Israel declares war on Hamas

[activeStick]

This is just absolutely heart breaking to read.

Czuba was screaming "you Muslims have to die" when he barged into the ground-floor apartment the mother and son shared in suburban Plainfield, family friend Yousef Hannon told NBC News before the funeral, citing texts she sent to the boy's father. Hannon said Czuba also shouted: "You are killing our kids in Israel. You Palestinians don’t deserve to live."

Shaheen "didn't have even one percent suspicion he would hurt the child" because Czuba had been like a grandfather to Wadea and even built him a tree house, Hannon said.

"The child, when he saw Czuba, ran to him for a hug and instead was stabbed 26 times," Hannon said.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news...uto-rcna120589

[blankall]

Originally Posted by activeStick

This is just absolutely heart breaking to read.



https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news...uto-rcna120589

Yeah horrifying to see that happen, especially in North America.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by GKDarts

Apologies if already posted earlier somewhere in this thread, Sam Harris,...14 minutes that is a very worthwhile listen.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k6VCF_csmDg

I listened to this, because I tend to agree with Sam Harris on a lot of things. And of course, a lot of what is said here is true. But while it's not quite a straw man, because there are certainly people who would make the arguments he's opposing in this 15 minute clip, he is not really taking on the meat of the issue.

Yes, he's right that there is no moral equivalence between the Israelis and the people who murdered hundreds of innocents at a concert for no other purpose than to kill them. But it strikes me absurd to say that Israel is a bastion of civilization in the region when the standard you are holding them to is "better than murdering terrorists and those who rejoice and revel in the murders". The conversation doesn't end there, the central question is, "how ought this supposedly civilized country act in the present circumstances in response to a heinous attack on its citizens?" He didn't answer that.

Harris is fond of moral thought experiments, including the "reverse human shields" one in that clip, which is an effective illustration of something that should be completely obvious (i.e., people who would avoid killing innocents if they could are morally better than people who kill innocents on purpose because intentions matter). Well, here's another thought experiment: imagine two hypothetical Israels, both of which state that they hope to accomplish their military goals while minimizing civilian casualties, but go about that very differently.

The first hypothetical Israel doesn't take its own commitment to avoiding civilian casualties seriously at all. It doesn't indiscriminately kill Palestinian civilians for no reason, but if there is credible evidence of even one Hamas terrorist being present in a civilian building, and even if there is good reason to think that civilians will be injured or killed, they will take their opportunity to kill that terrorist notwithstanding the collateral damage. And since any effort to warn the civilians or evacuate them might alert the terrorist and create a risk that he might successfully flee, no warnings or evacuations are given. In short, although this Israel would prefer that any given military action not kill civilians, that preference isn't a strong one.

The second hypothetical Israel takes its commitment very seriously. Before putting even a single civilian in harm's way, this Israel will ensure that it has unassailable evidence about the presence of terrorists and certainty about the nature of the crimes they have committed. Even then, this Israel will use means that will ensure - to the greatest degree possible - that there will be no civilians harmed, and accordingly, will not use bombs of any kind, but will instead risk its armed forces (this, notwithstanding that its soldiers will have a difficult time distinguishing civilians from the enemies who will kill them the moment they turn their backs). This Israel will not only warn any civilians in the area when there is to be a military action, but provide ample time to flee - even at the risk that the terrorists they are after will escape, or even that the warning will give the terrorists the opportunity to set up an ambush or bombing of their own. In short, this Israel considers collateral damage so abhorrent that it will knowingly risk the lives of its own citizens and compromise its own security interests to avoid such casualties.

I don't think either of those two hypothetical Israels is the real Israel and neither should be. But there is a spectrum between those two extremes, and where the real Israel sits on that spectrum varies over time. At the moment, in the aftermath of the attacks that have just been witnessed, the gravitational pull of the first hypothetical Israel increases and the real one shifts more in that direction.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by WCW Nitro

It was also before Hamas was elected, but you're right this whole thing can be but the other side did this ad infinitum. My personal view is that if we just focus on the present, Israel has done some really bad things lately that is making the situation worse.and since it has the guns and the money, I think it can try to improve the situation instead of just making the fire larger.

Nope. Israel had put in temporary restrictions during the second intifada. There was no permanent or joint blockade with Egypt until after Hamas took over Gaza.

[WCW Nitro]

Originally Posted by blankall

Nope. Israel had put in temporary restrictions during the second intifada. There was no permanent or joint blockade with Egypt until after Hamas took over Gaza.

