On 5/20/2024 at 10:45 AM, EaglesRocker97 said:

Thel main reason why this is a doomed enterprise is that there is no attempt by Israel to win hearts and minds of the Palestinian people, which is the folly of war against any insurgency. Take Iraq, for example, which I guess you could consider a relatively successful example of crushing an insurgency. There was a concerted effort to protect civilians, isolate the terrorists, and destroy them. There was a massive effort to rebuild civilian infrastructure and educate displaced peoples on a plan to construct a better life for them. Israel's approach has been essentially the inverse.

1) Israel is taking a concerted effort to protect civilians.  They engage in roof knocking to warn civilians of an incoming strike on a building. They create safe zones for civilians to evacuate to. They send texts and voicemails to alert civilians of impending military action to allow them to evacuate the localized area where the strike is concentrated.  All things that also give the enemy a warning that a military strike is coming and negatively impact Israel's ability to destroy the enemy, but saves civilian lives. 

2)   We toppled Sadaam's government and took control of the country in about 3 weeks.  Not quite an apples to apples comparison to this timeline as the enemy they are fighting is different. But yes, I agree Israel will need a plan and effort to rebuild the infrastructure.

3) I don't ever see Israel winning the hearts and minds of the Palestinian people no matter what happens. The people put Hamas in power in the first place, and there's a significant portion of the population that either supports their cause or at the very least is sympathetic to them.  The overwhelming majority of people support Hamas' October 7th terrorist attack.  Hamas still receives the most support among potential voters in the area compared to other options.

https://www.pcpsr.org/en/node/969#:~:text=49% (compared to 54%,believe both are unworthy of

That's not to say that Israel shouldn't act right.  I just don't think they'd ever win the hearts and minds of the palestinian people no matter what they do.  In an ideal fantasy world, there will come a time when the violence ends and the Israelis and Palestinians by and large would view each other as brother and sister and sing Kumbaya and all would be well.  Realistically, I think the best we can hope for is that they achieve normalized relations, where they may not like each other but at least the violence ends. 

14 hours ago, Dave Moss said:

A lot of posters here don’t seem to understand the fundamental differences between two nation-states at war and a country going after terrorists.  WWII is not relevant to the current situation.

Hamas isn't a rogue group of terrorists that operates against and outside the confines of a controlling power.  They are the controlling power in the region. 

33 minutes ago, Phillyterp85 said:

1) Israel is taking a concerted effort to protect civilians.  They engage in roof knocking to warn civilians of an incoming strike on a building. They create safe zones for civilians to evacuate to. They send texts and voicemails to alert civilians of impending military action to allow them to evacuate the localized area where the strike is concentrated.  All things that also give the enemy a warning that a military strike is coming and negatively impact Israel's ability to destroy the enemy, but saves civilian lives. 

 

I don't have a clear view of what's going on at the ground level, but it seems like more could be done to alert, protect, evacuate, and supply critical aid to civilians, and this is what a lot of senior U.S. officials are saying. The IDF is currently sieging a hospital in Jabalya.

40 minutes ago, Phillyterp85 said:

1) Israel is taking a concerted effort to protect civilians.  They engage in roof knocking to warn civilians of an incoming strike on a building. They create safe zones for civilians to evacuate to. They send texts and voicemails to alert civilians of impending military action to allow them to evacuate the localized area where the strike is concentrated.  All things that also give the enemy a warning that a military strike is coming and negatively impact Israel's ability to destroy the enemy, but saves civilian lives. 

2)   We toppled Sadaam's government and took control of the country in about 3 weeks.  Not quite an apples to apples comparison to this timeline as the enemy they are fighting is different. But yes, I agree Israel will need a plan and effort to rebuild the infrastructure.

3) I don't ever see Israel winning the hearts and minds of the Palestinian people no matter what happens. The people put Hamas in power in the first place, and there's a significant portion of the population that either supports their cause or at the very least is sympathetic to them.  The overwhelming majority of people support Hamas' October 7th terrorist attack.  Hamas still receives the most support among potential voters in the area compared to other options.

https://www.pcpsr.org/en/node/969#:~:text=49% (compared to 54%,believe both are unworthy of

That's not to say that Israel shouldn't act right.  I just don't think they'd ever win the hearts and minds of the palestinian people no matter what they do.  In an ideal fantasy world, there will come a time when the violence ends and the Israelis and Palestinians by and large would view each other as brother and sister and sing Kumbaya and all would be well.  Realistically, I think the best we can hope for is that they achieve normalized relations, where they may not like each other but at least the violence ends. 

They told folks to evacuate a few months ago to Rafah.  Now they’re bombing Rafah.  The only people this makes sense to are propagandists like yourself and a few others here.

5 minutes ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

 

I don't have a clear view of what's going on at the ground level, but it seems like more could be done to alert, protect, evacuate, and supply critical aid to civilians, and this is what a lot of senior U.S. officials are saying. The IDF is currently sieging a hospital in Jabalya.

There is definitely more that could be done to protect the civilians being used or allowing themselves to be used as human shields... like just letting what's left of Hamas survive, take what they want of the aid, and regroup to resume digging tunnels and firing rockets. They may even be able to get their ultralight glider factory up and running again - providing much needed jobs.

26 minutes ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

 

I don't have a clear view of what's going on at the ground level, but it seems like more could be done to alert, protect, evacuate, and supply critical aid to civilians, and this is what a lot of senior U.S. officials are saying. The IDF is currently sieging a hospital in Jabalya.

