Israel at War with Hamas October 7, 2023

[Diogenes]

There is no question this was a horrific attack by Hamas on Israel that also endangers Palestinians.
To what extent are attacks like this inevitable, considering the history of Israel?

Isn't this just another example of how religious conflict breeds violence?
or
Is it inevitable that strongly held beliefs will always ignite the passions of some?

Perhaps the difference with religions that claim authority from God is that they inspire absolute beliefs, an absolute conviction they are 'right' and therefore anything is justifiable... including following God's orders to kill your own son.

Palestinian land stolen in 1948, more in 1967, then more every day in the West Bank makes acts of terrorism inevitable. Then Netanyahu put a right wing criminal in charge of the 'Ministry of Justice,' and... BIG SURPRISE! ... another war.
"If I go the to write indictment number one, it would go to Israel's Justice Minister YARIV LEVIN. He is the man who drove this insane, corrupt, dishonest effort to basically take over the power of the Supreme Court. With Netanyahu's help, he fractured Israel. He fractured Israeli society. He fractured the Israeli ministry, the military. He fractured the Israeli air force...."
__ Tom Friedman

https://www.rawstory.com/tom-friedman-i ... A-TIAtHv6Y

[Athetotheist]

https://www.theatlantic.com/internation ... de/675602/

The most relevant of the document’s 36 articles can be summarized as falling within four main themes:

The complete destruction of Israel as an essential condition for the liberation of Palestine and the establishment of a theocratic state based on Islamic law (Sharia),
The need for both unrestrained and unceasing holy war (jihad) to attain the above objective,
The deliberate disdain for, and dismissal of, any negotiated resolution or political settlement of Jewish and Muslim claims to the Holy Land, and
The reinforcement of historical anti-Semitic tropes and calumnies married to sinister conspiracy theories.

Defeating Hamas is indeed a worthy goal, but how does it entail the obliteration of a hospital which turns out to yield no evidence of having been a Hamas HQ?

[Donray]

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/03/brie ... osion.html

https://www.cnn.com/2023/11/14/politics ... index.html

https://nationalpost.com/news/hamas-hospitals-israel

Hamas is using hospital's and schools for weapon storage. This is against UN policy.

Again, the Palestine people elected Hamas just as Germany elected Nazis. WWII was against Germany not Nazis. Palestine declared war against Iseral.

Why don't all the good Palestine's kill all the Hamas people and supporters and return the hostages?

Are you saying there are no one under 18 in Hamas or supports hamas?

[Donray]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/pa ... r-AA1lEGlQ

“A vast majority (72%; 82% in the West Bank and 57% in the Gaza Strip) said it was the correct decision for Hamas to launch their terrorist attack on October 7 in which 1,200 Israelis were murdered, 5,300+ were wounded, hundreds were taken hostage, and there was a systematic campaign of rape and sexual violence inflicted upon Israeli women,” the report noted.
“Nearly all Palestinians, 95%, claim that Israel has committed war crimes during their campaign to eliminate Hamas in response to the attacks. Only 10% of Palestinians believe that Hamas has committed war crimes while 89% said that they did not believe it.”

“85% of Palestinians had not seen the videos that were largely recorded by Hamas that showed the terrorists gleefully murdering, raping, and torturing Israeli citizens during the attacks. When asked about the atrocities, only 7% of Palestinians said that they believed it,” the report added.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/pa ... r-AA1lEGlQ

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to Donray in post #182

Hamas is using hospital's and schools for weapon storage. This is against UN policy.

So is what the IDF did to the Al-Shifa hospital. It's certainly a gross overreaction to kill dozens of defenseless civilians to eliminate weapons storage. Besides, the pretext was that Al-Shifa was being used as a vast Hamas command center. Apparently, it wasn't.

WWII was against Germany not Nazis.

WWII wasn't a fight against Nazis?

Why don't all the good Palestine's kill all the Hamas people and supporters and return the hostages?

What weapons do the good Palestinians have?

Are you saying there are no one under 18 in Hamas or supports hamas?

Let's look at it again:

"In fact, since the median age of Gazans is 18, half of Hamas’ subjects weren’t even born when the election took place. Since they have known no alternative, have absorbed little information but Hamas propaganda, and have witnessed periodic outbursts of violent conflict with Israel throughout their lives, it is impossible to know what they really think about their rulers."

[Purple Knight]

We can even say that my standard may cause some harm, perhaps to the guilty person's family, but that is far different than deliberate harm, physical or otherwise. One involves unintended consequences, sort of like, collateral damage, whereas the other involves deliberately causing suffering and death. The guilty person's family was not my intended target, whereas in your position, they are the intended target.

