20 votes

Weekly Israel-Hamas war megathread - week of February 19

This thread is posted weekly - please try to post all relevant Israel-Hamas war content in here, such as news, updates, opinion articles, etc. Extremely significant events may warrant a separate topic, but almost all should be posted in here.

Please try to avoid antagonistic arguments and bickering matches. Comment threads that devolve into unproductive arguments may be removed so that the overall topic is able to continue.

26 comments

  1. [10]
    gowestyoungman
    (edited )
    Link
    I dont really feel qualified nor motivated to make a comment about either side in this conflict. I first studied the Arab Israeli conflict when I did a report in Grade 7. That was fifty years ago...
    • Exemplary

    I dont really feel qualified nor motivated to make a comment about either side in this conflict. I first studied the Arab Israeli conflict when I did a report in Grade 7. That was fifty years ago and I dont think the conflict has gotten less complicated since then.

    What I did find fascinating was a video that a good friend shared on facebook that purported to show the destruction in Gaza. It starts with 6 short clips of violent bomb or missile explosions and then pans over multiple shots of devastated buildings.

    What I found fascinating is that I recognized 3 out of the first 6 clips. I paused one of them, screen shot it and then went down a rabbit hole search to see why it looked so familiar. I found it. The 3 clips are not from Gaza, they are from the stored ammonium nitrate explosion in the harbor of Lebanon in August 2020.

    Here's the paused "Gaza" explosion on the left from the video and a pic from the LA Times of the Lebanon explosion four years ago: https://i.imgur.com/SdAJZgD.jpeg There are differences in the angle and elevation of the shot and the lighting, but there are so many similarities that its undeniably the same explosion.

    My point being that ALL media reports are massaged and manipulated to present a particular viewpoint, this one just happens to be more overt than most so the deception was recognizable.

    But how much of what we see and hear isn't even what we think it is?

    The sad part is that I pointed out the inaccuracies in the video to my (highly educated) friend, and the response was "it doesnt matter, just look at the other shots, we all know what's going on" I would think a discerning viewer would want to know that what "we all know" is based on accurate reports, not deceptive videos.

    27 votes
    1. Eji1700
      (edited )
      Link Parent
      This is generally why I don’t bother to discuss the topic. It’s mostly people who have never been there, know barely more than what the news or a couple of college classes told them, and aren’t...

      This is generally why I don’t bother to discuss the topic. It’s mostly people who have never been there, know barely more than what the news or a couple of college classes told them, and aren’t really looking to discuss the extreme difficulty of the entire situation so much as just hammer home some prefabricated point.

      And to be clear, I fall mostly into that category as well, and try to be aware that it affects my knowledge of the situation

      15 votes
    2. skybrian
      Link Parent
      This is reason to be cautious and look for better sources. Social media isn’t a good source, in general, because most people aren’t careful about what they share and they’re strongly motivated to...

      This is reason to be cautious and look for better sources. Social media isn’t a good source, in general, because most people aren’t careful about what they share and they’re strongly motivated to share whatever supports their side.

      I do think reporting in mainstream newspapers is somewhat better.

      8 votes
    3. [7]
      gpl
      Link Parent
      There is plenty of high quality information out there verified by multiple reputable media orgs. Sure, those all could be likewise massaged and manipulated, but I find that unlikely. Your point is...

      There is plenty of high quality information out there verified by multiple reputable media orgs. Sure, those all could be likewise massaged and manipulated, but I find that unlikely. Your point is a good one but I would be careful extrapolating conclusions from some video on social media to ALL of media or sources in general. We live in an era where it is not even impossible to find direct videos and interviews from people on the ground in Gaza talking about their experiences over the past months, not filtered through any news orgs.

      Quality information is out there and not too hard to access, and concluding that we simply cannot trust anything we hear about this conflict from any source I think is an overly strong conclusion.

      12 votes
      1. [6]
        gowestyoungman
        Link Parent
        I do agree. I think I should have been more clear in my comment - I do believe that all mainstream media reports have a bias or the message is 'massaged' if you like. But the media I DO trust the...

