And hey, that is a cool attitude to have as long as you don’t get upset when Israel’s actions makes the rest of the world think that it is no longer just.
And one of the great things about being the US is we don’t even really have to get our hands dirty. Pull the Israeli funding, send the carriers home, and let the rest of the world know that Israel no long gets our protection.
But that’s where your parallel breaks down: the Allies did have the power to fight back to stop Germany and the Nazis — and the Allies then did fight back to stop Germany and the Nazis — and I don’t think the Allies did so because of talk of laws or accordance or whatever, but because they figured it made sense to rain death on the people who were, as it were, like unto those who are having death rain upon them since October 7th.
Asking me about a situation where the Allies can’t fight back in the 1940s is like asking me about one where Israel can’t fight back in the 2020s: it’s the wrong parallel. Asking me about one where the Allies can and do kill civilians in city after city is like asking me about one where the Israeli armed forces can and do kill civilians in city after city: I think you can ask me, both times, whether I figure it makes sense; and I think I can answer, both times, without referring to laws or accordance or whatever.
Like France did.
Of course the problem is that the money we give to Israel is spent in the US and supports politicians who vote for more money. But, we now have an alternative - Ukraine. We can take Ukraine funding out of Israels’ allowance.
There is no such thing as “just”. If morality and laws don’t matter (as per your statements), there is no “just” and “unjust”, or even if they exist, they don’t matter since they can’t be enforced
I would like to ask all the people denouncing Israel’s actions what they think Israel should have done after 8/7. As far as I can tell they had two options. (1) do nothing and passively wait for the next attack. (2) Do what they are doing now, that is fight a brutal urban conflict against an enemy entrenched in the civilian population. If they choose option 2, hospitals churches and schools will be destroyed and many people, many children, will die horribly.
If you can think of a third option, great. I’m all ears. But please be specific. Don’t just say “They should fight by the rules of war” or “They should minimize civilian casualties.” Say how.
Of course you can pick option 1 and feel good about your Gandhi like morality. Most of us are an Ocean away, some several oceans. But I don’t think that’s appealing to people who have watched there friends and neighbors murdered in brutal fashion.
While I’m here I will say Israel needs to shut down Settler violence in the West Bank. And get a better government. But those are asides to the main point.
There’s a huge excluded middle between “Do Nothing” and “Do what they are doing now”.
I did and still do believe Israel was justified in military action against Hamas. I also believe, based primarily on what I’m reading here, that they are perpetrating great evil for purposes of retribution against the Gazan people generally.
I am not convinced that Hamas was using all the hospitals in the north as command centers or even substantial military installations. So “concentrate action against non-hospital targets first, and only attack hospitals in the ultimate extreme necessity” would be a really good start. And once they do take a hospital, hold it and provision it liberally, and make it a fully working hospital as fast as possible rather than abandon it to do the best it can with no resources.
How about you be specific and tell us exactly what goals were reached by shutting down each hospital? By bombing each specific neighborhood? By killing each civilian and hostage?
I mean, it’s a bogus request. Obviously you can’t be specific about that. Arguing that any criticism must include the details of how to win Is just a way to justify every action of the IDF.
Israel is not going to kill their way to victory.
Of course I can’t be specific about it. Niether can you. That’s my point. If Israel is going to destroy Hamas, they have to do pretty much what they are doing now. Maybe there were things they could have done differently, maybe not. I don’t know if @tofor 's plan of Isolating hospitals first would work, or decrease human suffering. Maybe maybe not. I suspect it wouldn’t make that much difference. The hospitals would still be besieged.
I’m just tired of people saying “This is horrible!” and stopping there. Of course it’s horrible. But again, what are the other options for Israel to prevent another October 7th aside from brutal urban warfare?
I wouldn’t have a problem with brutal urban warfare in this case. But I don’t think that’s what’s happening. It really sounds like Israel is engaged in indiscriminate terror, which is exactly the thing that gave them (actual) justification to invade. Israel’s cause started out just, but it seems to be becoming less just over time as they don’t actually seem to care about the innocents they are killing.
I just requested that dead Palestinian civilians not be referred to as reapings from Hamas’ evil sow. I didn’t think that was a big ask, but apparently some people here are still cool with dehumanizing their enemy. I think Israel also needs to understand that causing massive civilian casualties continues to make Israeli civilians fair game in the eyes of Hamas. I know the next response is “but Hamas already views civilians as fair targets” so how is that changed?
It may also be accepting that military action against Gaza is not going to stop all terrorist attacks. At what point does the IDF actions there become more about retribution than actually ending Hamas? Israel has been playing this same stupid game for 75 years, and yet no one there seems willing to quit playing. And to once again preempt the retort of “if Israel puts their guns down, there will be no more Israel” I will say, maybe - but how has the current method been working out?
Fewer Israelis have been killed since Israel declared war than on the day before that, so pretty well, I guess.
And since 1947? But yeah, keep on plugging away, I’m sure this time it will work.
They’ve got peace treaties with 5 members of the Arab League now, as opposed to none then. There have been no all-out wars with any of the Arab states since 1973. So again, pretty well, I guess.
Great, glad to hear. If they got it all under control, they obviously don’t need our help anymore. We’ll just take the 5th Fleet home. And don’t bother calling the next time Hamas comes to visit.
Of course Israel had to do something, and that something likely had to be unsavory, but necessary, so the overall reaction of people across several countries I’ve talked to was that the war/invasion of Gaza was an understandable response.
When you are boxing with someone who punches below the belt, you can’t just continue the fight observing all the rules while he punches below the belt, you will have to punch below the belt too.
But even that can go to extremes, e.g. from one of many things I’ve read, an IDF sniper killed two women inside a church. Bombing a building with civilians in it that also has Hamas in it may be seen as justified by some (and I assume be seen as unjustified by a few in this thread), but that may have some strategic purpose, but some of the stuff the IDF is doing (e.g. the sniper shot killing of people inside the church, the killing of shirtless ex-hostages walking towards them, etc) has no strategic or tactical purpose.
So, @Larry_Borgia to answer your question about what Israel could do is, focus on things that advance Israel’s strategic objective, and cut the shit that doesn’t.
Exactly, some of Israel’s proponents in this thread are acting as if Israel by itself is powerful enough to take care of itself, but the truth is that Uncle Sam is helping them out to a large degree.
As I mentioned above:
The analogy may have been misunderstood by some, so I’ll clarify that in the above analogy Israel and Hamas are the two kids and the US and the Arab world are the two parents,
The help is still needed. But that’s help with them holding the guns, not help with the guns put away. You put away the guns, you get 10/7 again…and again and again.
I sure hope you’re not including me in that “some people here”, but just in case: as far as I know, I (a) haven’t referred — and aren’t referring — to them as “reapings”. And, as far as I know, I (b) am not dehumanizing them, either. I’m not disagreeing with either of your points, there! I’m saying I’m okay with those humans — not “reapings,” and not, uh, nonhumans — being killed!
I am no longer interested in my taxpayer dollars going towards Israel continuing to kill Palestinians with no end game in sight. Why should I? I’m not Jewish. With the end of the Cold War, Israel doesn’t give us a non-Communist partner in the region. I’m not really swayed by the whole “support a Democracy” argument when Israel is busy killing people and denying equal rights to Palestinians. And not to put too fine a point on it, but the last couple of wars that the US has been sucked into were at least some part due to our support of Israel.
I’m not really seeing what I’m getting out of this relationship.
No, I was not including you in that part of the discussion.