Hamas Israel War

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

I'm not sure I want to discuss children being tied to vehicles, being forced to kneel in front of tanks to deter attack, being forced into buildings in front of soldiers, forcing a 9 year old boy to open bags soldiers thought filled with explosives (the punishment for doing this was demotion btw, demotion in rank for that, wtf), you could say these practices have changed since these cases were brought to court but have they, an Israelii columnist reported in 2022 that a family of five were pulled from their house in Jenin to act as human shields and five children were used in this way in May this year.

Oh and remember you weren't holding your breath over the use of white phosphorus, Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International had plenty to say about it recently

How about answering the question Pierre asked?

The IDF are putting these Palestinian children in danger by using them as shields by attack from whom?

[jfman]

Originally Posted by pip08456

How about answering the question Pierre asked?

He probably didn’t because the act of human shields is a war crime. The fact someone else is required to be a participant in war is a red herring.

Originally Posted by jfman

The fact someone else is required to be a participant in war is a red herring.

To be a shield (of any kind) there has to be someone else attacking you.

[jfman]

Indeed, but the war crime is on the party using human shields.

https://wapo.st/3SQ00ok

Israel and Hamas agreed early Wednesday to a hostage release deal that will involve a four-day pause in fighting — the first cessation since Israel launched an air and ground assault on the Gaza Strip after Hamas’s Oct. 7 attack. At least 50 women and children among the estimated 240 people held hostage in Gaza will be released over that period, the Israeli government said in a statement. Hamas said on Telegram that the deal includes the release of 150 Palestinian women and teens from Israeli prisons, as well as “intensifying the entry of trucks for humanitarian relief, medical and fuel aid into all areas of the Gaza Strip.” Qatar, which has been mediating the talks, confirmed the deal for a “humanitarian pause,” adding that the starting time of the pause will be announced within the next 24 hours.

The pause is to be extended an extra day for the release of every 10 additional hostages, Israel said, adding that its forces will resume the war afterward. President Biden welcomed the deal in a statement that also thanked the leaders of Qatar and Egypt. Three Americans — two women and a girl — are expected to be among those released in the first wave of hostages, a senior Biden administration official told The Washington Post.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by jfman

Indeed, but the war crime is on the party using human shields.

Yes, but point was they are only a shield if they are being used to shield from an attack by someone.

Who were the IDF shielding from? And if they were being used as shields I’m sure a reference of some sort can be obtained advertising the fact.

No point having human shields unless the entity you’re shielding against is aware of the fact these innocents are in harms way.

Should be very easy to verify, I’ll await the response from Daddy’O

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Pierre

Yes, but point was they are only a shield if they are being used to shield from an attack by someone.

Who were the IDF shielding from? And if they were being used as shields I’m sure a reference of some sort can be obtained advertising the fact.

No point having human shields unless the entity you’re shielding against is aware of the fact these innocents are in harms way.

Should be very easy to verify, I’ll await the response from Daddy’O

It’s not the point, it’s a crass effort to deflect the blame for Israeli (alleged?) war crimes.

At some point Israel is responsible for its own actions if they fall below internationally recognised standards. The “wHaT aBoUt HaMaS?” defence isn’t a get out of jail free card in that regard.

For a small minority Israel are absolutely blameless in every regard, when the scoreboard of deaths for 2023 (or any other given year) suggests otherwise.

OB claims if there’s a ceasefire the “brutes” win, at this point how can anyone tell the difference?

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by jfman

It’s not the point

It is the point, and with respect the rest of that post read as …..” whaaa…whaaa…whaaaa……….whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.

No time for that.

I am talking in direct reply to Daddy’O, and his assertion that the IDF are using Palestinians as human shields, my question was ..who are the IDF using them to shield from? Seemed straight forward. No answer yet though.

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by Pierre

Yes, but point was they are only a shield if they are being used to shield from an attack by someone.

Who were the IDF shielding from? And if they were being used as shields I’m sure a reference of some sort can be obtained advertising the fact.

No point having human shields unless the entity you’re shielding against is aware of the fact these innocents are in harms way.

Should be very easy to verify, I’ll await the response from Daddy’O

It is very easy to verify, so easy you should've got off your backside and looked yourself if you don't want to wait, in the case of the boy tied to the vehicle it was to shield from stone throwers, all the money showered on Israeli security services and they break international laws for yobs with rocks and school girls with flags

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by jfman

It’s not the point, it’s a crass effort to deflect the blame for Israeli (alleged?) war crimes.

At some point Israel is responsible for its own actions if they fall below internationally recognised standards. The “wHaT aBoUt HaMaS?” defence isn’t a get out of jail free card in that regard.

For a small minority Israel are absolutely blameless in every regard, when the scoreboard of deaths for 2023 (or any other given year) suggests otherwise.

OB claims if there’s a ceasefire the “brutes” win, at this point how can anyone tell the difference?

With you, it’s all ‘Israel bad this’, ‘Israel bad that’. How about ‘Hamas murderous bustards’? ‘Hamas need to be destroyed’?

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

With you, it’s all ‘Israel bad this’, ‘Israel bad that’. How about ‘Hamas murderous bustards’? ‘Hamas need to be destroyed’?

They aren’t mutually exclusive positions and others are here for that insight.

Originally Posted by jfman

They aren’t mutually exclusive positions and others are here for that insight.

The semantic hoops you jump through to avoid giving your own insight on Hamas’ actions are quite impressive.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Chris

The semantic hoops you jump through to avoid giving your own insight on Hamas’ actions are quite impressive.

There’s always the search function - I don’t need to qualify my criticism of Israel on every occasion with implicit justification by placing it out of context.

I understand the rationale for others to prefer that to effectively steer, or at worst censor, criticism of Israel into more favourable terms. I’m not playing that game.

Originally Posted by jfman

They aren’t mutually exclusive positions and others are here for that insight.

Originally Posted by Chris View Post
The semantic hoops you jump through to avoid giving your own insight on Hamas’ actions are quite impressive.

Originally Posted by jfman

There’s always the search function - I don’t need to qualify my criticism of Israel on every occasion with implicit justification by placing it out of context.

I understand the rationale for others to prefer that to effectively steer, or at worst censor, criticism of Israel into more favourable terms. I’m not playing that game.

The closest I’ve seen to you posting a condemnation of Hamas is agreeing with me when I said "both are bad"…

Originally Posted by Hugh

Both are bad…

If one doesn’t condemn Hamas raping and killing civilians, does that make one "pro-rape"?

Or is it just important that the perpetrators meet a certain profile?

Originally Posted by jfman

So it'd have been alright if they left her alive then?

Pro-rape but anti-murder, at least we know where the line is I guess.

---------- Post added at 18:07 ---------- Previous post was at 18:05 ----------



Both are bad, as you say.

Other than that, you have been quite muted on the subject…

[jfman]

I’m not sure what more I can do beyond condemn all civilian deaths? I’ve said it’s unacceptable for terrorists to target non-military targets. I’ve made it clear nation states should be held to higher standards than terror groups which itself implies their actions fall below what is acceptable morally and legally in international law.

The irony isn’t lost on me here that this exemplifies my point about framing everything in a favourable way to Israel. Israeli victims of the conflict must be held up alone, Hamas condemned unequivocally. Palestinian victims and Israel’s actions can only be condemned with a “but…”.