Those organizations have different priorities than the IDF. Doctors without borders obviously wants to save lives, Amnesty International wants to free prisoners. I believe the IDF and Israeli government wants to preserve the lives of Israeli civilians.
If the IDF targeted civilians, that would be going to far. And if there are incidents where that has occurred, which surely has happened in the history of the IDF, then the people responsible should absolutely be fired.
But I have seen 0 evidence for anything like this. The only evidence provided is “but it’s a school!” and “but look at the numbers that the Ministry of Health put out!”.
And that is why, again and again, I have asked those on your side to propose a solution that effectively combats Hamas without this level of civilian damage. Because you can keep insisting that another, better solution must exist, but unless you actually propose such a method, I think you are wrong about that. Not because you support Hamas, but because you’re relying on unreliable information, much of it disseminated by Hamas allies.
The much larger factor is the UNRWA’s ridiculous definition of “refugee”, which applies to Palestinians and no one else on the planet. As well as the way that they routinely cover for Hamas.
Netanyahu is a real piece of shit, but he’s also not the one running the war, and those human rights organizations do have a record in the region - one I don’t think nearly as highly of as you appear to.
That seems a little inaccurate.
https://www.unrwa.org/who-we-are
The fact that they define Palestine refugees as “one group of refugees” makes me think that they’re not treating them as equivalent.
Given their establishment specifically
“to carry out […] direct relief and works programmes” for Palestine refugees
it’d be odd for them to work with other refugees.
There may be enough evidence for me to condemn them elsewhere, but that really doesn’t look like enough. Nor does the National Review article, which raises suspicions but is hardly a smoking gun.
No other group passes refugee status generation to generation. The only reason UNRWA is different is to enable the Palestinian-Israeli conflict to be perpetuated.
Why do all refugees from all countries go through one group aside from Palestinian refugees who go through their own unique group with different rules for what a refugee is? And why is it that the differences just so happen to create a pemenant refugee group?
If your demand is for some random guy sitting at a computer to propose a specific military strategy that meets your standards before you’ll consider that the IDF is not taking the best approach, then I’d guess you aren’t going to be reevaluating any time soon.
“In 1965, UNRWA changed the eligibility requirements to be a Palestinian refugee to include third-generation descendants, and in 1982, it extended it again, to include all descendants of Palestine refugee males, including legally adopted children, regardless of whether they had been granted citizenship elsewhere.”
All descendants of Palestine refugee males seems a bit odd.
If you assume that the IDF is not taking the best approach it possibly can despite lacking a sufficient understanding of the situation to even suggest an alternative at the level of rigor necessary for an internet debate, then I’d guess you aren’t going to be reevaluating any time soon.
If you aren’t comfortable suggesting an alternative, what makes you so sure one exists?
https://www.unrwa.org/who-we-are/frequently-asked-questions
…I log into Twitter and Reddit and everyone is talking about the UNRWA. Then I log into the Dope and everyone here is talking about the UNRWA.
The UNRWA isn’t the problem here. And they aren’t doing anything unusual. And on the one hand we’ve got a few teachers who made inappropriate tweets, and on the other hand we’ve got doctors and professors who signed a letter urging the bombing of hospitals.
I’m not going to be judging every teacher in the UNRWA or every doctor in Israel based on either of these things.
Depends on whether your goal is to help solve the conflict or perpetuate it.
…I’m assuming the IDF are not taking the best approach because of the over 4000 dead children.
And I’m not going to be reevaluating any time soon.
Again:
Would it help if the IDF turned Iron Dome off and put soldiers inside the bomb shelters to keep out Israeli children until the body count evened out a bit?
…the alternative is to stop killing the children.
Got it, so Israel should let Hamas kill Israelis with impunity as long as they find a kid to hide behind.
My take on it is that no matter what at the end of Israel’s response to the attack, Hamas is going to have leadership, members and weapons to carry out another 10/7 attack. The main way to prevent that was always going to be security and intelligence.
I would still support a military response to cripple Hamas to the extent that is reasonable. I think there actually are high level Hamas leaders where if the best you can do kill them involves dozens of civilians dying that is still a worthy tradeoff. Based on the amount of bombs dropped on Gaza, they are pretty clearly going after lower level members that we’ve seen time and time again Hamas have little trouble recruiting replacements. So I would bomb a lot fewer Hamas members, even if they are using human shields. But I ultimately think that the number of deaths we’ve seen cannot be reasonable because Hamas will still be able to regroup as they always have in this conflict.
And while I could be wrong it seems like Israel is not planning on perpetually occupying Gaza, but if the plan is to temporarily occupy and take out a lot more of Hamas’s infrastructure, it would make sense to do the evacuation order and then not extensively bomb the areas they tell people to evacuate to.
And I don’t think it’s been necessary to shut off the water, electricity etc. at any point. If they modified their operation to do everything else and just never do that, it would have been more humane without compromising any legitimate strategic goal of reducing the ability of Hamas to attack them.
…4000 Palestinian children aren’t dead because “Hamas are hiding behind them.” They are dead because the IDF strategy is indiscriminate and hasn’t prioritised not killing innocents. Add to this the siege, which doesn’t target Hamas, but targets the 2.5 million people living in the Strip.