• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Israel Attacked and its Response

im not sure civilians have been a major 'concern' except as a talking point since the era of Total War began in the late 19th/early 20th century
 
mako1331 said:
Now, this is a completely different argument, and one that's probably a little more up in the air given how they look past all his other bullshit. I'm not sure even the whole imperfect vessel argument could get them to look past abandoning the holy land though.
Click to expand...
Yeah especially when getting the third temple built is super important. I think scrapping the second coming for 4 more years of Trump has to be a non-starter for many of the extremely devout.
 
wakelaw13 said:
This is fairly accurate, especially the second sentence. I would not use the word "byproduct," both because the death of a civilian on either side is equally tragic and because I know that Israel has intentionally targeted civilians in the past.
Click to expand...
Idk man IDF is pretty notorious for shooting kids who throw rocks at them.
 
wakelaw13 said:
This is fairly accurate, especially the second sentence. I would not use the word "byproduct," both because the death of a civilian on either side is equally tragic and because I know that Israel has intentionally targeted civilians in the past.
Click to expand...
So the big ethical distinction is that Hamas wants to kill civilians and Israelis don't care enough to stop killing them.

This is really troubling because Israel has the technological and logistical capability to kill many many times what the most ardent Hamas fighter could ever dream of inflicting on Israelis. Does the (small) ethical distinction matter if the practical outcome is the same or much worse?
 
A lot of these defenses of Israel’s military philosophies vs Hamas’s are distinctions without differences. The only real actual difference is that the West considers one side - Israel, a legitimate nation and military with whom we are allies with, while the other side is an occupied state with a political leadership and military that we refuse to recognize as legitimate.

Any historical account of the American military includes innumerable circumstances where civilians are killed, by malice and negligence. Israel kills Palestinian civilians regularly. All this rhetoric about Islamic barbarism is so much bullshit. Putting a goddamn military uniform on and putting out a press release doesn’t make killing civilians any less barbaric.
 
birdman said:
So the big ethical distinction is that Hamas wants to kill civilians and Israelis don't care enough to stop killing them.

This is really troubling because Israel has the technological and logistical capability to kill many many times what the most ardent Hamas fighter could ever dream of inflicting on Israelis. Does the (small) ethical distinction matter if the practical outcome is the same or much worse?
Click to expand...
I would not phrase it that way. The goal of Hamas is literally genocide and the creation of a state under Sharia law. That is not Israel's goal, but Israel has committed war crimes and has killed civilians, both intentionally and as collateral damage. I do not think it is a minor distinction, nor do I think either side is without fault.
 
wakelaw13 said:
I would not phrase it that way. The goal of Hamas is literally genocide and the creation of a state under Sharia law. That is not Israel's goal, but Israel has committed war crimes and has killed civilians, both intentionally and as collateral damage.
Click to expand...

Some of y’all really need to catch up on your Clausewitz
 
wakelaw13 said:
I've read every post on this thread since the latest attack and spent a week reading everything I could on the subject before offering a substantive opinion, which was made in good faith. I don't care for the dismissal of my statements as willfully ignoring others. I understand the concept of what Louis said and I don't think it is an accurate generalization of the thread.

To answer your question, I have never asserted that Israel is without fault. I have never alleged that civilians have not died at the hands of Israeli soldiers or bombs. My point was that there is an ethical difference between the tactics of Hamas and Israel. Only one side of the conflict is actually dissuaded by the presence of human shields. That's where I'm coming from.
Click to expand...

I've been avoiding posting anything on this thread due to a similar reaction. Early on, reading this thread was pretty shocking. The level of callousness really caught me off guard, the willingness to promote news clips and twitter posts that disputed the details of the Hamas attack and highlighted the mistakes (intentional or not) of Israel's reporting seemed, well, way out of balance. I've tried very hard not to go down the rabbit hole of videos out there, but when you watch Hamas fighters just stroll through a music venue shooting everyone point-blank in the head, tossing grenades into shelters, laughing, etc. - I can't tell you how much it doesn't matter to me that the number of beheadings is off or that certain accounts were bullshit.