        I do agree. I think I should have been more clear in my comment - I do believe that all mainstream media reports have a bias or the message is 'massaged' if you like. But the media I DO trust the most is the raw footage, from people who are there at the time of the incident, and have no reason to put a spin on their report.

        Which is exactly what I saw the day of the Oct 7 attack. There are phone videos of the attackers moving through the music festival, shooting down people as they tried to flee, throwing grenades into shelters where they were trying to hide, running into kibbutz and shooting people in their homes, firing at vehicles as they tried to speed away. Probably one of the worst was someone walking up to a Coke stand at the festival that just looked abandoned but as they got closer and tilted the camera down, the floor was covered with dead young people who hadn't been there very long. It was absolutely horrible. I don't think any of that was faked, it was real because it was mere hours after the attack.

        Which makes me wonder how much longer mainstream media will be necessary. Everyone has a phone these days, and there is often instant reporting of events as they happen. That seems to be much more accurate and more powerful than a talking head telling us what to think three days later.

        6 votes
        1. [2]
          gpl
          Link Parent
          It’s also what we see daily coming out of Gaza. It sounds like we don’t necessarily disagree on the basics here, but to me (and genuine apologies if I’m reading into things) there was a subtext to...

          It’s also what we see daily coming out of Gaza. It sounds like we don’t necessarily disagree on the basics here, but to me (and genuine apologies if I’m reading into things) there was a subtext to your original comment implying that perhaps the atrocities and destruction we’re seeing daily in Gaza is being overblown or misrepresented by people with an agenda. Sure, perhaps there are certain groups in specific cases, like the one you point to, who have misrepresented things, but my point is just like on Oct 7 we have enough raw and first hand evidence that what is happening there is not okay. If we are on the same page there then ok, but that is the notion I got from your comment that I wanted to push back on.

          As for the utility of main stream media, I think there’s a sense in which their function is changing, but I think they’re still very important. I do think it’s unreasonable to expect the average person to both follow and understand the context of the myriad crises and atrocities occurring across the world each day. Compassion exhaustion is a thing. And here I think mainstream media can help: to contextualize and verify unclear parts of the story, provide input from experts, and devote time and resources to holding elected leaders accountable and uncovering wrongdoing. I’m not thinking about the average CNN or Fox News talking head here, which I tend to totally ignore, but investigative journalists, foreign correspondents, and local papers that do this type of thing. Of course every organization, no matter how “unbiased” they claim or appear to be has an angle. That’s step number 1 of media literacy is identifying the author and whatever agendas they might have, and step 2 is comparing and weighing multiple different coverages of the same event to see what details get emphasized and deemphasized by each. What we now call “mainstream media” used to be called “the free press” after all and has historical been a counterweight to overreaching governments.

          7 votes
          1. gowestyoungman
            Link Parent
            No, I dont think the atrocities in Gaza are overblown. That one video was particularly massaged. Although to be fair, I do sometimes wonder when seeing all the destroyed buildings if those are...

            No, I dont think the atrocities in Gaza are overblown. That one video was particularly massaged. Although to be fair, I do sometimes wonder when seeing all the destroyed buildings if those are from recent blasts, or is this old footage? Its hard to verify anything unless there is at least a timestamp or an on the ground witness who is livestreaming. Trust, but verify.

            I very much agree with compassion exhaustion being a major factor. All of our news is about horrible things happening, and its 24/7 around the world. I think most people care about some things passionately, but it does get very difficult to spread that to so many issues. Especially when they are half a world away, and no one we know personally is involved.

            Personally Im still a pacifist. I believe ALL war is wrong. But which one to protest? Israel-Palestine? Russia-Ukraine? Yemen-US by proxy? And Afghanistan, Ethiopia, Iraq, Syria, Somalia, Libya, the Central African Republic, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Myanmar, Colombia, and Mali are all currently in civil wars.

