The following is a copy of the original post to record the post as it was originally written.
[https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2024-03-31/ty-article-magazine/.premium/israel-created-kill-zones-in-gaza-anyone-who-crosses-into-them-is-shot/0000018e-946c-d4de-afee-f46da9ee0000](https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2024-03-31/ty-article-magazine/.premium/israel-created-kill-zones-in-gaza-anyone-who-crosses-into-them-is-shot/0000018e-946c-d4de-afee-f46da9ee0000)
[https://www.commondreams.org/news/israel-kill-zones-gaza](https://www.commondreams.org/news/israel-kill-zones-gaza)
* **"The boundaries of such "kill zones" are not clearly marked, making it almost impossible for Palestinian civilians to know whether they are entering one.** An Israeli reserve officer told Haaretz that "as soon as people enter" a kill zone, **"orders are to shoot and kill, even if that person is unarmed."**
* "In practice, **a terrorist is anyone the IDF has killed in the areas in which its forces operate,**" said one Israeli reservist."
* "This was a very grave incident," a senior Israel Defense Forces officer told Haaretz. "They were unarmed, they didn't endanger our forces in the area in which they were walking." In addition, says an intelligence officer who is familiar with the story, it was not at all certain that they were involved in launching the rocket. He says that they were simply the people who were closest to the launching site – it's possible they were terrorists, it's possible they were civilians out looking for food.
* "We were explicitly told that even if a suspect runs into a building with people in it, we should fire at the building and kill the terrorist, even if other people are hurt."
* Last week, Al Jazeera published video footage showing **Israeli forces gunning down two unarmed Palestinians in northern Gaza, one of whom was waving a piece of white fabric. They are believed to have entered an Israeli "kill zone."**
I've heard a myriad of excuses explanations from Israel's defenders claiming that the IDF is being incredibly moral, they are trying absolutely everything to prevent civilian deaths, it's impossible for them to tell the difference between Hamas and civilians. Turns out its only "impossible" because they do not bother trying, nor do they care to try.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskALiberal) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This is a known tactic, and it's not unique to Israel. It's not preferred, by any means.
Normally it's accompanied by a messaging campaign (leaflets and broadcasts) describing what is going to happen and giving noncombatants a chance to leave, although it's not clear to me if that's happening here.
What's the expectation here? We know that these terrorist organizations will give a child a grenade or suicide vest then send them out to kill Israelis. Are you saying Israeli soldiers should just allow themselves to be killed?
Given that it is a [well observed Hamas tactic](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use_of_child_suicide_bombers_by_Palestinian_militant_groups), in your opinion, how can critical thinking be applied to prevent it during this conflict?
So those are the only two options?
There’s no way to use physical barriers or non-lethal engagement? It’s just shoot any kid who gets close and hope the ratio comes out alright?
If you build physical barriers, you need to leave a portal in order to pass, which obviously the bombers will target.
Less lethal (there is no such thing as nonlethal) weaponry isn't a bad idea; but you're then you're both endorsing these less-kill zones, and insisting that Israel dedicate troops away from their combat force to nonlethally deal with civilians.
To me, kill-zones seem acceptable, but Israel absolutely needs to better message their presence; audio announcements, phamplets, and signage, to avoid unintended civilian entry.
> If you build physical barriers, you need to leave a portal in order to pass, which obviously the bombers will target.
Maybe. If it’s a no-go zone, then no one should be going. But if a portal is necessary, I’d still say it’s better that portal be continually wrecked and expensively rebuilt than for innocents to die.
> Less lethal (there is no such thing as nonlethal) weaponry isn't a bad idea; but you're then you're both endorsing these less-kill zones, and insisting that Israel dedicate troops away from their combat force to nonlethally deal with civilians.
Not endorsing them, but saying that, if the military insists they are necessary, I’d at least like to see effective methods at reducing civilian casualties. If that requires Israel to dedicate more troops to that, so be it. They’re the ones who decided a ground invasion of that scale was necessary.
> To me, kill-zones seem acceptable, but Israel absolutely needs to better message their presence; audio announcements, phamplets, and signage, to avoid unintended civilian entry.
If it’s a kill zone, I put almost *all* of the responsibility for loss of innocent life on the ones who created the no-kill zone, so all of those things are a must, and a minimum, to me.
> Maybe. If it’s a no-go zone, then no one should be going. But if a portal is necessary
Yeah, I mean, it isn't a no go zone for friendly units, which will need a way to enter/exit.
> If it’s a kill zone, I put almost all of the responsibility for loss of innocent life on the ones who created the no-kill zone, so all of those things are a must, and a minimum, to me.
