A state of affairs you described as “keep[ing] Palestinians restricted to enclaves, subject to several measures that control their lives, and segregated from Jewish Israelis”.
Which, if Gaza is an occupied territory and not a part of Israel, is fully within their right. Gazans cannot be said to be “segregates from Jewish Israelis” unless Gazans are Israelis.
…I quoted directly, word for word, from the Ammnesty International Report. I included quotes marks to make it clear I was quoting somebody else, I included a direct link to the report, if you require more context or more information, I would direct you to read the report to see if it answers your questions.
Palestinians and residents of Gaza specifically are not represented in any effective way in the Israel election process despite the fact that the Israeli government controls all physical and most communication access to the Gaza Strip. That Hamas is able to rule Gaza undemocratically and through brutal suppression of opposition is a consequence of that blockade.
Stranger
I’ve never been impressed by Amnesty International and I doubt reading anti-Israel propaganda from them would change my mind on the subject. Either Gaza is a part of Israel and therefore this is a law enforcement action with the intent of suppressing an insurrection, or it’s the occupied territory of Egypt and/or some hypothetical Islamic Republic of Gaza and its citizens are not entitled to free movement into Israel.
Israel on Sunday rejected growing calls for a ceasefire in Gaza, with military specialists saying that forces are set to intensify their operations against Palestinian Islamist group Hamas, with no time frame set for their activities.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu demanded that all of the more than 240 hostages captured by Hamas during its Oct. 7 attacks are returned.
“There will be no ceasefire without the return of the hostages. This should be completely removed from the lexicon,” Netanyahu told crews at the Ramon air force base in southern Israel, reiterating the government’s long-standing position.
“We say this to our friends and to our enemies. We will simply continue until we defeat them. We have no alternative.”
Moderating:
Once again, please keep the discussion to relatively current events. If you’d like to discuss the history of Palestinian oppression, please start another thread, in a more appropriate forum than MPSIMS.
And i already removed a number of posts about apartheid as inappropriate for this thread. Please don’t bring it up again, even if you don’t use the word “apartheid”.
Once again, feel free to start a new thread, in another forum. Honestly, i recommend the pit, but you can try p&e if you prefer.
Haman in the Purim story, though, was an actual Amalekite (descended from Agag, the king of Amalek in the time of Saul), not a metaphorical Amalekite like (as far as we know) the others you mentioned.
BTW, thanks for relentlessly carrying the torch here. I’ve posted a little bit in this and other related threads, but knowing you’re responding makes me feel free to not spend about 10000% more time here than I already do. Reading all this is time-consuming enough.
…I didn’t cite anti-Israel propaganda. That isn’t an accurate characterization of the work that Ammnesty International do.
Law enforcement actions with the intent of “suppressing an insurrection” of an occupied territory are covered by the Geneva Conventions and the laws of war. Cutting water, power, food to the entire population of 2.5 million people, displacing 1.5 million of those people, killing over 4000 children, indiscriminate bombing, including 102 attacks on health care by the IDF, that includes 504 fatalities, 459 injuries. None of this is allowable under the conventions. Not even to “suppress an insurrection.”
Cite for the hospital numbers from the World Health Organization in Occupied Palestinian Territory.
First of all, what about the Egyptians? What are they, chopped liver? The Palestinians are trapped in Gaza not because of Israel, but because the Egyptians won’t let them out and no other country will take them in. Unless, of course, you claim the Gazans have an inherent right to enter Israel, in which case… no. They don’t.
Second of all, put any discussion of “occupation” aside. Assume, for the moment, that Gaza is an independent state. Does one state have the right to blockade and besiege another independent state with which it is in a state of war? If so, how would such a blockage look different than the one Israel has placed on Gaza?
I’m going to delete the comment that was previously in this post out of an abundance of caution regarding the above mod note.
True, but from my secular perspective that’s because the story of Haman was constructed based on the preexisting story. But it’s not like any of the Jewish people in the story have a duty to go and kill Haman. Haman tries to kill them and is then punished by the Shah. So I still think it fits mold either way you look at it.
While I appreciate the compliment, you realize that you are also guilting me into continuing to post here, right? 
Just kidding, I do appreciate it.