            7 votes
        2. streblo
          Link Parent
          I don't understand your logic here. Useless talking heads aside, actual journalism has never been more relevant. Yes, there's all sorts of misinformation on social media. Disinformation is not...

          What I did find fascinating was a video that a good friend shared on facebook that purported to show the destruction in Gaza. It starts with 6 short clips of violent bomb or missile explosions and then pans over multiple shots of devastated buildings.

          Which makes me wonder how much longer mainstream media will be necessary. Everyone has a phone these days, and there is often instant reporting of events as they happen. That seems to be much more accurate and more powerful than a talking head telling us what to think three days later.

          I don't understand your logic here. Useless talking heads aside, actual journalism has never been more relevant.

          Yes, there's all sorts of misinformation on social media. Disinformation is not only politically convenient among nationals, it's also been weaponized by nation states to decrease cohesion, undermine democracy and pursue political goals. Everything you view from sources outside your circle of trust on these charged issues should be treated with skepticism. Which is also why idealistic notions of 'citizen journalism' are dead on arrival. Trust is the most important factor here, which favours either an established media org with a history and culture of internal dissent or at least a person whose circle of trust overlaps with your own and who has an established history of dealing with the topic at hand. A random person who may or may not have ulterior motives or even be a real person at all is not something I want to replace journalism with.

          5 votes
        3. [2]
          skybrian
          Link Parent
          But, didn't you just post about how easy it is to repurpose videos that were originally taken somewhere else? I'm not going to look for this stuff because I don't like gore, and someone needs to...

          But, didn't you just post about how easy it is to repurpose videos that were originally taken somewhere else?

          I'm not going to look for this stuff because I don't like gore, and someone needs to vet them anyway.

          Geolocation doesn't need to be done by newspapers (in Ukraine there were other groups doing it), but it needs to be done by someone. (Not me!)

          1 vote
          1. gowestyoungman
            Link Parent
            Yes, but I felt the videos that came out of the slaughter at the music festival weren't repurposed because a) they were out within a very short time after they occurred, so the short time frame...

            But, didn't you just post about how easy it is to repurpose videos that were originally taken somewhere else?

            Yes, but I felt the videos that came out of the slaughter at the music festival weren't repurposed because
            a) they were out within a very short time after they occurred, so the short time frame lent some credibility because it would be hard to come up with several videos showing similar shots in that short a time. Not impossible, but it would have to be orchestrated ahead of time.
            b) there was more than one on the ground livestreamer showing the same thing - running for their lives and hiding in some scarce shrubs with lots of gunfire in the background. That's not the kind of footage that I've ever seen anywhere else - dozens of terrified young people, in casual wear, running for their lives across an open desert and hiding quietly in some shrubs.
            c) mainstream media later showed the same videos and but edited to take out the most gruesome parts. There are many that they would NOT play because the general public wouldn't like it. Which always amazes me - we want to know what's happening, we just don't want to see the reality of how bad it really is.

            2 votes
  2. smoontjes
    Link
    Israeli engineering corps is constructing a highway that will be cutting Gaza in half: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=haS3EJk4VSg This plus buffer zones inside Gaza all the way along the Israeli...

    Israeli engineering corps is constructing a highway that will be cutting Gaza in half: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=haS3EJk4VSg

    This plus buffer zones inside Gaza all the way along the Israeli border (and I assume along this highway as well) means that Gaza's territory is going to shrink by even more.

    13 votes
  3. skybrian
    Link
    Exclusive: Israeli forces fired on food convoy in Gaza, UN documents and satellite analysis reveals (CNN) … … … …

    Exclusive: Israeli forces fired on food convoy in Gaza, UN documents and satellite analysis reveals (CNN)

    Israeli forces fired on a United Nations convoy carrying vital food supplies in central Gaza on February 5, before ultimately blocking the trucks from progressing to the northern part of the territory, where Palestinians are on the verge of famine, according to documents shared exclusively by the UN and CNN’s own analysis.