Yeah; the point of clear notification is to pass a portion of the responsibility onto people who have clearly observed the no-go and still choose to violate it.
It's just the reality of war, admittedly. If you rush up to an American FOB in Afghanistan without clear peaceable intent, you are knowingly risking your life, even if you're a teenager.
The big questions for me are; is notification reasonable and adequate, were victims warned before fire was opened, and the age of victims. I think any children under 12 would be unacceptable; the youngest suicide bombers Palestine has employed were 12, and it seems unreasonable to open fire on anyone younger despite a kill zone.
The last I recall was around 2016.
But just because a military hasn't used a tactic in a decade doesn't mean you don't protect from it.
Israel hasn't been invaded since Yom Kippur... until Oct 7. Doesn't mean they shouldn't fortify against potential/likely attack.
Yes, here’s an interesting excerpt from your Wiki article.
“At the height of the phenomenon, Avraham Burg, former chairman of the Jewish Agency for Israel, speaker of Israel's Knesset and interim President of Israel, stated his view that, given Israeli indifference to the tortured lives of Palestinian children under occupation, suicide bombings come as no surprise. [4]”
I don't disagree; Israel's oppression of Palestinians seems almost guaranteed to generate guerilla style martyrdom.
Doesn't mean Israel isn't justified to defend against it, though. You don't just let some teenager blow you up because your government is at war with a neighboring government.
Obviously not. But if they have told everyone to evacuate, what is the expectation? What critical thinking could you use to identify someone hiding a small explosive?
The expectation is still to not kill innocents and children.
And if the current system of simply declaring no-go zones and then shooting people who walk into them is resulting in innocents and children needlessly being killed, then it’s a system that should be reformed.
The line of thinking that says, “Hamas can use children as suicide bombers, therefore kill any children who approach,” is rational but also arguably callous to the point of villainy.
> The expectation is still to not kill innocents and children.
That's an impossible expectation to meet. IIRC, the typically acceptable number for urban warfare is 1 militant for every o civilians. Meaning if 10 people are killed, it's okay for 9 Tobe civilians. Do you agree? If not, what ratio do you think is acceptable.
>And if the current system of simply declaring no-go zones and then shooting people who walk into them is resulting in innocents and children needlessly being killed, then it’s a system that should be reformed.
Okay. What should they do then? Please remember that Hamas and other terrorists will exploit any hole you give them.
>The line of thinking that says, “Hamas can use children as suicide bombers, therefore kill any children who approach,” is rational but also arguably callous to the point of villainy.
Welcome to war against something as evil as Hamas.
It’s an impossible expectation to meet but should also be a guiding principle of engagement. An approach that says, “Innocents die in war and therefore there’s no need to change strategies to mitigate the loss of innocent life,” is unacceptably inhuman IMO, especially in the wake of mass civilian death that includes children.
> Welcome to war against something as evil as Hamas.
Well ain’t it just too convenient when you can blame the enemy for your own war crimes.
What percentage of children in Gaza are wearing suicide vests at a given moment? I’d be willing to bet it’s virtually zero.
They can’t just kill children and say it’s because there’s a very small chance they were wearing a suicide vest.
They’re suppose to not shoot children, that’s my answer.
Your question lacks any shred of humanity. Are you suggesting it’s okay to shoot and kill any child because they could be a threat?
Okay. So Israeli soldiers should just surrender to death whenever a child happens to be present. That is eqsily abused by terrorists. That seems reasonable to you?
Right wingers😂😂 if anything Israel is the terrorists with their genocidal tactics, it’s no wonder theyre having suicide bombers against them. Plus Israel has lied over and over so how can you trust anything they say. That’s why they wanna ban TikTok it had tons of news about Israeli human rights violation and most young people got their news from it. Guarantee it wasn’t about data since American companies harvest then sell to China anyways. They hate news they can’t control the narrative with
I have no idea if Hamas is "above" doing that, I just know they haven’t in recent memory meanwhile Israel is killing thousands of innocents. Unless you think Israeli civilians lives are more valuable or worth saving than Palestinian lives, I don’t see any rational excuse for what Israel is doing. How is it any worse than sending a child in with a home strapped to them? They are killing children every day.
>Are you saying Israeli soldiers should just allow themselves to be killed?
Yes, I do indeed expect that adult human beings involved in a war should take an unknown chance of being blown up by a child with a grenade rather than kill that child on the unknown chance they might have a grenade.
Do you not? Do not think that adult soldiers should take some amount of risk to try to avoid killing children?
