Israel (now broader Mid East discussion) (6 Viewers)

[HoustonSaint68]

Right. But then we should be looking at international human law, and the principles of proportionality, distinction, and precaution, which are what - at least nominally - cover this. Which is more of an essay type question than it is a simple and very broad "what are they allowed to do," question.

As I'm not, hopefully understandably, going to write an essay on this myself, I'll link to one, from Médecins Sans Frontières: https://guide-humanitarian-law.org/content/article/3/proportionality/

To the point, and to address part of your comment, I would agree with the statement there that trying to use "the overall strategic objective of its war to globally justify the alleged proportionality of massive civilian deaths and destruction" is wrong.

Cool. I never actually expected your own personal treatise here on such a nuanced topic. But I've noted the previous links you've provided on this thread, and was looking for something along those lines on this topic, with openness to your own comments on such a linked reference. All, as previously stated, as additional grist for the mill.

There certainly was a reason that I originally quoted posts from the three people that I did. The side most opposite of you three is overrepresented, and too often simplemindedly so, in general media. In fairness though, the side opposite of that is overrepresented, and too often simplemindedly so, in the streets.

 

[SystemShock]

If in a year the US finds itself at war with Russia trying to help Ukraine root Russia out of Ukrainian territory, I would also be opposed to bombing the Russian army if they started using Ukrainian school children as human shields. I think you would be as well. Wouldn't you?

That's a different scenario, not to mention it lacks the history between Israel and the Arab world.

 

[SystemShock]

Nothing. Israel had a security failure. Their government failed on Oct 7.

It was pathetic that they weren’t able to stop people in motorcycles and paragliders. Especially with the level of surveillance they had.

Israel had no right to murder 40,000 civilians because it failed to protect its people.

Just like we had no right to invade Afghanistan or Iraq after 911.

"She was asking for it"....

I take it you think the U.S. deserved 9/11 as well?

At no point you mention any liability from Hamas's side. I guess Hamas has the right to murder any man, woman, and child they want anywhere they want, it's the victims' fault, and as long as they use their own people as human shields to hide behind like the cowards they are, no one can do anything about it.

 

[livefromDC]

That's a different scenario, not to mention it lacks the history between Israel and the Arab world.

No, it's not. You want to make it different based on your feelings. You're introducing your own ideology. You want killing civilains to be okay in one place but not the other. The truth is far simpler. It's not ok in either.

 

[Arathrael]

Cool. I never actually expected your own personal treatise here on such a nuanced topic. But I've noted the previous links you've provided on this thread, and was looking for something along those lines on this topic, with openness to your own comments on such a linked reference. All, as previously stated, as additional grist for the mill.

There certainly was a reason that I originally quoted posts from the three people that I did. The side most opposite of you three is overrepresented, and too often simplemindedly so, in general media. In fairness though, the side opposite of that is overrepresented, and too often simplemindedly so, in the streets.

I did edit the previous post to add some (short) comments while you were replying by the looks of it. Happy to discuss more though, time allowing (not that it does much right now, but for what it's worth).

 

[SamAndreas]

If I set the rules, I would agree with you. I don't set the rules though (probably just as well on balance), so I'm speaking in the context in which we live, where some things that would be clearly considered crimes in any other context are somehow A-OK if you label them 'war', but at least some things are still seen as going over a (far too distant) line and still count as crimes.

That said, even if we still considered it all crime, there would still be distinctions to be made. Shoplifting and murder are typically both crimes, but they're not the same.

War isn't A-OK, but it is in that it happens.

Is as in it exists. It's one of those is, ought, problems for philosophers.

 

[WhoDatPhan78]

"She was asking for it"....

I take it you think the U.S. deserved 9/11 as well?

At no point you mention any liability from Hamas's side. I guess Hamas has the right to murder any man, woman, and child they want anywhere they want, it's the victims' fault, and as long as they use their own people as human shields to hide behind like the cowards they are, no one can do anything about it.

Nothing I said suggested that Usrael deserved it.

Sorry to disappoint you.

Hamas launched an attack, that was wrong.

It was a successful attack because the state of Israel failed.