Yes, it was temporary but my point is that it's still collective punishment, which is illegal and what Israel does constantly.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by WCW Nitro

Yes, it was temporary but my point is that it's still collective punishment, which is illegal and what Israel does constantly.

Well, you were actually right and blankall was wrong, as they have maintained control of the airspace, sea, and import/exports since well before Hamas took power.

The “blockade” officially started in 2007, but it was effectively in place long before that, with looser restrictions but the same Israeli control.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Snuffleupagus

I've heard this Moon characters name come up before, he must have been a beauty, banned i presume?

He's "spurs" now.

[jayswin]

Man, this has been so difficult to follow. Just heart breaking from every angle. Israel hurt by monsters and in turn became the monster. It's just awful.

[Beninho]

The situation on the border of Lebanon is in my opinion what the world should be watching. Does Israel put troops on the ground in Gaza without preemptively striking a blow to Hezbollah? I don’t think Hezbollah plans to sit idle in all of this and I’d imagine Israel does not want to be caught flat footed on defence again. There have already been multiple reports of Hezbollah attempting to breach the border.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Beninho

The situation on the border of Lebanon is in my opinion what the world should be watching. Does Israel put troops on the ground in Gaza without preemptively striking a blow to Hezbollah? I don’t think Hezbollah plans to sit idle in all of this and I’d imagine Israel does not want to be caught flat footed on defence again.

I dont think Hezbollah will do much of anything, they have their hands full propping up Assad and maintaining control in Lebanon, they will lob a few morters over but they last thing they want is a high level war with Israel while Turkey is sitting on their northern border itching to hit Syria all the while Beirut is melting down economically

[Beninho]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

I dont think Hezbollah will do much of anything, they have their hands full propping up Assad and maintaining control in Lebanon, they will lob a few morters over but they last thing they want is a high level war with Israel while Turkey is sitting on their northern border itching to hit Syria all the while Beirut is melting down economically

I agree with you, but Israel has a history of making unpredictable military moves. My question is do they use this situation as a reason to hurt what is in my opinion their most dangerous enemy? It may not be likely but definitely not out of the realm of possibilities. There will be two American air craft carriers on the coast as well, I don’t think it is out of the question at all the more I think about it. I also just read Israel evacuated 30km along the Lebanese border yesterday

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Beninho

The situation on the border of Lebanon is in my opinion what the world should be watching. Does Israel put troops on the ground in Gaza without preemptively striking a blow to Hezbollah? I don’t think Hezbollah plans to sit idle in all of this and I’d imagine Israel does not want to be caught flat footed on defence again. There have already been multiple reports of Hezbollah attempting to breach the border.

Escalation is a major concern in general. Hezbollah will continue to provoke and of course, Iran is threatening to get involved. If there is a protracted ground war, I could see all kinds of militant groups with Palestinians and volunteers from other countries attempting to disrupt Israel.

Then on the other side, the Americans are close to getting pulled in. They have put 2000 of the special forces on 24 hour "be ready to deploy" notice. They were already on 96 hour notice, but it sounds like it's escalating and becoming more of a possibility. Denmark has also just sent a naval ship to the area

[Beninho]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Escalation is a major concern in general. Hezbollah will continue to provoke and of course, Iran is threatening to get involved. If there is a protracted ground war, I could see all kinds of militant groups with Palestinians and volunteers from other countries attempting to disrupt Israel.

Then on the other side, the Americans are close to getting pulled in. They have put 2000 of the special forces on 24 hour "be ready to deploy" notice. They were already on 96 hour notice, but it sounds like it's escalating and becoming more of a possibility. Denmark has also just sent a naval ship to the area

Yes I agree. The vibe I am getting from family and friends in Israel is that this is the “calm” before the storm. An escalation to a larger regional conflict is what people seem prepared for. It definitely seems like something unpredictable is going to occur.

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by Beninho

Yes I agree. The vibe I am getting from family and friends in Israel is that this is the “calm” before the storm. An escalation to a larger regional conflict is what people seem prepared for. It definitely seems like something unpredictable is going to occur.

We here expect at very least some massive volleys from Lebanon. There are two points at which Hezbollah is likely to enter:

1. When Israel moves tanks into Gaza.
2. When international opinion shifts far enough from horrors of Oct 7 attack to horrors of Gaza bombings. The detergent from USA will be weaker while pressure from Muslim world for revenge will be stronger.

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by Tron_fdc

It's weird that people are complaining about a double standard when it comes to how Israel wants to fight this war.

You're fighting a terrorist organization who use terrorism, and you want to get rid of those terrorists. Fair enough.

But you are arguing that it's ok to act like said terrorists just this once in response because that's the only way to do things here?

