The morality of human shields and dealing with hostile borders

[labmath2]

I don't think Israel is a righteous organization, but I do think Hamas is completely responsible for the situation. They always provoke and initiate barbaric aggression. Such barbaric acts can never be counted as defense ops. So with Hamas it's always initiation. As initiators they are responsible for everything that proceeds.

This is why i think history is necessary. I do not know anyone that would deny that Israel forcefully took areas that were occupied by Palestinians. To say that those who had their property taken from them should just accept the way things are now is unreasonable. Unless you think Israelis were justified in forcefully taking land from Palestinians then it is really hard to make the case that Hamas is completely responsible. You need to look at the history.

[mreyallior]

Labmath2,

 

It doesn't matter whether my long deceased granddad stole the land from Palestinians, whether he got the land by virtue of winning in a war the Palestinians started (more likely), or whether it never belonged to Palestinians.

 

Whatever my granddad did, doesn't give anyone any slight little right to try to kill me. So Hamas, firing rockets at me, is 100% guilty to whatever violence follows.

 

You can keep trying and trying to pick something that will stick, but there's no excuse for the barbarism that Hamas is initiating. It makes Hamas responsible for all that results, including the many dead Palestinians.

 

If you really care about the Palestinians, hold them accountable to normal moral standards, not lowered, and help them catch up with the 21 century and the rest of the world.

[labmath2]

Labmath2,

 

It doesn't matter whether my long deceased granddad stole the land from Palestinians, whether he got the land by virtue of winning in a war the Palestinians started (more likely), or whether it never belonged to Palestinians.

 

Whatever my granddad did, doesn't give anyone any slight little right to try to kill me. So Hamas, firing rockets at me, is 100% guilty to whatever violence follows.

 

You can keep trying and trying to pick something that will stick, but there's no excuse for the barbarism that Hamas is initiating. It makes Hamas responsible for all that results, including the many dead Palestinians.

 

If you really care about the Palestinians, hold them accountable to normal moral standards, not lowered, and help them catch up with the 21 century and the rest of the world.

Now i understand. You are right, you did nothing wrong. All the Palestinians now have to do is forcefully take land from Israelis, pass it on to their kids or sell it, and those people will have moral claim to it. 

I am willing to accept that most Israelis did nothing wrong, but i have to also be willing to accept most Palestinians did nothing wrong. If you think its fine to kill innocent on the Palestinian side, then it is certainly fine for Hamas to kill innocent on the Israeli side.

Edited July 23, 2014 by labmath2

[Heam]

Before I embark on the dubious task of responding to mreyallior, I want to present to readers some context about the current conflict in Gaza thus far.

 

Since Israeli bombs started falling on Gaza roughly 15 days ago

695 Palestinians have been killed

of these, at least 155 children have been killed

87 militia members have died

4,550 Palestinians have been wounded by Israeli bombings. Palestinian hospitals are at capacity. They are out of supplies

In addition, Israel's shelling is even targeting a hospital

 

On the Israeli side, 34 Israelis lie dead, 178 wounded

32 of the dead and 150 of the wounded are soldiers

2 of the dead and 28 of the wounded are civilians

 

From a raw percentages standpoint, 88% of the people Israel kills are civilians, 22% are children

Of the people Palestinians have killed, 6% are civilians, 94% are invading soldiers.

 

Note, from these percentages alone I could weave a tapestry that'd make any sophist cream his corduroys, but in the interest of truth and philosophy, I will present the facts and allow the readers to draw their conclusions.

 

For more context and perhaps as a way to explain the irrationality and combativeness of brother mreyallior, Israel is offering heavy incentives for people to propagandize the internet on its behalf. Obviously this is not to say conclusively that mreyallior is a paid shill, but just something to think about given the current war climate and Israel's horrible reputation in the dying hours of mainstream media and its dominance over the information market. Also worth pointing out that 12 of mreyallior's 14 total posts on this forum have been in this thread alone.

 

Anyhow, without further ado, the following are my responses to mreyallior, and mreyallior alone so as not to provide confusion...

 

Quote in response to common Israeli assertion that Palestinian society is suicidal:

"They are. Countless of videos show that they are even happy to testify about being such. So why deny it now? Why such rank hypocrisy? Why lying Waleed? Can't you stay honest for one paragraph? damn..."

 

If Palestinian society was suicidal, I don't think you'd have many more enemies to fight since they wouldn't have one of the highest population growth rates on the planet. That's speaking from a purely logical perspective. Also if there are "countless videos" which back up your assertion that Palestinians are suicidal by nature, and not within the context of a war culture which has taken root after three generations of war against an Israeli wehrmacht, I'd like to see them. Additionally, please post a study which outlines Palestinians' genetic propensity toward suicidality controlling for the presence of Israeli military occupation, chemical weapons attacks, and economic sieges. I look forward to the evidence and I really do thank you for taking the time to open my eyes to another perspective on the conflict.

 

And, if I'm a liar, I don't see why you've continued typing at my text box. I mean, why waste your time?

 

In response to a counterargument about Palestinian militias using "human shields" in conflicts with Israel:

"They can be willing human shields or unaware human shields as well."

 

Ah, the moving goalposts. So first it's Hamas taking human shields, but now we have the phenomenon of "willing human shields." So if people are making a show of placing their entire families on a rooftop in order to avoid an Israeli strike against their home, you take the side of the pilot with the 2 ton bomb in the airplane flying a mile overhead rather than the families who seek to protect their livelihoods from attack. That speaks volumes, mreyallior. In fact, it really does play into my assertion that Israeli society bears a sick, barbaric culture dressed up in a neoliberal clown costume in the eyes of Westerners, not unlike the Potemkin villages of ye olde Soviet Russia. 

 

I'm taking a break from the direct quotes because at this point in post #22, mreyallior goes into full lawyer-mode with strawman attacks and nonsequitirs about honor killings and suicide bombs. He's throwing the whole JIDF propaganda pamphlet at me at this point, so it's necessary I point out what he's doing so as to highlight the sophistic nature of his argumentation style. His default to shit-flinging is also evidence of the fact that he either never actually read the entirety of post #17 of this thread, which is rather insulting to me as I took great effort in crafting it, or he is purposefully ignoring parts of it in order to make me more closely resemble the strawman from his playbook on propagandizing for Israel.

 

So let's backtrack to post #17, where I state:

 

My position on Israeli violence is that it does not care about distinguishing between militia-affiliated and non-militia Gazans. If it cared about the lives of Gazans, it wouldn't be inflicting an economic siege for 7 years running, nor would it have fielded an occupation force, nor would it continue inflicting war after war on the people there knowing well it does not possess the capacity to prevent civilian deaths. It also would not dump chemical weapons on hospitals, schools, refugee camps, and target civilian infrastructure.

 

In response to receiving information about Israel's 7-year economic siege on Gaza, mreyallior replies: 

"No it isn't, it's free choice. What you mean is restriction or people moving into Israel. This restriction is a result of stubborn cultural choice to engage in terror. Blowing up restaurants, buses, dance clubs, stabbing children and parents in their sleep, kidnapping, stealing and what not. Barbarism. This restriction is necessary because Islam is a culture of barbarism, where sisters are murdered for the "honor of the family" and gay man are put to death too. Give me a break."