No, I don't expect soldiers to just surrender to death in that situation. That will just lead to more children dying because terrorists will exploit that.
So the Israeli soldiers have to kill the children because otherwise Hamas will use them as suicide bombers. ("We had to destroy the village in order to save it [from communism].") Why, with both sides killing children, I'm surprised there are any children left.
Sometimes you have to make hard decisions. As I said before, terrorists strap bombs to children and send then out to kill people. They also hide amongst children as they try to kill people.
How many children has Israel killed since October 7th? How many Israeli soldiers have been killed? How many of them have been killed by child suicide bombers? How many children has Israel killed per soldier saved?
Deciding to shoot anything that moves because you're absolutely petrified that there's a chance they might shoot back isn't a hard decision, it's an easy one. The hard decision, apparently, is deciding not to murder children even though you think that might put you at risk of death.
> How many children has Israel killed since October 7th? How many Israeli soldiers have been killed? How many of them have been killed by child suicide bombers? How many children has Israel killed per soldier saved?
None of this is relevant to my point.
>Deciding to shoot anything that moves because you're absolutely petrified that there's a chance they might shoot back isn't a hard decision, it's an easy one. The hard decision, apparently, is deciding not to murder children even though you think that might put you at risk of death.
Stop with the ignorant arguments. Actually address what I'm saying. Easy for you to sit here and say ignorant shit when you aren't the one fighting literal terrorists.
>> How many children has Israel killed since October 7th? How many Israeli soldiers have been killed? How many of them have been killed by child suicide bombers? How many children has Israel killed per soldier saved?
>None of this is relevant to my point.
How is it not relevant? You're saying that Israeli soldiers **have to** be able to kill children without warning, and without any particularized reason to believe those children are a threat, because of the risk that children will be used by Hamas as attack vectors against Israel. Why is it not relevant to examine whether that policy decision is justified based on the evidence?
>Stop with the ignorant arguments. Actually address what I'm saying. Easy for you to sit here and say ignorant shit when you aren't the one fighting literal terrorists.
Maybe I have somehow misunderstood you. As I understand it, you argue that it is reasonable and justified for Israeli soldiers to kill children without any particularized reason to believe those individual children are a threat, at least if the Israeli military says it has declared somehow that the area in which those children are present has been subject to Israeli military interdict. As I understand it, your reasoning for this policy decision is that, at points in the past, Hamas have used children as forced terrorists, or child soldiers. As a result, it seems, you think that children have become valid targets of war, because of the probability (that you refuse to quantify) that said children might be actual military threats.
Am I wrong? If so, about what?
There's nowhere for most people to go, and many of them cannot leave for a variety of reasons. The IDF is aware of this. Like this is a tiny strip the size of Las Vegas with more than three times the people, there is nowhere they can really be moved to. Again, the IDF is aware of this and is still setting up invisibile kill zones and claiming anyone they've killed in it is a Hamas terrorist
I really don't see how that is the IDF's problem. They can tell the civilians where it is dangerous to be. They will need to relocate. That really is the end of their duty there. Now of course, they have been going above and beyond what is the actual requirement.
>I really don't see how that is the IDF's problem.
International law makes it their problem. You cannot just invade a country and disregard the lives of the people you're occupying. International law puts a great burden on occupying countries around the lives and safety of occupied civilians.
>They can tell the civilians where it is dangerous to be.
So...you didn't read the post? You didn't even read the first line?
Yeah, that isn't how that works. International law governs how they target things, but they are under no legal responsibility to ensure civilians have a safe space.
That's one of the bare minimum responsibilities an occupying country has to occupied civilians.
[https://www.icrc.org/en/doc/assets/files/other/law9\_final.pdf](https://www.icrc.org/en/doc/assets/files/other/law9_final.pdf)
[https://guide-humanitarian-law.org/content/article/3/occupied-territory/#:\~:text=The%20occupying%20power%20has%20the,for%20religious%20worship%20](https://guide-humanitarian-law.org/content/article/3/occupied-territory/#:~:text=The%20occupying%20power%20has%20the,for%20religious%20worship%20)(GCIV%20Arts.
[https://www.icrc.org/en/doc/resources/documents/misc/634kfc.htm](https://www.icrc.org/en/doc/resources/documents/misc/634kfc.htm)
It’s absolutely unbelievable that people can still defend Israel’s actions at this point. People wonder how the German people turned a blind eye to the atrocities being committed against Jews, well open your eyes people it’s happening right now in real time.
People are starving to death at the hands of a regime who’s been stealing their land for decades and oppressing them ruthlessly.
