregard for civilian casualties? The strategy would be pointless.

11 minutes ago, Phillyterp85 said:

No, I just don't think that this war is a genocide. I think it's urban warfare which unfortunately comes with civilian casualties, and that is true for any armed conflict, but especially true when talking about conflicts in densely populated urban areas. And even more the case when one of the combatants purposefully uses civilians and civilian infrastructure as human shields. Why would Hamas even use the strategy of human shields if Israel had blatant disregard for civilian casualties? The strategy would be pointless.

No, no it isn't. Again the percentage of civilian deaths here are well north of 80%. The only urban conflict I can find in recent history with numbers that approach that is the battle of Mosul, where ISIS was straight up executing civilians during the battle. Fallujah? About 25%. Bakhumet? 1%. Hue? About 60% (also had civilian firing squads). Hell Fing Stalingrad was about 15%.

But again the numbers, as heinous as they are, aren't what defines genocide. It's intent and it's tactics. Has Israel called for the mass killing starvation or displacement of the Palestinian people? Yes - Netenyahu, Ben-Gvir, Gallant and many other officials have said it blatantly. Have they used genocidal tactics - "involves acts such as killing, causing serious harm, inflicting destructive living conditions, preventing births, or forcibly transferring children" Israel publicly and proudly created a complete blockade of essential goods into Gaza during this crisis including food water and medicine.

This particular aspect is pretty cut-and-dry for such an incredibly complicated conflict.

51 minutes ago, DEagle7 said:

No, no it isn't. Again the percentage of civilian deaths here are well north of 80%. The only urban conflict I can find in recent history with numbers that approach that is the battle of Mosul, where ISIS was straight up executing civilians during the battle. Fallujah? About 25%. Bakhumet? 1%. Hue? About 60% (also had civilian firing squads). Hell Fing Stalingrad was about 15%.

But again the numbers, as heinous as they are, aren't what defines genocide. It's intent and it's tactics. Has Israel called for the mass killing starvation or displacement of the Palestinian people? Yes - Netenyahu, Ben-Gvir, Gallant and many other officials have said it blatantly. Have they used genocidal tactics - "involves acts such as killing, causing serious harm, inflicting destructive living conditions, preventing births, or forcibly transferring children" Israel publicly and proudly created a complete blockade of essential goods into Gaza during this crisis including food water and medicine.

This particular aspect is pretty cut-and-dry for such an incredibly complicated conflict.

According to the IDF, there have been 22,000 enemy combatants killed in the war. IF that number is accurate, that would put the civilian to combatant mortality ratio at 2.5:1, which for urban warfare is not an excessive number. Not saying their number is accurate, I’m just not sure where you’re getting 80% number from. You said it was from the Israel’s own estimate. But that’s not what the IDF is saying.

I agree with what you said regarding the blockade. Israel claims they implemented the temporary blockade because they had evidence that Hamas was stealing the aid and using it as a source of revenue to fund their operation. There were definitely points where there was theft of aid from time to time, but nothing to substantiate the claim that there was a systemic theft of aid by Hamas that was then used as a source of revenue to fund their operations.

1 hour ago, DEagle7 said:

But again the numbers, as heinous as they are, aren't what defines genocide.

It's been repeated to him at least 5 times now and he still reverts back to his FNC talking points. It's no different than having a conversation with diehard at this point.

14 minutes ago, Phillyterp85 said:

According to the IDF, there have been 22,000 enemy combatants killed in the war. IF that number is accurate, that would put the civilian to combatant mortality ratio at 2.5:1, which for urban warfare is not an excessive number. Not saying their number is accurate, I’m just not sure where you’re getting 80% number from. You said it was from the Israel’s own estimate. But that’s not what the IDF is saying.

I agree with what you said regarding the blockade. Israel claims they implemented the temporary blockade because they had evidence that Hamas was stealing the aid and using it as a source of revenue to fund their operation. There were definitely points where there was theft of aid from time to time, but nothing to substantiate the claim that there was a systemic theft of aid by Hamas that was then used as a source of revenue to fund their operations.

