German Hostage Found Dead

[Belsnickel]

(12-14-2023, 11:28 AM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Was that so hard to answer, i mean 1k words to admit that the Peel Partition offered 2 states and you are still trying to argue it.
Factual records???  Like how the Jews were there Long before the Arabs?  
Why are you arguing about who owned the land? The British conquered it and took it from the Ottoman Empire.

King David took Jerusalem and named it as the capital of Israel in 1000 BC for the Jews (and built the first Temple), before them it was the Canaanites.
Then the Assyrians came along and conquered part of Israel and laid siege to Jerusalem in 701 BC.
Then the Babalyonines came along and conquered it all and laid waste to the Temple 586 BC
Then Persian King Cyrus conquered it from the Babalonians and allowed the Jews to return. 516 BC
Switched hands several more times, Alexander the Great, Hasmonean Dynasty of Jewish Rulers, Romans, Persians again.

632 Muhammed, the prophet of Islam, died and was said to ascend to heaven from a rock in the center of where the Jewish Temple used to be. 

That's kinda clear that the Jewish were there first and kicked out???? 

1099 AD Crusades starts.
1187 AD Saladin captures it.
1517 Ottoman capture it.
1917 British Capture it.
1948 State of Israel established.

(12-14-2023, 11:28 AM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: King David took Jerusalem and named it as the capital of Israel in 1000 BC for the Jews (and built the first Temple), before them it was the Canaanites.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(12-14-2023, 07:57 PM)Belsnickel Wrote:

Yeah, that's why these historical "we were here first" arguments are really a non-starter.  They do absolutely nothing to contribute to a solution to the actual issue.  Every single square inch of land inhabited from humans was in the hands of another group of humans at some time.  It's utterly immaterial to the present day.  The question at hand is, is there a middle of the road solution that both parties can stomach?  No solution of consequence will please either party.

[Dill]

(12-14-2023, 06:35 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Excusing and mitigating their actions while drawing equivalencies to the IDF is absolutely defending them.
Except it's not a lie.

Except no one is doing any of that and you are claiming they are. That's not exactly the truth.

Cite a direct "excuse" then, and a direct claim of "equivalence." Post number and thread.

Not some emotional bank shot like "it's ABSOLUTELY 'excusing' if you mention the occupation." 

If you can't do that then this just another attempt to censor discussion, making it all about what YOU can tolerate,

and trying to de-legitimate perspectives based on human rights, international law, and history, unlike yours.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(12-15-2023, 01:20 PM)Dill Wrote: Except no one is doing any of that and you are claiming they are. That's not exactly the truth.

Cite a direct "excuse" then, and a direct claim of "equivalence." Post number and thread.

Not some emotional bank shot like "it's ABSOLUTELY 'excusing' if you mention the occupation." 

If you can't do that then this just another attempt to censor discussion, making it all about what YOU can tolerate,

and trying to de-legitimate perspectives based on human rights, international law, and history, unlike yours.

How about this?

(12-05-2023, 09:43 AM)Dill Wrote: Would you put it past Israel to deliberately bomb a hospital and call it an "accident"? 

I see this question, I have to wonder what the purpose of it is in a thread about female hostages being raped and killed?  Could it be an attempt to draw an equivalence of "bad behavior" between Hamas and the IDF?  Why, I think it just might be.  I'm sure your logic twisting non-answer will be very entertaining.  You have a very long history of heavily criticizing Israel and excusing/mitigating excesses of Islamic extremists.  At least be a man and own it.  Also, kindly stop derailing a thread about female hostages being raped and killed in order to defend your indefensible position.  Thank you.

[Dill]

(12-15-2023, 03:08 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote:  Also, kindly stop derailing a thread about female hostages being raped and killed in order to defend your indefensible position.  Thank you.

First, a post to explain why I won't be following that polite order on principle. 

The disinformation surrounding the Arab-Israeli conflict enables bad U.S. foreign policy and an illegal occupation. In liberal democracies, challenging disinformation and contesting ideological frames which otherwise limit and distort understanding of policies is generally considered good thing. 

So three points of context that should operative on every thread about the current Hamas-Israel war:

1. Hamas exists because of Israeli dispossession and occupation (not because of "ISLAM" or "anti-semitism"). 

2. The current war, and all its ugly events, follow from a confluence right-wing Israeli and right-wing Palestinian politics.

3. And no one who really wants to "contribute to a solution to the actual issue" will block discussion of 1 and 2 on any thread thereon.

Expanding context is a requirement on this thread especially. No serious discussion of rape as a war crime can go very far as repetitive "condemnation." Even a lengthy, lurid description of rape evidence to help people imagine the crime will become tiresome if repeated. Hence we BOTH link discussion to more than just rape and more than just Hamas, striving to place these incidents in a larger context. 

You do this by, for example, transferring the hate and anger you foment here to other targets, like "leftist progressives" who supposedly aren't moving fast enough to condemn rape as a military tactic (and without even checking whether that is actually the case). 

That's not "derailing" from your perspective. Nor is OtherMike's foray into historical error on Israel's behalf, which also escapes your urge to censor. So your derailing charge is just a very selective filtering of thread contributions through a hard right vision of what the conflict is about. And that vision can only be maintained by policing information and perspectives which undermine it.

