← Back to context

Comment by elcritch

11 hours ago

Israel invests in defending their civilians with technology like Iron Beam.

In contrast the Gazan government strategically uses humans shields [2, 3] and despite this the majority of Palestinians still support starting this war by attacking civilians on Oct 7th [1]. Defense technology doesn’t help if you don’t want it unfortunately.

Hamas also has hundreds of miles of tunnels which civilians aren’t allowed to use.

1: https://www.pcpsr.org/en/node/1000#:~:text=The%20Trump%20Pla... 2: https://stratcomcoe.org/cuploads/pfiles/hamas_human_shields.... 3: https://www.fdd.org/analysis/2023/11/01/hamas-officials-admi...

To say that israel invests in defense is at least 1/4 untrue, since the US sends billions every year. The US gave them about 7b cash last year, which is around 1/4 of their defense budget, and doesn’t include things like stationing carriers nearby, or doing airstrikes on houthi blockades.

Us $ to israel: https://usafacts.org/answers/how-much-foreign-aid-does-the-u...

Israel defense budget: https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/israel-raise-defen...

  • > To say that israel invests in defense is at least 1/4 untrue, since the US sends billions every year.

    This is factually incorrect. The amount of money that the US gives Israel is completely and totally irrelevant to whether or not Israel also invests their own money in defense.

    The fact that the US has a problem with foreign influence literally does not matter for the statement above.

    To be clear, I don't agree with the GP's implied suggestion that Israel is more defensive than offensive, but making objectively incorrect statements is not a valid way to refute that.

    • Can i rephrase to help you understand my point?

      The defensive and offensive capabilities of Israel is about 1/4 larger because of american tax dollars not their own spending.

      1 reply →

  • That the US contributes doesn’t take away from the billions Israel did and does invest. The US defense contractors also get a big chunk of that aid.

    The US also gives similar levels of military aid to Egypt as well. The EU and US give billions to Ukraine.

    Gaza also receives billions in aid; substantial amounts of which has been hihacked and looted. For example this lady summer the UN reported that 88% of their aid trucks in Gaza were looted [1].

    1: https://www.fdd.org/analysis/2025/08/05/un-reports-88-percen...

    • > That the US contributes doesn’t take away from the billions Israel did and does invest

      Actually it does? It takes about 1/4 away.

      > The US also gives similar levels of military aid to Egypt as well. The EU and US give billions to Ukraine.

      Yes, the US uses defense aid to further their own agenda internationally, and funnel public dollars into private hands.

      > Gaza also receives billions in aid

      Food, medical, and infrastructure aid is not the same thing as weapons.

      > 88% of their aid trucks in Gaza were looted

      Ok? This tells me that both food and food aid are in short supply, if people are willing to take it by force. If myself and my family was starving, i would hyjack food trucks too. Wouldn’t you?

      6 replies →

Nitpick here: Your link #1 turns out to have been being manipulated by Hamas.

I do agree the Hamas strategy was explicitly about getting civilians killed, though.

> the Gazan government strategically uses humans shields

This just means Israel knows they're hitting women and children every time they send a bomb their way.

> the majority of Palestinians still support starting this war

Palestine isn't a democracy with well documented preferences. Israel is though, so why don't you say that a majority of Israelis are fine with the killing of women and children in Gaza?

elcritch, you're beating around the bush but strongly suggesting there's a reasonable justification (not just an explanation) for killing women and children if it suits someone's needs. Does this apply just to Israel killing people in Gaza or universally valid? Because I distinctly remember the US going to war over WMD that never existed. So elcritch, are you saying US women and children are fair game now?

  • > are you saying US women and children are fair game now?

    Women have been serving in combat roles in the U.S. military for decades now…

  • 1) The average death per bomb was less than 1. Strikes mostly hit things which had already been evacuated.

    2) When human shields get hit we blame the side that put them in harm's way, not the side that harmed them. Just look at the criminal trials in police actions--a hostage dies when SWAT hits a place, the murder rap lands on the person who took the hostage even if it turns out to be a police bullet in the hostage.

    And your note about WMD--said WMD existed. On paper. We read the paper, didn't realize it was underlings lying to Saddam.

  • > there's a reasonable justification (not just an explanation) for killing women and children if it suits someone's needs

    The Law of Armed Conflict specifies exactly when it considers such a reasonable justification to exist, which is not "never". You don't get to plop down women and children in front of military installations and go "neener neener" like you're a child on the school playground.