    CNN has seen correspondence between the UN and the Israeli military that show the convoy’s route was agreed upon by both parties prior to the strike. According to an internal incident report compiled by UNRWA, the main UN relief agency in Gaza, which was also seen by CNN, the truck was one of 10 in a convoy sitting stationary at an IDF holding point when it was fired upon.

    No one in the convoy was hurt, but much of its contents – mainly wheat flour desperately needed to bake bread – were destroyed. Tracing the strike offers a window into the major challenges that humanitarian efforts face in getting aid to Gaza’s more than 2 million people – nearly 85% of whom are internally displaced – amid Israel’s nearly five-month bombardment of the strip.

    The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) has not responded to CNN’s repeated requests for comment on the strike. The IDF said on February 5 that it was looking into the incident.

    It is one of multiple incidents where aid convoys, as well as warehouses storing aid, have been hit since the war began.

    In the wake of the strike on February 5, UNRWA decided to stop sending convoys to northern Gaza. The last time the agency was able to deliver food north of Wadi Gaza – a strip of wetlands that bisects the enclave – was on January 23. The UN estimates that 300,000 people are still living in northern Gaza, with very little assistance. Acute malnutrition has already been identified in 16.2% of children there, above the threshold considered critical, according to the UN.

    In a statement to CNN, the US State Department called the February 5 strike on the convoy “unacceptable,” and said that humanitarian assistance needed to be able to reach civilians. “In every conversation we are having with the Government of Israel, we raise the absolute need for humanitarian workers to be able to safely distribute assistance and for civilians to be able to access assistance, and for Israel to take all feasible precautions to protect civilians,” the spokesperson said.

    Half of UNRWA’s aid mission requests to northern Gaza have been rejected since the start of the year, according to the agency. Severe delays make other journeys that are permitted no longer viable.

    Aid missions are being further complicated by several other factors – from UNRWA’s impending loss of funding, to the Israeli military’s looming offensive in Rafah and reports of harassment of humanitarian workers.

    UNRWA, the largest aid agency on the ground in Gaza, has been facilitating much-needed aid deliveries into Gaza from Israel and Egypt. Their operations have been under pressure in the wake of accusations that emerged in late January from Israeli intelligence that 12 of UNRWA’s staff were involved in the Hamas-led terror attacks on Israel on October 7.

    The agency terminated their contracts and launched an investigation. But the accusation still prompted multiple UN member states to withdraw funding and as of February 12, UNRWA had lost 72% of the required $1.2 billion it needs to cover humanitarian missions until the end of March.

    12 votes
  4. skybrian
    Link
    Israel’s economy shrank at 20% rate after outbreak of war (Financial Times) ...

    Israel’s economy shrank at 20% rate after outbreak of war (Financial Times)

    GDP declined by an annualised 19.4 per cent compared with the third quarter. On a pure quarter-by-quarter basis, the economy contracted 5.2 per cent compared with the previous three months.

    The sharp drop was caused in part by the call-up of 300,000 reservists, who had to leave behind their workplaces and businesses to embark on months of army service, the Central Bureau of Statistics said.

    Other factors to hit the economy included the government’s sponsorship of housing for more than 120,000 Israelis evacuated from the northern and southern border areas of the country.

    Following the October 7 attack, Israel also imposed tough restrictions on the movement of Palestinian workers from the West Bank into the country. The move hit the construction sector, causing labour shortages that became an additional drag on economic growth, the bureau said.

    ...

    The war has triggered a steep increase in government spending, which rose 88 per cent in the three months after the outbreak of war compared with the preceding quarter. Consumers, meanwhile, were spending 27 per cent less.
    Imports of goods and services fell 42 per cent, the report said, while exports dropped 18 per cent.

    Earlier this month, the rating agency Moody’s lowered Israel’s sovereign rating from A1 to A2 because of concerns about the war in Gaza, in particular over how long the conflict could last and its broader impact on the country’s economy.

    3 votes
  5. [5]
    HeroesJourneyMadness
    Link
    I keep hearing how complicated the long history is, and I’m sure that’s true. I’ve not read up on it- I know little more than the average American with a passing interest in history. That said-...
    • Exemplary

    I keep hearing how complicated the long history is, and I’m sure that’s true. I’ve not read up on it- I know little more than the average American with a passing interest in history.