[Dill]

(12-15-2023, 03:08 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I'm sure your logic twisting non-answer will be very entertaining.  You have a very long history of heavily criticizing Israel and excusing/mitigating excesses of Islamic extremists.  At least be a man and own it.  

Lol. Umpteenth reminder--Labelling, especially pre-labeling, is not argument. 

My "long history of heavily criticizing Israel and excusing/mitigating excesses of Islamic extremists," if we look at actual cases, is just my long history of exposing your disinformation about the Arab-Israeli conflict and your targeting one ethnic group for constant denigration. 

No one in this forum has more actively sought to disseminate Israeli state propaganda about Israel's "war of independence," 1967, and Hamas purported use of human shields. You've claimed Muslim immigrants dilute the culture of Germany and that Islam is a threat to democracy; you've defended Trump's Muslim ban, and in myriad places presented ISIS and the Taliban as defining representatives of Islam.  If you were targeting Jews or Hispanics like this, I'd be "excusing" them too. 

All of the disagreements between us that I can remember, about whatever topic, are really at base arguments about whether human rights should be extended to all people, and whether accurate, fact-based analysis should take priority over ideology.  Were I given to retrograde gendering of manly honesty, I'd happily own this "very long history."  

[Mike M (the other one)]

(12-14-2023, 04:07 PM)Dill Wrote: I'm familiar with this history. Your conception of "sides" is rather too simple here.

E.g., only some Jews were taken to Babylon, their upper classes. The rest remained living and farming in Palestine. The land was not empty.
With the Muslim conquest, many Jews converted to Islam by the 8th century.  Today's Palestinians are a mixture of all the people who have
lived in Palestine throughout history--including Jews.

The question of land ownership in Palestine and statehood for Palestinians can't be settled by appeals to nations dissolved thousands of years ago and whose ancestors are now on "both sides" of the present conflict.

And in a courtroom--international or Israeli--the theft of land from legally titled owners in the present cannot be adjudicated by foggy historical both-sidesism.  Land taken by force in '47, or today in East Jerusalem and the West Bank, cannot be legitimated by vague references to Saladin's conquest of Jerusalem.
Present claims and titles do not legally rest on some determination of who was in Palestine first millennia ago. They rest on contemporary conceptions of law and universal human rights existing deeds. 

No one who supports existing law and conceptions of universal rights can look at the current conflict and infer that "both sides" have done their "fair share" to cause the problems we have today, when only one side invaded the country and took it by force from the people living there. The problem is not something that happened in the 7th century CE.  It's an illegal occupation going on right now. Today.

Quite a double standard at play if someone looks at this history and reframes forcible seizure of land as Palestinian refusal of statehood.

Administrating: "People who administrate are in charge."
So 4+ posts and 1k+ words, you finally agree, the British were in control of the land and rights of the people on that land. 
I'm tired of this song and dance.

Looks like you don't know history as well as i thought. 

You could have saved yourself and us from a lot of unnecessary words, by simply saying the Palestinians have ties to that land as well during ancient times via Philistia in the South (which was a larger area than the Gaza Strip is).


And in case you and some of the rest of you have already forgotten, I said BOTH have claims to the land in that area dating back to Ancient times.


And i also know that some of you are blowing off the King David part cause it comes from the Bible. 
Let me remind you, the bible is FULL of ancient historical references, IE Cities and People and so on, Not that all of the Stories are accurate that involve man's interpretations of events. 

[Mike M (the other one)]

(12-14-2023, 07:57 PM)Belsnickel Wrote:

Are you saying that King David did not exist and that the Egyptian Reliefs from that time period are incorrect? Not even including the references to David from the Quran? Those things mention King David as an Israelite King and Prophet of Allah. 

[Belsnickel]

(12-18-2023, 03:16 AM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Are you saying that King David did not exist and that the Egyptian Reliefs from that time period are incorrect? Not even including the references to David from the Quran? Those things mention King David as an Israelite King and Prophet of Allah. 

Nope. I was highlighting the contradiction in your post about the Jews being there first. I mean, this is also not considering that the people we know as the Israelites weren't Jews as we know them, today, anyway as they were not monotheistic until the Babylonian exile when they first encountered Zoroastrianism which is when they ditched other deities in their religious texts. In addition, the non-Jewish inhabitants in the Palestinian territories are also descendants of those Israelites that remained during the various diasporas, often because of the inability to afford to leave, and they eventually converted.

Anyway, the whole "who was there first" thing is, as SSF and I discussed before, too complex to really use to justify anything in this conflict.

[Dill]

(12-18-2023, 03:13 AM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Administrating: "People who administrate are in charge."
So 4+ posts and 1k+ words, you finally agree, the British were in control of the land and rights of the people on that land. 
I'm tired of this song and dance.

Looks like you don't know history as well as i thought. 

Whaa??? I've never disputed that British were administering the Mandate.

Our disagreement was not whether British were administrating the land, but whether they "owned" it and had a right to give it away. Your claim (#84) was that the Palestinians did not own their own land. And the British "owned all of their rights" by right of conquest (which is not recognized in international law). That is categorically false.

