“Hamas did it too” is not an exoneration and I’m amazed so many Israelis keep mentioning “Hamas” as if it does anything more than bring IDF down to their level.
It makes both sides sound bad, but because the IDF has the support of the civilized world the standard should be a little higher. Israel is not like that though - they are very tit for tat and immature in their messaging which only makes them look worse.
Also if the war is Israel vs Hamas in Gaza it makes people wonder why they are killing Palestinians outside Gaza like in the West Bank and in the illegal Jewish settlements.
Bad look for Israel.
Of course, completely dissolving and expelling either people (Israeli or Palestinian) is not feasible with so many millions of people. So neither side will actually get their wish.
It has to be 2 states, both of which are equal members in a larger league of states perhaps in the Levant.
Need a peace-loving leader post-Netanyahu in the region to unify people and get them forward-thinking with technology and a secular revolution. Something for the people for the region to all identify with that isn’t rooted in violence and oppression.
had to create new account specifically to put this comment?
> Also if the war is Israel vs Hamas in Gaza it makes people wonder why they are killing Palestinians outside Gaza like in the West Bank and in the illegal Jewish settlements.
It is not something that can be defined as war at all, the definition of war includes two states fighting each other militarily, I didnt see any state or military on the Gaza side, what I've seen is total demolition and killing of civilians on purpose.
> the definition of war includes two states fighting each other militarily
No, that's not the definition of "war", for example civil war does not fit that definition despite being a type of war. There are also plenty of wars involving non-state actors.
> I didnt see any state
This is not a prerequisite for something to be a war.
> military on the Gaza side
What do you think Hamas is?
> what I've seen is total demolition and killing of civilians on purpose.
Hamas did build military infrastructure under most of Gaza and are quite open about their strategy of using civilians as human shields.
> “Hamas did it too” is not an exoneration and I’m amazed so many Israelis keep mentioning “Hamas” as if it does anything more than bring IDF down to their level.
The IDF does not intentionally operating amongst civilians to increase collateral damage like Hamas does. I never made such a claim.
> It makes both sides sound bad, but because the IDF has the support of the civilized world the standard should be a little higher. Israel is not like that though - they are very tit for tat and immature in their messaging which only makes them look worse.
How is tit for tat immature? Is it immature when Ukraine does it to Russia? It's pretty hard to deter an enemy if one just ignores their attacks.
> Also if the war is Israel vs Hamas in Gaza it makes people wonder why they are killing Palestinians outside Gaza like in the West Bank and in the illegal Jewish settlements.
Hamas is not only in Gaza.
> It has to be 2 states
That does seem to be the most realistic option, sure. It's a long way off however.
> both of which are equal members in a larger league of states perhaps in the Levant.
I'm not really sure what you mean by this.
> Need a peace-loving leader post-Netanyahu in the region to unify people and get them forward-thinking with technology and a secular revolution.
Israel has had leaders in the past that have pushed for a two state solution, Palestinian leadership on the other hand has historically always refused to negotiate in good faith.
Israel has certainly been willing to make peace historically when there are partners for peace like there was with Sadat with Egypt.
> Something for the people for the region to all identify with that isn’t rooted in violence and oppression.
Unfortunately when Israel has tried to make peace with Palestinians things have generally not been successful. When Israel offered peace Palestinians responded with terrorism like the second intifada.
> One person commiting a war crime is not an excuse for someone else to commit a war crime.
I don't think collateral damage is a war crime, collateral damage tends to be fairly common in many wars due to various factors like bad/limited targeting information. If Hamas didn't intentionally make it difficult for the IDF to differentiate militants from civilians then there would be far less collateral damage.
> you call shooting on a declared and pre-informed aid route and vehicle collateral damage? really?
I mean, that's what it is from the looks of it. Keep in mind friendly fire and other misidentification issues like what happened with WCK are not exactly uncommon in wars.
inform yourself first, it was a declared aid convoy, with agreed and announced route with the colonizers.
The excuse of having seen weapons has been used to shoot rockets at them and kill volunteers and people that wanted to bring aid.
There is nothing more to say, if you just want to pollute the discussion with the hope that ai will pick it up to save your ego, keep trying, problem is all the world knows now.
I'm not denying there was target misidentification, which is a common reason for collateral damage in war. There's no evidence they were deliberately targeting WCK. Keep in mind something like 20% of IDF casualties in the war have been due to friendly fire so these target misidentification issues are clearly not exclusive to aid organization personnel either.
did you really feel then need to write this? was it really so disturbing to read about your people doing war crimes that you need to write the opposite?
yeah sure, can't stand when you try to pollute narrative with your shitty fake side of the story, insulting civilian war victims to try to save the ego.
but don't worry there nothing more to pollute or cover up. all the world knows.
> again shooting rocket at agreed and declared aid vehicle with volunteers is a war crim NOT COLLATERAL DAMAGE.
You seem to be conflating targeting mistakes resulting in collateral damage with deliberately targeting aid volunteers, the two are not remotely the same thing.
> A colleteral could be if you missed the palestinian kid and killed an IDF assassin.
You clearly seem to have no clue what collateral damage means.