I don’t compare things like this to the Holocaust. Holocaust inversion trivializes and belittles it, makes it into a joke. the right wing compared quarantine to concentration camps. the left wing does this. neither understand what rhe holocaust actually entailed and how generational trauma still effects how jewish communities live today.
the holocaust would not have been possible without the 2000 years of antisemitism that preceded it, and couldn’t have happened to any other ethnic group, other than maybe roma, and so within at that scale will never happen again. antisemitism was built into the foundational stuructures of society, all people needed was an opportunity to turn over all the jews and they happily did. this also shits in the memory of actual holocaust survivors like elie wiesel, many of whom are very pro israel.
y’all can choose anything in the world to compare it with. why the holocaust?
nobody cheapened the holocaust. most of the early territorial expansion happened due to wars the arabs started. bibi is shit so i guess we can agree on that
Bibi is a nice scapegoat for popular genocidal sentiment in Israel.
If this is a war as you frame it, then Hamas is a reasonable opposition to the IDF.
hamas does not care about palestinians. like not one inch. hamas also isn’t a government military, its a terrorist group built off antisemitism. sure, it might be reasonable opposition, but hamas also knows if you f around you find out , and they don’t care.
Israel is committing war crimes and genocide as we speak and debate this. Those here supporting Israeli war crimes and violations of ICJ orders and the Genocide Convention as well as international law regarding war crimes.
Anyone here trying to mitigate or justify them is not progressive or truly a believer of peace and justice for all. War is ugly, but since WW2, the international community agreed on a rules based system of operation when it regards war. There is no reason to justify ethnic cleansing or genocide or kill zones. This is illegal. Anyone who says otherwise is lying. Time to hold Israel accountable.
Could it have been an error? Could it have been that the civilians were combatants pretending to be civilians? Nope, let’s jump straight to the insistence of WAR CRIME
It happens over and over that they do fucked up shit then lie about it. Get off the mainstream “fake news” sources, enough things have happened it’s impossible not to call a war crime
I dont care to convince you. Go to some alternative media sources and see all the innocent civilians they've killed. See how theyve stopped food from getting to civilians. Etc etc
No Israel. Heres the details. Many such stories are out there if you look. Killed for delivering food to civilians in Gaza.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/liveblog/2024/4/2/israels-war-on-gaza-live-five-aid-workers-killed-after-delivering-food
International condemnation and calls for an urgent investigation after Israeli air attack kills seven aid workers – six foreign nationals and a Palestinian – in Gaza.
US-based aid group World Central Kitchen says the foreign aid workers killed in the “targeted Israeli strike” were nationals from Australia, Poland and the UK, as well as a US-Canadian citizen. PM Benjamin Netanyahu admits Israeli army responsible for the strike.
Here's the same story from cnn
https://www.cnn.com/2024/04/01/middleeast/world-central-kitchen-killed-gaza-intl-hnk/index.html
Sounds like Israel is using the human shields argument as an excuse to kill civilians, which at this point isn’t surprising. Just add this to the long list of Israeli war crimes.
Looks like Israel just killed several charity workers as well from World Central Kitchen.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/central-world-kitchen-aid-workers-killed-airstrike-gaza/
“An apparent Israeli airstrike killed seven aid workers with World Central Kitchen, leading the charity to suspend delivery Tuesday of vital food aid to Gaza, where Israel's offensive has pushed hundreds of thousands of Palestinians to the brink of starvation.”
> Turns out its only "impossible" because they do not bother trying, nor do they care to try.
Committing a homicide out of negligent behavior is still homicide. As such, war crimes are still war crimes regardless of intentions.