 

I don't know if anybody has ever told you this, mreyallior, but when you place a military in control of another country's borders and prevent supplies entering from land, air, and sea, it is not a "free choice." If Israel would like to close its borders with Gaza, that is its decision. That, however, does not give it the right to block Gaza's coastline from receiving ships or its airspace as it currently does today. 

 

In response to realizing that Israel does, in fact, blow up Gaza mreyallior responds with the following:

"Israel bombs terrorists. If the terrorists had a base where they stay 6 days a week, it would be very easy to target them - they know this obviously so they prefer to stay at home, and by this, turning everybody around them, willing, knowing or not, to a human shield."

 

So in a demonstration that he is not interested in acknowledging any part of my post that interrupts his narrative, he defaults to the tried-and-untrue accusation that Israel's targets are restricted to "terrorists" with no bearing on the broader population save for when said terrorists decide to take on "human shields." The suspension of disbelief required in order to believe something so patently false is indicative of mreyallior's unwillingness to accept the murderous nature of his favorite fascists on the east Mediterranean seaboard despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary hitting him from all directions, including in post #17 and in other posts that people have written in this thread.

 

Finally, he denies the claim that Israel uses chemical weapons, to which I leave you with these:

Among the places worst affected by the use of white phosphorus was the UNRWA compound in Gaza City, at which Israeli forces fired three white phosphorus smoke shells on 15 January 2009. The white phosphorus landed next to some fuel trucks and caused a large fire which destroyed tons of humanitarian aid.^[72][73][74] Prior to this strike, the compound had already been hit an hour earlier and the Israeli authorities had been informed by UNRWA officials and had given assurance that no further strikes would be launched on the compound.^[75] In another incident on the same day a white phosphorus smoke shell landed in the al-Quds hospital in Gaza City also causing a fire that forced hospital staff to evacuate the patients.^[76] The commander of the Gaza division, Brig. Gen. Eyal Eizenberg, and the commander of the Givati brigade, Col. Ilan Malka, were later disciplined for authorizing the shelling.^{[77] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_phosphorus#Israeli-Palestinian_conflict_.282009.E2.80.932012.29}

[AustinJames]

I don't have enough information to draw an ultimate moral conclusion on the actions of individual Israelis, or individual Palestinians.  There are some inevitable conclusions that can be reached, however, concerning the nature of state violence.

 

The Palestinians are not the victims of the Israelis, and the Israelis are not victims of the Palestinians.  The citizens of both Israel and Palestine are victims of state aggression.  This thread is a good example of what the state intends: to incite slave-on-slave violence.  The state would have you believe that annihilation is imminent without further exercise of state power.  The state bearing the most power bears the most responsibility for the violence within the area of its jurisdiction.

 

The most advanced military in the world cannot strike with surgical precision enough to avoid civilian casualties, so the argument that the murdered children are purely a result of "human shield" strategy seems to me far-fetched.

 

Moreover, what my grandfather did does not give anyone the right to attack me; I agree.  However, if my grandfather wrongfully imprisons someone in his basement, and I inherit the house and the prisoner, I am morally obligated to free the prisoner.  If I do not free the prisoner, and do not feed the prisoner, the prisoner is not immoral for using force to improve their situation.  I don't know if this is applicable (as I said I don't have enough information), so please help me isolate my misunderstanding.

[labmath2]

I don't have enough information to draw an ultimate moral conclusion on the actions of individual Israelis, or individual Palestinians.  There are some inevitable conclusions that can be reached, however, concerning the nature of state violence.

 

The Palestinians are not the victims of the Israelis, and the Israelis are not victims of the Palestinians.  The citizens of both Israel and Palestine are victims of state aggression.  This thread is a good example of what the state intends: to incite slave-on-slave violence.  The state would have you believe that annihilation is imminent without further exercise of state power.  The state bearing the most power bears the most responsibility for the violence within the area of its jurisdiction.

 

The most advanced military in the world cannot strike with surgical precision enough to avoid civilian casualties, so the argument that the murdered children are purely a result of "human shield" strategy seems to me far-fetched.

 

Moreover, what my grandfather did does not give anyone the right to attack me; I agree.  However, if my grandfather wrongfully imprisons someone in his basement, and I inherit the house and the prisoner, I am morally obligated to free the prisoner.  If I do not free the prisoner, and do not feed the prisoner, the prisoner is not immoral for using force to improve their situation.  I don't know if this is applicable (as I said I don't have enough information), so please help me isolate my misunderstanding.

This period.

[mreyallior]

I'm going to completely ignore the two dishonest members labmath2 and Waleed. Discussion with liars is futile.AustinJames,"The Palestinians are not the victims of the Israelis, and the Israelis are not victims of the Palestinians."Yes they both are. There are injustices made by Israel (Blocking the Gaza Port, Bombing their Airport, making them depend on goods from Israel - however, this is often done to prevent the growth and weaponizing of the militias), and the terror that Palestinian militias are doing does generate victims (suicide bombers, rockets... scary barbaric stuff)"The citizens of both Israel and Palestine are victims of state aggression."Are you comparing non-surgical-precision-strikes to suicide bombers on buses and restaurants? I think you are. You have to be very emotionally detached from Israelis and attached to Palestinians to be so biased to make such comparison."The state would have you believe that annihilation is imminent"No, it's rather the Arab leader themselves who openly declare their mission: Kill and humiliate all Israelis and take over all the land.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KlucHGOAr1ohttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3hMUZ3wOXXc"The most advanced military in the world cannot strike with surgical precision enough to avoid civilian casualties, so the argument that the murdered children are purely a result of "human shield" strategy seems to me far-fetched."??? cannot strike with surgical precision....."human shield" strategy far-fetched??? exactly the opposite. Because surgical precision is impossible, non-combatants will get hurt, and this means we can relate to them as human shields - whether they've been takes as such, volunteered to be such, or whether they are such because they have nowhere to go. Anyway you look at it, they are the 3rd person in the room, the Bill (Tom and Jerry, remember?) in the room."if my grandfather wrongfully imprisons someone in his basement"Look, Gaza is a prison because the people in Gaza supported and joined terrorist militias. Actions have consequences. When the wall of separation was built, it was built with a consensus of the Israelis - The consensus came about thanks to the Palestinian terror. We wanted peace, they gave us terror, so we built a wall to protect ourselves. Now they cry it's a prison? Actions have consequences.Funny AustinJames, you started by suggesting we establish principles and then go to see how they apply, you brought up an inappropriate analogy, I brought up 2 more appropriate analogies, and you didn't continue the discussion on principles but rather rushed to draw a conclusion about Israel and Hamas.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11ff6yVw478

[StylesGrant]

Two wrongs do not make a right. This is why I am an athiest who hates chimp DNA style tribalism (which when I hear the word tribalism I don't think of cool Maori tattoos, but rather Pentecostal sermons that aren't over until Jezebel repents to save Israel, and the snakes go back in the bag). 