I see where you're making the distinction. So you're not fundamentally inconsistent. And I agree with you that the ideal is to be Ghandi. Sometimes you can be Ghandi but sometimes you can't. It's not a false dichotomy to observe that in at least some instances, it's getting justice through violence or not at all, and in that case (which I believe to be so for the conflict in question) I can't condemn people for being violent.

You say there's an obligation to make sure you're not using violence unnecessarily. I don't disagree in most cases, and the planning that goes into terror attacks puts them squarely into the realm of those majority cases.

But you do have to weigh in on what you would say, if it did turn out that Israel is so fundamentally unsympathetic to the Palestinians, and at the same time so fundamentally concerned for its own People, that killing their children was really the only way to force them to give any consideration at all? I'm not saying you're wrong that there exists some peaceful way for the Palestinians. I don't see any but you might always be right, and in that case my position is wrong because it's based on there being no other viable option. If there is one then the Palestinians are just as guilty as Israel. But what if there really isn't a peaceful option? What if they can't be Ghandi?

[Donray]

[Replying to Athetotheist in post #184]

War is hell. Hamas knew that it wanted a war and got it. Hamas has no regard for those Palestine's that you say are good. Hamas is the one to blame for all the people killed during the WAR they wanted. Iseral is defending itself.

So, the Palestinis got what they wanted. WAR. And now they are begging because WAR is hell for everyone. Germany was destroyed during war and so will Gaza. It is what Hamas wanted.

To end the war all Hamas needs to do is surrender and make sure ALL their hostages are released and not one woman was raped.

DON"T blame Israel for protecting their people.

[AgnosticBoy]

I see where you're making the distinction. So you're not fundamentally inconsistent. And I agree with you that the ideal is to be Ghandi. Sometimes you can be Ghandi but sometimes you can't.

Ghandi was a pacifist. I only brought him up to show that it's possible to fight for peace and be successful, even under an unjust system/circumstances. I'm not a pacifist because I'm willing to use force, up to and including war, when it is justified.

But you do have to weigh in on what you would say, if it did turn out that Israel is so fundamentally unsympathetic to the Palestinians, and at the same time so fundamentally concerned for its own People, that killing their children was really the only way to force them to give any consideration at all? I'm not saying you're wrong that there exists some peaceful way for the Palestinians. I don't see any but you might always be right, and in that case my position is wrong because it's based on there being no other viable option. If there is one then the Palestinians are just as guilty as Israel. But what if there really isn't a peaceful option? What if they can't be Ghandi?

I've answered this question already. There is no guarantee that any option would work. Ideally, non-violent approaches should be tried before violent ones. If I have to resort to violence, then I can just do so by going after the people that are actually a threat or who are actually fighting against me. That shouldn't have to involve looking a baby or any innocent person in the eyes and slitting their throats as Hamas is accused of doing.

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to Donray in post #186

DON"T blame Israel for protecting their people.

Israel isn't being blamed for protecting their people. It's being blamed for violating international humanitarian law, which being attacked does not give a country the right to do.

[William]

[Replying to Athetotheist in post #188]

DON"T blame Israel for protecting their people.

Israel isn't being blamed for protecting their people. It's being blamed for violating international humanitarian law, which being attacked does not give a country the right to do.

Of interest, are the arms manufactured and sold to buyers produced by the same group of people who make the International Humanitarian Laws?

{Internet Search International Humanitarian Laws.}

International humanitarian law (IHL) is a set of rules that seek to limit the effects of armed conflict. It lays out the responsibilities of states and non-state armed groups during an armed conflict. It requires, among other things: the rapid and unimpeded passage for humanitarian aid during armed conflicts.

The core fundamental principles of IHL are:
The distinction between civilians and combatants.
The prohibition to attack those hors de combat (i.e. those not directly engaged in hostilities).
The prohibition to inflict unnecessary suffering.
The principle of necessity.
The principle of proportionality.

The principle of necessity.
In this chapter, I will discuss the principle of necessity, which in previous eras was thought to be a cornerstone of Just War theory. The principle of necessity seems to be simple indeed. In situations where the only way to achieve military victory in a Just War requires the employment of a certain tactic, say the bombing of cities, then that tactic is justified regardless of other normative considerations. I will explain what the basis and limit of this principle are, arguing that the principle of necessity is not simple or easy to apply. I will also argue that this principle should be seen as subsidiary to the principle of humane treatment. Military necessity should be seen as a kind of emergency exception, at best, and not as a guiding principle of humanitarian law.