Your primary claim was that Palestinians have rejected statehood 5 times, defining them as the problem, not the people
who took their land by force and still hold 5 million Palestinians under an illegal occupation.

My counter is that Palestinians have never received a genuine offer, and there is no state or legal entity which had a legal right
to offer their land to immigrants--certainly not the state which seized their land by force. The first two "offers" were offers to
give their land away, and the remaining were offers to get a little archipelago of fenced in towns on the West Bank with no
sovereignty. That's not statehood. So "offers" sure, but not valid offers.

Your counter to this history is "See, they did get offers." 

(12-18-2023, 03:13 AM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Looks like you don't know history as well as i thought. 

You could have saved yourself and us from a lot of unnecessary words, by simply saying the Palestinians have ties to that land as well during ancient times via Philistia in the South (which was a larger area than the Gaza Strip is).
And in case you and some of the rest of you have already forgotten, I said BOTH have claims to the land in that area dating back to Ancient times.
And i also know that some of you are blowing off the King David part cause it comes from the Bible. 
Let me remind you, the bible is FULL of ancient historical references, IE Cities and People and so on, Not that all of the Stories are accurate that involve man's interpretations of events. 

The Bible is a story that involves "man's interpretation of events."

Since Biblical claims to land create no legal standing in modern international law, "some of us" are not much interested in King David or whether BOTH have claims dating back to ancient times. So far, I don't see any recognition/understanding of international law in your argument, or of the conception of universal human rights which underpins it.

This current conflict is not about whether Palestinians had "ties" to the land they lived on for thousands of years, but whether a community of Jews immigrated from Europe had a right to take that land from them by force, and then hold generations of their descendants under military control without citizenship or rights.

You seem to think they do have that right, and it is retro-actively justified by Palestinian refusal to accept dispossession, plus King David or something.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(12-13-2023, 07:08 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Both sides have claims to that land dating back over 2k years. The British tried to figure out a way to make it work and the Arabs make the Republicans Party of No look like amateurs compromisers. They've made it perfectly clear over the years that anything involving the Jews is a NO Deal.

(12-18-2023, 08:22 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: Nope. I was highlighting the contradiction in your post about the Jews being there first. I mean, this is also not considering that the people we know as the Israelites weren't Jews as we know them, today, anyway as they were not monotheistic until the Babylonian exile when they first encountered Zoroastrianism which is when they ditched other deities in their religious texts. In addition, the non-Jewish inhabitants in the Palestinian territories are also descendants of those Israelites that remained during the various diasporas, often because of the inability to afford to leave, and they eventually converted.

Anyway, the whole "who was there first" thing is, as SSF and I discussed before, too complex to really use to justify anything in this conflict.

Ofc it's a contradiction, It seems i have to take an extreme opposite stance in order for Dill to meet me half way (which is usually what i said in the first place)

[Dill]

(12-15-2023, 03:08 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Cite a direct "excuse" then, and a direct claim of "equivalence." Post number and thread.
How about this?
Dill wrote: Would you put it past Israel to deliberately bomb a hospital and call it an "accident"? 

I see this question, I have to wonder what the purpose of it is in a thread about female hostages being raped and killed?  Could it be an attempt to draw an equivalence of "bad behavior" between Hamas and the IDF?  Why, I think it just might be.  

That's neither an "excuse" nor a direct claim of "equivalence."  All of my responses to your post are about the internal limits on your "wondering."  

My post #45 was in response to Millhouse's comment: "Wouldn't put it past Hamas that they will round them all up and put them in some refugee hospital, and then blow it up blaming Israel." And also to Luvnit's similar, constant generation of unrestricted Hamas evil to explain civilian casualties and the like.

But I am definitely violating the unstated interpretive rule operative in their and your posts, which requires the IDF be held blameless of war crimes or criminal intent, while opening the imagination to any and all possible evil on Hamas' side. E.g. if the body of a hostage is found, there is no consideration of the possibility that Israeli bombing could have directly caused the death; it just has to be Hamas silencing victims

And yet, yesterday the IDF killed three Israeli hostages themselves, as they tried to surrender with a white flag.  
https://www.cnn.com/2023/12/16/middleeast/what-we-know-hostages-killed-israel-gaza/index.html.  
Had the first report simply been of three more dead hostages found, who knows what Hamas motives would have been spun up to explain their deaths.

Not a stretch to suppose that many Palestinian civilians in Gaza have been killed this way, but your "no-equivalence" rule blocks basic recognition of such possibility.  Reminding people of the IDF's sordid history of indiscriminate targeting and using women and children as human shields isn't to create "equivalence" but to break what is in effect an ideological constraint on discussion and encourage a more realistic assessment of what is happening in Gaza. If you lack capacity for analysis-before-blame, then of course any such analysis will just look like another style of blame.

Casting all evidence controverting your interpretive rule as "excusing" or "equivalence" is just a form of crude censorship, an attempt to shape discussion with blame rather than to encourage accurate understanding of what is happening in this new war and why.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(12-18-2023, 10:31 PM)Dill Wrote: That's neither an "excuse" nor a direct claim of "equivalence."  All of my responses to your post are about the internal limits on your "wondering."

Good lord, your statements just ooze with pomposity.  

