Back to the war, any sign of Israel massing forces for a ground attack? There’s no urgency, I suppose; in fact, they’re probably hoping the longer the blockade goes on, the weaker the conditions within Gaza itself will be. So far it seems to be airstrikes alone.
Of course there is. They will obviously not turn the power back on before they go in, and they cannot leave the civilian population without power or other supplies for long. There is already little chance of recovering hostages alive, and the chances do not increase with time.
I have no doubt that they will go in immediately as soon as they are prepared.
The only tactical approach to the tunnels I can imagine that might have a chance of saving hostages is nerve agents that incapacitate but do not kill. I don’t know if just tear gas would do it, or indeed if anything else would violate the law. Perhaps preparing for that might take a little time, but the Israelis have obviously known about the tunnel networks for a long time, so I would think they are prepared for this.
Because it’s not. Israel will not consider this. It is neither internally realistic nor externally realistic. If the government tries to murder hundreds of thousands of people, their own population will rise up in fury and demand a new prime minister, while Israel’s allies will abandon them. The Israeli government is not stupid enough to consider this as a serious option.
Being a civilized nation that abides by basic standards of human decency is a fundamental part of Israel’s defensive strategy.
I really wish I felt as certain about this as you do.
Hoo boy, it is not looking that way right now.
Cutting off food and water to an area with hundreds of thousands of children might be the act of the enraged, and an act of furious grief, but it is not meeting basic standards of human decency. If it were, they wouldn’t be facing pleas by the United Nations and Red Cross and Doctors Without Borders and so many other groups to ease up.
This.
Were you legitimately worried that the US would “glass the Middle East” with nukes after 9/11? Obviously some people did call for such a response, but were you ever concerned that this is a realistic possibility? Because what you’re proposing Israel do is in that ballpark.
I think the “open air prison” statement is apt. After all, most actual prisoners aren’t chained to a bed in solitary confinement and are, up to a point, able to move around their concrete structure and socialize with each other.
Israel has blockaded Gaza since 2005, making it extremely difficult for ordinary Gazans to leave. They have severely crippled Gaza’s economy by placing draconian restrictions on what can and can’t be imported or exported. They have, for instance, not allowed Gaza to build a seaport or an airport. The justification for the blockade is that it was necessary to prevent Hamas from smuggling weapons in. Doesn’t really seem to have worked too well at that, but has been very effective at producing a couple generations of desperately impoverished people who are prime candidates for radicalization.
I’m not proposing that Israel do this, I’m hoping that they don’t. Reading Gallant’s statements that he has “released all restrictions” from the armed forces, that the siege of Gaza won’t be lifted until all hostages are returned, and that Gaza “will never be the same” after the invasion doesn’t really fill me with confidence that his intent is to scrupulously observe international human rights law and make the protection of civilian populations a top priority.
Obviously there’s a very significant moral distinction between targeting civilians and targeting military threats, but in a heavily populated urban area, I’m not sure there’s much practical difference between “targeting” civilians and simply being indifferent to their well-being.
Thank you.
I struggle even with describing it as a moral difference. If you take actions that have a predictable effect of killing civilians, I’m not sure that not wanting those deaths makes much of a moral difference. This is a criticism I’ve had for decades of United States military actions. But I’m aware it’s well outside of international standards of warfare.
It’s a real-life trolley problem.
A trolley problem with a large number of innocent deaths on both sides of the switch. The exact numbers are unknown, which doesn’t help. But Israel’s doing nothing only means that different innocents will die; not that nobody will.
I don’t see any good choices here. Do you know of any?
An Israeli military spokesman said Israel was “going on the offensive”. Besides that, there are reports that Gaza is being softened up with unprecedented levels of strikes from aircraft and artillery, while “vast” numbers of forces (troops, tanks, and aircraft) are covering the border and at least 360,000 reservists have been mobilized.
Of course, hundreds of thousands are also protesting against the government, so who knows what will happen. [Apparently an emergency government for now.]
