The IDF's solution to bank robbers holding people hostage would be to blow up the bank
When that mass shooter was in Uvalde they should have droned the school.
Better analogy would be the killer in uvalde using a kid as a human shield while also shooting into the other classrooms trying to kill other kids.
Do you shoot back or do you sit around like the cops did and wait till the killer gets bored, runs out of ammo, or runs out of victims.
Just look up how many thousands of rockets and mortars Hamas has launched at seemingly random targets in Israel since October 7th.
Better analogy would be the killer in uvalde using a kid as a human shield while also shooting into the other classrooms trying to kill other kids.
Sure, and then you bomb the school to kill them all. Also bomb all the surrounding buildings just in case.
Just look up how many hundreds of thousands of Palestinians Israel has killed in the last 30 years. Israel is the bad guy here, it's not debatable.
the bad guy
Why does there have to be a singular "the" bad guy?
And why the need to lump a huge group together to lay that blame?
The Israeli government and Hamas both share the blame for all of this, among others.
As is too common in the world, while a relatively small group deserves the blame, many more, on both sides, suffer the consequences.
The “rockets” you’re referencing aren’t the threat you’re trying to invoke. How many Israelis have been killed by Hamas rockets ever much less since October 7th? Maybe if Israel didn’t have a concentration camp outside of their city walls they wouldn't have to worry about the threat of retribution?
Better analogy is the Uvalde shooter also starved and killed kids in the school for generations. Then some of the starving children started throwing sharpened pencils.
So you think that had the US military known about the 9/11 planes 5 minutes earlier they should have still just let them hit the WTS?
Shit you're right, I forgot that banks and hospitals are exactly the same as a plane headed towards a building
Let's pretend
Pretend huh. Still not willing to admit it?
How many soldiers does it take to change a location to a military target?
Is it a percentage? Is it their presence at all?
Ok, does that apply to Israeli hospitals or public venues that had soldiers there as guards?
If the attack on those venues is terrorism by virtue of the civilians there, but not a legitimate military strike despite the soldiers being there, then at the very least, bombing hospitals and refugee camps is terrorism too even if a few soldiers and weapons are found.
Executing human shields is monstrous, and "look what you made me do" is the language of abusers.
Someone using something as a human shield makes it into a human shield. Requires just one.
How many soldiers does it take to change a location to a military target?
Could be as few as one. Which is why there's zero tolerance for using such locations.
Ok, does that apply to Israeli hospitals or public venues that had soldiers there as guards?
It's the same rule for everyone.
If the attack on those venues is terrorism by virtue of the civilians there, but not a legitimate military strike despite the soldiers being there, then at the very least, bombing hospitals and refugee camps is terrorism too even if a few soldiers and weapons are found.
There's two related issues. Killing civilians and using civilian cover to conduct warfare. Both are despicable.
Executing human shields is monstrous, and "look what you made me do" is the language of abusers.
Right, though I'd put more blame on those, you know, using human shields. They're the ones putting the humans between you and your enemy to begin with.
Maybe Israel should stop using music festival attendees as "human shields..." that would be nice.
If they were operating behind the music festival then absolutely. Nobody should be using human shields.
But this is the most reasonable response.
If they realize that human shields aren't working, they won't use them and a more optimal number of people will be killed overall.
Also, any human shields you kill should be attributed to the people using those human shields.
Thats my take on this. I will agree to disagree with anyone who thinks otherwise.
PS: For all those replying: where did the words "Israel" and "Hamas" come from? I would like to bring to your attention that I didn't cover any details specific to the conflict anywhere above.. As far as I am concerned:
- Hamas is a terrorist organization
- civilians in Gaza are innocent
- Opinions about Israel are based entirely on Hamas reporting which could.be accurate or could be misinformation.
PPS: Lets play some mental games for a second.
Statement 1: X is mass murdering innocent people. And Y is trying to kill X.
Who is the bad guy and who is the good guy? X is bad Y is good.
Now let me reveal How X is mass murdering people.
Statement 2: X is doing so by putting those innocent people into the fire of Y on X.