Quote:My post #45 was in response to Millhouse's comment: "Wouldn't put it past Hamas that they will round them all up and put them in some refugee hospital, and then blow it up blaming Israel." And also to Luvnit's similar, constant generation of unrestricted Hamas evil to explain civilian casualties and the like.

Ahh, so by your own admission you're attempting to draw a equivalence between the IDF and Hamas.  Thank you for finally having the courage of your convictions and admitting it.

Quote:But I am definitely violating the unstated interpretive rule operative in their and your posts, which requires the IDF be held blameless of war crimes or criminal intent, while opening the imagination to any and all possible evil on Hamas' side. E.g. if the body of a hostage is found, there is no consideration of the possibility that Israeli bombing could have directly caused the death; it just has to be Hamas silencing victims

Another Dillism false equivalence.  War crimes can happen inadvertently.  Civilians can be killed, especially during urban warfare, with no direct intent to kill them.  By strict definition this is a war crime.  Is it at all comparable to Hamas deliberately and systemically targeting civilians for murder, torture, gang rape and kidnapping?  NOPE!  But for you it is, hence my castigation of your deplorable position.

Quote:And yet, yesterday the IDF killed three Israeli hostages themselves, as they tried to surrender with a white flag.  
https://www.cnn.com/2023/12/16/middleeast/what-we-know-hostages-killed-israel-gaza/index.html.  
Had the first report simply been of three more dead hostages found, who knows what Hamas motives would have been spun up to explain their deaths.

Yes, a tragic occurrence.  And by the IDF's own admission the soldiers in question did not follow the ROE.  I'm sure this horrible occurrence will haunt them the rest of their days.  Unlike the Hamas animals who openly celebrated their wanton slaughter and rape of civilians, going so far as to phone their parents to brag about it.  As for your "what if" scenario, it deserves zero consideration, especially from an apologist equivocator.

Quote:Not a stretch to suppose that many Palestinian civilians in Gaza have been killed this way, but your "no-equivalence" rule blocks basic recognition of such possibility.  Reminding people of the IDF's sordid history of indiscriminate targeting and using women and children as human shields isn't to create "equivalence" but to break what is in effect an ideological constraint on discussion and encourage a more realistic assessment of what is happening in Gaza. If you lack capacity for analysis-before-blame, then of course any such analysis will just look like another style of blame.

Oh, it's certainly possible.  I'd go so far as to say probable.  Of course, it also falls directly into the realm of accidental killing, as opposed to deliberate and celebrated killing as it is for your boys in Hamas.

Quote:Casting all evidence controverting your interpretive rule as "excusing" or "equivalence" is just a form of crude censorship,

Quote: an attempt to shape discussion with blame rather than to encourage accurate understanding of what is happening in this new war and why.

Calling an apologist and a false equivocator exactly that is neither.  Your attempts to obfuscate your odious position are transparent and exposed.  As long as you engage in either, or both, activity it will be my pleasure to point it out.  But don't worry, your fellow far leftists will never dare to disagree with you, so you'll have company of a sort.

[GMDino]

https://www.businessinsider.com/israel-used-thousands-of-unguided-dumb-bombs-strikes-on-gaza-2023-12

Quote:Intel says Israel has been dropping thousands of 'dumb' bombs on Gaza. It hasn't exactly been hiding their use.
Chris Panella 
Dec 14, 2023, 5:36 PM EST

Share


Save


A missile explodes in Gaza City during an Israeli air strike on October 8, 2023.MAHMUD HAMS/AFP via Getty Images

• Nearly half of the bombs Israel has dropped in Gaza have been unguided bombs, new US intel says, per CNN.
• It's a shocking number, but Israel hasn't been hiding its use of "dumb" bombs or other controversial weapons.
• Photos and videos have documented Israel's extensive and destructive bombing campaign.
  

Over two months after Israel began its fight against Hamas, more details about the weapons it has been using in Gaza are coming to light.


New intelligence says nearly half the explosives Israel dropped in Gaza were unguided "dumb" bombs, a staggering statistic. But while the number, equating to thousands of devastating strikes, is shocking, Israel hasn't exactly hidden its use of the controversial weapons.

Three sources familiar with the new assessment by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence on Israel's airstrikes told CNN this week that about 40-45% of the 29,000 air-to-ground munitions used in Gaza were unguided. The remainder were precision-guided weapons.

That means that Israel used upwards of over 13,000 so-called "dumb" bombs in its devastating strikes in Gaza. Such weapons, which don't have internal guidance systems or kits to improve their aim and generally follow the trajectory at which they were dropped, have the potential to cause significant devastation beyond the intended target area.


In the Gaza Strip, which has been subjected to continuous Israeli airstrikes in the wake of the 10/7 Hamas terror attacks on October 7, thousands of civilians have been killed.

Israel received some criticism for its suspected use of unguided munitions during the first week of its air campaign in Gaza. In early October, the Israeli military shared photos and videos of fighter jets taking off for bombing campaigns with what experts quickly identified as unguided "dumb" bombs.

Some open-source information accounts also documented the use, with one saying it that it suggested "the Israeli Air Force may be dipping into stocks of older, less accurate unguided munitions." But the IDF also shared photos and videos of its bombs equipped with Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAMs) and other precision-guided weapons.

