111
submitted 1 year ago by 0x815@feddit.de to c/news@beehaw.org

The right-wing leader appeared on multiple cable news shows to speak on the current state Israel’s monthlong siege on Gaza, which human rights experts have warned amount to ethnic cleansing and war crimes.

UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk accused both Israel and Hamas of war crimes, and said that the only solution to the violence is to end the Israeli occupation and allow Palestinians the right to self-determination.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Devi@beehaw.org 44 points 1 year ago

Israeli civilians being killed is a war crime though? Double standards much?

[-] goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org 23 points 1 year ago

Makes sense when they only think one side are actually human :(

[-] sqgl@beehaw.org 6 points 1 year ago

Hamas & Likud think that way.

Ironically the party folks killed on Oct 7th would have been anti-Likud types.

[-] anachronist@midwest.social 5 points 1 year ago

Bibi reduced military protection in the south to punish the kibbutz dwellers, and to focus on war-criming the West Bank. Either he figured his trunks full of cash would keep Hamas in line, or he just really didn't care what happened down there.

He also clearly gives zero shits about the hostages. Hamas wanted to negotiate for their release at the beginning of the conflict, but he decided he would rather war-crime Gaza instead.

[-] sqgl@beehaw.org 1 points 1 year ago

What deal were Hamas offering at the start?

[-] anachronist@midwest.social 3 points 11 months ago

According to three sources familiar with the talks, the original deal on the table involved freeing children, women and elderly and sick people in exchange for a five-day ceasefire, but the Israeli government turned this down and demonstrated its rejection with the launch of the ground offensive.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/nov/09/netanyahu-rejected-ceasefire-for-hostages-deal-in-gaza-sources-say

[-] t3rmit3@beehaw.org 3 points 11 months ago

Exchanging them for Palestinian hostages that Israel is holding.

[-] sqgl@beehaw.org 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Israel could have gone along with this and still attacked Hamas but I suppose they knew there would be Palestinian civilians killed so they wanted the excuse of "But muh hostages!".

I predict the swap will be done now that Israel needs no more excuse. Hamas leaders will be able to (or allowed to) flee, just like Arafat fled the Beirut siege, calling it a victory.

[-] t3rmit3@beehaw.org 5 points 11 months ago

Netanyahu is going to bomb the hostages and then blame Hamas, saying they were used as human shields, just like he's been doing with Palestinian civilians. 200 Israeli hostages "murdered by Hamas (using Israeli bombs)" is more useful politically to his war-machine than 200 live hostages.

[-] sqgl@beehaw.org 2 points 11 months ago

I doubt it. He is fighting for political survival. He is probably a goner regardless but even he realises that to do what you suggest would be political suicide. He only cares about himself.

Are you by any chance in denial of the PIJ missile which misfired into the hospital carpark a couple of weeks back? The one which Hamas lied was a direct hit by Israeli bombs killing 500?

[-] t3rmit3@beehaw.org 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Are you by any chance in denial of the PIJ missile which misfired into the hospital carpark a couple of weeks back? The one which Hamas lied was a direct hit by Israeli bombs killing 500?

No, I think it is likely that it was a rocket that misfired. Israel has been responsible for all the intentional bombs hitting hospitals, schools, places of worship, etc though, so I'm not sure what significance you are attributing to what someone believes about the one unintentional one?

[-] sqgl@beehaw.org 4 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Sorry. I misjudged you. Been on Reddit too long. No room for nuance there.

The significance is that media is still often relaying Hamas claims as if fact and you might have been relying wholly on such reports.

That hospital incident was clearly Hamas bs from the outset - no photos, a video of the carpark leaked within 24 hours, Al Jazeera themselves unwittingly streamed live footage of the misfiring rocket.

[-] anachronist@midwest.social 2 points 11 months ago

Hamas's leaders aren't in Gaza, they're in Qatar living off money funneled through the Israeli government.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2023/10/16/how-benjamin-netanyahu-empowered-hamas/

[-] cupcakezealot 2 points 11 months ago

makes sense since likud and bibi funded hamas

[-] zerfuffle@lemmy.ml 11 points 1 year ago

Everyone knows that Muslims aren't human

  • Bibi, probably
[-] danhakimi@kbin.social 8 points 1 year ago

Targeting civilians is a war crime. Targeting enemy combatants while trying to evacuate civilians, trying to warn civilians so desperately that you warn the enemy combatants too, and killing civilians in attacks that target legitimate military targets and reflect a sufficient level of care to minimize risk to human life, is not a war crime, that's the definition of "collateral damage."

There's no double standard there, that's the whole issue.

