The anti Israel = anti semitism agenda

[MichaelAwkward]

The justify comment was aimed at B&W as he seems to think attacking a civilian population just because youre outgunned in every way is valid. Lets be blunt, it is not.

But yes youre right it goes both ways. I dont condone anything Israel has done, lets be clear on that, but it still in no way justifies attacks, from either side, on civs.

It’s a bit different when the civilians on the Israeli side are taking part in the land/house stealing that your family and friends are dying for…

If significant numbers of Israelis were protesting against their government, refusing to move into former Palestinian areas, it’d be different but so far I’ve only seen small isolated shows of support for Palestine within Israel.

 

[Dolph]

They bombed a refugee camp that killed 10 people, mostly children.

How is that Hamas fault? Were they using refugees as human shields?

What evidence do you have that they were not?

There are only three possibilities.

Israel deliberately targeted civilians for no reason at all.
Israel hit the camp by accident.
Israel reacted to the camp being used for military purposes based on Intel received (irrespective of whether the Intel is accurate or not).

The first is possible, but is quite an accusation to make and requires actual evidence.

The second, normally when it occurs countries admit to it and apologize.

The third is the most likely answer, but without direct access to their intel is impossible to evidence.

 

[VincentHanna]

The onus is on Israel to prove it was a valid target.

Not me to prove it wasn't.

 

[Dolph]

The onus is on Israel to prove it was a valid target.

Not me to prove it wasn't.

They have stated it was a valid target. That's about the level of proof you get generally with intelligence led decisions.

If you don't believe them, you should have an objective, evidence based reason for doing so.

 

[Minusorange]

The onus is on Israel to prove it was a valid target.

Not me to prove it wasn't.

They did, they shaded the building in red

https://twitter.com/x/status/1393565656621137920

 

[Rroff]

What evidence do you have that they were not?

There are only three possibilities.

Israel deliberately targeted civilians for no reason at all.
Israel hit the camp by accident.
Israel reacted to the camp being used for military purposes based on Intel received (irrespective of whether the Intel is accurate or not).

The first is possible, but is quite an accusation to make and requires actual evidence.

The second, normally when it occurs countries admit to it and apologize.

The third is the most likely answer, but without direct access to their intel is impossible to evidence.

Israel were targeting a Hamas commander or similar - I can't remember exactly - AFAIK it was known some of his family was in the vicinity.

After the strike despite and even it seemed because the evidence was coming out that some of his family including young children were killed many pro-Israel and even official Israel accounts were crowing, mocking and taunting, etc. about it - until it came out they seem to have missed the intended target and killed largely a bunch of children. At which point there was, unusually, sudden backtracking and even some of the Israeli bots deploring it. Soon after that they targeted the tower journalists were in along with a flurry of other strikes IMO to try and bury the screw up in a chaos of other stories (as obviously targeting the position the press were in would cause a lot of noise in the media).

 

[MichaelAwkward]

They have stated it was a valid target. That's about the level of proof you get generally with intelligence led decisions.

If you don't believe them, you should have an objective, evidence based reason for doing so.

It’s not like the IDF have ever lied about things like this before…

 

[Dolph]

It’s not like the IDF have ever lied about things like this before…

So has hamas.

 

[Dolph]

Israel were targeting a Hamas commander or similar - I can't remember exactly - AFAIK it was known some of his family was in the vicinity.

After the strike despite and even it seemed because the evidence was coming out that some of his family including young children were killed many pro-Israel and even official Israel accounts were crowing, mocking and taunting, etc. about it - until it came out they seem to have missed the intended target and killed largely a bunch of children. At which point there was, unusually, sudden backtracking and even some of the Israeli bots deploring it. Soon after that they targeted the tower journalists were in along with a flurry of other strikes IMO to try and bury the screw up in a chaos of other stories (as obviously targeting the position the press were in would cause a lot of noise in the media).

If you've got a credible citation for that, I'll happily retract and come out criticising.

 

[deuse]

Iran died in 1979 unfortunately.

Yep

 

[Rroff]

If you've got a credible citation for that, I'll happily retract and come out criticising.

Lot of the information is lost in the chaos over it I did originally see it mentioned on Twitter what the intended target was before the actual strike but can't find it again now. The strike is the one at Al Shati.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/may/15/israel-gaza-west-bank-rockets-jerusalem-warplanes

EDIT: The articles on it suggest the families killed weren't linked to the original target but that wasn't the impression I got from various feeds in the immediate aftermath.