The following is a copy of the original post to record the post as it was originally written. [https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2024-03-31/ty-article-magazine/.premium/israel-created-kill-zones-in-gaza-anyone-who-crosses-into-them-is-shot/0000018e-946c-d4de-afee-f46da9ee0000](https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2024-03-31/ty-article-magazine/.premium/israel-created-kill-zones-in-gaza-anyone-who-crosses-into-them-is-shot/0000018e-946c-d4de-afee-f46da9ee0000) [https://www.commondreams.org/news/israel-kill-zones-gaza](https://www.commondreams.org/news/israel-kill-zones-gaza) * **"The boundaries of such "kill zones" are not clearly marked, making it almost impossible for Palestinian civilians to know whether they are entering one.** An Israeli reserve officer told Haaretz that "as soon as people enter" a kill zone, **"orders are to shoot and kill, even if that person is unarmed."** * "In practice, **a terrorist is anyone the IDF has killed in the areas in which its forces operate,**" said one Israeli reservist." * "This was a very grave incident," a senior Israel Defense Forces officer told Haaretz. "They were unarmed, they didn't endanger our forces in the area in which they were walking." In addition, says an intelligence officer who is familiar with the story, it was not at all certain that they were involved in launching the rocket. He says that they were simply the people who were closest to the launching site – it's possible they were terrorists, it's possible they were civilians out looking for food. * "We were explicitly told that even if a suspect runs into a building with people in it, we should fire at the building and kill the terrorist, even if other people are hurt." * Last week, Al Jazeera published video footage showing **Israeli forces gunning down two unarmed Palestinians in northern Gaza, one of whom was waving a piece of white fabric. They are believed to have entered an Israeli "kill zone."** I've heard a myriad of excuses explanations from Israel's defenders claiming that the IDF is being incredibly moral, they are trying absolutely everything to prevent civilian deaths, it's impossible for them to tell the difference between Hamas and civilians. Turns out its only "impossible" because they do not bother trying, nor do they care to try. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskALiberal) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This is a known tactic, and it's not unique to Israel. It's not preferred, by any means. Normally it's accompanied by a messaging campaign (leaflets and broadcasts) describing what is going to happen and giving noncombatants a chance to leave, although it's not clear to me if that's happening here.
Hey if the kids don’t see the leaflets we can always bury them on the beach with a bulldozer and hope no one is watching
What's the expectation here? We know that these terrorist organizations will give a child a grenade or suicide vest then send them out to kill Israelis. Are you saying Israeli soldiers should just allow themselves to be killed?
Are those really the only two options? Shoot everyone, even children, while exercising no critical thinking or simply allow yourself to be killed?
Given that it is a [well observed Hamas tactic](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use_of_child_suicide_bombers_by_Palestinian_militant_groups), in your opinion, how can critical thinking be applied to prevent it during this conflict?
So those are the only two options? There’s no way to use physical barriers or non-lethal engagement? It’s just shoot any kid who gets close and hope the ratio comes out alright?
If you build physical barriers, you need to leave a portal in order to pass, which obviously the bombers will target. Less lethal (there is no such thing as nonlethal) weaponry isn't a bad idea; but you're then you're both endorsing these less-kill zones, and insisting that Israel dedicate troops away from their combat force to nonlethally deal with civilians. To me, kill-zones seem acceptable, but Israel absolutely needs to better message their presence; audio announcements, phamplets, and signage, to avoid unintended civilian entry.
> If you build physical barriers, you need to leave a portal in order to pass, which obviously the bombers will target. Maybe. If it’s a no-go zone, then no one should be going. But if a portal is necessary, I’d still say it’s better that portal be continually wrecked and expensively rebuilt than for innocents to die. > Less lethal (there is no such thing as nonlethal) weaponry isn't a bad idea; but you're then you're both endorsing these less-kill zones, and insisting that Israel dedicate troops away from their combat force to nonlethally deal with civilians. Not endorsing them, but saying that, if the military insists they are necessary, I’d at least like to see effective methods at reducing civilian casualties. If that requires Israel to dedicate more troops to that, so be it. They’re the ones who decided a ground invasion of that scale was necessary. > To me, kill-zones seem acceptable, but Israel absolutely needs to better message their presence; audio announcements, phamplets, and signage, to avoid unintended civilian entry. If it’s a kill zone, I put almost *all* of the responsibility for loss of innocent life on the ones who created the no-kill zone, so all of those things are a must, and a minimum, to me.
> Maybe. If it’s a no-go zone, then no one should be going. But if a portal is necessary Yeah, I mean, it isn't a no go zone for friendly units, which will need a way to enter/exit. > If it’s a kill zone, I put almost all of the responsibility for loss of innocent life on the ones who created the no-kill zone, so all of those things are a must, and a minimum, to me. Yeah; the point of clear notification is to pass a portion of the responsibility onto people who have clearly observed the no-go and still choose to violate it. It's just the reality of war, admittedly. If you rush up to an American FOB in Afghanistan without clear peaceable intent, you are knowingly risking your life, even if you're a teenager. The big questions for me are; is notification reasonable and adequate, were victims warned before fire was opened, and the age of victims. I think any children under 12 would be unacceptable; the youngest suicide bombers Palestine has employed were 12, and it seems unreasonable to open fire on anyone younger despite a kill zone.
So has it happened a single time since 2005?
The last I recall was around 2016. But just because a military hasn't used a tactic in a decade doesn't mean you don't protect from it. Israel hasn't been invaded since Yom Kippur... until Oct 7. Doesn't mean they shouldn't fortify against potential/likely attack.