[-] Devi@beehaw.org 10 points 11 months ago

They have bombed a neonatal unit! You can't murder premature babies and be like "Whoopsy!". Absolutely disgusting. As for 'evacuating civilians' they've blocked the borders. Workers who worked outside Gaza have been forcibly returned.

This is genocide.

[-] danhakimi@kbin.social 4 points 11 months ago

They have bombed a neonatal unit!

Source for this?

[-] anachronist@midwest.social 9 points 1 year ago

I agree. Why doesn't Israel start acting like that? It's minimum behavior for a civilized nation.

[-] danhakimi@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It is. When your enemy is embedded in hospitals and mosques and everywhere else civilians try to go for safety, it gets hard. But I'm sure your alternative is just for Israel to just agree to a one-sided ceasefire and wait for Hamas to shore up its weapons, move the hostages, and repeat its 10/7 attack, huh?

[-] t3rmit3@beehaw.org 8 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Hamas wouldn't have done 10/7 if not for Israel's colonialism and genocide, and Israel has never had a true "ceasefire" in Palestine. They for years have done bombing campaigns that they euphemize as "mowing the grass", against Gaza. You can't divorce the current conflict from the history that led to it.

Turns out that desperation breeds extremism, and Israel is the one who made Palestinians desperate.

People don't denounce slaves who revolt as being too brutal, but continually murdering and starving peoples' children apparently is not bad enough to justify revolt when it's only Palestinians being murdered.

[-] tryptaminev@feddit.de 4 points 11 months ago

ahh yes. Because the Israeli army has literally no options between "relentless bombing of Gaza, denying access to food, water and medicine, sniping civillians trying to flee according to your demand on the safe routes you designated and bombing ambulances trying to move patients in the same way" and "doing nothing and watch Hamas regroup."

Israel could have led an infantry assault into Gaza withou pounding everything first. That would have meant higher casualties though and here shows the true nature of Israels government and army.

They do not care for any palestinian life. So far for every Israeli soldier that got killed, more than 200 palestinian civillians were killed.

In world war 2 the axis powers killed about 6 civillians for every axis soldier and the allies killed about 1 civillian for every 4 ally soldiers. So the war that was about total destruction and genocide still had more than a magnitude less civillians killed relative to combatants killed.

[-] t3rmit3@beehaw.org 5 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

"Yeah, but if there's one Hamas guy inside a densely-populated refugee camp, what possible other choice do we have than to bomb literally tens of buildings in there? He could have been in any of them! We gave those civilians ample warning that they are subject to murder at any time, anyways! How can you say we're not merciful and restrained!?"

[-] danhakimi@kbin.social 2 points 11 months ago

ahh yes. Because the Israeli army has literally no options between “relentless bombing of Gaza, denying access to food, water and medicine,

the IDF turned off its supply of 7% of gazan water for a few days, and is still getting shit for it. Hamas never bothered to maintain the power plant or desalination plant, stole fuel from the power plant that could have been used to keep running the hospitals and desalination plant, and openly dug up water pipes to fashion into rockets. They didn't even hide that, they were proud of that.

sniping civillians trying to flee according to your demand on the safe routes you designated

You know that bridge was Hamas snipers, right? Israel didn't have a real presence in that area yet, the closest thing they had was a ship that did not fire small bullets. People initially blamed all the bullet-ridden bloody bodies on the bridge on an Israeli airstrike, and then realized that there was no sign of any explosion anywhere on the bridge, and had to change their story. =/

and bombing ambulances trying to move patients in the same way”

Hamas said that there were no patients in those ambulances, but the IDF had intelligence that there were, in fact, terrorists in them. This is in keeping with a long-standing pattern going back a good 20 years, Hamas loves shuttling terrorists around in ambulances.

Israel could have led an infantry assault into Gaza withou pounding everything first. That would have meant higher casualties though and here shows the true nature of Israels government and army.

I love how, now, people are saying "they should have invaded by land!" when, before the ground invasion began, everybody was protesting the concept of a land invasion and surrounding nations had threatened to declare war if Israel invaded.

They do not care for any palestinian life. So far for every Israeli soldier that got killed, more than 200 palestinian civillians were killed.

You know how I know you made that number up? Nobody anywhere has published any number of palestinian civilians that were killed in this war.

In world war 2 the axis powers killed about 6 civillians for every axis soldier and the allies killed about 1 civillian for every 4 ally soldiers. So the war that was about total destruction and genocide still had more than a magnitude less civillians killed relative to combatants killed.

Please, feel free to cite Hamas statistics here, I'd love to see if they've finally claimed a number of civilians vs combatants.

this post was submitted on 14 Nov 2023
111 points (100.0% liked)

World News

22058 readers
54 users here now

Breaking news from around the world.

News that is American but has an international facet may also be posted here.


Guidelines for submissions:

These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.


For US News, see the US News community.


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS