Israel - Palestine Discussion | Post Respectfully | Discuss more, tweet less
- Thread starter esmufc07
- Start date
Thanks, good interview that echoes some themes I’ve touched on here before. I would say among the Israeli journalists who regularly write in English that I’m familiar with, Haviv Rettig Gur probably comes closest to representing the disillusionment and apathy of the broad, post-Oslo/Second Intifada centre on the Israeli political spectrum.
Well they were wrong there, I get what you are saying and I understand it is logical.
But let me ask you this, has the phrase been used by Israel as a justification for the deaths of civilians over the last month?
I'm not sure they believe that tbh. If anything, Israel attacking such targets plays into their hands both as a battleground strategy and the PR war going on alongside the war on the ground.
Hamas' best hope of surviving this is for the international community to put enough pressure on Israel to stop. Realistically what is Hamas' best option in achieving this?
When Israel told Gazans to move south, Hamas told them to stay. At that stage could they really claim they believed Israel would not target those locations? So why tell them to stay put?
Maybe that's how Palestinian thinks too when the IDF detain, imprison, torture, and bombed their loved ones.
No, they just killed 15k ethnic Russians in 8-year period.
To be honest with you. I had also the same thinking why couldn't the 6 millions Jews killed at least 60.000 German Army/SS.
I my mind when I was I child 100 Jews killed 1 Soldier was very doable.
Start losing the narrative --> move to deliberately target and kill journalists
Only the imbecilic Israeli government and their terrorist army could come up with a genius plan like this.
Only the imbecilic Israeli government and their terrorist army could come up with a genius plan like this.
Yes, its not just a trendy term on Twitter. The phrase is being invoked because its an actual thing in both International (Geneva) and Israeli law, which they are using as a pretext to suggest places like hospitals, mosques, schools etc. are fair game if Hamas are deliberately using them because they think doing so would shield them from Israeli weapons.
Not that the Israelis necessarily care about international law since they themselves will never be put in a position to answer for any of their indiscretions. They do however care to use the phrase because it allows them to both vilify Hamas for doing it, while also buying themselves a bit of perceived legal leverage to go after Hamas in those places under the excuse that Hamas are violating article 28 of Geneva IV (again, not that the Israelis actually care or are themselves immune from criticism for violating other international norms, but they do find it useful to use it against Hamas).
Last edited:
Spot on.
I really don't like to resort to Piers Morgan, but there's another interviewee one should listen to.
He's a Palestinian doctor who not only lost 25 members of his family since 7/10 but also three daughters and a niece in the 2009 Gaza War, when an Israeli tank shelled his home. Even then, he's still an advocate of peace and reconciliation, and an example of what it means to live as a Palestinian in Gaza.
"Listen to us, don't hear about us".
He's a Palestinian doctor who not only lost 25 members of his family since 7/10 but also three daughters and a niece in the 2009 Gaza War, when an Israeli tank shelled his home. Even then, he's still an advocate of peace and reconciliation, and an example of what it means to live as a Palestinian in Gaza.
"Listen to us, don't hear about us".
Last edited:
...
I came in to post this. Genuinely broke my heart that interview.
The "human shield" defense also plays into the image of Israel as the true victim in the conflict. "It is my tragedy that you have forced me to kill your civilians. What a burden I must bear." Hence why every other defense of the IDF includes a comment about being "heartbroken."
It is in line with the old quote attributed to Golda Meir, "we will perhaps in time be able to forgive the Arabs for killing our sons, but it will be harder for us to forgive them for having forced us to kill their sons."
I actually messed up and had to edit my post.
He lost 25 members of his family since 10/7. In 2009, he "only" lost 3 daughters and a niece, but still firmly believes in peace to this day. Yet you have here people (to stay polite) full of it, dishing out death and judgment from the comfort of their armchair, thousands of miles away.
I have to restrain myself from replying and regularly take a break from this thread to not lose my sanity. What happened on 10/7 was a human tragedy and a war crime. What happened since then is a human tragedy and a war crime. What happened in the past decades in Gaza and in the West Bank is a human tragedy and a war crime.
So either the world starts to listen to the plight of the Wretched of the Earth and see what's unfolding there, or we will see even bigger tragedies and war crimes in the coming years.
Last edited:
Just out of curiosity, what do you guys think about people tearing down posters of kidnapped Israeli children? Do you think the posters are a political stunt? Would you personally tear down those posters on the street or at your university? Would you condemn those who do?
Think it’s a heartless thing to do. But on a scale of condemnation it’s not going come anywhere near the reaction to Hamas’s actions on 7th or Israel/IDFs actions now. The first is a misdemeanor - the latter two are about as criminal as things get. IDF’s butchery and wanton destruction is beyond the pale and far eclipsed the horrors of Oct 7 a long time ago.
Emotions are running high, there is genuine frustration on the political narrative so it’s understandable that some people make the idiotic decision to tear down hostage release photos. Personally think they’d be much better off using the same walls and covering them with the tens of thousands of pictures of IDFs victims (not over the pictures but on the same area) for perspective
Fair enough, which was my initial point. Oppressive regimes will always play the ''they're hiding behind civilians'' card to justify civilian deaths. Even when as has no doubt happened in Gaza and elsewhere, there doesn't happen to be anyone actually hiding behind the civilians at the time they are killed.
They bombed a refugee camp and killed 400+ innocent people to get one Hamas leader. Not sure if they got him or are even able to confirm if they got him.
Agreed. Wasted opportunity for a meaningful, civilised discussion. I'm not so shocked about the general public doing it on the streets, massively disappointed that it's happening at universities, however.
That was the specific incident that the Post article about "Israel's threshold for civilian casualties" focused on.
It's clear that when you go past a certain point, "having a high threshold of acceptable civilian deaths" is not very different than "intentionally killing civilians."
I know the quote and how much weight it holds for those trying to take the moral high ground and justify Israel's doing in Palestine.
It happens in every single asymmetric conflict. Mao's "On Asymmetric Warfare" gives an insightful view about its mechanisms. The best examples that come to my mind post WWII are Vietnam and Algeria. There are many others though.
Blend in and make it harder for the occupier to identify and neutralize the enemy. No one in their right mind who would wage war against an overwhelmingly superior opponent on an open field. It's not a war between two conventional armies that could be decided on a battlefield and there's no concept of frontline. Even less when the "insurgents" are confined to a 360 km² territory which is blocked on an all sides. What Hamas banks on is not a military victory which can't be achieved, but a war of opinions where they have a much bigger chance to win. Everybody forgot about Palestine and its people, which were about to become a footnote in History, with the whole world (not) watching... Until 10/7.
Is it moral? Hell, no. Is it respectful of human life? Hell, no. Does it mean that Hamas could ever be a dialogue partner for a long-term peace in the region? Hell, no. Does it justify what happened on 10/7? Hell the feck no. But it did change things, whether we like it or not, and we now are at a crossroads. For the better or the worse, we shall see.
It's a trick as old as the world which gained even more traction since WWII. Israel will never win by only using its military, unless the world agrees to a Palestinian extermination and I'm not throwing it out lightly. They won't even get rid of Hamas, and the best they've achieved until now is to create even more radicalized people they'll have to fight in 5-10 years. We talk about the dead but what about the survivors who have been scarred for life?
I'm absolutely flabbergasted that people keep falling for it and then wonder, decades or centuries later, why they lost and looked like the bad guys. But then again, History tends to repeat itself.
Last edited:
Comical Ali vibes.
It's a dystopian trope that perfectly encapsulates today's popular and mainstream narratives that have no basis in fact. Israel is an occupying force and has no right to self defence under international law. Palestinians on the other hand are an occupied people and have the right to resist. Yet the mainstream propaganda presents Israel as the victim and Palestinian resistance fighters as terrorists. An up is down, slavery is freedom type of narrative that fits in perfectly with the times.
Same kind of quote said by men who hit their wives.
"You're making me so angry, this is your fault"
One of the few voices on the other side who can see reason and how suicidal the currently Israeli policy is. There are, thank god, many others.
Interestingly labelled as self-hating Jew(s).
Last edited:
The end of Gaza's most beautiful neighbourhood (bbc.co.uk)
Around noon on Friday 20 October, the residents of the upscale Gazan neighbourhood of al-Zahra stood in front of the rubble and dust that used to be their homes.
Fridays were supposed to be special: the Islamic day of prayer marks the start of the weekend and in al-Zahra it meant falafel and hummus, coffee and tea, all served in spacious family apartments or villas by the Mediterranean Sea. Residents here knew they were luckier than most in Gaza.
But overnight, Israeli bombs had flattened 25 apartment blocks, home to many hundreds of people. Israel had been bombing Gaza for days in response to the Hamas attacks of 7 October, but al-Zahra had not been hit until now.
Some of those who lived here - among them doctors, lawyers, academics, fashion designers and entrepreneurs - tried to stay and survive in the ruins, but most packed up what little they could salvage and dispersed across the Gaza Strip.
Hana Hussen, who grew up in al-Zahra, followed the news with horror from hundreds of miles away in Turkey, where she had moved two years ago. In a hurried phone call that day, she rang her family to check they were safe.
She told them she loved them.
Then the line went dead.
Around noon on Friday 20 October, the residents of the upscale Gazan neighbourhood of al-Zahra stood in front of the rubble and dust that used to be their homes.
Fridays were supposed to be special: the Islamic day of prayer marks the start of the weekend and in al-Zahra it meant falafel and hummus, coffee and tea, all served in spacious family apartments or villas by the Mediterranean Sea. Residents here knew they were luckier than most in Gaza.
But overnight, Israeli bombs had flattened 25 apartment blocks, home to many hundreds of people. Israel had been bombing Gaza for days in response to the Hamas attacks of 7 October, but al-Zahra had not been hit until now.
Some of those who lived here - among them doctors, lawyers, academics, fashion designers and entrepreneurs - tried to stay and survive in the ruins, but most packed up what little they could salvage and dispersed across the Gaza Strip.
Hana Hussen, who grew up in al-Zahra, followed the news with horror from hundreds of miles away in Turkey, where she had moved two years ago. In a hurried phone call that day, she rang her family to check they were safe.
She told them she loved them.
Then the line went dead.
'Let it play out.' Christ...
I mean, not to credit him, but at least his stance is an honest one. Contrast that to Biden who's administration is essentially mirroring the same approach, albeit coating it with fabricated concern, all while continuing to rubbish any notion of a ceasefire.
I mean, I feel dirty again giving him any semblance of credit, but that's a more balanced take than 'Israel has the right to defend itself, we stand 100% with our Israeli allies'. Even acknowledging it as a two way street is some form of refreshing breakaway from even the Dem stance. For starters he's acknowledging the human catastrophe in Gaza, something even his Democratic compatriots struggle to empathise or even acknowledge.
Israel has a right to defend itself.
Hamas uses human shields.
Israel targets Hamas military sites.