Israel-Hamas Thread II

[wing2000]

Funny that we didn't claim we should be helping the Palestinians. Your the one that wants a to do that. America is t interested in bringing in more Jew haters. We have enough of them already.

I suggest you reconsider your choice of words....and perhaps, simply admit when you're mistaken.

 

[essentialsaltes]

In case your reading skills diminish as you read, here's the salient part you conveniently missed (ignored?)

This article was amended on 9 December 2023 to clarify that +972 Magazine is an Israeli-Palestinian publication, rather than Israeli. It was then amended on 10 December because an earlier subheading said the proportion of civilian deaths was higher than that in all world conflicts in the 20th century; as the main text indicated, this should have referred to it being higher than the average proportion of civilian deaths in these conflicts. And it was further amended on 18 December due to a clarification made in the source article, stating that the conflicts being analysed were those from the second world war to the 1990s, not those during the whole of the 20th century.​

 

[JosephZ]

No. It's a position based on long-standing rational principles accepted in Western Civilization i.e, just war theory, on the just cause to go to war and the just means of conducting war. You've been given many citations in this thread but choose to ignore them labelling them Latin gibberish.

I mentioned earlier that jus ad bellum requires a reasonable prospect of success. War can't be justified if the prospect of success is low. Israel can't defeat Hamas militarily and decades of failed attempts to destroy terrorist groups with military force by other states has proven this.

Jus ad bellum also requires that war be used as a last resort. Israel had other options to track down and hold those responsible for the October 7th terror attack and neutralize Hamas. All-out war in Gaza was not a last resort and now appears to be an act of vengeance against all Palestinians for what happened in October rather than a just war.

Israel's actions do not meet the requirements of just war theory.

 

[RDKirk]

I mentioned earlier that jus ad bellum requires a reasonable prospect of success. War can't be justified if the prospect of success is low. Israel can't defeat Hamas militarily and decades of failed attempts to destroy terrorist groups with military force by other states has proven this.

Jus ad bellum also requires that war be used as a last resort. Israel had other options to track down and hold those responsible for the October 7th terror attack and neutralize Hamas. All-out war in Gaza was not a last resort and now appears to be an act of vengeance against all Palestinians for what happened in October rather than a just war.

Israel's actions do not meet the requirements of just war theory.

"Just war" is an idealistic unreality.

No war really starts or concludes in a just manner.

 

[civilwarbuff]

The kid with the bomb was a factual event. To which you linked for heaven's sake.

And which post was that?....considering I have given you so many supporting posts of any of my claims......unlike you I might add.

 

[o_mlly]

I mentioned earlier that jus ad bellum requires a reasonable prospect of success. War can't be justified if the prospect of success is low. Israel can't defeat Hamas militarily and decades of failed attempts to destroy terrorist groups with military force by other states has proven this.

Jus ad bellum also requires that war be used as a last resort. Israel had other options to track down and hold those responsible for the October 7th terror attack and neutralize Hamas. All-out war in Gaza was not a last resort and now appears to be an act of vengeance against all Palestinians for what happened in October rather than a just war.

Israel's actions do not meet the requirements of just war theory.

First, thank you for a thoughtful, rational post.

Yes, that there is a reasonable prospect for success, and that war is a last resort are principles in jus ad bellum.

The stated Israeli objectives that I am aware of for going to war are:

• Return of the hostages.
• Destabilize, isolate, and destroy Hamas and provide support to a new, broad-based government in Gaza.
• Destroy Hamas’s military capability and infrastructure.
• Protect Israel from Gaza-based threats and attacks.

The prospect for success is a prudential judgement. If any of the above objectives are reasonably achievable in the minds of the Israeli then going to war is just. As an historical fact, the US did militarily destroy two terrorist groups: Al Qaeda and ISIS.

Vengeance, a disorder of the will, is not listed as an Israeli objective. A war of vengeance is never a just war. One may infer such an intention but that would only be speculation.