 

Every apparent evil of moral superiority, absolutism, ethnic, cultural, religious, classist, racial, hegemony can be seen in this conflict. It is an example or a microcosm of what is wrong with the human race.

 

The wells and water treatment centers in that country should be filled with San Pedro brew, those people need some serious inner knowledge.

[mreyallior]

Waleed,

 

You lied, I exposed you. You feel no remorse when you get caught lying.

 

You just continue with more lies in an attempt to win by attrition.

 

More proof of willing "human shields" tactic:

 

 

Evidence of Hamas Shooting from Within Homes 0:39
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rfbjO2WznEk&list=PLN4IwhiPAXNWZwaHy7PVfyfFiJpyNQsgS&index=3

Hamas' War Crimes 0:41
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fqizsl1Vx-g&list=PLN4IwhiPAXNWZwaHy7PVfyfFiJpyNQsgS&index=4

IDF Paratroopers Discover Tunnel Under a House in Gaza 0:24
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_-WryT5Szzw&list=PLN4IwhiPAXNWZwaHy7PVfyfFiJpyNQsgS&index=5

Hamas: We Place Civilians in the Line of Fire 1:45
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uzFgIhFKII8&list=PLN4IwhiPAXNWZwaHy7PVfyfFiJpyNQsgS&index=11

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v7Tpm80NvIo&list=PLN4IwhiPAXNWZwaHy7PVfyfFiJpyNQsgS&index=12

Hamas Spokesperson: "We Are Leading Our People to Death" 0:16
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EXxAdzSHyC4&list=PLN4IwhiPAXNWZwaHy7PVfyfFiJpyNQsgS&index=16

IDF Targets Weapons Caches in Civilian Neigborhood 1:50
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0e3xv7pI93M&list=PLN4IwhiPAXNWZwaHy7PVfyfFiJpyNQsgS&index=25

Hamas kills... 1:14
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmMiydv94cw&list=PLN4IwhiPAXNWZwaHy7PVfyfFiJpyNQsgS&index=26

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-7UaIugheo&list=PLN4IwhiPAXNWZwaHy7PVfyfFiJpyNQsgS&index=27

When Hamas Puts Civilians in the Line of Fire 1:40
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CMO-_qEpgg0&list=PLN4IwhiPAXNWZwaHy7PVfyfFiJpyNQsgS&index=28

Hamas Spokesperson Encourages Use of Human Shield 0:32
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UXZEzbT0H1s&list=PLN4IwhiPAXNWZwaHy7PVfyfFiJpyNQsgS&index=29

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qBS-xQvm18U&list=PLN4IwhiPAXNWZwaHy7PVfyfFiJpyNQsgS&index=31

[Samir]

I find this article by Stef most helpfull:

 

Murdering the Group, Saving the Individual

http://freedomain.blogspot.de/search?q=Murdering+the+Group;+Saving+the+Individuals

 

"The solution to the crisis in the Middle East is not easy, but it is simple'and the alternatives are stark. We must outgrow our addictions to the false gods of history, be they religious, political or national. Giving the modern equivalents of witch-doctors access to 21st Century weapons has become far too dangerous.

 

If we cannot break our addiction to our fantasies of collective virtue, the slaughter will only increase. And so we must say to the warring tribes of the Middle East 'and indeed to the whole world:

 

'As long as there are Arabs and Jews and Americans and Iranians, our natural brotherhood remains drowned in bloody tribal fantasies. If we refuse to give up our gods and groups and leaders, we will forever live in war and fear and hatred. If we can find the strength to outgrow this madness, we may not all find heaven, but at least we will be free to escape hell. The solution to violence is not vanquishing our foes, but our own illusions.'"

[mreyallior]

Samir,

 

Ok, I'm going to vanquish my own illusion and wear a t-shirt that says "Proud Jew" and walk around in Gaza. Let's see if vanquishing my own illusion works. Wait... just to be on the safe side, let's do it step by step. First, I'll wear a t-shirt that says "Proud Muslim" and walk around in Tel Aviv, and let's see what happens. Then, you wear a t-shirt that says "Proud Jew" and walk around in Gaza...

 

Now, you know it's not going to work out so good. Vanquishing your own illusion doesn't protect you from people who still hold to their own. If a group of delusional religious barbaric freaks fires rockets at me, the solution can't be to persuade myself that I'm the delusional.

 

Clearly, if I make it a whole day in Tel Aviv with a t-shirt that says "Proud Muslim" - the Israelis are not so delusional... and clearly, if you don't return from Gaza alive after you've wear a t-shirt that says "Proud Jew" - the Palestinians are very delusional and barbaric.

 

So yes, I agree with you and Stef about vanquishing illusions - that's exactly what the Palestinians have to do. The t-shirt challenge proves who's the delusional and barbaric, and I'll take it any day. Come on, let's do it.

 

Seriously, if you blame Israelis of delusion just as much as Palestinians, the t-shirt challenge should get both of us killed. Want me to go ahead and start first? I'm pretty sure I'll be safe in Tel Aviv, no matter what my t-shirt says about me.

[Samir]

What illusions of yours have you vanquished? Just curious.

[mreyallior]

Everything. State, religion, family... even the illusion that we can live in harmony with everyone if WE stay civilized in the face of aggression. We can and should always be civilized, but when faced with aggression, we should respond with aggression.

Specifically, I used to believe we can live in peace with the Palestinians if WE change the say we behave towards them. I was a leftist before I became an anarchist. Today I realize that it takes two to tango. I don't blame myself of everything, don't blame myself if my parents are irrational or not empathetical. Don't blame Israel if Palestinians support Hamas.

I used to try to rationalize the motive Palestinians have to attack, I used to believe that they are not lying, that it's just our media that distorts their perfectly rational message and motive to attack. I outgrew this illusion and understand that some people can be truly deranged, barbaric and evil. And evil people do lie quite a lot.

 

I believe Israel needs to become a free society - and that doesn't mean letting everybody in. Free Israel would have to deal with neighboring states and wars. While I hope that when we get to that, there won't be any more wars, I do understand that the Muslim terrorist militias might still pose a threat and initiate aggression as they do now.

 

I do remember Stefan talking about nuclear weapons in a free society, how it's perfectly logical for a free society to own them for protection. So if we can have them for protection, we can of course own conventional bombs for protection, and use them when attacked. The resulting deaths of innocent people is only to blame on the aggressor, not the one defending from the aggressor.

[Samir]

I'm (relatively) safe in Berlin, so it's easy to talk and ask questions that kinda bypass the debate, so If you would be so kind to indulge me: being surrounded by crazy people who want you dead, have you considered moving to a place where that wasn't the case?

[mreyallior]

1) I don't think they pose a too big threat, as Israel does have nukes and can turn them into dust in a button push

2) I want to leave Israel and will hopefully for many other reasons

3) If a new place was found for Israelis to move as a group, say, north Canada, I'll be the first one to move and to blame the ones staying behind for committing suicide. New Israel is a wonderful idea, let's talk to Canada!

[jacbot]

I feel like I should stay out of this... but what the hell.

 

You do know that this "human shield" thing is just propaganda, right?

 

What's the difference between "human shields" and the Israeli state is recklessly bombing a civilian population? How would you tell the difference between the two?

 

Also, you're getting deep into the weeds with trying to call what the Israeli state does "self defense". first off it's not a person and so cannot practice "self defense"... and anyway if any of this was about "self defense" then they would have located Israel in Arizona, not the middle east where they continually get into wars with everyone.

 

Ok, so you universalized the statement that "self defense" doesnt exist for a state,..., so when Poland fought back nazi invasion/ USSR invasion.. that wasnt selfdefense...or in defense of its citizens.

[J-William]

Samir,

 

Ok, I'm going to vanquish my own illusion and wear a t-shirt that says "Proud Jew" and walk around in Gaza. Let's see if vanquishing my own illusion works. Wait... just to be on the safe side, let's do it step by step. First, I'll wear a t-shirt that says "Proud Muslim" and walk around in Tel Aviv, and let's see what happens. Then, you wear a t-shirt that says "Proud Jew" and walk around in Gaza...

You go ahead and wear a shirt saying "proud whitey" in a black neighborhood, and a shirt saying "Die motherfucking crackers!" in a white neighborhood.

 

Does it make the black people terrorists for punching you in the face? Does it make the white people magnanimous saints for merely crossing the street to avoid you in case you're dangerous?

I'm back with more lies!!!! 

 

Looks like they just bombed a UN school and killed 30 and wounded more than 200. 

That damn dirty UN with their human shields. Israael will teach them a lesson or two!

 

Honestly no one has to argue with you, the headlines are killing any argument you might make. they are murdering ever more civilians at the same time as Israelis are sipping tea and saying "there's a war on?"

[J-William]

Ok, so you universalized the statement that "self defense" doesnt exist for a state,..., so when Poland fought back nazi invasion/ USSR invasion.. that wasnt selfdefense...or in defense of its citizens.

Err... Poland didn't do a lot of fighting. but yeah, self defense doesn't exist for a state because rights don't exist, and states doubly so. Besides you can tell when something the state does is self defense because they get near universal support. Take for instance the German siege of St. Petersburg in WWII, almost every person in that city supported the fight against the germans. 

 

Before I embark on the dubious task of responding to mreyallior, I want to present to readers some context about the current conflict in Gaza thus far.

 

Since Israeli bombs started falling on Gaza roughly 15 days ago

695 Palestinians have been killed

of these, at least 155 children have been killed

87 militia members have died

4,550 Palestinians have been wounded by Israeli bombings. Palestinian hospitals are at capacity. They are out of supplies

In addition, Israel's shelling is even targeting a hospital

 

On the Israeli side, 34 Israelis lie dead, 178 wounded

32 of the dead and 150 of the wounded are soldiers

2 of the dead and 28 of the wounded are civilians

 

From a raw percentages standpoint, 88% of the people Israel kills are civilians, 22% are children

Of the people Palestinians have killed, 6% are civilians, 94% are invading soldiers.

 

Thanks for the post.

 

I think our Israel fanatic friend has clearly shown he is not here for facts and figures, but I agree that paints a pretty clear picture.

[mreyallior]

Looks like they just bombed a UN school and killed 30 and wounded more than 200.

 

Hamas militants were probably firing on IDF troops from there. Hamas been already caught before using schools and hospitals as bases. It wouldn't surprise me if they did it again. Unlike you, I can't lie barefaced. I have to wait to see the evidence.

self defense doesn't exist for a state because rights don't exist

 

1) Non sequitur

2) So Hamas doesn't defend anything, eh?

 

you can tell when something the state does is self defense because they get near universal support.

 

You're in the FreedomainRadio board, saying something isn't true unless it gets near universal support. Genius!

[J-William]

 

 

Israel, not Hamas, turns Palestinians into ‘human shields’

Speaking this morning as Israeli forces continue a new ground offensive in the Gaza Strip, Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu described the IDF as “a moral army like no other”. He added: “those responsible for the damage to uninvolved civilians are the Hamas, and Hamas alone, who use civilians as human shields.”

It is a familiar refrain. But in fact, it is the Israeli military itself that turns Palestinians into ‘human shields’, and strips them of their protected status under international law.

In the aftermath of ‘Operation Cast Lead’, Israeli newspaper Haaretz published an article on the legal advice given to the country’s armed forces by the international law division (ILD) of the Military Advocate General’s Office.

Addressing the subject of IDF-issued warnings to Gaza residents, including the so-called ‘knock on the roof’ tactic seen in ‘Operation Protective Edge’, a senior ILD figure made the following, disturbing admission.

The people who go into a house despite a warning do not have to be taken into account in terms of injury to civilians, because they are voluntary human shields. From the legal point of view, I do not have to show consideration for them. In the case of people who return to their home in order to protect it, they are taking part in the fighting.

In other words, the Israeli military strips Palestinian civilians in the Gaza Strip of their protected status under international law, labelling them ‘voluntary human shields’. In the same article, an ILD official justified targeting Gaza’s “entire governmental infrastructure”.

As Israel deliberately targets family homes, and the death toll rises, this is an important additional insight into the tactics being used by the Israeli army in its bombardment of the Gaza Strip. It is also further evidence of war crimes.

World opinion continues to shift away from supporting Israel.

 

Seems that only government willing to shield Israel from a UN human rights commission inquiry is the old faithful lapdog the US.

Even Europe is to ashamed to help Israel.

[mreyallior]

J-William,

 

Here you are again, on the FreedomainRadio board, talking about "World Opinion", and not talking about principles.

Do you see the problem?

[J-William]

You're in the FreedomainRadio board, saying something isn't true unless it gets near universal support. Genius!

Yeah, guess what? I'm also on the FDR board arguing against traumatizing and murdering children. So I feel pretty good about that.

 

Even Lefty places that like HuffPo that usually stand behind Obama and Israel are getting in on being against murdering children. 

  America's Israeli JihadistsAmerican foreign fighters are at it again in the Middle East.

Most recently, they're wearing the uniform of the Israeli state, willing participants in the onslaught of Gaza's population. American volunteers have contributed to thedeaths of at least 633 Palestinian civilians since the recent conflict began. Of the 30 Israelis killed, it has emerged that at least two had dual US citizenship. 

 

 

 

AIPAC Is the Only Explanation for America's Morally Bankrupt Israel Policy

The official name for Israel's latest assault on Gaza is "Operation Protective Edge." A better name would be "Operation Déjà Vu." As it has on several prior occasions, Israel is using weapons provided by U.S. taxpayers to bombard the captive and impoverished Palestinians in Gaza, where the death toll now exceeds 500. As usual, the U.S. government is siding with Israel, even though most American leaders understand Israel instigated the latest round of violence, is not acting with restraint, and that its actions make Washington look callous and hypocritical in the eyes of most of the world.

