Should all the militants be killed? From what I’ve seen, the standard for being labeled is pretty flimsy. You Huck a rock at an IDF soldier, you’re a militant that needs to be killed.
1 Like
I’m not even clear that there are that many “bad” guys that need to be killed. What’s the minimum requirement to make it on the “bad” guy that needs to be killed list?
It’s because of the tunnel system that Hamas built over many years. It’s a huge, complex system, and Israel hasn’t yet mapped all of it. Hamas uses these tunnels to travel, to store weapons, and to hide hostages. Israel can clear the surface in an area, but Hamas will return using the tunnels. Israel can flood the tunnels with seawater, but that would cause a crisis, with it restricting access to drinkable water, as well as health issues arising from any contaminants in the water. For those reasons, Israel has refrained from flooding them.
Yet they keep on shooting at/bombing media members and humanitarian groups
1 Like
So send soldiers in and have them take control of the tunnel system until they can destroy it.
1 Like
The tunnels are hidden. They’re booby trapped. Israel does try to find them and control them, but there are hundreds of miles of tunnels, and it’s not an easy task!
I see a pragmatic distinction.
In one scenario, you killed to get something you wanted.
In both scenarios, innocent people die. I doubt their loved ones are much relieved that their killings were moral.
Sadly, they have to be suspicious even of these groups, because Hamas has used them to smuggle weapons.
Just last week, there was a strike that killed 4 Palestinians, who were contracted as guards for an aid shipment. All were in agreement on what happened - the delivery had been coordinated with Israel, and part of the plans were that none of the workers would be armed. The 4 individuals decided on their own to bring weapons, and all went into the front truck. Israel bombed just that truck, and the 4 people were killed. The other trucks were untouched, and were able to complete their deliveries. The people running the aid organization said that the 4 people acted on their own, despite knowing what the agreement was.
I don’t even think we’ve achieved unanimity on “Hamas was wrong to take Israeli hostages” which is arguably even less controversial.
Correct. We’ve got the one holdout.
That seems to be a pretty callous reason to kill people.
1 Like
I disagree. Israel has to view armed individuals as militants.
No, you are performing an action that you know (within all reasonable likelihood) will result in the civilian’s death. That is not the same as intending the civilian’s death. The intent is to destroy the ammunition.
No.
If you are at a concert and I take you prisoner and later point a gun at your head and pull the trigger, that is NOT the same thing as causing your death in the process of trying to rescue my friends and family members who are being illegally detained by your friends and family members. You may or may not be innocent, but my objective wasn’t to cause your death, it was to rescue my friends and family.
That matters. Both legally and morally.
1 Like
Right, but if you ask certain hardliners in the Israeli government they’ll tell you the Palestinians are really people so it’s OK.
You only have the reported deaths. Thats the deaths that have only been verified by looking at the corpses. 38,000 as of June 19, 2024.
The likely total deaths is actually much higher than that because people are buried under rubble, some are sick (and will die), some will die for malnutrition etc
Lancet indicates 186,000 likely total deaths due to the conflict in Gaza so far (June 2024), which is 23,000 deaths per month.
As I have posted previously, not even Pol Pot of the Khmer Rouge killed people at this rate.
You simply cannot defend this kind of slaughter (the fact that they are still trying to justify it is a huge problem as it is making the US and others look like hypocrites to the wider world. This weakens US Security). This has now gone way beyond self-defense, and its also why Israel has been marginalised internationally, and will continue to be marginalised going forwards.
They fully deserve to be heavily economically sanctioned by what they have now done in Gaza.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(24)01169-3/fulltext
How often is the civilian being killed for the sake of convenience rather than waiting a few minutes/hours for it to be safer.
1 Like
This argument doesn’t carry weight though.
A) My toddler runs in front of your car going the speed limit too late for you to slow down or swerve around him. You slam on the brakes but it’s too little too late.
B) You break into my home and kidnap my toddler from his bed at gunpoint, ferry him away and then point a gun at his head and pull the trigger, after torturing him for fun.
Either way my baby is dead. Do you not see a distinction in your actions???
The law would treat you VERY differently in those scenarios.
If the aid agency said hey this is where we’re going to be and how, it seems like there are options to deal with this with more caution rather than nuking everyone who might have a gun.
I got no idea. And I have no idea in each detailed circumstance how well the combatants in this conflict are observing what I would consider the laws of war. But I’d suggest it doesn’t look too good.