What makes me feel uncomfortable is the whole and eye for an eye argumentation in these debates. Your comment on the actions of the US makes me see that clearer. I do not think you can compare war crimes that will end in what-aboutism, and I do believe Israel, the US and Russia has commited horrible war crimes against civilians.
I do not get is how any sane human being can justify killing or abusing civilians at such large scales. A war crime is always a crime even though you might think it is justified.
There is no eye for an eye argument. The Gaza war is not about revenge, it’s about security. Israel didn’t poke out the Palestinians “eyes” because the Palestinians poked their eye first. They did it because they wanted the stop the Palestinians from poking their eye out before it happens again.
As far as justifying killing and abuse, the world is a complicated place. Personally I think killing is justified in self defense but you may not agree. Israel is certainly a bad actor but Hamas is far worse and unfortunately you do have to choose sides here.
What I think is clear is that Israel is not obligated to go easy on Hamas just because Hamas is economically and militarily weak. Being oppressed doesn’t automatically make you right.
Dig up WW2 German propaganda. It is the same hysteria around "security" aka "If we Aryans don't genocide, all the bad non-Aryans will genocide us".
> What I think is clear is that Israel is not obligated to go easy on Hamas just because Hamas is economically and militarily weak.
Not what the International Law Israel is signatory to, says. Besides, you'd do well to recall that NATO imposed a no-fly zone over Libya so that Gaddafi wouldn't bomb the living daylights out of the rebels who didn't have an Airforce to counteract. And we all know, NATO did no such thing for Palestinians.
> Personally I think killing is justified in self defense
> The Gaza war is not about revenge, it’s about security.
Neither. It's about land, resources, and trade routes. The justifications are about revenge, security, religion, etc, but that's not what's keeping this all going.
> As far as justifying killing and abuse, the world is a complicated place.
There's nothing complicated about illegal occupation, apartheid, systemic rape and torture, or genocide. There really isn't.
> I think killing is justified in self defense
Sure, and the UN agrees. Try comparing casualty rates some time.
> Israel is certainly a bad actor but Hamas is far worse
By what possible metric? Certainly not as measured by civilian casualties. Not confirmed rapes or torture. Not hostages taken. Not in tons of bombs dropped on civilians, not on targeting of journalists and UN workers, not in terms of hospitals bombed, or schools, or mosques, or churches, or ancient landmarks. Not in terms of 'who started it'. Not in terms of buying media and politicians favor, or spreading lies designed to justify atrocities.
> What I think is clear is that Israel is not obligated to go easy on Hamas
They are obligated to follow international law. And we (the Western countries arming and enabling them) are obligated to punish their failure to do so.
The Vatican isn’t an ethnostate. There are many Palestinian Israeli citizens, clearly it’s not the race but the culture that Israel has a problem with.
Israel has many bad actors, few will deny that. But Hamas is much much worse and at the end of the day they can’t co-exist so you have to choose sides. Looking at the history of the last 100 years in the region it is clear to me that israel can not let the Palestinians into their country if they want any amount of security.
What makes me feel uncomfortable is the whole and eye for an eye argumentation in these debates. Your comment on the actions of the US makes me see that clearer. I do not think you can compare war crimes that will end in what-aboutism, and I do believe Israel, the US and Russia has commited horrible war crimes against civilians.
I do not get is how any sane human being can justify killing or abusing civilians at such large scales. A war crime is always a crime even though you might think it is justified.
There is no eye for an eye argument. The Gaza war is not about revenge, it’s about security. Israel didn’t poke out the Palestinians “eyes” because the Palestinians poked their eye first. They did it because they wanted the stop the Palestinians from poking their eye out before it happens again.
As far as justifying killing and abuse, the world is a complicated place. Personally I think killing is justified in self defense but you may not agree. Israel is certainly a bad actor but Hamas is far worse and unfortunately you do have to choose sides here.
What I think is clear is that Israel is not obligated to go easy on Hamas just because Hamas is economically and militarily weak. Being oppressed doesn’t automatically make you right.
> it's about security
Dig up WW2 German propaganda. It is the same hysteria around "security" aka "If we Aryans don't genocide, all the bad non-Aryans will genocide us".
> What I think is clear is that Israel is not obligated to go easy on Hamas just because Hamas is economically and militarily weak.
Not what the International Law Israel is signatory to, says. Besides, you'd do well to recall that NATO imposed a no-fly zone over Libya so that Gaddafi wouldn't bomb the living daylights out of the rebels who didn't have an Airforce to counteract. And we all know, NATO did no such thing for Palestinians.
> Personally I think killing is justified in self defense
Whatever the current campaign is, it has wretched far beyond "self-defense": https://www.regthink.org/the-day-of-today/
> Being oppressed doesn’t automatically make you right
That it may not, but the Oppressor is by definition in the wrong.
7 replies →
> The Gaza war is not about revenge, it’s about security.
Neither. It's about land, resources, and trade routes. The justifications are about revenge, security, religion, etc, but that's not what's keeping this all going.
> As far as justifying killing and abuse, the world is a complicated place.
There's nothing complicated about illegal occupation, apartheid, systemic rape and torture, or genocide. There really isn't.
> I think killing is justified in self defense
Sure, and the UN agrees. Try comparing casualty rates some time.
> Israel is certainly a bad actor but Hamas is far worse
By what possible metric? Certainly not as measured by civilian casualties. Not confirmed rapes or torture. Not hostages taken. Not in tons of bombs dropped on civilians, not on targeting of journalists and UN workers, not in terms of hospitals bombed, or schools, or mosques, or churches, or ancient landmarks. Not in terms of 'who started it'. Not in terms of buying media and politicians favor, or spreading lies designed to justify atrocities.
> What I think is clear is that Israel is not obligated to go easy on Hamas
They are obligated to follow international law. And we (the Western countries arming and enabling them) are obligated to punish their failure to do so.
3 replies →
Race is a social construct. It is not a component of ethnicity.
> It’s religious nationalist.
So ethonoationalist. Just like the Vatican. Pope Francis was from South America but that doesn't make the Vatican not an ethnostate.
> The apartheid sucks but the Palestinians have repeatedly shown they can’t be trusted to remain peaceful, leaving Israel with no choice.
That's race essentialism.
Also, who killed Rabin to prevent the Oslo accords? Big hint, it wasn't the Palestinians.
The Vatican isn’t an ethnostate. There are many Palestinian Israeli citizens, clearly it’s not the race but the culture that Israel has a problem with.
Israel has many bad actors, few will deny that. But Hamas is much much worse and at the end of the day they can’t co-exist so you have to choose sides. Looking at the history of the last 100 years in the region it is clear to me that israel can not let the Palestinians into their country if they want any amount of security.