The use of options other than war to achieve those objectives would also be a prudential judgement. One may propose other means but not impose them on Israel as better than war.

 

[rjs330]

No, it's you that wanted to know what we were doing. And it seems that it's perfectly valid for you to complain 'You guys aren't doing anything' (when we actually are - I told you that you should have checked). And it seems perfectly ok for you to say 'But we don't have to do anything ourselves' (which you hadn't realised was exactly what you are doing - nothing. Again, you should check).

And in fact your own party is not just determined not to do anything. They actively want to prevent others from doing anything as well. I'll be generous and not mention the rejection of Jewish refugees after the Second World War.

Like I said, the double standards are shameful.

You think I was actually complaining people weren't doing enough? I think you are the one doing that. Someone mentioned that your own country wasn't doing enough despite your complaints.

And you pointed out Australia took 800 BECAUSE THEY HAD Australian TIES.

That's still being extremely restrictive.

No I don't care if Australia takes anyone in or not. Quite frankly the Gazans ought to all be removed a settled into Muslim countries and not anywhere in the west. They wouldn't be happy here. The West is an antithesis of what they believe.

So take in a thimble full of Palestinians and call it helping if you want. I don't really care except to point out it's relatively meaningless. But hey you can believe your country is doing an amazing job if you want.

 

[Carl Emerson]

This article on the New York Times claims the war is being fought on social media and Hamas have operated editorial control.

New York Times FINALLY admits that Hamas controlled ‘news’ coming out of Gaza

It’s got to be a difficult thing to admit that Hamas was essentially functioning as a defacto editorial board Op-ed.

www.israelnationalnews.com

 

[rjs330]

Well that leaves nearly 150,00 (less the 56 you already took in of course). But darn it, the GOP want none at all. Zero! If they were only as warm hearted and caring as so many seem to be in this thread where the well known Christian compassion suffuses every post.

How many do you think you should take? Out of all the ones who don't support Hamas. Australia managed 800. Base a figure on that and be sure to let me know.

I'm sure they would all be very honest about it if asked. Especially if it means getting into America. We know all people who want to get in are very honest people. Every single person who wants in from Mexico claims asylum. Muslims think lying to infadels is just fine. So you can trust them if you want and let them all into your country.

 

[rjs330]

Hospital director from Gaza admits Hamas are using hospitals and ambulances. He admitted that some of his staff was Hamas. He admitted that Hamas uses hospitals because they believe they are safe spaces.

This is confirmation to what OTHER Palestinians have said about it.

'An IDF hostage was held there': Gaza hospital director comes clean, says staffers were Hamas - I24NEWS

Ahmad Kahlud admited he was enlisted into Hamas in 2010 in the rank of a Brigadier General.

www.i24news.tv

 

[rjs330]

I suggest you reconsider your choice of words....and perhaps, simply admit when you're mistaken.

We've seen all the Jew haters in the pro-palestinian marches. We do t need more from Gaza.

 

[civilwarbuff]

This article on the New York Times claims the war is being fought on social media and Hamas have operated editorial control.

New York Times FINALLY admits that Hamas controlled ‘news’ coming out of Gaza

It’s got to be a difficult thing to admit that Hamas was essentially functioning as a defacto editorial board Op-ed.

www.israelnationalnews.com

Excellent post.

 

[civilwarbuff]

Muslims think lying to infadels is just fine. So you can trust them if you want and let them all into your country.

Can you imagine Sydney, Aus. listening to the Muslim call to prayer 5 times a day?

 

[Bradskii]

No. It's a position based on long-standing rational principles accepted in Western Civilization i.e, just war theory, on the just cause to go to war and the just means of conducting war. You've been given many citations in this thread but choose to ignore them labelling them Latin gibberish.

Trying to conduct a rational argument with an emotional child is a waste of time. Same is true with an emotional non-child.

Suggesting that the death of children is an unfortunate consequence of the conflict is one thing. That's done and dusted. But no-one needs to post links of gun carrying children and give examples of bomb carrying 12 year olds to further that argument. They are not connected in any way. You obviously understand that.

