I've had several friends say the same thing, that the Israelis are so technologically advanced that they had to have known and let the attack happen.
Their argument acknowledges the israeli technological superiority but ignores the hubris that naturally accompanies that position.
The proliferation of cheap and easily operable drones played a large role. Much of the Israeli defence was dependent on unmanned observation and munition towers that were taken out by drones.
UN Security Council fails to pass a vote for a cease fire. Everyone voting Yes (even the US's dog, Japan!), while the UK abstains to follow their boss the US, while US vetoed and voted No, to continue the bombing.
UN Security Council fails to pass a vote for a cease fire. Everyone voting Yes (even the US's dog, Japan!), while the UK abstains to follow their boss the US, while US vetoed and voted No, to continue the bombing.
The UN is irrelevant and any of their votes mean absolutely nothing, in ANY recent conflict.
A ceasefire will accomplish what exactly? Give Hamas more time to reload?
Instead of calling for a ceasefire (which will accomplish literally nothing), why isn’t the UN passing a resolution to demand the release of all remaining hostages?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Language For This Useful Post:
The UN is irrelevant and any of their votes mean absolutely nothing, in ANY recent conflict.
A ceasefire will accomplish what exactly? Give Hamas more time to reload?
Instead of calling for a ceasefire (which will accomplish literally nothing), why isn’t the UN passing a resolution to demand the release of all remaining hostages?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
100% this
As someone who has experienced the ineptutude and uselessness of the U.N. as a child from a war-torn country, I agree wholeheartedly.
The U.N. has lost all meaning in the modern world. It had a small use in a particular place in time, but hasn't done anything remotely useful in the last 50 years. It's not a bastion of peace, but almost the exact opposite, a place for hateful and repressive regimes to extoll pretend virtues like "human rights".
It's a joke. Then we have someone like Russia accusing Israel of "war crimes" when merely suggesting flooding the terror tunnels. Laughable, especially coming from one of the biggest abusers of decency and rules of war, whatever thay may be anymore (i.e. Russia).
The Following User Says Thank You to Envitro For This Useful Post:
There are plenty of reasons to criticize the UN, but suggesting they haven’t accomplished anything in 50 years, especially in the face of the amount of aid and protection of displaced people they’ve been responsible for in Gaza alone, is complete ignorance.
What would a ceasefire accomplish? It would preserve the lives of thousands of innocent Palestinians. Do we care about those people or not?
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to PepsiFree For This Useful Post:
There are plenty of reasons to criticize the UN, but suggesting they haven’t accomplished anything in 50 years, especially in the face of the amount of aid and protection of displaced people they’ve been responsible for in Gaza alone, is complete ignorance.
What would a ceasefire accomplish? It would preserve the lives of thousands of innocent Palestinians. Do we care about those people or not?
Of course we care about these people...what a silly question. That's like questioning whether you care about the hostages...of course you do.(I hope)
Why are they not demanding the release of the hostages or at the very least to verify the hostages are not being tortured and are actually alive with the same vigour and frequency?
The Following User Says Thank You to Zevo For This Useful Post:
Of course we care about these people...what a silly question. That's like questioning whether you care about the hostages...of course you do.(I hope)
Why are they not demanding the release of the hostages or at the very least to verify the hostages are not being tortured and are actually alive with the same vigour and frequency?
Well, if we care about these people, it should be fairly obvious what a ceasefire would accomplish, no?
The UN and their representatives have demanded the release of the hostages multiple times. Is it fair to question why the release of hostages wasn’t included in this demand? Sure. Is it fair to question whether <200 hostages are worth putting thousands more at risk? Of course.
But I also think the complete dismissal of the UN, considering how expansive it is and how much good it does despite its bloat or the ineffectiveness of things like the security council is entirely misguided.
Israel isnt going to stop until it has cleaned Gaza out of any resistance, it's the smart move by them, nothing it does will make Hamas stop attacking them, nothing they do will change world opinion, it's best option is to completely degrade Gaza as any kind of base for resistance while they are in there regardless of cost or opinion.
The drawback of never relinquishing your resistance and claim to the land for Palestinians is it gives no reason for Israel to care what you or your supporters think.
For anyone asking Israel to stop you have to ask the question 'what's in it for Israel?'
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to afc wimbledon For This Useful Post:
Well, if we care about these people, it should be fairly obvious what a ceasefire would accomplish, no?