It's based of comparing Israel's list of combatants compared to the death reports in the area which came out to I think 83%. There's also a demographic study that put it at closer to 87%.

First of all you're really going to take the IDF's estimate at face value but disqualify the UN from weighing in? Seriously?

Second of all that's still means 60% of the deaths are civilians. Based on Israel's counting methods, which we would have to be absolutely crazy to take at face value. And no, even that's not just "standard urban warfare". That's a number you can approach in urban warfare when one side is executing civilians, like Mosul and Hue. Most urban conflicts have not approached that number historically.

11 minutes ago, DEagle7 said:

It's based of comparing Israel's list of combatants compared to the death reports in the area which came out to I think 83%. There's also a demographic study that put it at closer to 87%.

First of all you're really going to take the IDF's estimate at face value but disqualify the UN from weighing in? Seriously?

Second of all that's still means 60% of the deaths are civilians. Based on Israel's counting methods, which we would have to be absolutely crazy to take at face value. And no, even that's not just "standard urban warfare". That's a number you can approach in urban warfare when one side is executing civilians, like Mosul and Hue. Most urban conflicts have not approached that number historically.

No, I am not taking the IDF estimate at face value. I literally said in my post that I'm not claiming that their number is accurate. I was specifically asking where you got your 80% number from, as you claimed that was from the Israeli side.

"Second of all that's still means 60% of the deaths are civilians"

Right, it would be a 2.5:1 civilian to combatant ratio. Estimates of the civilian to combatant ratio from the Iraq invasion are of a 3:1 civilian to combatant ratio, or 75% of all fatalities.

"Most urban conflicts have not approached that number historically."

That's simply not true. A 2:1 civilian to combat ratio is actually on the low side in urban warfare. I'm pretty sure I posted a study here previously that showed a list of armed conflicts and the civilian to combatant fatality ratio. I'll see if I can find it again. @Bill I'm pretty sure you've been able to cite statistics before on civilian to combatant ratios in urban warfare, please correct me if I'm wrong.

2 hours ago, Phillyterp85 said:

And even more the case when one of the combatants purposefully uses civilians and civilian infrastructure as human shields. Why would Hamas even use the strategy of human shields if Israel had blatant disregard for civilian casualties? The strategy would be pointless.

The "we have to kill all the civilians because hamas" is also an IDF talking point. They've been caught in that lie numerous times.

1 minute ago, Gannan said:

The "we have to kill all the civilians because hamas" is also an IDF talking point. They've been caught in that lie numerous times.

Not at all what I said. But ok...

55 minutes ago, Phillyterp85 said:

According to the IDF

Herein lies the problem. This is no different than saying "According to Putin" when talking about the war in Ukraine.

1 minute ago, Gannan said:

Herein lies the problem. This is no different than saying "According to Putin" when talking about the war in Ukraine.

I was responding to DEagle who said according to Israel's own estimates, that civilians made up 80% of the war casualties. So I responded saying that the data I found from the IDF was a 2.5:1 civilian to combatant ratio, which is 60%. I also stated that I'm not claiming that the IDF figure is accurate. I was asking for where DEagle got his figure from since it differed with what I found, and we're both saying it came from the same source.

8 minutes ago, Phillyterp85 said:

No, I am not taking the IDF estimate at face value. I literally said in my post that I'm not claiming that their number is accurate. I was specifically asking where you got your 80% number from, as you claimed that was from the Israeli side.

"Second of all that's still means 60% of the deaths are civilians"

Right, it would be a 2.5:1 civilian to combatant ratio. Estimates of the civilian to combatant ratio from the Iraq invasion are of a 3:1 civilian to combatant ratio, or 75% of all fatalities.

"Most urban conflicts have not approached that number historically."

That's simply not true. A 2:1 civilian to combat ratio is actually on the extremely low side in urban warfare. I'm pretty sure I posted a study here previously that showed a list of armed conflicts and the civilian to combatant fatality ratio. I'll see if I can find it again.

Iraq is another one where civilians were being executed in masse during the conflict as the Sunni and Shias tried to wipe each-other out during the conflict. Literal roving death squads and civilian massacres. So is that happening here too? If so, who is doing it?