Even some of the precision weapons, due to the size of the bomb, some of which are 2,000 pounds, can do serious damage beyond the intended target.



Palestinian civilians and rescuers help clear the rubble in the heavily bombarded city center of Khan Yunis in the southern Gaza Strip following overnight Israeli shelling, on October 10, 2023. SAID KHATIB/AFP via Getty Images

Throughout both its air and ground campaigns in Gaza — which have wreaked havoc on the strip, displaced almost two million people according to the United Nations, and killed almost 20,000 people while injuring over 50,000, according to Gaza's Hamas-affiliated health ministry — Israel has often downplayed international concerns over the results of its attacks.
Just Wednesday, an Israeli military spokesperson said the IDF remained "committed to international law and a moral code of conduct" and was "devoting vast resources to minimize harm to the civilians that Hamas has forced into the role of human shields."

"Our war is against Hamas, not against the people of Gaza," Maj. Karen Hajioff said.

Officials and experts have called Israeli statements that it is committed to protecting civilians into question, noting the extensive destruction caused by the ongoing airstrikes and ground assaults in Gaza, blurring the line between what Israel may consider to be acceptable collateral damage and what is necessary for the fight against Hamas.


Even President Joe Biden has expressed concern, warning on Tuesday that Israel "has most of the world supporting it" right now, but "they're starting to lose that support by the indiscriminate bombing that takes place." Biden's comments were a stark shift from the earlier unconditional and unwavering support for Israel.

When asked about the use of unguided munitions in Gaza and the intel published in CNN, the IDF told Business Insider it "strikes military targets of the Hamas terrorist organization, based on high quality intelligence and the operational necessity, while using high-quality munitions that are operated by skilled pilots and advanced systems, which continuously assess and verify that the strikes are directed at military targets."

"The type of munitions used in each strike is determined according to the characteristics of the target, the operational need, and the effort to mitigate harm to civilians, which the terrorist organization uses as human shields," it added.

Smoke rises after an Israeli airstrike that has been going on for five days in Gaza City, Gaza, on October 11, 2023. Ali Jadallah/Anadolu via Getty Images

Striking targets within Gaza with unguided munitions, as the IDF has apparently done extensively, has led to massive damage in areas outside of target zones. Those "dumb" bombs can often be impacted by weather, wind, angle, other environmental factors, and the ability of the pilot and aircraft.


Justin Bronk, a senior research fellow for airpower and military technology at the Royal United Services Institute think tank, previously told Business Insider that these bombs would normally be used in a more open area where targets are dispersed and the use wasn't indiscriminate, "but if you're using them against targets in a built-up area, then it is almost by definition indiscriminate, particularly when using this older style of unguided bomb with a much higher drag design."
The type of bomb seen in some Israeli Air Force photos was the 750-lb M117, a weapon that first entered service in the 1950s.

Israel has also been using massive, 2,000-pound Smart, Precise Impact, Cost Effective (SPICE) bombs, which are weapons equipped with Israeli-developed guidance kits that, similar to JDAMs, convert air-to-ground unguided bombs into precision-guided munitions. Bombs with either SPICEs or JDAMs are generally considered to be highly accurate, but the extreme wide area affected by the blast raises concerns, weapons investigators told BI's Jake Epstein.


The use of such devastating weapons, along with the IDF's revelations that it uses an artificial intelligence system to determine where in Gaza it should bomb, have been seen by some observers as cause for concern. That system is part of an operation known as the "target factory," which has increased the number of strike locations by over 70,000 percent since it first became functional several years ago.

Back in late November, a media investigation by the left-wing Israeli outlet +972 Magazine into the role of the AI system, called "Gospel," in the airstrikes found that it produces recommendations for targeting homes or areas where suspected Hamas or Palestinian Islamic Jihad militants might reside, which can then be hit with airstrikes.

Sources told the media outlet that the Israeli military knows in advance how many civilians might be killed in attacks on residences, and strikes are determined based on assessments of the potential collateral damage.

One former Israeli intelligence officer told the outlets that the Israeli Gospel system creates a "mass assassination factory" with a clear emphasis on "quantity and not on quality."

The Sousi mosque in Gaza City after an air strike. MAHMUD HAMS/Getty Images

Despite growing international pressure for a ceasefire and controversial accusations that Israel committing genocide against civilians in Gaza, Israeli officials have continued to signal that the war has no end in sight. Earlier this month, Israel's Defense Minister Yoav Gallant said "we do not have the legitimacy to stop," per a translated statement.

"There is only one legitimate thing to do: to win against Hamas, to strike them and eliminate them — destroying their governing and military capabilities, and bringing the hostages home," he said.

That's been the main goal of Israel after Hamas' horrifying, multi-front terrorist attacks killed over 1,200 Israelis and injured thousands more, mostly civilians, in early October.

Update: December 15, 2023 — This story has been updated with comment from the IDF.