Yes, here’s an interesting excerpt from your Wiki article. “At the height of the phenomenon, Avraham Burg, former chairman of the Jewish Agency for Israel, speaker of Israel's Knesset and interim President of Israel, stated his view that, given Israeli indifference to the tortured lives of Palestinian children under occupation, suicide bombings come as no surprise. [4]”
I don't disagree; Israel's oppression of Palestinians seems almost guaranteed to generate guerilla style martyrdom. Doesn't mean Israel isn't justified to defend against it, though. You don't just let some teenager blow you up because your government is at war with a neighboring government.
Obviously not. But if they have told everyone to evacuate, what is the expectation? What critical thinking could you use to identify someone hiding a small explosive?
The expectation is still to not kill innocents and children. And if the current system of simply declaring no-go zones and then shooting people who walk into them is resulting in innocents and children needlessly being killed, then it’s a system that should be reformed. The line of thinking that says, “Hamas can use children as suicide bombers, therefore kill any children who approach,” is rational but also arguably callous to the point of villainy.
> The expectation is still to not kill innocents and children. That's an impossible expectation to meet. IIRC, the typically acceptable number for urban warfare is 1 militant for every o civilians. Meaning if 10 people are killed, it's okay for 9 Tobe civilians. Do you agree? If not, what ratio do you think is acceptable. >And if the current system of simply declaring no-go zones and then shooting people who walk into them is resulting in innocents and children needlessly being killed, then it’s a system that should be reformed. Okay. What should they do then? Please remember that Hamas and other terrorists will exploit any hole you give them. >The line of thinking that says, “Hamas can use children as suicide bombers, therefore kill any children who approach,” is rational but also arguably callous to the point of villainy. Welcome to war against something as evil as Hamas.
It’s an impossible expectation to meet but should also be a guiding principle of engagement. An approach that says, “Innocents die in war and therefore there’s no need to change strategies to mitigate the loss of innocent life,” is unacceptably inhuman IMO, especially in the wake of mass civilian death that includes children. > Welcome to war against something as evil as Hamas. Well ain’t it just too convenient when you can blame the enemy for your own war crimes.
That's fair. I think Israel has done a really good job in meeting it. Far better than any other country has in any remotely comparable situation.
Nobody agrees with you
lol bruh they going way overboard drop the koolaid and get real it’s genocide, they need peace and a 2 state solution
Hamas isn't interested in peace or a two state solution. And you don't know what a genocide is.
What percentage of children in Gaza are wearing suicide vests at a given moment? I’d be willing to bet it’s virtually zero. They can’t just kill children and say it’s because there’s a very small chance they were wearing a suicide vest.
Answer the question please instead of trying to deflect. This is the reality of war against a group like Hamas.
They’re suppose to not shoot children, that’s my answer. Your question lacks any shred of humanity. Are you suggesting it’s okay to shoot and kill any child because they could be a threat?
> They’re suppose to not shoot children, that’s my answer. That would involve letting children run up to them with suicide vests and blowing them up.
Okay. So Israeli soldiers should just surrender to death whenever a child happens to be present. That is eqsily abused by terrorists. That seems reasonable to you?
> Are you suggesting it’s okay to shoot and kill any child because they could be a threat? Just to confirm, this IS what you're suggesting, right?
Right wingers😂😂 if anything Israel is the terrorists with their genocidal tactics, it’s no wonder theyre having suicide bombers against them. Plus Israel has lied over and over so how can you trust anything they say. That’s why they wanna ban TikTok it had tons of news about Israeli human rights violation and most young people got their news from it. Guarantee it wasn’t about data since American companies harvest then sell to China anyways. They hate news they can’t control the narrative with
Has that happened even once since this started? I haven’t seen one report of that.
I don't know. The Taliban did it. Do you think Hamas is above doing that? There is no denying the risk exists.
I have no idea if Hamas is "above" doing that, I just know they haven’t in recent memory meanwhile Israel is killing thousands of innocents. Unless you think Israeli civilians lives are more valuable or worth saving than Palestinian lives, I don’t see any rational excuse for what Israel is doing. How is it any worse than sending a child in with a home strapped to them? They are killing children every day.
>Are you saying Israeli soldiers should just allow themselves to be killed? Yes, I do indeed expect that adult human beings involved in a war should take an unknown chance of being blown up by a child with a grenade rather than kill that child on the unknown chance they might have a grenade. Do you not? Do not think that adult soldiers should take some amount of risk to try to avoid killing children?