J-William,

 

Here you are again, on the FreedomainRadio board, talking about "World Opinion", and not talking about principles.

Do you see the problem?

I never saw Stef having a problem with world opinion being against slavery, even if it wasn't terribly philosophical.

 

So, being opposed to harming children would be something that most Israelis could stand to learn a thing or two about... unfortunately that's to "controversial". 

 

 

 

Israeli agency bans radio clip naming children killed in Gaza Calling material 'politically controversial,' Israel Broadcasting Authority refuses to run item by B’Tselem human rights group.

The Israel Broadcasting Authority banned a radio broadcast made by the human rights organization B’Tselem about children killed in Gaza, claiming its content was “politically controversial.”

On Wednesday the IBA again censored the clip, after considering B’Tselem’s appeal against the decision.

The clip, submitted a few days ago, says children have been killed in the fighting in Gaza and mentions a few of their names. The IBA said it was politically controversial and it does not allow clips of a political character.

[mreyallior]

Besides AustinJames, there wasn't anybody on this thread who tried using first principles to establish whether we have human shields in this situation, who are they and what are the morals involved.

 

You haven't debated principles. You keep pointing out "World Opinion" and "the headlines are killing any argument you might make" as if the opinions of al-jazeera and huffington post is a measurement of truth value.

 

But you keep repeating your propaganda "Israel bombing schools" - Well, that's what happens when you skip logic and principles. If we would establish the principle that getting innocent people in the line of fire is immoral, it would be very clear that only Hamas is to blame for schools being attacked. (http://www.unrwa.org/newsroom/press-releases/unrwa-condemns-placement-rockets-second-time-one-its-schools)

 

You're stubbornly irrational and a liar:

"self defense doesn't exist for a state because rights don't exist" non-sequitur

"you can tell when something the state does is self defense because they get near universal support" (appeal to popularity)

"it's not a person and so cannot practice "self defense"..." (So what Hamas is doing... there goes your whole point)

"this "human shield" thing is just propaganda" (outright lie)

"it was pretty bad when the Nazis did it" I didn't hear about any Jewish suicide bombers in 1934...

 

You keep talking about the tragic loss of lives in Gaza, in an Appeal To The Stick, and pull a Red Herring in an effort to change the discussion from who is to blame to is it tragic or not.

 

Once I proved you're a liar and irrational, the discussion with you is over.

 

You can keep flooding the thread with lies and rubbish, but I'm not paying attention to you anymore.

 

"If Israel lays down it's weapons, there would be" -SHARIA LAW

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmMiydv94cw

no thanks

[Heam]

So would I be in the wrong to report mreyallior at this point for dismissing essentially anything I say as "lies," no matter how much evidence and what the case is? He's a particularly volatile individual and seems to have zero interest in an actual debate aside from this amateur propaganda schtick. I mean, I thought post #39 was particularly well-written and well-supported, but in post #42, he says:

 

 

I'm going to completely ignore the two dishonest members labmath2 and Waleed. Discussion with liars is futile.

No supporting evidence supplied. No argument. Just that I'm a liar and not worth his time. Extremely disrespectful.

 

Again, in post #44

 

You lied, I exposed you. You feel no remorse when you get caught lying.

What are we supposed to do if Eyal Lior is going to arrogantly presume he's better than myself and other posters by dismissing us out of hand as liars, and feeling "no remorse"? 

[AustinJames]

"The Palestinians are not the victims of the Israelis, and the Israelis are not victims of the Palestinians."Yes they both are. There are injustices made by Israel (Blocking the Gaza Port, Bombing their Airport, making them depend on goods from Israel - however, this is often done to prevent the growth and weaponizing of the militias), and the terror that Palestinian militias are doing does generate victims (suicide bombers, rockets... scary barbaric stuff)

 

"Israel" is not "Israelis."  Israel is a state.  Israelis are people within the borders of Israel.  All the actions you describe being performed by "Israel" are reinforcing my point, as they are examples of state aggression.  The retaliations made by Palestinians are against the aggression of the State of Israel.  Both the Palestinian victims and the Israeli victims are the consequence of state aggression.  Therefore, the State of Israel is Tom, The State of Palestine is Jerry, and Bill is represented by the victims on both sides of the border.

 

Also, in one of your earlier posts, you said:

 

 

 

You don't have to be a genius or study a 100 years research on suicide bombers to know that retaliating with great force puts an end to the support terrorist organizations get.

 

Where is your evidence for this claim?  It doesn't seem to have worked out very well for the U.S.  Terrorist organizations have only gotten stronger since the U.S. has applied massive amounts of force.  There is a lot of evidence to the contrary, which has been presented to you, but you ignored it.

 

Robert Pape has compiled vast amounts of evidence contrary to your claim.  If you have any rational integrity, you will review your claim, measured against the evidence.  Or, you could provide real evidence (not just the anecdotal sort) to support your claim.

 

 

"The citizens of both Israel and Palestine are victims of state aggression."Are you comparing non-surgical-precision-strikes to suicide bombers on buses and restaurants? I think you are.

 

Yes, I am. Because of the population density, there is no discernible difference in the effect, and it is impossible to know the intent.  One difference is that the suicide bomber is not flying miles above his intended victims, or pushing a button from the safety of a bunker.  Another difference is that the State of Israel does not acknowledge the impossibility of a surgical strike, but claims they are not targeting civilians, which allows them to incur as many civilian casualties they want, and then claim they were being used as human shields by the terrorists.  The terrorists do not pretend to be capable of a surgical strike.

 

 

You have to be very emotionally detached from Israelis and attached to Palestinians to be so biased to make such comparison.

 

I don't discriminate between victims of state aggression, like you do.  I don't hold any stake in the conflict, like you do.  I haven't made any broad, discriminatory generalizations of a culture or ethnic group, like you have.  Project much?

 

 

"The state would have you believe that annihilation is imminent"No, it's rather the Arab leader themselves who openly declare their mission: Kill and humiliate all Israelis and take over all the land.

 

Once again, you're proving my point.  These Arab leaders are representatives of various STATES.  Whatever end of the imminent annihilation they claim to be on, perpetrating or receiving, is irrelevant to my point.  It's always a state bringing it about.

 

 

"The most advanced military in the world cannot strike with surgical precision enough to avoid civilian casualties, so the argument that the murdered children are purely a result of "human shield" strategy seems to me far-fetched."??? cannot strike with surgical precision....."human shield" strategy far-fetched??? exactly the opposite. Because surgical precision is impossible, non-combatants will get hurt, and this means we can relate to them as human shields - whether they've been takes as such, volunteered to be such, or whether they are such because they have nowhere to go. Anyway you look at it, they are the 3rd person in the room, the Bill (Tom and Jerry, remember?) in the room.

 

By your definition of "human shield," then, all the Israelis in those buses and restaurants you mentioned earlier were "human shields" because surgical precision is impossible, and the State of Israel did not reduce their aggression against Palestinians when violence broke out.  You can't claim a rule for one person and claim the opposite for another because they live on the other side of an invisible line.