The UN and their representatives have demanded the release of the hostages multiple times. Is it fair to question why the release of hostages wasn’t included in this demand? Sure. Is it fair to question whether <200 hostages are worth putting thousands more at risk? Of course.
But I also think the complete dismissal of the UN, considering how expansive it is and how much good it does despite its bloat or the ineffectiveness of things like the security council is entirely misguided.
I agree there should be a cease fire. If Hamas wanted a cease fire they would release the hostages. Why should Israel agree to a cease fire if Hamas is going to keep attacking them.
And I disagree that the UN(or most people demanding a cease fire, and that includes you) are advocating for the release of the hostages as fervently.
It seems to be putting the onus on Israel and not the group the started this.
There is nothing more in this world I want right now than a cease fire. I have family in the area and they are directly in harms way.
The Following User Says Thank You to Zevo For This Useful Post:
I agree there should be a cease fire. If Hamas wanted a cease fire they would release the hostages. Why should Israel agree to a cease fire if Hamas is going to keep attacking them.
And I disagree that the UN(or most people demanding a cease fire, and that includes you) are advocating for the release of the hostages as fervently.
It seems to be putting the onus on Israel and not the group the started this.
There is nothing more in this world I want right now than a cease fire. I have family in the area and they are directly in harms way.
I think most people who are pressuring for a cease fire are doing the math. Right now 14 Palestinians have died for every 1 Israeli. That is 17,000 ( the lowest estimate) to 1,200. That ratio will only grow in the next 3 or 4 months.
I agree there should be a cease fire. If Hamas wanted a cease fire they would release the hostages. Why should Israel agree to a cease fire if Hamas is going to keep attacking them.
For one, this resolution would have granted the security council more powers to push for a ceasefire. A ceasefire would still have to be agreed on by both Israel and Hamas.
On the flip side of your comment, if Israel wanted the hostages released, they’d agree to a ceasefire. There really is no point in pretending they’re being handcuffed here. Hostages were released in the last ceasefire but not before, so it should be assumed that ceasefires = hostage releases, but not that hostage releases = ceasefires.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zevo
And I disagree that the UN(or most people demanding a cease fire, and that includes you) are advocating for the release of the hostages as fervently.
How fervently would you like it? I think it’s totally bizarre to single me out, considering my demands mean literally nothing (sorry, don’t have a direct line to Israel or Hamas) and I haven’t called for a ceasefire once.
At the end of the day, it’s less than 200 hostages vs thousands of innocent people dead. What do you think, honestly, should get more effort to put an end to?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zevo
It seems to be putting the onus on Israel and not the group the started this.
A ceasefire involves two parties, and “they started it” is not a valid excuse to do whatever you want.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zevo
There is nothing more in this world I want right now than a cease fire.
I highly doubt it, considering you’re busy making excuses for why Israel shouldn’t even agree to one in the first place.
The Following User Says Thank You to PepsiFree For This Useful Post:
For one, this resolution would have granted the security council more powers to push for a ceasefire. A ceasefire would still have to be agreed on by both Israel and Hamas.
On the flip side of your comment, if Israel wanted the hostages released, they’d agree to a ceasefire. There really is no point in pretending they’re being handcuffed here. Hostages were released in the last ceasefire but not before, so it should be assumed that ceasefires = hostage releases, but not that hostage releases = ceasefires.
How fervently would you like it? I think it’s totally bizarre to single me out, considering my demands mean literally nothing (sorry, don’t have a direct line to Israel or Hamas) and I haven’t called for a ceasefire once.
At the end of the day, it’s less than 200 hostages vs thousands of innocent people dead. What do you think, honestly, should get more effort to put an end to?
A ceasefire involves two parties, and “they started it” is not a valid excuse to do whatever you want.
I highly doubt it, considering you’re busy making excuses for why Israel shouldn’t even agree to one in the first place.
Historically though it kind of is, Israel have the 'legal' right (not that I think international law is worth the paper it is written on) to engage in any length of offensive action and 'conquer' Gaza from end to end in order to defeat Hamas and if possible release it's citizens, it has an obligation to minimize but not prevent or avoid Civilian deaths.
The only side right now that has any reason to stop this is Hamas, they release all the prisoners and leave Gaza or surrender and it ends straight away, truth is though they dont give a tinkers
There are plenty of reasons to criticize the UN, but suggesting they haven’t accomplished anything in 50 years, especially in the face of the amount of aid and protection of displaced people they’ve been responsible for in Gaza alone, is complete ignorance.
