Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Leafsnail]

Tank shells?

Tank shells don't fly in indirect roles aaaaand you can't exactly see them.

I don't know what you mean by "indirect roles" or how that's relevant.  It is already known that IDF tanks sometimes fire on buildings.  The projectiles were probably actually identified as shells afterwards I guess, they definitely aren't rockets though due to the lack of

I guess we will all have to wait and see. i am not saying isreal definitely didn't kill all those people, i am saying that its extremely possible a misfire from hamas did that. taking into consideration that more than 10% of hamas rockets/mortars actually misfire and hit gaza.

You'd have to ignore literally all of the evidence to say this though (multiple hits on the same target, the missiles being identified as shells rather than rockets or mortars, the IDF warning the shelter that they were going to blow it up the previous night, the IDF admitting that they were the ones who "accidentally" launched the first mortar at the playground).  I might as well say that maybe the IDF is the one firing all the rockets at Israel, you can't prove they aren't!!

Also with all those unrelated links are you saying that the Gaza offensive is ok because all Muslims should be exterminated or what?

but Hamas is perfectly fine and attempting to kill civilians every day is just fine and dandy is it?

The other side being bad does not justify wholesale massacres of civilians, particularly if their badness is largely a result of your treatment of them

[Descan]

Should we like, change the title to "Just because Israel sucks doesn't mean Hamas doesn't suck"? Because that seems to come up a lot. I know burningpet is kind of an idiot in that regard, doesn't seem to pay attention to anything that doesn't fulfill his stereotypes so when we say "Hamas sucks too!" he doesn't listen and continues to stereotype us as terrorist sympathizers... but I thought Kris was better than that?

[GlyphGryph]

"Israel Bad Does Not Mean Hamas Good"

[Dutchling]

Don't forget "Hamas Bad Does Not Mean Israel Should Bad"

[Leafsnail]

"Israel Bad Does Not Mean Hamas Good"

"But at the Same Time We Should Perhaps Demand a Higher Moral Standard from a Developed and Supposedly Liberal Country with Diplomatic Ties to the Western World than a Terrorist Group Consisting Largely of Horrifically Marginalized and Oppressed People"

[Owlbread]

Pretty much the same thing can be said in the European Politics thread too.

"But at the Same Time We Should Perhaps Demand a Higher Moral Standard from a Developed and Supposedly Liberal Country with Diplomatic Ties to the Western World than a Terrorist Group Consisting Largely of Horrifically Marginalized and Oppressed People"

Thank you, Leafsnail.

[GlyphGryph]

I should clarify "People Saying Israel Bad Is Not People Saying Hamas Good".

That's what I meant, since the argument is always "anyone who criticizes Israel support terrorists!"

I will also except
"Hamas Bad. Israel Bad, and Much More Effective."

[palsch]

Here's my question; are people seriously arguing that Israel targeted the UN school to... what? Kill refugees and aid workers? Destroy any international goodwill they might have had left?

The idea that Israel would make a deliberate strike just to kill people in such a manner is absurd. That's not to say that it couldn't have been an Israeli strike, but the idea that they are deliberately slaughtering people just to slaughter them makes absolutely zero sense, as well has having some unpleasant history in this area.

[Descan]

... Not to pick sides, but "That doesn't make any sense!" is not a valid argument against something happening or being said in politics or geopolitics, and especially not in Middle Eastern geopolitics.

You're assuming everyone in politics is rational.

[GlyphGryph]

Why did they kill the children on the beach?

I'm sure that whoever did it at the time thought they had a good reason to do it, and since the response has been "deny, deny more, deny the denials and continue to deny", whatever the good reason was probably wasn't so good in hindsight. I doubt consideration of it being a UN school even went through their heads - from the things many, even those in power, have said, they just don't care. Burningpet himself offers up one possible reason - they see the UN organization as just another Hamas front.

I doubt that's true, but people clearly believe it.

[Dutchling]

I doubt anyone thinks Israel is bombing civilians for the evils.

It's their apparently really screwed up notions about collateral damage and how much is acceptable.

[burningpet]

Here's my question; are people seriously arguing that Israel targeted the UN school to... what? Kill refugees and aid workers? Destroy any international goodwill they might have had left?

The idea that Israel would make a deliberate strike just to kill people in such a manner is absurd. That's not to say that it couldn't have been an Israeli strike, but the idea that they are deliberately slaughtering people just to slaughter them makes absolutely zero sense, as well has having some unpleasant history in this area.

Sense, logic and truth are not strong with "some" of the posters here.


Hamas, Misfire, yet, again. i'd say that's the third, but i guess that's probably way more but we have no way to know for other cases.
https://twitter.com/nickschifrin/status/493788547460378624
https://twitter.com/TamerELG/status/493810531908591616

IDF never shot in that area, so, yeah, this one can't be twisted by hamas and his supporters.

[burningpet]

Here's my question; are people seriously arguing that Israel targeted the UN school to... what? Kill refugees and aid workers? Destroy any international goodwill they might have had left?

The idea that Israel would make a deliberate strike just to kill people in such a manner is absurd. That's not to say that it couldn't have been an Israeli strike, but the idea that they are deliberately slaughtering people just to slaughter them makes absolutely zero sense, as well has having some unpleasant history in this area.

You begin questioning the logic and sense of the people making these decisions when they start going off and using civilians as shields for seemingly no reason other than them wanting to lose face. Or using flechette rounds in urban areas with plenty of civilians. That kind of thing.

So, wait, you seriously maintain that israel, if it even shot a deadly shell there, did so intentionally to hurt civilians?

And there's a logic in using flachete in places that are supposed to be clear of civlians. the logic being, wanting to kill terrorists as fast as possible and spare soldiers lives doing so.

[GavJ]

did so intentionally to hurt civilians?

If you knowingly attack an area that has civilians in it, then yes. I call that intentionally hurting civilians. Whether or not that was your main strategic objective, it is very different than a "mistake" because you knew full well it would happen.

Anyway, regardless of what you label it, there are three distinct categories of actions here, not two:

Does Israel set out with the primary goal of hurting civilians? No probably not. (though possibly)
Does Israel set out to do other things, and not particularly care that civilians will almost certainly end up dying as a result? Yes, seemingly absolutely.
Does Israel ALSO sometimes probably mistakenly kill civilians? Yes as well.

[Leafsnail]

Here's my question; are people seriously arguing that Israel targeted the UN school to... what? Kill refugees and aid workers? Destroy any international goodwill they might have had left?

To send a message, just like Hamas.  The idea that Palestinians deserve "collective punishment" for allowing Hamas to come to power and operate is not an uncommon one in Israel (see: burningpet's posts).  Indeed, it to some degree exists in official Israeli policy - that's why the blockade places strict limits on food imports into Gaza.

https://twitter.com/nickschifrin/status/493788547460378624
https://twitter.com/TamerELG/status/493810531908591616

The second one is somewhat plausible, the first... not really.
http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/middle-east-unrest/strikes-near-gazas-shifa-hospital-refugee-camp-kill-least-10-n166571
Like I guess it's technically possible for three highly inaccurate rockets to all misfire in exactly the same way and hit the same target, but that seems insanely unlikely.