Definitely not. I mean, I really hate a lot of the choices that Netanyahu and his government made, but it’s not to suggest that I have a perfect answer in my back pocket.
In theory, you can notify the occupants of a building that their building will be destroyed.
Likewise, in theory, you can send people in - on foot - to destroy any weapons systems rather than blasting the whole building.
And, of course, you can work to make sure that there are areas of safety that the people can go to, that they’re aware of those locations, and that they can receive food and water while there.
The first two might not be realistic, depending on the situation on the ground.
Well, they could always take refuge in Egypt, or Jordan, or Syria…
Except they can’t. Those countries have historically expelled Palestinians, and are refusing to open humanitarian corridors to take in refugees. Why isn’t there outrage over that?
Why wasn’t there outrage over Kuwait expelling all Palestinians in 1991? why isn’t there similar outrage over what’s happened to the Kurds? The answer is because Israel is hated, so whatever happens there gets the global outrage treatment, while the Chinese can enslave an entire Muslim population and ‘re-educate’ them in an act of ethnic cleansing, and no one really cares.
Egypt and other Arab countires have been using the Palestinians as pawns in a greater conflict with Israel since the end of WWII, and they were used as pawns during the Cold War. And the Palestinian leadership has been corrupt and fanatical. Yassir Arafat had no interest in peace, and when Israel got too close to agreeing to demands that would settle the issue, he walked from negotiations and started an intifada. And made billions doing so.
There is plenty of blame to go around for the situation in the Palestinian territories. I feel sorry for the average Palestinian, but they are victims of geopolitical exploitation by many actors in the world. As is Israel.
You can recognize all these things, and understand the suffering on all sides and regret it, while still accepting that the choices now faced by Israel all seem to involve reponses that will kill a lot of people. That’s on Hamas and Iran, not Israel. Self-defense is not optional.
There’s a questionable assumption in there - apartheid and ethnic cleansing are not “basic standards of human decency” and there are people in the current administration advocating exactly. Then there’s the whole denying fuel, power, food, and water to 2+ million people. That’s not decent, either.
Which is not to argue Hamas is decent - they’re not. They’re the opposite of decent. The point is two wrongs don’t make a right.
I have often wondered the same thing. Palestinians have been historically treated abysmally by other Muslim states.
I think you are correct in that they have been used as pawns by countries/leaders who care not a whit for the Palestinians themselves, but see them as a useful tool for the ultimate cause of wiping Israel off the map.
Not really related to anything but I had never really checked the history of the region of Israel after the destruction of Jerusalem, by the Romans, up to the time of WWI.
I found it interesting to note that, under Roman and then Byzantine rule, the Jews (and then the Samaritans) rebelled against the powers-that-be and ended up sequentially getting themselves kicked out of their own homeland and scattered to the wind.
I guess this is one of those, “If you come at the King”, sorts of deals.
By AFP - Agence France Presse
October 11, 2023
That assumes the end goal was to kill people. IMO the end goal was to trigger a response from Israel that in turn triggers a response from Islamic governments in the region.
Imagine something like this:
Saudi Prince, Iran President Hold Call On Israel-Hamas War
-
Saudi Arabia’s de facto ruler and Iran’s president spoke by phone about the war between Israel and Hamas, Saudi state media said early Thursday, their first call since a surprise rapprochement in March.
-
Prince Mohammed told Raisi that Riyadh is “communicating with all international and regional parties to stop the ongoing escalation”, SPA said.
-
He also stressed “the kingdom’s firm position towards supporting the Palestinian cause”, it said.
I expect Synagogues to be attacked around the world at the very least.
I still think they need to cut off the head of the snake.
Get the Hamas leaders.
The hell with what Quatar thinks.
Don’t announce themselves. Don’t ask for an appointment, don’t knock on the door. Just go in and get them and haul their butts to someplace and force them to stop the crap now. And give intelligence.
Not certain if they would hold power over the Hamas on the ground if they were captured. But dang it, I’d do it.