“As long as is deemed necessary,” roughly translates to, “As long as Palestinians exist as an ethnic group,”
Ah, so that's why they do not actually try to kill them...?
Why are they not just bombing those 2 millions is that is the case? Why use roof knocking and then precision bombs when they actually want to kill them all?
Dropping 2000lb bombs in refugee camps is not "precision bombs"
"precise enough."
For context, the largest bomb dropped by the US in Iraq and Afghanistan in a populated area was 500 pounds.
Then why does it fit so well with Israel's history of violently conquering their neighbors?
Refuge camp by name only or actual refuge camp?
You mean like Israel bombing the designated safe area multiple times, or bombing civilian caravans, or bombing ambulances, or bombing hospitals, or killing hospital patients, or
Even if all the males 14+ are automatically considered combatants, the civilian death ratio would be 70% minimum (being women and children). That's on top of Israel creating a famine, extreme water crisis, destroying the majority of medical infrastructure, and extremely limiting foreign aid (to a fraction of what was needed prior to Oct 7).
The population density of Gaza as a whole is roughly one-tenth of Mosul and yet the civilian deaths accounted for the same effort are significantly less in Gaza as compared with the 2017 capture of the Mosul. I am not sure why anyone on earth is expecting the IDF to magically do better than the world's largest coalition in history in OIR. Urban combat sucks for everyone involved.
You made a whataboutism argument that flagrantly flies in the face of the core point, which is that Israel's government & military are currently controlled by a radical right wing, crypto-fascist, ethno-supremacist, and hyper-religious political party that has members who have OPENLY AND PUBLICLY SUPPORTED ETHNIC CLEANSING. Why you feel the need to counter that point with, but, but, but, IT'S NOT AS BAD AS MOSUL is truly just frustratingly stupid. I don't support the mass killing of civilians in their own homeland anywhere in the world. Why is that so fucking hard to understand?
the sentiments on this site are no longer representative of truth
You are not the arbiter of truth.
or popular opinion as dissent is being filtered out.
The popularity of an idea has absolutely no bearing on its merits or validity.
Sure, Isreal does technically have the capability to completely destroy Palestine in one quick operation, for instance, it could just use some of its almost certain to exist nuclear weapons on the relatively small area of Gaza. However, consider for a moment what the actual consequences of that or a similarly destructive action would be: Isreal may be powerful in its region, but it is not a global superpower after all. It receives considerable support from other countries, particularly the US and much of the EU, and losing that support, or even worse, managing to actually draw their anger, would put them in a dangerously vulnerable position with a fairly small population and land area and enemies on all sides. As it stands, their current actions have made supporting them somewhat divisive and politically charged in the west, but havent broadly lost them support, but doing something that blatantly indefensible might just be enough to do that. Further, the current Isreali government from my understanding doesnt have a perfect grip on popular support and power, and doing something that heinous might risk losing them domestic support as well.
Because they would be instantly villified and the world would need to react swiftly with shock and awe to overwhelm the military and remove the country's leadership.
This way, the Zionists get to relish in hearing of daily murders, slowly and torturously eliminating a race of people they deem to be subhuman, for months and years to come with the implicit support of an uncaring world.
Are you trying to say the close to 30,000 people they have killed were intentional then? If they try not to kill anyone they didn’t mean to kill? Or am I misunderstanding you?
They don't have the ordinance to do that, nor the means to fight a war on more than one front when the Arab world justifiably retaliates.
Gallant also outlined Israel’s plans for Gaza after the war. He said Hamas would no longer control Gaza and Israel would reserve its operational freedom of action. But he said there would be no Israeli civilian presence and Palestinian bodies would be in charge of the enclave.
“Gaza residents are Palestinian, therefore Palestinian bodies will be in charge, with the condition that there will be no hostile actions or threats against the State of Israel,” Gallant’s office said in a statement on Thursday.
Al Jazeera’s Sara Khairat, reporting from Tel Aviv, said Gallant made it clear that Israeli officials want a “Palestinian entity” to be in charge of running civilian affairs in the Gaza Strip, but with “very specific conditions”.
Notable that it's another public - this time on the record - contradiction of Smotrich and Ben-Gvir.
It's a bit weird because they switch from quoting Gallant to quoting Kairait, but I wonder if there's anything to his adoption of Gantz's "entity" language here. If so, it could be a sign of a bigger split between Gallant and Netanyahu. Might be nothing, but it would be consistent with their recent anger with him about his public statements about post-war Gaza.
Note that even if we take his statements at face value and not rightly assume he's lying, this at best means Gaza will become like the West Bank. That's the inevitable result of Palestinians not being able to shoot settlers.
A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/