    That said- I’ve heard what Israel has been doing to Palestine described as “slow-motion genocide” BEFORE October.

    I’ve also heard the language change over the years… going from “Palestine” to “Palestinians” to “the West Bank and Gaza Strip” and now we’re down to “Gaza”.

    I’m also sure there are fancy academic words to describe how an oppressed people who have had genocide committed against them are deeply socially able to be blind to their own recreation of these atrocities. But I don’t see much of that conversation being had.

    I have Jewish family. I don’t understand antisemitism, but that doesn’t mean I deny that it exists. I’ve heard a slur or two- it just doesn’t figure much into my day-to-day. Im sorry if it does for some people.

    That said- I absolutely believe the amazing increase in volume of antisemitic news and “anti-hate” messaging is to one extent or another signal-boosted and funded as part of a smokescreen for Israel. Who can argue when the marketing for your genocide is “don’t hate”?

    Those are just some big-picture observations from a guy who deliberately doesn’t watch a lot of news to protect his sanity. Thank you for coming to my TED talk.

    11 votes
    1. [4]
      Comment deleted by author
      Link Parent
      1. Eji1700
        Link Parent
        For the tag, remember those label's are by design done by anyone, and I believe it just takes one other person for it to show "Exemplary". Maybe there are more, but there is as always the issue of...

        For the tag, remember those label's are by design done by anyone, and I believe it just takes one other person for it to show "Exemplary". Maybe there are more, but there is as always the issue of using it as a "super like", especially in charged topics like this.

        For the rest, I do agree it's a pretty absurd take. People seem very willing to believe there's a boogeyman behind everything rather than things just being complicated, and that's really the heart of just about every conspiracy.

        7 votes
      2. [2]
        vektor
        Link Parent
        Trying not to go too far and cause issues... I think anyone who accepts the notion that Israel "signal-boosts and funds" pro-Israeli narratives must also accept that Hamas/Iran are doing the same....

        Trying not to go too far and cause issues...

        I think anyone who accepts the notion that Israel "signal-boosts and funds" pro-Israeli narratives must also accept that Hamas/Iran are doing the same. In fact, if I recall correctly the existence of Iranian troll farms is reasonably well established.

        This is obviously a war that is being waged in the information sphere as well. Let's not let that muddy the waters too much here: Humanitarian appeals should be evaluated by their arguments, not by who we insinuate to have made them.

        To hold a mirror up to HeroesJourney - and I know I'm going a bit farther than his argument, just to make a point: How do you like the claim that "Israel should stop bombing civilians even if Hamas uses them as human shields" is part of a pro-Hamas smokescreen perpetuated by Iranian troll farms? Does that feel very unsavory? I hope it does.

        4 votes
        1. HeroesJourneyMadness
          (edited )
          Link Parent
          Obviously, this is a topic fraught with controversy and IMO truth is something incredibly hard to discern. I don’t think “both sides” is a valid argument here though for two large reasons. Money...

          Obviously, this is a topic fraught with controversy and IMO truth is something incredibly hard to discern. I don’t think “both sides” is a valid argument here though for one two large reasons. Money and the US government (which might also for this purpose be considered money). Israel has the backing of large moneyed powerful interests. I don’t think Hamas does- even if you throw Iran on top. (which is a whole other topic I don’t know much about) If Iran were 100% “in” with Hamas, it seems this would be covered more in what little news I do see.

          Edit: I just saw I never answered your question. Sorry about that. I’m on mobile ATM. Yes, that claim that it’s PR from Iranian troll farms does feel and seem gross. I get how the reverse could feel awful. But again- I don’t think this intellectual “both sides” kind of argument is valid. German newspapers in the 30s and 40s I bet could have or did argue both sides all day long. It implies an equality in power and morality that I question because it’s the beginning of justification for its existence. It’s an attempt to frame the entire issue wrong. Israel is a nation. The Palestinian people in Gaza are not.