 

Let's say Jerry punches Tom in the face, then runs into a crowded street.  Tom runs him down in a car, killing or mauling a few dozen innocents in the process.  Is Jerry to blame for the lack of "precision" inherent in the nature of Tom's attack?

 

 

"if my grandfather wrongfully imprisons someone in his basement"Look, Gaza is a prison because the people in Gaza supported and joined terrorist militias. Actions have consequences. When the wall of separation was built, it was built with a consensus of the Israelis - The consensus came about thanks to the Palestinian terror. We wanted peace, they gave us terror, so we built a wall to protect ourselves. Now they cry it's a prison? Actions have consequences.

 

But if you shouldn't be punished for something your granddad did, why should those in Gaza, who have been born since the imprisonment, be punished for what their parents and grandparents did?  Once again, you can't have different moral rules for different geographical regions, religions, races or cultures.

 

 

Funny AustinJames, you started by suggesting we establish principles and then go to see how they apply, you brought up an inappropriate analogy, I brought up 2 more appropriate analogies, and you didn't continue the discussion on principles but rather rushed to draw a conclusion about Israel and Hamas.

 

I didn't draw a conclusion about Israel and Hamas, I drew a conclusion about the immorality of state aggression, whoever the perpetrator.  

 

The analogies were regarding the human shield issue, and I found no great disagreement in the analogies you provided.  Therefore, the area of disagreement is beyond the moral implications of taking a human shield, so reasoning from a human shield principle would not have been productive.

 

The area of our disagreement seems to be, rather, what constitutes state aggression, and what constitutes morally justifiable self-defense in response to state violence.  Rather than asking, "is it morally justifiable to take a human shield?" it is more productive to first ask, "is taking a human shield self-defense?"  Then, we would ask, "at what point does self-defense become immoral?"  If a neighbor threatens you, and you punch him in the face, surely this may be morally justifiable.  If you burn down his house with his family inside, it may be considered self-defense, but it surely cannot be morally justifiable.  So what is the underlying principle that determines what degree of retaliation is morally justifiable?  Articulate this principle, and then show how it supports your claims.

[JamesP]

mreyallior, stop with the name-calling. The guidelines are at the top of every page of this board. Read them.

 

Also, you said that you weren't going to engage with Waleed, and then two posts later, you engaged with him, and he hadn't even replied to you. If you're going to call somebody else dishonest, you should probably at least make sure that your words and actions are not conflicting.

[Heam]

 

Yes, I am. Because of the population density, there is no discernible difference in the effect, and it is impossible to know theintent.  One difference is that the suicide bomber is not flying miles above his intended victims, or pushing a button from the safety of a bunker.  Another difference is that the State of Israel does not acknowledge the impossibility of a surgical strike, but claims they are not targeting civilians, which allows them to incur as many civilian casualties they want, and then claim they were being used as human shields by the terrorists.  The terrorists do not pretend to be capable of a surgical strike.

Good point about effect and intent. State propaganda out of Israel goes to great lengths to sanitize the murders it commits by pushing the button which kills 800 people with one hand and waving the scepter of moral piety over the bodies of its victims with the other. 

These Arab leaders are representatives of various STATES.  Whatever end of the imminent annihilation they claim to be on, perpetrating or receiving, is irrelevant to my point.  It's always a state bringing it about.

 

Just wanted to note that Lior is not painting an accurate picture of the regional political landscape because many Arab leaders, including the Jordanians, Egyptians, Saudis, and Emiratis do support Israel's strike on Gaza. They also have an alliance with Muslim Kurds, so when he attempts to make it seem as though Israel is afloat in a sea of hostility, he's defaulting to the JIDF propaganda archives circa 1970 and should really consider renewing his subscription. 

 

Again, these details do not necessarily coincide with the actual philosophical principles of the discussion you're having, but just giving you some context as to the unreality from which Lior is arguing from.

[J-William]

Wow, check out this poll: link Younger american, non-whites, are less likely to support Israel.. also more educated people and people who watch more news are more likely to support Israels' actions. aka propaganda works!

 

I think it's worth having a look at some comments from NYT readers. Even if the main stream media is unfailing in its loyalty to Israel, the average americans are starting to get it. 

 

 

MM

 Danville, CA 9 hours ago

Enough Israel, enough. As a father of 2 small kids, seeing these pictures is beyond heartbreaking. This is not going to win you any hearts or minds. You are fast losing the respect of the entire international community whatever is left of it. Yes you have a right to self defense but your actions are leading to indiscriminate killing and maiming of 100's of innocent children - and that is beyond the pale. You simply cannot claim a moral high ground now. What have you unleashed? Do you have any sense of humanity left? And please do not equate your actions to the thuggishness of Hamas and their tunnels and rockets that have caused far, far less damage than the lasting damage you are causing to an entire population of innocent children. Please, at least for the sake of children stop this madness and figure out a way to more effective self defense.

• [*]Reply [*]  [*]

927Recommend

 

 

NYT Pick Chris  Canada 9 hours ago

These children don't know the difference between Palestinian and Jew. This conflict is not their fault, yet, they are the ones paying the price.

This is horrifying. I am disgusted.

• [*]Reply [*]  [*]

717Recommend

 

 

NYT Pick viola  boston 9 hours ago

How much blood on Netanyahu's hands is necessary before he feels that it is enough!? How many children must die before he is satisfied? Yes Hamas has brought it on to themselves but enough is enough! What Israel is accomplishing now is to create the next generation of terrorists fueled by the hatred that he is creating anew. This will solve nothing. It only proves that Israel has more weapons and is willing to use them. More tunnels will be built. An ultimately impotent strategy!

• [*]Reply [*]  [*]

552Recommend

 

 

Midwest Guy  Milwaukee, WI 9 hours ago

I think it's time for war crimes to be charged against Israel.

• [*]Reply [*]  [*]

537Recommend

 

 

NYT Pick amaBern  Brooklyn, NY 8 hours ago

It pains me to say this, but I'm grateful my father, grandparents, great-grandparents and other relatives - Jews who fought tirelessly for social justice, peace and helping those less fortunate than themselves - are not alive to see this. I feel ashamed.

• [*]Reply [*]  [*]

523Recommend

 

 

nilesh  balitmore, md 9 hours ago

To see so many children suffering is painful. Not only is Israel responsible but the US is as well as we have supplied so many of the arms. I'm so tired of hearing that Hamas is responsible. The people that pull the triggers or push the buttons to drop these bombs are responsible. Enough.

• [*]Reply [*]  [*]

453Recommend

 

 

ESH  NY 9 hours ago

Just because you CAN do something, doesn't mean you SHOULD. Since ISR alleges that Hamas puts "human shields" schools and mosques -- and weapons -- doesn't mean the 800 pound gorilla should crush out innocent Palestinian civilians like gnats. 

Hamas/PA/Gazans/WB Palestinians will never win the "hot" war -- but ISR will never win the PR struggle. The fundamental cause of the problem is Israel's continuing occupation and subjugation of Palestinians/Gazans. 

How can Israel -- of all countries -- pursue a policy that subjugates the population of Gaza in what amounts to an open-air prison. 