And once again I will point out that genocide has nothing to do with numbers. It has everything to do with the intent and tactic. We can argue until we're blue in the face about whether 80+% of deaths being civilians is "par for the course" for standard urban warfare without ulterior motive (it isn't). But at the end of the day you've already consented that the intent and tactics fit the description.

9 minutes ago, DEagle7 said:

Iraq is another one where civilians were being executed in masse during the conflict as the Sunni and Shias tried to wipe each-other out during the conflict. Literal roving death squads and civilian massacres. So is that happening here too? If so, who is doing it?

And once again I will point out that genocide has nothing to do with numbers. It has everything to do with the intent and tactic. We can argue until we're blue in the face about whether 80+% of deaths being civilians is "par for the course" for standard urban warfare without ulterior motive (it isn't). But at the end of the day you've already consented that the intent and tactics fit the description.

"Iraq is another one where civilians were being executed in masse during the conflict as the Sunni and Shias tried to wipe each-other out during the conflict

I war referring to the civilian to combatant ratio of deaths from the US Government's strikes. I wasn't talking about deaths from internal conflict.

"But at the end of the day you've already consented that the intent and tactics fit the description."

Don't know if I'd say that. Israel has taken action to try to evacuate civilians from an area prior to conducting a strike. They've dropped pamphlets warning civilians to evacuate. They conduct roof knocking to get civilians to evacuate a building prior to an impending strike. If a country was trying to destroy a group of people, I don't think they'd take those measures. And if a country was trying to destroy a group of people, I think the civilian to combatant ratio would be through the roof and there would certainly be far more greater deaths than there have been. And again, even by Hamas' own data, non-violent deaths in 2025 were back to pre-war norms. There wasn't mass starvation and mass excess death as one would expect if a genocide was truly happening.

What I did say is I do agree that specifically, that temporary 11 week blockade they implemented from March to May of 2025 met the definition of genocidal tactics. Had they turned that into a permanent measure, then it would have amounted to a genocide and we would have seen excess deaths due to starvation and suffering. I think they did that to put pressure on Hamas, but that's not justification for violating international rules of war. And they should be reprimanded for implementing such tactics, even if temporarily.

12 minutes ago, Phillyterp85 said:

"Iraq is another one where civilians were being executed in masse during the conflict as the Sunni and Shias tried to wipe each-other out during the conflict

I war referring to the civilian to combatant ratio of deaths from the US Government's strikes. Not from internal conflict.

"But at the end of the day you've already consented that the intent and tactics fit the description."

Don't know if I'd say that. Israel has taken action to try to evacuate civilians from an area prior to conducting a strike. They've dropped pamphlets warning civilians to evacuate. They conduct roof knocking to get civilians to evacuate a building prior to an impending strike. If a country was trying to destroy a group of people, I don't think they'd take those measures. And if a country was trying to destroy a group of people, I think the civilian to combatant ratio would be through the roof and there would certainly be far more greater deaths than there have been. And again, even by Hamas' own data, non-violent deaths in 2025 were back to pre-war norms. There wasn't mass starvation and mass excess death as one would expect if a genocide was truly happening.

What I did say is I do agree that specifically, that temporary 11 week blockade they implemented from March to May of 2025 met the definition of genocidal tactics. Had they turned that into a permanent measure, then it would have amounted to a genocide and we would have seen excess deaths due to starvation and suffering. I think they did that to put pressure on Hamas, but that's not justification for violating international rules of war. And they should be reprimanded for implementing such tactics, even if temporarily.

The number you cited includes that sectarian infighting though. If you look at JUST estimated civilian total deaths from US forces it's about 13-15k. Out of about 190-210k total civilian deaths.

3 minutes ago, DEagle7 said:

The number you cited includes that sectarian infighting though. If you look at JUST estimated civilian total deaths from US forces it's about 13-15k. Out of about 190-210k total civilian deaths.

Ahh my mistake then.