          3 votes
  6. [8]
    DanBC
    Link
    Feels a bit weird to continue calling this a war against Hamas when it's clear that it's a genocide against Palestinians.

    Feels a bit weird to continue calling this a war against Hamas when it's clear that it's a genocide against Palestinians.

    20 votes
    1. [7]
      smoontjes
      Link Parent
      I've been in the "is it really a genocide?" boat for several months because it's an extreme word to use. But the longer this goes on, the clearer it becomes that it is fast approaching what looks...

      I've been in the "is it really a genocide?" boat for several months because it's an extreme word to use. But the longer this goes on, the clearer it becomes that it is fast approaching what looks a lot like one.

      My arguments so far have mostly been in my head first of all, because I have tried to disengage from pointless bad-faith discussions on the topic.. but yeah I had just been thinking that if they truly intended to commit a genocide against Palestinians, they would not have held back this much. It's all a game to them though, isn't it? Balancing the scales. If they truly did go through with things more atrocious than what they already do, every western power would pull support and the IDF would quickly be unable to defend their country from what would be imminent attack by Hezbollah and Iran, as well as potentially other Arab nations if things were gruesome enough.

      I still think it's a bit pointless, in a way, to call it a genocide. It's splitting hairs. Israel are led by far right extremists who are committing atrocities and war crimes on a huge scale and the country's leadership should be tried - that's all that matters. They can keep arguing that they need to eliminate Hamas and Hamas started it on October 7th (not untrue to be fair) and brought it on themselves etc. etc. But at the moment, Israel have murdered over one percent of the Gazan population which is an insane number when you consider the claim from IDF that they have killed 12000 Hamas fighters (Hamas themselves claims 6000) so when you consider three or five times as many innocents have been killed... it's not not genocide. And it's only going to fuck up the future for long lasting peace and security for both Israelis and Palestinians.

      Apparently though, the average Israeli still wants the IDF to continue, which is really scary.

      This comment is becoming kind of rambly but I have a very good Israeli friend and I think that's why I was so biased in the beginning stages of this conflict. October 7th shook her to her core and I was scared she was ok, or her family had been killed that day. She is staunchly anti-anything to do with Jewish supremacy though, for whatever it's worth.. the other thing that makes me want to agree with your sentiment is a video that got posted here on Tildes, I think? Of someone 3 years ago talking about the sheer power difference between these Gaza and Israel, so yeah it's not a war, it's "just an atrocity"

      I recommend r/CredibleDefense by the way, it's very matter of fact analysis - sometimes a little too cold but it's aim is total objectivity and it's good for that.

      12 votes
      1. [6]
        teaearlgraycold
        Link Parent
        Two things. One - it's bizarre to hear playground dispute logic in a conversation about genocide. Two - even from my limited understanding this situation did not start last October.

        Hamas started it on October 7th (not untrue to be fair)

        Two things. One - it's bizarre to hear playground dispute logic in a conversation about genocide. Two - even from my limited understanding this situation did not start last October.

        7 votes
        1. [5]
          smoontjes
          Link Parent
          I'm not sure what you're arguing so I feel like you are taking my comment out of context. One I made in good faith. But if by "this situation" you mean the entire history of Israel/Palestine...

          I'm not sure what you're arguing so I feel like you are taking my comment out of context. One I made in good faith.

          But if by "this situation" you mean the entire history of Israel/Palestine conflicts, then no, it did not start on October 7th. What I was referring to though is this current war which definitely would not have happened if Hamas hadn't launched their terrorist attack.

          Hamas leadership was fully aware of the fact that Israel would respond disproportionately. They do not care about their own population though. They are religious extremists and will keep making a "martyr" of every single one of their countrymen and -women because to them, the end justifies the means. And in a similar vein, Israeli leadership is going to keep arguing that they are justified and righteous as well. Such is the nature of religious extremism (yes, on both sides).