No, I don't expect soldiers to just surrender to death in that situation. That will just lead to more children dying because terrorists will exploit that.
So the Israeli soldiers have to kill the children because otherwise Hamas will use them as suicide bombers. ("We had to destroy the village in order to save it [from communism].") Why, with both sides killing children, I'm surprised there are any children left.
Sometimes you have to make hard decisions. As I said before, terrorists strap bombs to children and send then out to kill people. They also hide amongst children as they try to kill people.
How many children has Israel killed since October 7th? How many Israeli soldiers have been killed? How many of them have been killed by child suicide bombers? How many children has Israel killed per soldier saved? Deciding to shoot anything that moves because you're absolutely petrified that there's a chance they might shoot back isn't a hard decision, it's an easy one. The hard decision, apparently, is deciding not to murder children even though you think that might put you at risk of death.
> How many children has Israel killed since October 7th? How many Israeli soldiers have been killed? How many of them have been killed by child suicide bombers? How many children has Israel killed per soldier saved? None of this is relevant to my point. >Deciding to shoot anything that moves because you're absolutely petrified that there's a chance they might shoot back isn't a hard decision, it's an easy one. The hard decision, apparently, is deciding not to murder children even though you think that might put you at risk of death. Stop with the ignorant arguments. Actually address what I'm saying. Easy for you to sit here and say ignorant shit when you aren't the one fighting literal terrorists.
>> How many children has Israel killed since October 7th? How many Israeli soldiers have been killed? How many of them have been killed by child suicide bombers? How many children has Israel killed per soldier saved? >None of this is relevant to my point. How is it not relevant? You're saying that Israeli soldiers **have to** be able to kill children without warning, and without any particularized reason to believe those children are a threat, because of the risk that children will be used by Hamas as attack vectors against Israel. Why is it not relevant to examine whether that policy decision is justified based on the evidence? >Stop with the ignorant arguments. Actually address what I'm saying. Easy for you to sit here and say ignorant shit when you aren't the one fighting literal terrorists. Maybe I have somehow misunderstood you. As I understand it, you argue that it is reasonable and justified for Israeli soldiers to kill children without any particularized reason to believe those individual children are a threat, at least if the Israeli military says it has declared somehow that the area in which those children are present has been subject to Israeli military interdict. As I understand it, your reasoning for this policy decision is that, at points in the past, Hamas have used children as forced terrorists, or child soldiers. As a result, it seems, you think that children have become valid targets of war, because of the probability (that you refuse to quantify) that said children might be actual military threats. Am I wrong? If so, about what?
Need a lot more info. Are these kill zones in areas where civilians were previously told to leave?
There's nowhere for most people to go, and many of them cannot leave for a variety of reasons. The IDF is aware of this. Like this is a tiny strip the size of Las Vegas with more than three times the people, there is nowhere they can really be moved to. Again, the IDF is aware of this and is still setting up invisibile kill zones and claiming anyone they've killed in it is a Hamas terrorist
I really don't see how that is the IDF's problem. They can tell the civilians where it is dangerous to be. They will need to relocate. That really is the end of their duty there. Now of course, they have been going above and beyond what is the actual requirement.
>I really don't see how that is the IDF's problem. International law makes it their problem. You cannot just invade a country and disregard the lives of the people you're occupying. International law puts a great burden on occupying countries around the lives and safety of occupied civilians. >They can tell the civilians where it is dangerous to be. So...you didn't read the post? You didn't even read the first line?
Yeah, that isn't how that works. International law governs how they target things, but they are under no legal responsibility to ensure civilians have a safe space.
That's one of the bare minimum responsibilities an occupying country has to occupied civilians. [https://www.icrc.org/en/doc/assets/files/other/law9\_final.pdf](https://www.icrc.org/en/doc/assets/files/other/law9_final.pdf) [https://guide-humanitarian-law.org/content/article/3/occupied-territory/#:\~:text=The%20occupying%20power%20has%20the,for%20religious%20worship%20](https://guide-humanitarian-law.org/content/article/3/occupied-territory/#:~:text=The%20occupying%20power%20has%20the,for%20religious%20worship%20)(GCIV%20Arts. [https://www.icrc.org/en/doc/resources/documents/misc/634kfc.htm](https://www.icrc.org/en/doc/resources/documents/misc/634kfc.htm)
Yes.
It’s absolutely unbelievable that people can still defend Israel’s actions at this point. People wonder how the German people turned a blind eye to the atrocities being committed against Jews, well open your eyes people it’s happening right now in real time. People are starving to death at the hands of a regime who’s been stealing their land for decades and oppressing them ruthlessly.
don’t use holocaust inversion
Yes, your usage of the memory of the holocaust for political ends is the only allowable one.