[GMDino]

https://apnews.com/article/israel-hostages-gaza-hamas-war-52fa9628e6284cdad6d7f7db6cc30742

Quote:In Israel’s killing of 3 hostages, some see the same excessive force directed at Palestinians



[color=var(--color-primary-text)]1 of 4 | 
Friends that attended the funeral of 26-year-old Alon Shamriz mourn over the grave of a victim of the Oct. 7th attack buried in the same cemetery in Kibbutz Shefayim, Israel, Sunday Dec. 17, 2023. Shamriz was one of three hostages mistakenly shot to death by Israeli troops Friday in a neighborhood of Gaza City.(AP Photo/Ohad Zwigenberg)



[color=var(--color-primary-text)]2 of 4 | 
Friends that attended the funeral of 26-year-old Alon Shamriz mourn over the grave of a victim of the Oct. 7th attack buried in the same cemetery in Kibbutz Shefayim, Israel, Sunday Dec. 17, 2023. Shamriz was one of three hostages mistakenly shot to death by Israeli troops Friday in a neighborhood of Gaza City.(AP Photo/Ohad Zwigenberg)

[/color]

[color=var(--color-primary-text)]3 of 4 | 
Friends that attended the funeral of 26-year-old Alon Shamriz mourn over the grave of a victim of the Oct. 7th attack buried in the same cemetery in Kibbutz Shefayim, Israel, Sunday Dec. 17, 2023. Shamriz was one of three hostages mistakenly shot to death by Israeli troops Friday in a neighborhood of Gaza City.(AP Photo/Ohad Zwigenberg)

[/color]

[color=var(--color-primary-text)]4 of 4 | 
Dikla Shamriz, center left, holds the hand of her husband Avi, left, as they mourn with other relatives during the funeral of their 26-year-old son Alon in the cemetery of Kibbutz Shefayim, Israel, Sunday Dec. 17, 2023. Shamriz was one of three hostages mistakenly shot to death by Israeli troops Friday in a battle-torn neighborhood of Gaza City.(AP Photo/Ohad Zwigenberg)

[/color]



[color=var(--color-byline-authors)]BY TIA GOLDENBERG[/color]
Updated 3:14 AM EST, December 18, 2023
Share[/color]

TEL AVIV, Israel (AP) — Israelis were left stunned and speechless when three hostages held by Hamas were killed by Israeli forces in the middle of an active war zone after they waved a white flag and screamed out in Hebrew to show they did not pose a threat.

For some, the incident was a shocking example of the ugliness of war, where a complex and dangerous battlefield is safe for no one. But for critics, the incident underscores what they say is the excessively violent conduct of Israel’s security apparatus against Palestinians. Except in this case, it cut short the lives of three Israelis trying desperately to save themselves.

“It’s heartbreaking but it’s not surprising,” said Roy Yellin, director of public outreach with the Israeli human rights group B’Tselem. “We have documented over the years countless incidents of people who clearly surrendered and who were still shot.”

Yellin said the killings violated basic military ethics and international law that prohibit shooting at people trying to surrender, whether combatants or not. But he said it was part of a long trend of largely unpunished excessive force that in recent weeks has ensnared Israelis themselves.

According to a military official, the three hostages, all men in their 20s, emerged from a building close to Israeli soldiers’ positions in the Gaza City neighborhood of Shijaiyah, where troops have been battling Hamas militants in intense combat.

They waved a white flag and were shirtless, possibly trying to signal they posed no threat. Two were killed immediately, and the third ran back into the building screaming for help in Hebrew. The commander issued an order to cease fire, but another burst of gunfire killed the third man, the official said.

The army’s chief, Lt. Col. Herzi Halevi, said hostages “did everything possible” to make it clear they did not pose a threat, but that the soldiers acted “during combat and under pressure.”

On Sunday, Halevi reviewed the rules of engagement with troops, saying the prohibition against opening fire on those who surrender must also apply to Palestinians.

“When you see two people who do not threaten you, who don’t have weapons, who have their hands up and are not wearing shirts, take two seconds,” he said in comments broadcast on Israeli TV. “And I want to tell you something that is no less important: if these are two Gazans with a white flag who want to surrender, will we shoot them? Absolutely not. Absolutely not. That is not the IDF (Israel Defense Forces).”

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Saturday that the killings “broke my heart, broke the entire nation’s heart,” but he indicated no change in Israel’s intensive military campaign. With popular opinion firmly behind the military effort, the hostages’ deaths weren’t likely to prompt a change in the public mood.

Israel says a number of hostages have died in Hamas captivity. But the deaths of the three hostages struck a nerve because they were killed by the forces trying to rescue them.

Roughly 129 hostages remain in the Gaza Strip, according to the Israeli military, and their plight has gripped the nation, which sees their captivity as the embodiment of the security failure surrounding Hamas’ Oct. 7 attack that sparked the war. The hostages’ deaths prompted hundreds of demonstrators to take to the streets in anger.


It also came days after another incident raised questions about Israel’s open-fire rules. After Hamas militants shot at a busy Jerusalem bus stop, an Israeli man who had rushed to confront the attackers was gunned down by an Israeli soldier, even though he had raised his hands, knelt on the ground and flung open his shirt to indicate he wasn’t a threat. The military has launched an investigation.

Critics see a direct link between a long list of shooting deaths of Palestinians – from the killing of 32-year-old autistic man Eyad Hallaq, to the death of Al Jazeera journalist Shireen Abu Akleh, and many more over the years – to the incidents that led to the deaths of Israelis.