          You can call it playground logic if you want but that's how the real world works and I'm not sure why that's bizarre to you - someone attacking someone else doesn't get solved peacefully by an adult. It evidently gets solved brutally by thousands dying.

          Recently watched this, by the way, which is very long but well worth the watch to understand the history.

          10 votes
          1. [3]
            spit-evil-olive-tips
            Link Parent
            I mean...what is your definition of "the current war"? if you define it to be "the stuff that started on October 7th", then yes, tautologically it started on October 7th. I often see a version of...

            But if by "this situation" you mean the entire history of Israel/Palestine conflicts, then no, it did not start on October 7th. What I was referring to though is this current war which definitely would not have happened if Hamas hadn't launched their terrorist attack.

            I mean...what is your definition of "the current war"?

            if you define it to be "the stuff that started on October 7th", then yes, tautologically it started on October 7th.

            I often see a version of this repeated as a pro-Israel "there was a ceasefire on October 6th" talking point (including from Hillary Clinton)

            it reminds me of this quote from Ta-Nehisi Coates, writing in 2015 about protests in Baltimore after police murdered Freddie Gray:

            When nonviolence begins halfway through the war with the aggressor calling time out, it exposes itself as a ruse.

            the war between Israel and Hamas escalated on October 7th, there's no doubt about that. but I think it's absurd to call that the "start" of anything. it'd be like saying that the North Vietnamese started a war by launching the Tet offensive.

            Israel has had a continuous blockade of Gaza since 2007 (with other on-and-off blockades happening before then).

            and a blockade is an act of war:

            According to modern international law, blockades are an act of war. They are illegal as part of a war of aggression or when used against a civilian population, instead of a military target. In such case, they are a war crime and potentially a crime against humanity.

            so by the international definition of what "war" is, the current war goes back to at least 2007. there's obviously history and context that matters from before then. but I don't think you can meaningfully define the "current war" in such a way that excludes 2007 - October 6th 2023.

            Hamas leadership was fully aware of the fact that Israel would respond disproportionately. They do not care about their own population though. They are religious extremists and will keep making a "martyr" of every single one of their countrymen and -women because to them, the end justifies the means.

            OK, so Hamas knows (or strongly believes) that Israel will respond to the October 7th attacks by increasing the collective punishment of the citizens of Gaza.

            but does that alter the moral calculus in any way? collective punishment is a war crime. if Hamas, as you say, knows that Israel will collectively punish civilians in Gaza, and doesn't care or is OK with it, does that justify the collective punishment of those civilians?

            8 votes
            1. [2]
              smoontjes
              Link Parent
              I really feel this is splitting hairs to a needless degree. I don't disagree with pretty much anything you say though I just note that it seems to me to be a pretty agreed upon that the two...

              I really feel this is splitting hairs to a needless degree. I don't disagree with pretty much anything you say though I just note that it seems to me to be a pretty agreed upon that the two parties were not in a state of active war against one another before October 7th - or October 27th when Israel invaded. I'm just a layman though so look the conflict up on Wikipedia, for whatever that's worth as a source it clearly says that the "Israel–Hamas war" is part of the "Part of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict".

              but does that alter the moral calculus in any way? collective punishment is a war crime. if Hamas, as you say, knows that Israel will collectively punish civilians in Gaza, and doesn't care or is OK with it, does that justify the collective punishment of those civilians?

              No, it alters nothing. I have literally zero solutions to anything but I feel I yesterday in my original comment already touched on the futility of Israel's acts. They are shooting themselves in the foot.

              I'm not sure why or where I'm being misunderstood but English is not my native language so maybe that's why? Or maybe I'm just bad at discussions and getting my points across properly

              4 votes
              1. Eji1700
                Link Parent
                I think you're getting your point across fine for what it's worth.

                I think you're getting your point across fine for what it's worth.

                1 vote
          2. teaearlgraycold
            Link Parent
            Oh, that wasn’t an attack on you at all. Just streaming a bit of my mental chatter into the page.

            Oh, that wasn’t an attack on you at all. Just streaming a bit of my mental chatter into the page.

            2 votes