I'm not surprised there are multiple viewpoints here, and I'm not surprised recent events are being used as fuel for a "oh so you're just now realizing this is a problem" take. I mean, there's some serious validity in that honestly. But it's definitely surprising that the idea of not condoning Hamas but having to condemn Israel in the same breath - with the associated equivalence implied - seems to be the one take that isn't being stomped on here. Especially because personally, in a room with some legit experts on this subject who are not Israel apologists - that is not the tenor taken.

I have zero interest in arguing this, but did want to chime in that wakelaw's posts do seem in good faith and I'm sure many reading this thread have had similar reactions, right or wrong.
 
wakelaw13 said:
I would not phrase it that way. The goal of Hamas is literally genocide and the creation of a state under Sharia law. That is not Israel's goal, but Israel has committed war crimes and has killed civilians, both intentionally and as collateral damage.
Click to expand...
Ok, I'll rephrase, Hamas wants to commit genocide, whereas Israel seems ok with committing genocide as a side effect of other legitimate military objectives.

There is a pretty descent chance we are going to witness the Israeli army commit genocide and massive ethnic cleansing in the next two weeks with a ground invasion and the "tone" of this thread that you don't like are basically a few people saying maybe they should pump the breaks or even stop it all together.
 
birdman said:
Ok, I'll rephrase, Hamas wants to commit genocide, whereas Israel seems ok with committing genocide as a side effect of other legitimate military objectives.

There is a pretty descent chance we are going to witness the Israeli army commit genocide and massive ethnic cleansing in the next two weeks with a ground invasion and the "tone" of this thread that you don't like are basically a few people saying maybe they should pump the breaks or even stop it all together.
Click to expand...
I can't believe I have to say this but I dispute that Israel is "ok with committing genocide." I also find it hard to believe you sincerely think my concern is with the "tone" of the thread, just because I said that I was surprised by it.
 
DCDeac said:
I've been avoiding posting anything on this thread due to a similar reaction. Early on, reading this thread was pretty shocking. The level of callousness really caught me off guard, the willingness to promote news clips and twitter posts that disputed the details of the Hamas attack and highlighted the mistakes (intentional or not) of Israel's reporting seemed, well, way out of balance. I've tried very hard not to go down the rabbit hole of videos out there, but when you watch Hamas fighters just stroll through a music venue shooting everyone point-blank in the head, tossing grenades into shelters, laughing, etc. - I can't tell you how much it doesn't matter to me that the number of beheadings is off or that certain accounts were bullshit.

I'm not surprised there are multiple viewpoints here, and I'm not surprised recent events are being used as fuel for a "oh so you're just now realizing this is a problem" take. I mean, there's some serious validity in that honestly. But it's definitely surprising that the idea of not condoning Hamas but having to condemn Israel in the same breath - with the associated equivalence implied - seems to be the one take that isn't being stomped on here. Especially because personally, in a room with some legit experts on this subject who are not Israel apologists - that is not the tenor taken.

I have zero interest in arguing this, but did want to chime in that wakelaw's posts do seem in good faith and I'm sure many reading this thread have had similar reactions, right or wrong.
Click to expand...
I think given how heavy and tragic all this is our conversations have pretty much all remained civil and argued in good faith.

I’m sure I’m read as callous, and I’m generally fine with that, and find it easier to work that way than be too distant or too emotionally attached.
 
wakelaw13 said:
I can't believe I have to say this but I dispute that Israel is "ok with committing genocide." I also find it hard to believe you sincerely think my concern is with the "tone" of the thread, just because I said that I was surprised by it.
Click to expand...
i mean, israel has been ok with committing genocide in the past
 
Yeah Israel has been committing genocide in Palestine for decades and are doing it now. They’re not the only ones doing it but they’re doing it too and it’s pretty clear to me at least that they’re “okay” with doing so in their own nation’s defense
 
wakelaw13 said:
I can't believe I have to say this but I dispute that Israel is "ok with committing genocide." I also find it hard to believe you sincerely think my concern is with the "tone" of the thread, just because I said that I was surprised by it.
Click to expand...
I guess you and I have a different interpretation of the situation on the ground or perhaps a different definition of genocide, but Israel has cut off power, wildly undermined medical infrastructure, cut off water, ended food imports...etc. and lots of people are going to die as a result. The water cut off alone likely will lead to widespread disease and death as a result (NPR reported this morning that people have turned to drinking sea water). That, on top of the indiscriminate bombing, looks a little bit genocidal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top