I don’t want to get slapped down for hijacking, so I’ll respond to this tangent only once more here, and I’ll be happy to pick it up elsewhere if you or anyone wants to follow up - the obligation to wipe out literal Amalek only exists when the Israelite nation is led by a duly-anointed king (Maimonides, Laws of Kings and their Wars, Chapter 1, Laws 1-2). That condition did not exist at the time of the Purim story, when they were in exile and ruled by the Persians.
The leftist French newspaper Libération has published an article critical of Al-Jazeera, accusing them of being the main source of disinformation for Hamas, focusing on the “plight of the Palestinian people” in order to build sympathy for the “Pro-Palestinian cause” while ignoring the atrocities committed by Hamas.
The article is paywalled, but here’s an allowable length (i hope) excerpt and link:
Soft power | Al-Jazeera, a massive news channel at the service of Gazans… and Hamas
Assuming a pro-Palestinian bias and glorifying the Islamist movement, the first satellite channel in the Arab world has considerable resources thanks to its Qatari funding. And remains one of the only international media to inform live from the Gaza Strip.
Al-Jazeera’s bias for the Gazans who “fall as martyrs” under the strikes of the “aggressor” or “the Israeli occupier” is obvious and assumed. The channel systematically uses the terminology of “resistance” to designate “the armed groups” that fight Israel. **Their operations against the “invasion forces” in Gaza have been welcomed, and often magnified in recent days, since the IDF’s ground offensive inside the Palestinian enclave. The operation “Al-Aqsa Flood” of the Al-Qassam Brigades, the armed wing of Hamas, on October 7, was glorified by the channel.
Al-Jazeera reported the number of Israelis killed by citing Israeli sources, without ever specifying whether the victims were soldiers or civilians. In the days following the attack, the Arabic-speaking channel completely concealed the atrocities and massacres committed by the attackers on the families on the Gaza border. Only Al-Jazeera English, the group’s English-speaking channel, reported “the horror scenes” in Kfar Aza’s kibbutz, where its correspondent went during a press visit organized by the Israeli army. Hamas, its orientation, its positions, its actions such as the legitimacy of its government in Gaza, do not arouse any criticism on the part of Al-Jazeera.
I think we are in agreement as far as is relevant to this thread. When modern Jews (modern here defined as the entire Rabbinic period) talk about Amalek it is in the context of an enemy (usually a specific person or group rather than a whole nation) that wants to destroy the Jewish people; trying to portray it as anything else is either ignorant or dishonest.
When they speak of Amalek in spirit, or Amelek’s modern analogues, yes. But any talk of a Torah commandment to genuinely eradicate the Amalekite nation refers to the descendants of the Biblical Amalek, which at present is only theoretical, but will likely be practical when the Messiah comes.
This is excellent. Al Jazeera offers a valuable non Western perspective on many issues outside the middle east, but this leads some of us on the Left to forget that their journalistic integrity extends as far as the regressive government of Qatar allows.
It’s a similar issue with the UNRWA. Providing aid to the Palestinians in Gaza is obviously very important, especially since Hamas does such a shit job of caring for civilians. Yet the specific organization in place to do this perpetuates the conflict and coordinates with Hamas.
Evidence of Hamas operating rocket launching facilities out of Boy Scout buildings and Mosques:
The video I linked earlier included footage of Hamas firing from upper floor windows in several of the hospitals that have been hit so far, as well as footage of tunnels under the hospitals.
As well as rocket launchers at playgrounds and swimming pools.
Those of us who pay attention to this conflict long-term, rather than whenever calling Israel apartheid is trendy, already knew that this is Hamas’s SOP, but the much greater amount of video footage this time around is nice to have as confirmation. Not that I expect it to sway those whose minds are already made. I’ve already seen claims that the IDF planted those rocket launchers, for example.
I’m not sure what sway of minds you are expecting. I don’t think anyone here doubted it, or supported Hamas doing it. The question is, what is the appropriate response to it.
If some terrorist group took over a Boy Scout headquarters in the US, I would expect the response to be something other than blowing up the building, boy scouts and all. If they were hiding out in a hospital, I’d hope the response wouldn’t be blowing up the hospital. Telling the boy scouts and hospital patients sorry, it’s the terrorists’ fault, doesn’t cut it.
I get it, there are no good solutions. You try to wait out the terrorists, maybe there are more attacks. You send in soldiers, some of them will probably be killed. But there are alternatives and reasonable discussion that can be had about them. Jumping from “Hamas launched rockets from the hospital, therefore bombing it is appropriate” is not the foregone conclusion you are trying to portray.