When people say that humanitarian law is different from human rights law, as we saw in Chapter 4, they are primarily thinking of humanitarian law's utilitarian-sounding principle of necessity that seems to justify almost any tactic, including intentional killing and torture, as opposed to the human rights not to be killed or tortured, which seem to prohibit these tactics in all circumstances. If we are going to bring these two important areas of international law together, we will need to reconcile such differences. This is one of the main tasks of this chapter. {SOURCE}

The principle of proportionality.
Proportionality is a core principle in international law, which provides that the legality of an action shall be determined depending on the respect of the balance between the objective and the means and methods used as well as the consequences of the action.

What is the principles proportionality rule?
The rule of proportionality requires that the anticipated incidental loss of human life and damage to civilian objects should not be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage expected from the destruction of a military objective.
When such laws are broken, what is the consequence and how is it enforced?

{IS} How Does International Humanitarian Law Apply in Israel and Gaza?
From the site. October 27, 2023 1:45PM EDT

It is important to say that the rules of law are non-reciprocal, meaning that they apply irrespective of what the other side has done. Violations - such as deliberately targeting civilians or imposing collective punishment - can never be justified by claiming that another party has committed violations, or that there are power imbalances or other injustices

The laws of war only apply in specific situations, notably during an armed conflict or an occupation. Other laws, particularly international human rights law, apply at all times, governing the duties of all states to protect the rights of the people in the territory where they have jurisdiction or a degree of control.

International humanitarian law governs the conduct of hostilities and is distinct from the law that governs the decision to use force.

What are the consequence's imposed upon countries at war which break the International humanitarian law?

[foolmefoolsyou]

[Replying to Athetotheist in post #177]

NO to your question. Mow answer me how many Palestine people are Hamas or support Hamas? Hamas got elected so at least 50% support or are Hamas what is your estimate?

Israel Knew Hamas’ Attack Plan a Year Before Oct. 7: Report
A YEAR BEFORE Hamas’ Oct. 7 attack on Israel, a document detailing plans to carry out the assault circulated among Israeli officials, according to the New York Times.
http://tinyurl.com/23644mzb
https://tinyurl.com/38dtrezp

Israel has been attacking Gaza for decades, trying to ethnically cleans the land for Zion settlements
Timeline: Israel’s attacks on Gaza since 2005
This is the latest assault by Israel on Gaza since the 11-day war in May 2021 killed hundreds and wounded thousands.
https://tinyurl.com/mrxuun7a

Effects of the Gaza War (2008–2009)
There are multiple humanitarian, medical, economic, and industrial effects of the 2008–2009 Gaza War which started with the Israeli air strikes on 27 December 2008 and ended on 18 January with a cease-fire implemented unilaterally by Israel, and later the same day by Hamas and other Palestinian factions. The cease-fire followed twenty-two days of bombardment by land, sea and air which left over 1,300 Palestinians dead and over 5,000 injured, and the death of 13 Israelis. The United Nations Development Programme warned that there will be long-term consequences of the attacks on Gaza because the livelihoods and assets of tens of thousands of Gaza civilians have been affected
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_o ... 80%932009)

The 2014 Gaza War, also known as Operation Protective Edge (Hebrew: מִבְצָע צוּק אֵיתָן, romanized: Miv'tza Tzuk Eitan, lit. 'Operation Strong Cliff'), was a military operation launched by Israel on 8 July 2014 in the Gaza Strip[/b], a Palestinian territory that has been governed by Hamas since 2007. Following the kidnapping and murder of three Israeli teenagers in the West Bank by Hamas-affiliated Palestinian militants, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) initiated Operation Brother's Keeper, in which some 350 Palestinians, including nearly all of the active Hamas militants in the West Bank, were arrested. Hamas subsequently fired a greater number of rockets into Israel from the Gaza Strip,
The Israeli military operation aimed to stop rocket fire into Israel from the Gaza Strip.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Gaza_War

As a response to the above we get this~~~~~~~~

The Arabic word 'Hamas (حماس) means "courage" or "zeal".
The Hamas covenant interprets its name to mean "strength and bravery".
HAMAS–the acronym for Harakat al-Muqawama al-Islamiya (Islamic Resistance Movement)—is the largest and most capable militant group in the Palestinian territories and one of the territories’ two major political parties. HAMAS emerged in 1987 during the first Palestinian uprising, or intifada, as an outgrowth of the Muslim Brotherhood’s Palestinian branch. The group is committed to armed resistance against Israel and the creation of an Islamic Palestinian state in Israel’s place. HAMAS has been the de facto governing body in the Gaza Strip since 2007, when it ousted the Palestinian Authority from power.
OPERATING AREAS
Primarily in Gaza; also maintains a presence in the West Bank; Palestinian refugee camps in Lebanon; and key regional capitals, such as Doha, Qatar, and Cairo, Egypt.'