Where were the Jews of the Warsaw ghetto supposed to go? 

Where are Gazans supposed to go now?

• [*]Reply [*]  [*]

438Recommend

 

 

David  Colorado 9 hours ago

It's time for America to end our blind support for Israel.
It's time for America to end the billions in U.S. aid to Israel.

• [*]Reply [*]  [*]

386Recommend

 

 

jim  arizona 9 hours ago

From what I understand Israel is a member of the UN, and the only member nation that actively occupies foreign lands. Israel continues to eat away at Palestine's lands, consuming more and more all the time. They build settlements in Palestine, and when Palestine protests, and brings up arms against Israel, throwing stones and lobbing low-tech missiles, the western media labels that "terrorism", instead of "war", in an attempt to reduce those actions to something less than human. This is the way poor people fight wars, and the only way this poor nation can afford to fight. I am tired of how here in the U.S. we are not allowed to question Israel in any way, as any non pro-Israel speak is somehow defined as "anti semitic". It is time we have an open, honest, and objective debate about the Israel/Palestine conflict here in America.

• [*]Reply [*]  [*]

384Recommend

Lee  Atlanta, GA 9 hours ago

Shame on the Israeli government. We expect better from a state filled with so many gifted and wonderful people. And shame on the US for enabling this nonsense.

As bad as Hamas's leadership is, and make no mistake it is horrible, collective punishment of the residents of Gaza only strengthens the position of Hamas. That much is clear to anyone who has been following this tragedy over the last decade. It's time for a new strategy.

• [*]Reply [*]  [*]

315Recommend

 

 

brooklynforchange  New York City 9 hours ago

This is absolutely horrific, and I have no words to express my feelings.

However hard pro-Israeli voices and organizations and corporations want to justify the genocide under Netanyahu and his brutality government, it's absolutely clear to the rest of the world that they're committing war crimes. 
...
But what Netanyahu and his government have been doing deserves a war crimes tribunal -- the Nuremberg way.

Janice

 Southwest Virginia 9 hours ago

Why is the United States still in bed with Israel? Why is our tax money going to make carnage of this sort possible?

• [*]Reply [*] 
  

We need to separate ourselves, finally. We've been in league with bullies before, and it did not turn out well.

• [*]Reply [*]  [*]

204Recommend

 

 

Ben  Chomsky 9 hours ago

This is OUR doing. We equipped the monster that has been unleashed on a defenseless people. Netanyahu should be prosecuted for war crimes.

• [*]Reply [*]  [*]

196Recommend

 

Ben  Chomsky 9 hours ago

Israelis living in "perpetual threat" is no excuse to kill women and kids. This is a crude and cruel justification for Israel's war crimes... even for an Israeli apologizer.

• [*]In Reply to clownsaround [*]  [*]Reply [*]  [*]

185Recommend

 

Alex  Canada 9 hours ago

This is outrageous. Civilans are being slaughtered and the western media and their masters offer nothing of substance to the public. Compare the reporting on the Ukrainian crisis with what is going on in Gaza. Where is the outrage and condemnation. The hypocrisy is appalling and little wonder that the Russians ignore western moralizing.

• [*]Reply [*]  [*]

179Recommend

 

Richard Huber  New York City 9 hours ago

It's worse than that; not only are we supplying them the arms but we are doing it free of charge! Our "foreign aid" to Israel totals over $3 billion per annum, most of it spent on US produced arms.

• [*]In Reply to nilesh [*]  [*]Reply [*]  [*]

173Recommend

 

Anonymous  CT 9 hours ago

Would you have the same response if it were your kid's school that was attacked? I think not. 

There is NO excuse for bombing schools and places of safe refuge for people that have nothing to do with this endless tit for tat conflict among irresponsible parties

• [*]In Reply to clownsaround [*]  [*]Reply [*]  [*]

168Recommend

 

John S  new york, NY 9 hours ago

Israel tries to absolve the responsibility for their crimes by stating they warn Palestinians to flee. But when they do they still get bombed-this time in schools. It does not seem that Israel is taking any strong measures to discriminate their targets. To them every Palestinians is a target, even children. This is a campaign of ethnic cleansing. And Israel claims they have the " right to defend themselves ". This is called defending?

• [*]Reply [*]  [*]

167Recommend

 

The conscience of a Mexican phd student  Monterrey 9 hours ago

The opinion outside de US is broadly against Israel and the slow genocide it is perpetrating in Gaza, after analysing the evidence, and without a lobby group in Mexico that is telling us lies, this is clearly a genocide, no decent human being can say otherwise

• [*]Reply [*]  [*]

165Recommend

 

 

Sara  New York 9 hours ago

How can you refer to this mass slaughter of innocents as "proportionate"? Israel has to own these deaths and stop blaming everything on Hamas. Every day this is becoming more of a tragedy. John Kerry was right when he questioned these "pinpoint" attacks. Israel should be held accountable for this huge number of civilian deaths. Proportionate? I don't think so.

[StylesGrant]

 

 

"Israel" is not "Israelis."  Israel is a state.  Israelis are people within the borders of Israel.  All the actions you describe being performed by "Israel" are reinforcing my point, as they are examples of state aggression.  The retaliations made by Palestinians are against the aggression of the State of Israel.  Both the Palestinian victims and the Israeli victims are the consequence of state aggression.  Therefore, the State of Israel is Tom, The State of Palestine is Jerry, and Bill is represented by the victims on both sides of the border.

 

 

It's all about how culture programs people's brains. Culture =/= Truth. The ideas behind Zionism and Shariah Law are both quite deadly, as you would expect when people aggrandize their objects and symbols to such absolute truth rooted in total historically constructed subjectivism. 

[AustinJames]

Just wanted to note that Lior is not painting an accurate picture of the regional political landscape because many Arab leaders, including the Jordanians, Egyptians, Saudis, and Emiratis do support Israel's strike on Gaza. They also have an alliance with Muslim Kurds, so when he attempts to make it seem as though Israel is afloat in a sea of hostility, he's defaulting to the JIDF propaganda archives circa 1970 and should really consider renewing his subscription. 

 

Again, these details do not necessarily coincide with the actual philosophical principles of the discussion you're having, but just giving you some context as to the unreality from which Lior is arguing from.

 

Thank you for helping me better understand the situation.  Wading through the swamps of propaganda is disorienting, to say the least.

 

I think these details are important in the philosophical discussion of self-defense, though, so I'm glad you brought them up.  To refer to the example in my previous post; if a man is threatened by his neighbor, his reaction may be influenced by the degree of support he perceives from his other neighbors.  If he feels threatened by all his neighbors, it may be morally justified to respond with greater force than if he is only threatened by one neighbor, and the rest are friendly.  This isn't proven, of course; it is only my supposition.

[StylesGrant]

https://board.freedomainradio.com/topic/41047-terror-management-theory/

[Liberty Bill]

I see a False Dilemma here, or Excluded Middle.  Namely, it doesn't have to be either-or.  As I see it, it's immoral to take a human shield.  It is also immoral to kill them.  Sometimes there are no easy answers and no white hats.