Most recently, B’Tselem accused the army of carrying out a pair of “illegal executions” after releasing video footage that appeared to show Israeli troops killing two Palestinian men — one who was incapacitated and the second unarmed — during a military raid in the occupied West Bank. Military police are investigating, but rights groups say such incidents rarely lead to punitive measures.

Critics say the hostages incident reflects the military’s conduct toward civilians in Gaza. More than 18,700 Palestinians have been killed since the war began, of whom about two-thirds are said to be women and minors, according to the Health Ministry in Hamas-run Gaza, which does not differentiate between combatants and civilians.

Avner Gvaryahu, who heads Breaking the Silence, a whistleblower group that documents testimonies of former Israeli soldiers, said soldier accounts from previous military engagements in the Gaza Strip showed that once an area was deemed by the military to be cleared of civilians, they were instructed to “shoot everything that moves.”

“The army said this happened in violation of the rules of engagement. I’m skeptical of that, based on what we know of previous operations in Gaza,” he said. “How many Palestinians were shot at like this?”

The military says it does what it can to protect civilians, but says it faces a complex arena where Hamas embeds itself in densely populated civilian areas. Palestinians on several occasions have said Israeli soldiers opened fire in Gaza as civilians tried to flee to safety.

Kobi Michael, a senior researcher with the Institute for National Security Studies, a Tel Aviv think tank, disputed the comparisons between the hostage deaths to the killings of Palestinians in the West Bank or the killing of the Israeli civilian in Jerusalem. He said each case needed to be seen on its own, rather than as part of a broader trend.

“It shouldn’t have happened but we are in a war and it’s not a sterile environment,” said Michael, who is a former senior official at Israel’s Ministry for Strategic Affairs. “We need to understand the context.”

The killing of Israeli civilians in recent weeks has prompted a reckoning for some Israelis. Nahum Barnea, a leading commentator, wrote in Yediot Ahronot that the hostage incident was a crime and could not be passed over “as if it were nothing.”

Ben Caspit, writing in the daily Maariv, said the rise of Israel’s far-right has helped create an environment that makes it easier for forces to open fire.

He also highlighted a common sentiment among Israel’s hard-line right wing that there are no noncombatants in Gaza. That has fueled concerns among critics that Israeli forces are not being discriminate in their combat.

“In recent years our finger has become too light on the trigger. The recent events have made it even lighter,” he wrote.
“There are noncombatants in Gaza, and three of them were killed this weekend by our own soldiers.”

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(12-19-2023, 10:53 AM)GMDino Wrote: https://www.businessinsider.com/israel-used-thousands-of-unguided-dumb-bombs-strikes-on-gaza-2023-12

(12-19-2023, 11:08 AM)GMDino Wrote: https://apnews.com/article/israel-hostages-gaza-hamas-war-52fa9628e6284cdad6d7f7db6cc30742

I see a lot of posts on this issue from you and Dill.  I don't recall seeing many (any?) of them on the atrocities committed, and continuing to be committed, by Hamas. Especially gauche of you to be posting this in a thread about the murder and rape of the hostages.  Maybe start you own "The IDF is as bad as Hamas" thread?

[Dill]

(12-19-2023, 12:45 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Good lord, your statements just ooze with pomposity.  
Ahh, so by your own admission you're attempting to draw a equivalence between the IDF and Hamas.  Thank you for finally having the courage of your convictions and admitting it.

You always start with how I make you feel.

No "admission" here that I am "attempting" to draw equivalence, etc. You can't just manipulate your way to a valid conclusion by thanking me for what I have not "admitted" instead of addressing the reasons for my statement.  Talking "as if" I had done that is just a form of gaslighting. 

My argument is that no one can accurately describe, understand, and evaluate events on the ground while adhering to your "no-criticism-of-the-IDF-but-let-your-imagination-fly-with-Hamas" rule. The "equivalence" charge is just an attempt to block criticism and to control discussion by threat of accusation rather than rational, fact-based argument. 

(12-19-2023, 12:45 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Another Dillism false equivalence.  War crimes can happen inadvertently.  Civilians can be killed, especially during urban warfare, with no direct intent to kill them.  By strict definition this is a war crime.  Is it at all comparable to Hamas deliberately and systemically targeting civilians for murder, torture, gang rape and kidnapping?  NOPE!  But for you it is, hence my castigation of your deplorable position.

Had the first report simply been of three more dead hostages found, who knows what Hamas motives would have been spun up to explain their deaths.

Yes, a tragic occurrence.  And by the IDF's own admission the soldiers in question did not follow the ROE.  I'm sure this horrible occurrence will haunt them the rest of their days.  Unlike the Hamas animals who openly celebrated their wanton slaughter and rape of civilians, going so far as to phone their parents to brag about it.  As for your "what if" scenario, it deserves zero consideration, especially from an apologist equivocator.

Actually, I do consider shooting people trying to surrender a war crime, and at the same time NOT the equivalent of planned torture and and gang rape. But since I am not making that equivalence I don't need to answer for it.  Again, your premise here is that MENTION of IDF war crimes is AUTOMATICALLY "equivalence."  