 

[Dolph]

Lot of the information is lost in the chaos over it I did originally see it mentioned on Twitter what the intended target was before the actual strike but can't find it again now. The strike is the one at Al Shati.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/may/15/israel-gaza-west-bank-rockets-jerusalem-warplanes

EDIT: The articles on it suggest the families killed weren't linked to the original target but that wasn't the impression I got from various feeds in the immediate aftermath.

And this is the problem, it's hard to get clear information, much of it is contradictory and in some cases downright dishonest.

That guardian report, with its monopoly board and children's toys, was straight out of Damien Day's playbook though.

 

[deuse]

They bombed a refugee camp that killed 10 people, mostly children.


How is that Hamas fault? Were they using refugees as human shields?

You forgot what they did in 2014

https://www.un.org/unispal/document/auto-insert-181056/

 

[StriderX]

Dolph are you saying Associated Press are lying (fake news as it's called nowadays)?

 

[Rroff]

And this is the problem, it's hard to get clear information, much of it is contradictory and in some cases downright dishonest.

That guardian report, with its monopoly board and children's toys, was straight out of Damien Day's playbook though.

It is always difficult to separate propaganda in these situations - but in this case there is almost certainly a core of truth to it at the very least. I got home from work just in time to follow the build up to the strike through to the fallout on social media - unfortunately there has been a flurry of deleted posts since.

 

[VincentHanna]

You forgot what they did in 2014

https://www.un.org/unispal/document/auto-insert-181056/

You seem to be coming at this from the angle that I think Hamas are good and Israel are bad.

That is not the case. Both Hamas and Israel have done terrible things.

But in this instance if we just take the civilian casualties that we 100% know are innocent:

Israel has had 10 civilians killed.
Palestine has had 50 children killed.

That's not proportional.

 

[soundb0y]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1393920559243829248

Really doesn't take long for anti Israel to become anti-Semitism does it?

Was this not proved to be a fake audio overlay already?

 

[dowie]

That is not the case. Both Hamas and Israel have done terrible things.

But in this instance if we just take the civilian casualties that we 100% know are innocent:

Israel has had 10 civilians killed.
Palestine has had 50 children killed.

That's not proportional.

Again, pointed out before, this is a really silly argument to base your claim on outcomes like that.

Here is the obvious flaw - supposing Israel's iron dome wasn't quite as effective and/or Hamas' rockets were a bit more effective and this resulted in another 40 Israeli children dying...

Then if you're making an argument based on outcomes the same exact actions, same intent, same decisions would suddenly become proportional.

Likewise supposing everything else is the same but Israel decided to attack fewer targets... say 1/5 as many as they have so far (in proportion to the current outcomes), however in one of those attacks they made a fatal mistake - a warning wasn't sent in time or the target was missed and they hit a school or a hospital... well an outcomes based argument makes that not proportional, even if it involved fewer attacks than currently.

 

[hurfdurf]

Was this not proved to be a fake audio overlay already?

Source?

 

[Rroff]

You seem to be coming at this from the angle that I think Hamas are good and Israel are bad.

That is not the case. Both Hamas and Israel have done terrible things.

But in this instance if we just take the civilian casualties that we 100% know are innocent:

Israel has had 10 civilians killed.
Palestine has had 50 children killed.

That's not proportional.

No it isn't proportional but, and I'm not defending Israel, if Israel used the same approach as Hamas it would be more like 5000 Palestinian children killed and vice versa if it wasn't for a mixture of factors (mixed quality of Hamas munitions, Israel having better or even any raid warning in advance, obviously Iron Dome, etc.) a lot more Israeli children killed.

 

[hurfdurf]

Again, pointed out before, this is a really silly argument to base your claim on outcomes like that.

Here is the obvious flaw - supposing Israel's iron dome wasn't quite as effective and/or Hamas' rockets were a bit more effective and this resulted in another 40 Israeli children dying...

Then if you're making an argument based on outcomes the same exact actions, same intent, same decisions would suddenly become proportional.

Agreed, it’s not about proportionality. It’s about one being powerful and the other not, and one thriving and supported by the USA billions, the other have become stateless and slowly genocided.