While on the topic of genocide, I find it interesting that the UN Human Rights Council did not conclude that Hamas committed a genocide on October 7th. If they are of the opinion that the way Israel has conducted this war goes beyond typical urban warfare, beyond war crimes, and is elevated to the level of a genocide being committed; then how is it that an operation in which Hamas indiscriminately launched 5,000 rockets into civilian areas while thousands of militants invaded Israel with the sole intent of murdering, raping, and kidnapping as many Jews as they could does not also rise to the level of a genocidal act?

We will never forget today.

On 10/5/2026 at 1:29 PM, DEagle7 said:

Iraq is another one where civilians were being executed in masse during the conflict as the Sunni and Shias tried to wipe each-other out during the conflict. Literal roving death squads and civilian massacres. So is that happening here too? If so, who is doing it?

And once again I will point out that genocide has nothing to do with numbers. It has everything to do with the intent and tactic. We can argue until we're blue in the face about whether 80+% of deaths being civilians is "par for the course" for standard urban warfare without ulterior motive (it isn't). But at the end of the day you've already consented that the intent and tactics fit the description.

This is a pretty good video.

youtube.com/watch?v=GTL5trfjrdc&list=WL&index=3

Based on what you've provided, and reading more into the formal definition of genocide and what previous events have been classified as genocide. And the statements made by Israeli leaders in this video regarding the future of Gaza, I think I'll be changing my mind here and say there is a case for genocide to be made here.

35 minutes ago, Phillyterp85 said:

This is a pretty good video.

youtube.com/watch?v=GTL5trfjrdc&list=WL&index=3

Based on what you've provided, and reading more into the formal definition of genocide and what previous events have been classified as genocide. And the statements made by Israeli leaders in this video regarding the future of Gaza, I think I'll be changing my mind here and say there is a case for genocide to be made here.

Fwiw I fully believe Hamas would also be committing genocide if they had the funding weapons and numbers. Right now the best they can do is a sneak attack once a decade, and even then only when Bibi allows it. But they suck ass too.

52 minutes ago, Phillyterp85 said:

This is a pretty good video.

youtube.com/watch?v=GTL5trfjrdc&list=WL&index=3

Based on what you've provided, and reading more into the formal definition of genocide and what previous events have been classified as genocide. And the statements made by Israeli leaders in this video regarding the future of Gaza, I think I'll be changing my mind here and say there is a case for genocide to be made here.

A full 3 years of invasion later, I don't get why anybody is still fretting over the semantics of genocide/Genocide light/diet genocide/genocidal-ish. Who the F cares? That may have mattered at the outset, it doesn't matter anymore. Israel's actions must be condemned full stop.

On 10/5/2026 at 1:12 PM, Phillyterp85 said:

No, I am not taking the IDF estimate at face value. I literally said in my post that I'm not claiming that their number is accurate. I was specifically asking where you got your 80% number from, as you claimed that was from the Israeli side.

"Second of all that's still means 60% of the deaths are civilians"

Right, it would be a 2.5:1 civilian to combatant ratio. Estimates of the civilian to combatant ratio from the Iraq invasion are of a 3:1 civilian to combatant ratio, or 75% of all fatalities.

"Most urban conflicts have not approached that number historically."

That's simply not true. A 2:1 civilian to combat ratio is actually on the low side in urban warfare. I'm pretty sure I posted a study here previously that showed a list of armed conflicts and the civilian to combatant fatality ratio. I'll see if I can find it again. @Bill I'm pretty sure you've been able to cite statistics before on civilian to combatant ratios in urban warfare, please correct me if I'm wrong.

The ongoing ratio is not as preferable to, say, US operations in Iraq, however it is exponentially better than Mariupol.

A few things to note in US operations: there were significant efforts to remove civilians from populated areas¹, there were significantly less enemy combatants, and the enemy defensive fortifications were way less developed.

It's basically fighting in a terrain that is Tora Bora underneath Mosul. It doesn't help that it modern times COIN basically leads to a cult of the operator (which we're going through now wrt the ongoing mess in Iran), like Bibi being former spec ops, so the operations are raids and strikes, not take-hold-clear like they should be.

1: Israel tried to do this, but Egypt and Jordan want absolutely nothing to do with the Palestinians, so there's really nowhere to put them other than the tin hut towns in the strip.