So just another attempt to enforce your "no criticism of IDF" rule--a rule which blocks accurate description and understanding of what's actually happening in this war. It's possible that you just don't get this "accuracy first" standard, and for you all is blame from the get go; so if someone mentions IDF bad behavior, you sincerely cannot see anything but "equivalence!" and rush to prove Hamas is worse; or it's possible you do know, but don't want that standard near this topic. I can't tell. 

(12-19-2023, 12:45 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Not a stretch to suppose that many Palestinian civilians in Gaza have been killed this way, but your "no-equivalence" rule blocks basic recognition of such possibility.  Reminding people of the IDF's sordid history of indiscriminate targeting and using women and children as human shields isn't to create "equivalence" but to break what is in effect an ideological constraint on discussion and encourage a more realistic assessment of what is happening in Gaza. If you lack capacity for analysis-before-blame, then of course any such analysis will just look like another style of blame.
Oh, it's certainly possible.  I'd go so far as to say probable.  Of course, it also falls directly into the realm of accidental killing, as opposed to deliberate and celebrated killing as it is for your boys in Hamas.

Calling an apologist and a false equivocator exactly that is neither.  Your attempts to obfuscate your odious position are transparent and exposed.  As long as you engage in either, or both, activity it will be my pleasure to point it out.  But don't worry, your fellow far leftists will never dare to disagree with you, so you'll have company of a sort.

Another firm "NO" here.

Shooting civilians first and asking questions later does not, under current IHL, fall "directly into the realm of accidental killing" any more than does the death of women and children forced to act as human shields or intentionally shelling a refugee camp. 

Yeah "far leftists will blah blah blah"  Can you not, for one post, simply follow an argument and address it as argument without the partisan emotional drama? If you disagree with the priority I place on accurate description over repetitive angry condemnation, then calmly explain in rational and factual terms why that priority is misplaced--preferably without sharing your feelings with "pleasure" or substituting them for proof. Explain, in rational terms, why Hamas' "celebrated killing" should halt any fuller discussion of what is happening to civilians in the war zone. Simply claiming someone is an "apologist false equivocator" for taking in the whole picture does not "expose" anything. Even if you repeat it three times, it remains baseless accusation. God, if only political arguments were really that easy.

[Dill]

(12-19-2023, 02:07 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I see a lot of posts on this issue from you and Dill.  I don't recall seeing many (any?) of them on the atrocities committed, and continuing to be committed, by Hamas. Especially gauche of you to be posting this in a thread about the murder and rape of the hostages.  Maybe start you own "The IDF is as bad as Hamas" thread?

No. I like this thread just fine.  Glad to see Dino isn't cowed by repetitive, baseless accusation either.

And it is not "gauche" to introduce IDF shooting of hostages into a thread about the murder and rape of hostages--unless there is some unstated
rule that Israel cannot be criticized and only Hamas can be a danger to hostages--not Israeli bombing or intentional targeting of civilians.

Might as well try to restrict discussion to GERMAN hostages, since that is in the thread title. 

[Belsnickel]

(12-19-2023, 02:07 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I see a lot of posts on this issue from you and Dill.  I don't recall seeing many (any?) of them on the atrocities committed, and continuing to be committed, by Hamas. Especially gauche of you to be posting this in a thread about the murder and rape of the hostages.  Maybe start you own "The IDF is as bad as Hamas" thread?

I have created a general Israel/Hamas war superthread to just collect all the odds and ends about the ongoing war.

[Dill]

(12-19-2023, 11:08 AM)GMDino Wrote: https://apnews.com/article/israel-hostages-gaza-hamas-war-52fa9628e6284cdad6d7f7db6cc30742

It also came days after another incident raised questions about Israel’s open-fire rules. After Hamas militants shot at a busy Jerusalem bus stop, an Israeli man who had rushed to confront the attackers was gunned down by an Israeli soldier, even though he had raised his hands, knelt on the ground and flung open his shirt to indicate he wasn’t a threat. The military has launched an investigation.


Critics see a direct link between a long list of shooting deaths of Palestinians – from the killing of 32-year-old autistic man Eyad Hallaq, to the death of Al Jazeera journalist Shireen Abu Akleh, and many more over the years – to the incidents that led to the deaths of Israelis.

Most recently, B’Tselem accused the army of carrying out a pair of “illegal executions” after releasing video footage that appeared to show Israeli troops killing two Palestinian men — one who was incapacitated and the second unarmed — during a military raid in the occupied West Bank. Military police are investigating, but rights groups say such incidents rarely lead to punitive measures.

There is a rather natural progression here that I have seen before. Some Palestinian attack on Israel leads to sympathy for Israel, but then sparks greater international scrutiny of Israel's culture of military occupation--especially among those who were unaware there was a military occupation. Initially, Israeli behavior is "excused" because they are under threat and have a right to self defense; and then questions arise as to why they are under threat and whether Palestinians might also have a right to self defense. 

This war departs substantially from every previous event, though, in that it began with a massive strike that killed 1400 Israelis--roughly the number of Palestinians killed in Operation Cast Lead back in 2008, plus the very visible murder rape atrocities of unarmed civilians. The Palestinian casualties, which will follow the usual inexplicable excess, bring the focus back to the IDF and Netanyahu government. But in this case Israel's killing of their own hostages is accelerating the questioning.