 

One thing that I think is important to remember is that, morally, the Principle of Proportionality is just as important as the Non-Aggression Principle.  If you walk around wearing a force field, against which bounce off rocks with fire-crackers attached, you are not justified in slaughtering the aggressors.  Or, to be more precise, if Israel is protected by an Iron Dome missile defense system, against which bounce off 2-foot long home-made Qussam rockets (to the tune of 0 deaths as a result), Israel is not justified in launching missiles in return (to the tune of dozens of innocents killed).  The body count makes clear that Israel is violating the POP while hiding behind the argument that Hamas violated the NAP.  Even accepting this as true (and I do not, I would argue that Israel has been the aggressor in every conflict/battle since the 6 day war, and perhaps even since it was founded, though I haven't the time to flesh out that argument here), their response is immoral.

[mreyallior]

AustinJames,

If you look at Israel as Tom and Hamas as Jerry, and all the other victims collectively as Bill, then there's no point in blaming Israel for Bills death.

But this is a very foggy generalization. A better analogy would be to say Israeli citizens are Bill1 and Palestinian citizens are Bill2.

Also, you have to compare Tom and Jerry's actions - as they are not doing the same actions. Hamas is using suicide bombers that blow up restaurants, buses and clubs - on purpose. They don't even claim it's collateral damage. They target civilians. Israel doesn't. At least, it claims it's collateral damage due to human shield practice (proven true in many cases!!!).

Now, in the light of this evidence, of what Tom is doing and what Jerry is doing (different things), you have to judge who's at fault for Bill1's death and who's responsible for Bill2's death.

Regarding of your theory that you share with Robert Pape, I'm not sure I understand it. I'm not even interested to study it. Responding with force against force makes sense to me. If there's anything you learnt from this Robert Pape, please raise the argument and provide evidence. So far, from what I understand, your argument is that "ending the occupation is the only solution to suicide bombers". I'm not trying to make a straw man here, if I misunderstood you please clarify, but in light of the fact that Muslim militias claim entire Israel is an occupation, your suggestion to end the occupation means Israelis have to learn to swim really good.

The population density argument, that somehow makes it ok to put population at risk, is easy to debunk. The initiator of aggression is responsible for whatever tragic results that follows. Are rockets on Tel Aviv a self defense act? Surely not, so they are an act of aggression.

"I don't discriminate between victims"
You discriminate between aggressors. You hold Israel responsible for the death of non-combatant Palestinians. Why? Because you expect no moral standards from Palestinians who are widely supporting terrorist militias and also serving as willing human shields.

"all the Israelis in those buses and restaurants you mentioned earlier were "human shields"
No, because blowing up a bus or restaurant doesn't constitute self defense. You're not blowing up missile caches or missile launchers.

I'm truly getting tired of sorting out the fallacies you spew in my direction. Blah. I thought you're going to establish agreeable principles before going on and applying them to the situation. Apparently you have a conclusion and you're just looking for the facts that will support it, ignoring those that invalidate your conclusion.

You suggest an convenient analogy: "Let's say Jerry punches Tom in the face, then runs into a crowded street"...

Let me suggest another analogy:
"Tom fires shots at Jerry from a crowd that cheers him for doing this, and is openly supporting human shield practice to allow him to continue firing shots at Jerry."


"why should those in Gaza, who have been born since the imprisonment"
I can say all Israeis are imprisoned by all other countries, starting from Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Egypt, and blame even Canada for not letting us move there. Those damn Canadians are improsoning us!

hmm.... is there anything that you say that does make sense, or am I destined to deal with endless fallacies and inappropriate analogies if I want to have a discussion with you...

"I didn't draw a conclusion about Israel and Hamas"
Yes you did. You concluded that Israel is to blame for the deaths that Hamas is causing with their aggression.

"the area of disagreement is beyond the moral implications of taking a human shield"
In your opinion, Hamas isn't turning Palestinians into human shields (willing and unwilling) so in your opinion it's beyond this question. In my opinion, it's not.

"If you burn down his house with his family inside, it may be considered self-defense, but it surely cannot be morally justifiable"

Ahhh.. here's your error. It can't be self defense, and immoral at the same time. Self defense means I have no choice, if I have no choice I am not evil. If it's my family or his, to hell with his.


JamesP,

What name-calling? Pointing out lies and the people who spew them out and calling them barefaced liars?

 

"you said that you weren't going to engage with Waleed, and then two posts later, you engaged with him"
How come you have a problem with my dishonesty, but not with Waleeds?

You didn't seem to care that member Agalloch called me "retard", or that Waleed called my ideas "projection from Israeli shills", or the straw-man ad-hominem by J-William "he's here for some sort of emotional thing to do with his religion"

J-William and Waleed have been caught lying barefaced. They keep flooding the thread in hopes to minimize the weight and visibility their lies. If you care about dishonesty, please ask them to stop.

Both Waleed and J-William are pulling a Red Herring in this thread, by asking whether it's horrible that babies die, rather then who's to blame?


To all the other hypocrites [pick your own politically correct, forum-guidelines-appropriate term] that still blame Israelis for not allowing people in Gaza to enter Israel freely... I have a challenge.. better then the previous one! Please wear a t-shirt that says "I'm proud to be gay" and take a walk around Gaza. Take your own medicine before suggesting it to me. Ok? I'm not advocating for democracy (a-la "the only democracy in the middle east" BS), I just don't want to see public executions where I live.


Liberty Bill,
Your philosophy just isn't. If I have a very good lock on my door, and you try to pick it the whole day, me having a very good lock doesn't turn you into less of a burglar just because you can't pick it.

"Israel has been the aggressor in every conflict/battle since the 6 day war,"

Are you claiming that suicide bombers in buses and restaurants are a form of self defense? The rockets..? Interesting! (not really)

[jacbot]

1) Err... Poland didn't do a lot of fighting.

 

2)but yeah, self defense doesn't exist for a state because rights don't exist, and states doubly so.

 

3) Besides you can tell when something the state does is self defense because they get near universal support. Take for instance the German siege of St. Petersburg in WWII, almost every person in that city supported the fight against the germans.

 

1) first that is inaccurate and since people dont say random stuff for no reason you are trying to say something here? what exactly?

2) ok, lets see how you apply this rule.

3) Oh, Poland=no selfdefense, but  USSR=selfdefense because Stalin would kill your whole family if you surrendered or retreated. mmmm

Accurate depiction of what happened to Sovjet soldiers retreating at the battle of Stalingrad/

I feel like I should stay out of this... but what the hell.

 

You do know that this "human shield" thing is just propaganda, right?

 

I found this very disturbing

 

[powder]

mreyallior, I find it interesting that as a self-proclaimed anarchist you say things that confuse people with states.  You also said you want Israel to be 'free' (whatever that means), and maybe move to northern Canada, "lets talk to Canada".  Who the heck is Israel and Canada?  I live in the place you refer to as Canada and I would be happy to see you and your friends move here, just don't call your new area Israel please.  I don't want the bombs to follow you.