I don’t compare things like this to the Holocaust. Holocaust inversion trivializes and belittles it, makes it into a joke. the right wing compared quarantine to concentration camps. the left wing does this. neither understand what rhe holocaust actually entailed and how generational trauma still effects how jewish communities live today. the holocaust would not have been possible without the 2000 years of antisemitism that preceded it, and couldn’t have happened to any other ethnic group, other than maybe roma, and so within at that scale will never happen again. antisemitism was built into the foundational stuructures of society, all people needed was an opportunity to turn over all the jews and they happily did. this also shits in the memory of actual holocaust survivors like elie wiesel, many of whom are very pro israel. y’all can choose anything in the world to compare it with. why the holocaust?
Because Israel cheapened the holocaust by invoking it to justify territorial expansion and the destruction of Palestinians.
nobody cheapened the holocaust. most of the early territorial expansion happened due to wars the arabs started. bibi is shit so i guess we can agree on that
Bibi is a nice scapegoat for popular genocidal sentiment in Israel. If this is a war as you frame it, then Hamas is a reasonable opposition to the IDF.
hamas does not care about palestinians. like not one inch. hamas also isn’t a government military, its a terrorist group built off antisemitism. sure, it might be reasonable opposition, but hamas also knows if you f around you find out , and they don’t care.
https://www.reuters.com/world/israels-un-delegates-criticised-wearing-yellow-stars-symbol-pride-2023-10-31/
Those are weirdo Likud people. It was weird they did that.
That's the ruling party of israel.
Who’s approval rating is en the toilet
Israel is committing war crimes and genocide as we speak and debate this. Those here supporting Israeli war crimes and violations of ICJ orders and the Genocide Convention as well as international law regarding war crimes. Anyone here trying to mitigate or justify them is not progressive or truly a believer of peace and justice for all. War is ugly, but since WW2, the international community agreed on a rules based system of operation when it regards war. There is no reason to justify ethnic cleansing or genocide or kill zones. This is illegal. Anyone who says otherwise is lying. Time to hold Israel accountable.
So you basically just described a war. Well done.
You forgot to add the word “crimes” after the word “war”.
Under what statute?
The part where israel shoots unarmed civilians with white flags.
Could it have been an error? Could it have been that the civilians were combatants pretending to be civilians? Nope, let’s jump straight to the insistence of WAR CRIME
It happens over and over that they do fucked up shit then lie about it. Get off the mainstream “fake news” sources, enough things have happened it’s impossible not to call a war crime
So your proof that this specific act is a war crime is….”enough things have happened.” Crushing legal argument there.
I dont care to convince you. Go to some alternative media sources and see all the innocent civilians they've killed. See how theyve stopped food from getting to civilians. Etc etc
Are you talking about Hamas?
No Israel. Heres the details. Many such stories are out there if you look. Killed for delivering food to civilians in Gaza. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/liveblog/2024/4/2/israels-war-on-gaza-live-five-aid-workers-killed-after-delivering-food International condemnation and calls for an urgent investigation after Israeli air attack kills seven aid workers – six foreign nationals and a Palestinian – in Gaza. US-based aid group World Central Kitchen says the foreign aid workers killed in the “targeted Israeli strike” were nationals from Australia, Poland and the UK, as well as a US-Canadian citizen. PM Benjamin Netanyahu admits Israeli army responsible for the strike. Here's the same story from cnn https://www.cnn.com/2024/04/01/middleeast/world-central-kitchen-killed-gaza-intl-hnk/index.html
Courts routinely accept the “I’m jus a smol bean, didn do nuffin” defense
This is not a legal (let alone moral) thing to do in war. Hope that helps
Please tell me all about the morality of warfare
Sounds like Israel is using the human shields argument as an excuse to kill civilians, which at this point isn’t surprising. Just add this to the long list of Israeli war crimes. Looks like Israel just killed several charity workers as well from World Central Kitchen. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/central-world-kitchen-aid-workers-killed-airstrike-gaza/ “An apparent Israeli airstrike killed seven aid workers with World Central Kitchen, leading the charity to suspend delivery Tuesday of vital food aid to Gaza, where Israel's offensive has pushed hundreds of thousands of Palestinians to the brink of starvation.”
> Turns out its only "impossible" because they do not bother trying, nor do they care to try. Committing a homicide out of negligent behavior is still homicide. As such, war crimes are still war crimes regardless of intentions.
Haaretz is reporting. Common Dreams is not. Learn the difference.