You're just going to come off that moral high ground for a bit, kill a bunch of people, and then jump back up there later on when you're done?

That seems ridiculous to me.

Nothing ridiculous about it. Imagine a professional boxer. When he fights, he adheres to the rules of boxing. But then he is suddenly attacked on the street by a gangster. And the gangster does not really adhere to any rules, but rather uses all the dirty tricks possible. Does the boxer still need to adhere to rules of boxing? Or is it ok to fight just to win? And then, after he defeats the gangster, he can come back to being boxer and fight according to the rules again.

[Pointman]

By the way this solves the moral dilemma. Israel is a professional boxer, that is currently being challenged for an all-rules-are-off fight, and is fighting accordingly. IDF is fighting a gang, not a regular army.

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Beside the point that none of what I said has anything to do with Red Cross having inside info on Hamas, if you’re saying Israel doesn’t even know where they are and are still levelling entire areas of the city… that would be indiscriminate bombing.

How do you know Israel isn’t? Because you don’t expect it to happen? The world very obviously does not operate on your expectations, and it’s becoming increasingly clear that nobody in this thread should either.

I’ve asked it before, so I’ll ask you: if the only way is to accept civilian casualties, how many would you accept if you were in charge? Put a number on it.

You treat it like a special military operation. When you do a special military operation, you care how many civilians could possibly die. You care if bombing is "indiscriminate" or not.

The big picture flaw with this line of thinking is failure to comprehend what war actually means. Do you believe, that Ukrainians have a number of Russian civilians they accept as casualties, and once they reach the number, they will stop. No. Ukrainians will fight until Russians are removed from Ukraine. How many Russian civilians will die in the process, is Russian concern, not Ukrainian. If russians believe that they are losing too many civilians, they should retire forces from Ukraine. Same here. Israel will continue attacks until Hamas is destroyed. There's no limit on civilian casualties, because there's no such things in war. If Hamas believes that too many Gazans are dying, they should surrender. Until then bombing will continue.

Regarding indiscriminate bombings. You view it as an special forces operations or something. Like IDF is a SWAT unit that needs to kill criminals while not harming civilians. And if they destroyed criminals yet some civilians are dead, they failed. Again, this is war, not special operation. Gaza city is being bombed because it is enemy's city. Like Heroshima. Or Dresden. Or any other city that was bombed during the war. Bombing enemy cities is not a war crime. Of course it leads to civilians death. Yet it's a routine part of war. Hamas keeps bombing Israel cities as well, with strong volley on Jerusalem just yesterday.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Pointman

You treat it like a special military operation. When you do a special military operation, you care how many civilians could possibly die. You care if bombing is "indiscriminate" or not.

The big picture flaw with this line of thinking is failure to comprehend what war actually means. Do you believe, that Ukrainians have a number of Russian civilians they accept as casualties, and once they reach the number, they will stop. No. Ukrainians will fight until Russians are removed from Ukraine. How many Russian civilians will die in the process, is Russian concern, not Ukrainian. If russians believe that they are losing too many civilians, they should retire forces from Ukraine. Same here. Israel will continue attacks until Hamas is destroyed. There's no limit on civilian casualties, because there's no such things in war. If Hamas believes that too many Gazans are dying, they should surrender. Until then bombing will continue.

Regarding indiscriminate bombings. You view it as an special forces operations or something. Like IDF is a SWAT unit that needs to kill criminals while not harming civilians. And if they destroyed criminals yet some civilians are dead, they failed. Again, this is war, not special operation. Gaza city is being bombed because it is enemy's city. Like Heroshima. Or Dresden. Or any other city that was bombed during the war. Bombing enemy cities is not a war crime. Of course it leads to civilians death. Yet it's a routine part of war. Hamas keeps bombing Israel cities as well, with strong volley on Jerusalem just yesterday.

You are assuming Hamas is a rational actor. They are not. They will not give up, even if every Gazan civilian is killed. Does that then make it OK for Israel to do that?

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

You are assuming Hamas is a rational actor. They are not. They will not give up, even if every Gazan civilian is killed. Does that then make it OK for Israel to do that?

Is Israel supposed to have their own citizens pay the price? What's the alternative. They can't lock Hamas in, because that's collective punishment. They can give into Hamas' demands, but Hamas has clearly stated that's just going to give them a staging ground for more attacks.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by blankall

Is Israel supposed to have their own citizens pay the price? What's the alternative. They can't lock Hamas in, because that's collective punishment. They can give into Hamas' demands, but Hamas has clearly stated that's just going to give them a staging ground for more attacks.

Well ya, that's why there are no easy answers.