You cannot tell me Y is worse than X after that. I don't say that we can't judge Y for attacking X under these circumstances, but X is never better than Y.
If they realize that human shields aren’t working, they won’t use them and a more optimal number of people will be killed overall.
Israel has claimed it is shooting through human shields for decades. Do you think Hamas is too stupid to realize that it doesn't work?
Hamas likes it when Israel kills Palestinian citizens, because it make Israel justifiably look bad. Hamas wants to get other countries like Saudi Arabia and Iran involved in the war, and dead Palestinian civilians helps that goal.
If they realize that human shields aren't working, they won't use them and a more optimal number of people will be killed overall.
Kill civilians first, sort the rest out, later. /s
Also, any human shields you kill should be attributed to the people using those human shields.
Allegedly using. The IDF has yet to offer not debunked evidence that any hospital/refugee camp they bombed actually sheltered Hamas.
the extremely flawed and utterly repugnant lack of "logic" is that,
"if using human shields works as a strategy, they will do it more often".
"conversely, if we prove to them that using human shields is ineffective, they will stop doing it"
fucking. nauseating.
You'd think people would learn that's not the case after years of Hamas using human shields despite Israel proving they'll bomb a place regardless. Even if it were true by some metric, how in the fuck is the number of casualties incurred by Israel's policy of ignoring hostages worth it? In the days since October 7th, thousands of Palestinian civilians have been killed, including many in strikes on hospitals and refugee camps determined to house Hamas personnel. The policy is fucking monstrous and evidence shows it winds up in thousands of Palestinian deaths. Don't tell me that those stolen lives somehow prevent even more civilian deaths unless you've got some very strong proof that this strategy has done anything to stop Hamas from hiding behind civilians, or that the thousands of civilians massacred are worth the chance to kill a few terrorists
Edited for spelling
fucking thank you, yes, those are exactly the words i couldn't find to express the sentiment i wish i could have stated
furthermore "you made me do this" is ABUSER RHETORIC.
as in, israel claiming that hamas "made them" slaughter civilians,
likewise, urkaine "forced" russia to invade
Saying things like "worse" is just picking sides for no reason.
There's a point where you can stop measuring the cuntiness and just accept that they're both well over the threshold of being a cunt. There's no limit to the size of the cunt bucket. There's no queue to get in.
They're both cunts and the world (and especially all the civilians in the local vicinity) would be better off without them.
Criticize both is the only opinion I care reading these days. Anyone that says one side worse than other, immidiate disinterest from me. Correct opinion for me is everyone is an asshole.
Britain's way of dealing with the IRA wasn't killing Irish people by the hundreds while hoping that some of them might be terrorists. Spain's way of dealing with ETA wasn't killing Basque people by the hundreds while hoping that some of them might be terrorists.
If you think that neither Britain or Spain would have been justified in brutalizing the Irish or Basque populations, but you think that Israel's disregard for the lives of innocent Palestinians is justified, you're just a racist tool.
To anyone both sides-ing this issue, you are flattening the genocide. This is an overwhelmingly lopsided conflict. One side has the funding and backing of the largest military presence the world has ever known. One side has caged and gated the other into increasingly smaller and smaller spaces, like literal concentration camps. This one side has decided that healthcare, housing, food, water, communications, etc are not important to provide to the people who they've effectively imprisoned. This side has people at the highest points of leadership calling for ethnic cleansing. This side has been called out by the UN for genocide.
The other side is fighting back on their land, among their own people, in a space that is one of the densest populations on the planet per square foot, in a place with no resources, cannot leave, must defer to settlers who take their property if they leave it due to threat. None of this is by their own choosing. Guerrilla warfare is a tactic used when asymmetry is stark and is often negatively criticised without context to its necessity. Both side-sing ensures that the asymmetrical nature of this conflict remains status quo.
Using human shields makes you a war criminal. Attacking someone using human shields does not technically make you a war criminal, because it does not endanger civilians without furthering your "just" goal of killing that war criminal.
Please correct me if I am wrong. You still should consider if killing the war criminal is worth the cost and this does not mean civilians had it coming by any means.
Political Memes
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.