There have been fatuous claims that most of the innocent civilians are somehow not innocent because they support Hamas or are in some way fighting against Israel. So it has been pointed out that very many children are among the dead. Surely no-one would suggest that they are somehow involved. Surely no-one would be callous enough to imply that maybe the children aren't all innocent. Surely nobody would stoop so low to claim that 12 year olds might be involved. Surely we wouldn't have pictures of little girls with automatic weapons posted.

I was wrong. I should have known.

 

[civilwarbuff]

There have been fatuous claims that most of the innocent civilians are somehow not innocent because they support Hamas or are in some way fighting against Israel. So it has been pointed out that very many children are among the dead. Surely no-one would suggest that they are somehow involved. Surely no-one would be callous enough to imply that maybe the children aren't all innocent. Surely nobody would stoop so low to claim that 12 year olds might be involved. Surely we wouldn't have pictures of little girls with automatic weapons posted.

Surely no one would be callous enough to think it is better to see IDF soldiers or Israeli civilians gunned down or blown up by children than criticize them for defending themselves.

I was wrong. I should have known. Some think IT IS better.......

 

[Bradskii]

Perhaps, you'd like to try reading it again ... this time try reading the entire article.

Civilians make up 61% of Gaza deaths from airstrikes, Israeli study finds

Civilian proportion of deaths is higher than the average in all world conflicts in second half of 20th century, data suggests

www.theguardian.com

In case your reading skills diminish as you read, here's the salient part you conveniently missed (ignored?)

This article was amended on 9 December 2023 to clarify that +972 Magazine is an Israeli-Palestinian publication, rather than Israeli. It was then amended on 10 December because an earlier subheading said the proportion of civilian deaths was higher than that in all world conflicts in the 20th century; as the main text indicated, this should have referred to it being higher than the average proportion of civilian deaths in these conflicts. And it was further amended on 18 December due to a clarification made in the source article, stating that the conflicts being analysed were those from the second world war to the 1990s, not those during the whole of the 20th century.​

It's blazingly obvious that the article was updated after I posted it.

But considering what the article is saying...

the proportion of civilian deaths was higher than the average proportion of civilian deaths from the Second World War to the 90s

...I can see why you'd rather complain about which version is current than address what it actually says.

 

[Bradskii]

Surely no one would be callous enough to think it is better to see IDF soldiers or Israeli civilians gunned down or blown up by children than criticize them for defending themselves.

I was wrong. I should have known. Some think IT IS better.......

When you have evidence for that happening right now then we'll all join in to mourn the deaths. But you aren't doing that. You are implying that it could happen because children have been used as an example of innocents being killed as opposed to the fatuous claims that most citizens are Hamas supporters and have brought death and destruction upon themselves. You are implying that not all the children are innocent.

It's the most despicable and shameful position to take. And you keep doubling down on it...

 

[Bradskii]

And which post was that?....considering I have given you so many supporting posts of any of my claims......unlike you I might add.

It seems you can't even follow your own arguments. And you want me to help you?

 

[Bradskii]

You think I was actually complaining people weren't doing enough?

No, you were questioning why Australia wasn't doing anything. Without taking a few seconds to check. Like I said, people often look foolish when they ask questions without first checking what the answer is.

You are then left with suggesting that gee, it's not many. When It's your position that no-one should help genuine refugees anyway. You're arguing with yourself. And doing a pretty poor job of it as well.

 

[Bradskii]

Can you imagine Sydney, Aus. listening to the Muslim call to prayer 5 times a day?

We have much more than half a million Muslims in Australia. Most of them in Sydney. There's a mosque a few minutes walk from where I'm typing this. They are as welcome as all other religions. They'd have a local call to prayer but I've not heard it. When I've travelled in Muslim countries I find it quite beautiful. The Catholic church bells just up the road make more of a noise.

Intolerance is an ugly thing.