Comment by malandrew

3 days ago

Strawman much?

Taking hostages has practical benefits. Indiscriminate killing of folks that don't present a threat isn't practical.

Every single one of those combatants that left the fence that day had a limited amount of ammunition on them. Practically speaking, most US soldiers will patrol with about 7 magazines with 30 rounds in each magazine, plus two pistol magazines. Add another magazine in each firearm. A typical double stack magazine will be about 17 rounds, so we're talking about less than 300 rounds for a full load-out.

In the case of Hamas, they are using imprecise arms like AK-47s. They likely have no optics like red dots or scopes and are just using iron sights. Match grade AK-47s probably have 2 to 4 MOA of accuracy under ideal conditions with modern optics and meticulously handloaded ammunition using modern bullets.

Between poor accuracy and the need to occasionally lay down suppressive fire, 300 rounds isn't going to get you very far.

Unlike US warfighters, the Hamas warfighters also have no ability to call in close air support or be re-supplied. If you have a limited number of rounds and the only potential for "re-supply" comes from enemy combatants, the one thing you don't do is waste ammo on folks that aren't a threat like women, children, elderly. You prioritize fighting age men and in the case of the IDF, fighting age women as well.

RPGs are especially valuable and limited in supply and would likely be reserved for tanks, attack helicopters and vehicles that present threat. It's highly unlikely a reasonably trained fighting force with limited ammunition and explosives would waste them on non-threats. Not saying it didn't happen with any of those warfighters, but the majority would be more disciplined than that, especially coming from an environment plagued by scarcity. US soldiers pretty much have unlimited access to ammo and support and they aren't wasteful with ammo when there isn't a prospect of prompt resupply.

Honestly, I don't know how someone can see this take as unhinged unless they've been largely brainwashed into accept the narratives spun after October 7th.

When someone or some entity intentionally deceives you (which happened a lot with respect to October 7th. e.g. 40 beheaded babies), the only practical response is to assume maximum deceit so they are forced to present evidence to actually support their testimony about what they say happened.

No critical thinking person should accept the official Israeli government's accounting of what happened on October 7th at this point. “Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me”

Anyways, the truth about what actually happened that day is far more knowable than we currently know. All that is needed is transparency. Release everything.

Are you know claiming that an Ak-47 is incapable of killing people?

We've seen footage of Hamas fighters literally strolling Israeli villages and cities basically unopposed for hours, of course they could easily kill tons of people.

Seriously, just stop. If you find yourself in a position trying to defend a terrorist attack on civilians (on either sides) it means you lost the plot somewhere along the way.

And this is coming from someone who thinks that what has/is happening in Gaza is horrible and that is pro a 2 state solution.

  • > Are you know claiming that an Ak-47 is incapable of killing people?

    Yet another strawman.

    I'm guessing you have no practical experience with firearms otherwise you'd argue the points I'm making.

    > If you find yourself in a position trying to defend a terrorist attack on civilians (on either sides) it means you lost the plot somewhere along the way

    I don't know how you arrived at the view that I'm defending a terrorist attack. I'm asking for an accurate account of what happened by the terrorists on both sides on October 7th.

    Yes, if you have policies like the Hannibal Directive and the Dahiya Doctrine and your politicians actively advocate in defense of the rape of prisoners of war, you're as much as terrorist as Hamas. Let's not forget that the country was founded from the violence of the Irgun, Lehi, and Haganah.

    I'm happy to condemn terrorism by Hamas. Will you likewise condemn the terrorism committed by the IDF? I ask because "if you find yourself in a position trying to defend a terrorist attack on civilians (on either sides) it means you lost the plot somewhere along the way."

    • Dude, I already I said I find what's happening in Gaza horrible.

      The point is you are going lengths to try and prove what exactly? That Hamas only killed 800 people and took another 200 hostage as opposed to 1200? Does it matter? And will you also do the same to investigate and see how many Gazans did Hamas kill with failed rockets and explosives?

      What are you trying to achieve here?

      I'll say it again, you lost the plot.

      5 replies →

> Taking hostages has practical benefits.

So is leveling a country if you want to demonstrate consequences of an attack.

We should not argue like this, but this is the level you propose and demand with your justifications for terrorist attacks.

  • Fair enough. It was a poor choice of words. I wasn't trying to justify the taking of hostages. I was trying to raise a discussion that we should be demanding more evidence about what actually happened on October 7th and that such evidence most certainly exists (assuming it hasn't been intentionally destroyed).

    In another comment I just made I raise a question about the makeup of the 251 hostages. I'm genuinely interested in knowing how many of them were civilian hostages and how many are IDF soldiers and therefore prisoners of war.

    This same question applies to the hostages that Israel has taken as well. They are portrayed as prisoners/detainees, but other than the legitimate combatants, all others are effectively hostages as well.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_detentions_in_the_Israel%...

    relevant illustration: https://www.reddit.com/r/PropagandaPosters/comments/16w6g5l/...