• r_wraith
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    There is a difference between a military bombardement, where civilians were warned to leave the area beforehand and a suprise raid in which civilians and children were the only targets and people were raped abducted and tortured.

    • Madison420@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Leave to where sir, everywhere they’ve been told to go to has subsequently been bombarded, at what point is the warning lip service?

      You do understand Israel has been routinely credibly accused of deliberate targeting of civilians including women (irrelevant, a dead adult is as abborant at any other) children and the rape of both during this very conflict.

      Painting in shades of shit is regardless of the shade still going to be a shitty picture.

      • r_wraith
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        Of course it is a shitty picture. You ask leave to where? Right question, I don’t have an easy answer, as Egypt obviously won’t allow them in.

        Let me post a different question: What should Israel have done after the 7th? What would any other country in the world have done differently?

        • Madison420@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          So it’s not really that different is it drive the effect is the same.

          They could defend themselves sure. Most countries would have been hammered into the stone age by everyone else is they slapped back with such disparity of force. They’ve killed quite literally 10 times as many civilians by current reports most of which are children and destroyed any hope of livability within Gaza. It’s really not difficult math man.

        • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I don’t know, maybe literally anything that doesn’t involve murdering thousands of civilians? Use your imagination. The question itself is insulting. The people calling out Israel’s atrocities have no obligation to come up with policy suggestions that are acceptable to the people committing atrocities.

          • ahornsirup@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Urban warfare is never pretty. If Hamas cared about Palestine they’d release the remaining hostages and surrender unconditionally. But they don’t. Their leaders are safe in Qatar, and their zealots care only about murdering Jews, not about the people caught in the crossfire of the inevitable Israeli counterstrikes. If they cared about their people they wouldn’t use them as human shields.

            And yes, if you say that Israel shouldn’t attack if there’s a risk of civilian casualties you need to offer up an alternative that gets Hamas to stop attacking Israeli civilians.

            • BartsBigBugBag@lemmy.tf
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              Hamas is the only thing protecting Palestinians from fucking full invasion and settlement at this point dude. Israel has admitted their intention is to push everyone out of the country and settle the land for themselves. On national tv, from high level Israeli officials.

        • BartsBigBugBag@lemmy.tf
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Trade hostages for hostages to secure the safety of the hostages, as Hamas tried to do day one, two, and three. Not bomb hospitals, ever, for any reason. Not bomb refugee camps.

          Of course, if they stopped the illegal occupation and settlement, and stopped murdering Palestinians every single day, stopped imprisoning them, and stopped making them live under different rules than the settlers have, it’s very unlikely they would have ever been attacked in the first place. Hamas admits this attack was an act of desperation against the completion of the Israeli settlement and cultural genocide project. It didn’t happen in a vacuum. It was the direct result of the oppression Israel forces upon the people of Palestine.

    • Strawberry@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      civilians and children were the only targets

      This is simply not true. Hundreds of the Israeli casualties of Oct 7 were soldiers and police. Civilian witnesses/hostages from that day have stated that the Hamas attackers said they were shocked to find so few soldiers, and that they were there to fight the Israeli military and police