What would a ceasefire accomplish? It would preserve the lives of thousands of innocent Palestinians. Do we care about those people or not?
Anything the UN has done the Red Cross could do, the UN chief barely talks about releasing the hostages and are silent on the rapes and degradation of the women.
Anything the UN has done the Red Cross could do, the UN chief barely talks about releasing the hostages and are silent on the rapes and degradation of the women.
Tits on a bull has more uses than the UN...Mooo
This just supports the point that there are plenty of reasons to criticize the UN, but runs counter to the point that the UN is useless.
If they’re doing things other agencies could do, but aren’t, it stands to reason they’re filling a need.
But I understand Israel being anti-UN makes a lot of other people blindly follow suit.
I highly doubt it, considering you’re busy making excuses for why Israel shouldn’t even agree to one in the first place.
You're being absurd and arguing in bad faith by misrepresenting what I said. I never said Israel shouldn't agree to one, I said Hamas needs to release the hostages first and stop firing missiles.
And obviously I didn't single you out for any other reason than I was replying to you. Seemed obvious enough that I shouldn't have to clarify that but here we are.
You can reply if you like but I said my piece and am out for now.
The Following User Says Thank You to Zevo For This Useful Post:
“We, whose people were decimated in the Holocaust, and who watched as our people were butchered and dragged off to hell, look to the ICRC to do the right thing. In our eyes, this might be your last chance, Robert Singer writes.”
Two comments on the Red Cross that made me chuckle:
- the Red Cross is like that member of a group project that contributes nothing but rushes to the podium to deliver the presentation
- the only thing the Red Cross has done is act as Uber for the freed hostages.
Comparing the ratio of people killed on each side misses the point. Israel’s invasion of Gaza isn’t an act of retribution. The aim of the invasion is to wipe out the organization that carried out the Oct 7 attack, and to remove Gaza as a base for them to carry out further attacks. Morality aside, it’s in their interests to show some restraint in how they invade and occupy Gaza. Israel can’t completely disregard global opinion (or at least American opinion). But they are at war with the government of Hamas. Actual, full-on war.
The U.S. didn’t have a formula for how many civilian casualties Japan had to sustain before the bill for Pearl Harbour was paid. Their war aim was to utterly destroy the regime that rules Japan and its capacity to carry out aggression. To Israelis, this is that kind of war.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by fotze
If this day gets you riled up, you obviously aren't numb to the disappointment yet to be a real fan.
The Following User Says Thank You to CliffFletcher For This Useful Post:
Comparing the ratio of people killed on each side misses the point. Israel’s invasion of Gaza isn’t an act of retribution. The aim of the invasion is to wipe out the organization that carried out the Oct 7 attack, and to remove Gaza as a base for them to carry out further attacks. Morality aside, it’s in their interests to show some restraint in how they invade and occupy Gaza. Israel can’t completely disregard global opinion (or at least American opinion). But they are at war with the government of Hamas. Actual, full-on war.
The U.S. didn’t have a formula for how many civilian casualties Japan had to sustain before the bill for Pearl Harbour was paid. Their war aim was to utterly destroy the regime that rules Japan and its capacity to carry out aggression. To Israelis, this is that kind of war.
I suppose i have a hard time compartmentalizing. If i were in a position of power I wouldn't have a stomach for what you are justifying. The slaughter that would take a year and hundreds of thousands.
A ceasefire now would save Hamas in the face of an imminent total defeat. No other country would agree to a ceasefire under the present conditions, Israel has essentially got Hamas on deaths door but the world wants to give Hamas a lifeline. Fighting would stop if Hamas releases the hostages and surrenders. If Israel lets Hamas live the potential for a two front war with Hezbollah/Iran in the future remains. IDF has Hamas pinned in the North and will do the same in the South, there is zero benefit for Israel to have a ceasefire. Maybe if Hamas was posing a hardened resistance, but they are not. Hamas has two choices, surrender and allow a new chapter for the Palestinians in Gaza to begin or fight till the last terrorist standing. It’s that simple.
If you truly want peace I don’t understand why you also would want to allow Hamas to survive. There is no future for Palestinians with Hamas at the negotiating table. Only more war and more deaths.