Cant have your cake and eat it too

I'm beginning to tire of the "human shield' narrative. It's not really an accurate description, but if we're going to take the term at face value, given a hostage situation, is the reasonable response to just kill the hostage?

 

Quote

Following past Israeli military operations in Gaza in 2009 and 2014, Amnesty International repeatedly investigated "human shields” accusations and, while it did accuse Hamas of other violations of international humanitarian law, it found no evidence to back up the specific accusation of "direct[ing] the movements of civilians to shield military objectives from attacks.”

2 minutes ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

...given a hostage situation, is the reasonable response to just kill the hostage?

no

5 minutes ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

I'm beginning to tire of the "human shield' narrative. It's not really an accurate description, but if we're going to take the term at face value, given a hostage situation, is the reasonable response to just kill the hostage?

 

Hamas using Palestinian civilians as human shields is not the same thing as taking hostages and holding them for a ransom or other.

7 minutes ago, DrPhilly said:

Hamas using Palestinian civilians as human shields is not the same thing as taking hostages and holding them for a ransom or other.

 

It's not all that different. So, the cops are chasing me, and I run into a school and grab a couple kids, is it reasonable to kill the kids to kill me?

And this isn't actually what's really happening, at least not typically. The claim is dubious. More often, it's just that civilians are in close proximity to combatants.

8 minutes ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

I'm beginning to tire of the "human shield' narrative. It's not really an accurate description, but if we're going to take the term at face value, given a hostage situation, is the reasonable response to just kill the hostage?

FWIW there's much more to the human shield narrative than you're suggesting. You may want to look into a more balanced (and current) account. I don't litigate these things on here past my usual drive-by comments so I'm not to going start now.

Wikipedia actually has a fair summary (including your 10-year-old Amnesty quote) - but it's the source list that's useful.

2 minutes ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

 

It's not all that different. So, the cops are chasing me, and I run into a school and grab a couple kids, is it reasonable to kill the kids to kill me?

And this isn't actually what's really happening. The claim is dubious. More often, it's just that civilians are in close proximity to combatant positions.

It is totally different.  Even though you take the kids you aren't a threat to the rest of the population that the cops are protecting.  It is a false equivalency.

4 minutes ago, DrPhilly said:

Even though you take the kids you aren't a threat to the rest of the population that the cops are protecting.

 

How is that necessarily the case? How is anyone contained in a building a threat to those outside of it immediately? If you're making a general argument, then maybe I'm a domestic terrorist. Then is ok to kill the kids? Or even if we're outside, and I can escape, maybe I'm well-armed, decked out in in armor and tactical gear with high-powered weaponry.

3 minutes ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

 

How is that necessarily the case? How is anyone contained in a building a threat to those outside of it immediately? If you're making a general argument, then maybe I'm a domestic terrorist. Then is ok to kill the kids? Or even if we're outside, and I can escape, maybe I'm well-armed, decked out in in armor and tactical gear with high-powered weaponry.

I think you are really reaching with this one.  Hostages and human shields are very very different from one another.

6 minutes ago, DrPhilly said:

I think you are really reaching with this one.  Hostages and human shields are very very different from one another.

 

I feel like you're just arguing semantics. Let's say Timothy McVeigh and a few others are actually inside the Federal Building, should we just bomb the place to smithereens?

24 minutes ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

 

I feel like you're just arguing semantics. Let's say Timothy McVeigh and a few others are actually inside the Federal Building, should we just bomb the place to smithereens?

That isn't happening in Gaza.  You need to rethink this one.  Not the same in the least bit.

1 hour ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

I'm beginning to tire of the "human shield' narrative. 
 

oh, so sorry you getting tired of it. 

 

 

1 hour ago, Dave Moss said:

They told folks to evacuate a few months ago to Rafah.  Now they’re bombing Rafah.  The only people this makes sense to are propagandists like yourself and a few others here.

And they didn't warn citizens when they moved the offensive to Rafah?    

Civilian to combatant casualty ratios are generally 5:1 or higher in urban combat. That was our ratio in Fallujah. In Gaza, even using Hamas' numbers, that ratio is closer to 2:1. This idea that Israel isn't limiting civilian casualties is ridiculous and not backed up by the data. Most of the people spouting it are simply reacting to horrific images without putting it in the proper context -- urban warfare is hell. The rest, well...it's rather obvious they'd have a different opinion if we weren't dealing with Israel.

1 hour ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

 

Let's say Timothy McVeigh and a few others are actually inside a house full of sovereign citizens, should we just bomb the place to smithereens?

FYP and yes

Don't you laugh at me, @Dave Moss! 

I'll remove you from Twinsie Tuesday (TM) consideration for a month.

And don't think I won't.

Just now, Arthur Jackson said:

Don't you laugh at me, @Dave Moss! 

I'll remove you from Twinsie Tuesday (TM) consideration for a month.

And don't think I won't.

I'm going to have to report this profile for impersonating a moderator.

Otherwise, as to the actual post,

 

@Dave Moss -

7 minutes ago, Procus said:

I'm going to have to report this profile for impersonating a moderator.

Otherwise, as to the actual post,

 

 

 

 

(it's just a belly rub)

14 minutes ago, Procus said:

 

@Dave Moss -

Are American taxpayers footing the bill for the genocide in Darfur?