They have been moved around throughout the war, especially as the war has been quite destructive to the tunnel networks.
The fact that Hamas had them out of the tunnel network is precisely why Israel had the opportunity to make the rescue attempt. I’m sure Israel has intelligence on the locations of a number of hostages, but if they’re hundreds of feet below Gaza in a tunnel, there isn’t really anything Israel can directly do to get them out, other than keep attacking Hamas until they are forced to move hostages again, generating further opportunities.
Question: is specifically believing that Israel has no right to self defense, on its own, antisemitic? Does saying the opposite (eg Bernie Sanders) necessarily mean you’re pro-Israel? Or is there a subtlety here that I’m unaware of?
I’d say you’d have to believe it for antisemitic reasons, like Jews not having the same right to self defence as other countries/peoples or something.
Does anyone claim Israel doesn’t have that right, though? I mean, is anyone down on Israel for running Iron Dome? I don’t think so.
It’s Israeli offensives that people take issue with.
Definitely not. For example, I think Israel definitely has a right to self defence. I am very much not pro-Israel (meaning Israel-as-it-exists-now.)
There’s nothing subtle about the weaponization of the antisemitism accusation.
And as I’ve said above, there is basically zero criticism of Israel for combat deaths of actual Hamas militants. Even people who are pro-Palestinian and/or anti-Zionist to the extent of always calling Hamas attacks “armed resistance” generally agree that when a Hamas militant is attacking an Israeli soldier, the Israeli soldier is entitled to shoot back.
Trying to lump together all Israeli attacks on Palestinians under the heading “Israel’s right to self defense”, though, is transparently just a propaganda move. If I’m being attacked by a rapist, for example, I don’t get to haul out an AK-47 and light up the entire street in “self-defense”. Not even if some of my victims might be the rapist’s neighbors or friends and family, or even criminals themselves.
Nobody prominent; just random online people. I hadn’t heard that argument before, and was trying to get a sense of whether such folks were necessarily “death to Israel” types or, as I said, I was missing something. I’ve wondered the same about “from the river to the sea.”
…I agree? Not sure who you’re referring to, though…?
Qatari and Egyptian mediators said they had received a formal reply from Hamas to the U.N.-backed truce proposal, and Hamas and its ally Palestinian Islamic Jihad expressed “readiness to positively” reach a deal to end the war in Gaza in a joint statement on Tuesday.
Well, if you’re really that interested, sure, here’s the OP of the post that set me thinking about this. (Look in comments, reblogs, and reblog tags for some of the content I speak of beyond the initial screenshot from Twitter. I’m also making no assumptions about this group’s size or power in general.)
Hamas and Islamic Jihad respond to Joe Biden’s Gaza peace plan
Palestinian militant groups offer ‘amendments’ to US-backed proposals with talks to continue via mediators
Of course they are. Why should they care about the people of Gaza? They are making themselves rich by stealing food aid and selling it. They have it good, they are not suffering.
Sure they are. That’s why they’re trying to get a ceasefire now. Because of all the winning they’re doing. They’re winning so much they’re getting tired of winning.
They’re not. At least some responsible parties in Israel are, though. Not all Israelis are as malevolent and/or stupid as Netanyahu and his allies. Some would prefer not to dance to Hamas’s tune.