 

[HoustonSaint68]

I did edit the previous post to add some (short) comments while you were replying by the looks of it. Happy to discuss more though, time allowing (not that it does much right now, but for what it's worth).

Gotcha. And I may respond/inquire in more detail after reading the article.

 

[baarbogast]

are they part of Wahhabism?

 

[SamAndreas]

are they part of Wahhabism?

That term has become an exonym. As such it's not likely that all of those terrorist listed would self describe themselves as being such. Certainly not the Iranian backed contingent, it's the wrong religion to apply to them.

Who are a nation's citizens? Those who say they are.

That applies here, I wonder if there are many who would currently say they are Wahhab. Saudi Arabia is cracking down on individuals who might be described as being Wahhab. So I wouldn't think they would self describe as being that now to avoid being cracked down on by their own authorities.

The authorities there might chop off the heads of the people they crack down on.

 

[SystemShock]

No, it's not. You want to make it different based on your feelings. You're introducing your own ideology. You want killing civilains to be okay in one place but not the other. The truth is far simpler. It's not ok in either.

My feelings?
It is obviously not the same scenario:

Israel, a country whose every citizen lives by "Never Again", is attacked by Hamas, who targets men, women, and children. Israel retaliates. Hamas uses their own citizens as human shields and photo-ops.

U.S. gets involved on UKR-Russia conflict.

How are they possibly equal scenarios?

And no, it is not my ideology that it is ok to kill civilians in one place or another, or to even kill civilians. Talk about projecting feelings.

But, in any war ever, civilians, men, women, children, they have always died or suffered the consequences of the conflict. That's one of the reasons William Tecumseh Sherman said "war is hell". It'd be swell if no civilians would die in war, and that armies could pinpoint the other armies' regulars, or even better cowards didn't use their own people as human shields, but that's not going to happen any time soon.

The conflict in the M.E. has a long history. I don't really know who's right or who's wrong, but frankly, all things considered, I think the world is a better place with Jews than Muslim zealots.

 

[SystemShock]

Nothing I said suggested that Usrael deserved it.

It's Israel's fault, right? Israel is guilty of letting it happen. Israel is to blame because they couldn't prevented it. Ditto the U.S. Right?

One thing I forgot to mention: paragliders and motorcycles are very hard to monitor. There's a reason why the U.S. still has airborne troops.

Hamas launched an attack, that was wrong.

Was it that hard? Is that all Hamas gets here, as far as blame goes?

It was a successful attack because the state of Israel failed.

So, can we say that the civilian deaths in Gaza are Hamas' fault and they are to blame for their civilians' deaths because Hamas is failing to protect their citizens, or using them as human shields?

 

[SystemShock]

As such it's not likely that all of those terrorist listed would self describe themselves as being such.

Of course they don't. Thy think they are righteous holy warriors.

 

[WhoDatPhan78]

It's Israel's fault, right? Israel is guilty of letting it happen. Israel is to blame because they couldn't prevented it. Ditto the U.S. Right?

One thing I forgot to mention: paragliders and motorcycles are very hard to monitor. There's a reason why the U.S. still has airborne troops.


Was it that hard? Is that all Hamas gets here, as far as blame goes?


So, can we say that the civilian deaths in Gaza are Hamas' fault and they are to blame for their civilians' deaths because Hamas is failing to protect their citizens, or using them as human shields?

The state of Israel failed to protect it's citizens, that is the reason so many people died on 10/7.

The government of the United States failed to protect it's citizens on 911.

The attacks were not their fault. They are responsible for the success of the attacks.

In either case, getting embarrassed and killing civilians was not justified.

You can say anything you like, i don't give a sheet.

 

[SystemShock]

The state of Israel failed to protect it's citizens, that is the reason so many people died on 10/7.

The government of the United States failed to protect it's citizens on 911.

The attacks were not their fault. They are responsible for the success of the attacks.

If you are responsible for something failing, isn't it your fault if it fails?

In either case, getting embarrassed and killing civilians was not justified.

Just Israel is not justified? What about Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran?

You can say anything you like, i don't give a sheet.

Why do you get so emotional?
And why are you trying so hard to defend/not find fault in Hamas?