Israeli and Palestinian conflict

[leicsmac]

1 minute ago, MPH said:

 

and that’s what I can’t stand about all this.. sure.. make every effort to avoid civilian casualties, but Israel don’t seem to want to do that., in fact, they don’t even seem to care if civilians get killed, just as long as they get their target..

Personally, I think it's the lie of it that annoys me the most.

 

Like guys, please stop trying to Win Friends And Influence People by spouting platitudes about "minimising civilian casualties" or "following international law" when it's patently obvious neither is actually happening. At least have the basic honesty of purpose to own what you're doing and let people see that.

[Jon the Hat]

1 hour ago, leicsmac said:

Personally, I think it's the lie of it that annoys me the most.

 

Like guys, please stop trying to Win Friends And Influence People by spouting platitudes about "minimising civilian casualties" or "following international law" when it's patently obvious neither is actually happening. At least have the basic honesty of purpose to own what you're doing and let people see that.

I don't think that is a fair description.  Israel is in an impossible position.  Of course they want to minimise civilian casualties, but they cannot defend themselves against Hamas and guarantee no civilian casualties when Hamas are embedded in civilian areas.  So they have a choice, do nothing, or accept the painful reality of doing something.  It is not realistic for them to do nothing.  The ideal simply doesn't exist.  They can only hope to rid Gaza of Hamas and hand it back to a leadership who take a more conciliatory line and care more about their people than their principles.

 

You also need to look at their comms in the context of being surrounded by states which want them all dead. 

Edited 19 October 2023 by Jon the Hat

[ARTY_FOX]

5 hours ago, MPH said:

 

and that’s what I can’t stand about all this.. sure.. make every effort to avoid civilian casualties, but Israel don’t seem to want to do that., in fact, they don’t even seem to care if civilians get killed, just as long as they get their target..

You'd be shocked (or not in some cases) how many countries rules of engagement are essentially if you think they're the enemy get em. Regardless of who or what's around. 

[Mickyblueeyes]

6 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

I don't think that is a fair description.  Israel is in an impossible position.  Of course they want to minimise civilian casualties, but they cannot defend themselves against Hamas and guarantee no civilian casualties when Hamas are embedded in civilian areas.  So they have a choice, do nothing, or accept the painful reality of doing something.  It is not realistic for them to do nothing.  The ideal simply doesn't exist.  They can only hope to rid Gaza of Hamas and hand it back to a leadership who take a more conciliatory line and care more about their people than their principles.

 

You also need to look at their comms in the context of being surrounded by states which want them all dead. 

I get you but could someone explain to me why there are 65 dead and 1300 injured in the PLO controlled West Bank ? 
 

One such example was on Sky News yesterday where an Israeli general justified shooting teenagers in the head for throwing stones. I know teenagers. Some of them are dickheads. However, a trained snipper shooting them down for being a dickhead might be a bit harsh. 

My point is, over the years, the argument that this is collateral due to enemy locations is very hard to prove based on facts. There is genuine hatred on both sides and that has spilt over into the combat. 

 

Edited 19 October 2023 by Mickyblueeyes

[leicsmac]

7 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

I don't think that is a fair description.  Israel is in an impossible position.  Of course they want to minimise civilian casualties, but they cannot defend themselves against Hamas and guarantee no civilian casualties when Hamas are embedded in civilian areas.  So they have a choice, do nothing, or accept the painful reality of doing something.  It is not realistic for them to do nothing.  The ideal simply doesn't exist.  They can only hope to rid Gaza of Hamas and hand it back to a leadership who take a more conciliatory line and care more about their people than their principles.

 

You also need to look at their comms in the context of being surrounded by states which want them all dead. 

I totally agree with the nature of the choice being offered to the Israelis.

 

However, assuming that their intent to minimise civilian casualties is true in all circumstances (a point of debate in itself), my point would be that they are still trying to have their cake and eat it as it were by claiming no responsibility whatsoever for the innocent lives they take and saying that the violations of international law they inflict (of which there have been some) are not their responsibility either. It's incredibly dishonest and distasteful in face of the death and suffering being inflicted.

 

At least have the honesty to say "yes, we're killing children. Yes, we're monsters doing monstrous things, but we're doing it in the act of neutralising a bigger monster".  That would be honest, rather than the bollocks they are giving out right now... which the establishment in most Western nations and most of the UK print media appears to have swallowed hook line and sinker, because geopolitics.

[st albans fox]

2 hours ago, leicsmac said:

I totally agree with the nature of the choice being offered to the Israelis.

 

However, assuming that their intent to minimise civilian casualties is true in all circumstances (a point of debate in itself), my point would be that they are still trying to have their cake and eat it as it were by claiming no responsibility whatsoever for the innocent lives they take and saying that the violations of international law they inflict (of which there have been some) are not their responsibility either. It's incredibly dishonest and distasteful in face of the death and suffering being inflicted.

 

At least have the honesty to say "yes, we're killing children. Yes, we're monsters doing monstrous things, but we're doing it in the act of neutralising a bigger monster".  That would be honest, rather than the bollocks they are giving out right now... which the establishment in most Western nations and most of the UK print media appears to have swallowed hook line and sinker, because geopolitics.

Bit naive mac

You simply cannot use words like that in the modern era - they will be cut and clipped to take out of context 

‘Israel admits to being monsters doing monstrous things’   Or ‘yes, we’re monsters’ - official Israeli govt statement 

 

all public speakers are being incredibly careful with their words atm for this very reason

[leicsmac]

5 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

Bit naive mac

You simply cannot use words like that in the modern era - they will be cut and clipped to take out of context 

‘Israel admits to being monsters doing monstrous things’   Or ‘yes, we’re monsters’ - official Israeli govt statement 

 

all public speakers are being incredibly careful with their words atm for this very reason

Yep, I do understand why they speak as they do. I just think it's all bullshit in the name of realpolitik and perhaps we all can and should be doing better than that.

 

Perhaps however it is all just The Wire writ large and real and that the institutions that make up such things are irreversibly corrupt, and that not only is it impossible to reform them, but to try to reform them is to be crushed by the system.