I hope i get this across without getting pedantic responses.
So why is Hamas allowed to be excused for using human shields because of the population density where there is no choice, but civilians being killed by Israeli attack are completely unacceptable? Surely if its so density they don’t have a choice then Israel doesn’t either.
Other poster is correct, civilians on both sides are the only innocent ones here. No need to excuse one side as “no choice”.
I’m honestly curious. Have you ever heard of a single Palestinian accusing Hamas of using someone they know as a human shield? Has anyone ever, really?
The only “sources” backing these “well-known facts” are western media and Israeli-say-so. I’ve dealt with many Palestinians personally (I live in Egypt and we have a lot of them living here), and none of them ever complained about their families being used as human shields. Ever. You’d think some Palestinians would speak up about this by now if it were real.
You know who they unanimously consider unnecessarily brutal and cruel though? The IDF which treats them like less than dirt on a good day.
Standing directly behind someone, using them as a physical shield is not the human shield im talking about. The only direct evidence I’ve seen of this was the original attack when hostages were being taken back… and we know how that went.
Im referring to using protected places (hospitals, mosques, infrastructure) as bases for logistics, planning and operations - doing so removes the protection placed on those places and makes it legal to attack… regardless of what that means for the civilian population. There has been significant evidence of this.
Proportionality does need to be brought into discussion as I do believe much of the response on protected places was excessive - We’ve all seen the damage and suffering that removing the protection on these places has caused.
Going back to my original point, Hamas uses these with the justification of “we don’t have a choice” because there is a significant strength inbalance and everything not breaking the conventions has been destroyed - no where is this considered acceptable. The laws and convention doesn’t just apply when you are winning and its a “fair” fight. Nor does Israeli actions justify it - just like Hamas actions don’t justify Israeli breaches.
Regardless of this claim, the point still stands. No Palestinian I’ve ever met accused Hamas of jeopardising the Palestinian people’s safety. Only Israel does, for obvious reasons.
This is like the police cornering a wanted criminal into a crowded bus and shooting everyone indiscriminately whilst blaming it on them.
I’ve also never met any afgani women who openly accused the Taliban regime since they took back over - lack of evidence isn’t proof of something. Nor do I belive you can just casually say “oh, your point doesn’t matter” and dismiss it out if hand.
Hamas has no choice. They, along with Palestinian civilians, have been expelled from their homes and locked into the open air prison that is Gaza. They have a valid cause to fight for, and nowhere to go. In contrast, Israel is killing Palestinian civilians because they want to steal the little patch of land that they weren’t able to steal already. It’s not a valid cause and they have no reason to be anywhere near there.
Using your discussion they had no choice but to fight. Fair point.
They absolutely had choices on where to organise, whether or not to kill and capture civilians, or if they should set up in hospitals and key infrastructure that keeps their civilians alive. Do you have a justification for this?
Where should they organize? They’re in one of the most densely populated regions of the world, no place is far from civilians. If they had a larger territory, fighting intentionally close to civilians would be much worse. But given they literally caged in by the enemy they are fighting, there is no other alternative.
As for hospitals and key infrastructure, there is no evidence that they were used in the way that Israel has accused. Israel attacked hospitals and other key infrastructure to dismantle them to prevent the Palestinians they want dead from getting any aid or relief. They lie about Hamas’ presence there only to mask their genocidal actions. If they could prove to the world they were in the right, they would have done so by now.
Because we have strong evidence Israel is not trying to avoid civilian casualties. There’s a difference between the missile attacks on boots on the ground too. When you actually have people in there, it shouldn’t be too hard to avoid killing civilians. Meanwhile, they’re doing things like literally using civilians as human shields or killing civilians collecting aid from an aid convoy.
I can accept some excuses from Israel, if it were accompanied by so much evidence that it’s on purpose. They clearly have no interest in avoiding civilian deaths, and quite probably show an interest in causing them.
Yes - we also have no evidence Hamas is avoiding civilian casualties either. This is the point - why are we excusing one but not the other?
I struggle with any excuses from Israel- you have the manpower, tech and logistic to do soo much better and (regardless of your actual intent) causing excess suffering isn’t going to help your long term position. We learned this in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Three things: We aren’t giving weapons to Hamas to fight, they’re on the defence, and they’re a significantly less organized less advanced force. Gorilla warfare is the stand operating practice of a less advanced force fighting a more advanced one. They can’t hide in jungles though. They only have urban places (or directly next to the border).
I don’t think Hamas is good by any means. They just are. The situation in which they were created is not of their own will. The situation they fight in is not of their design. Their existence is also, in part, a piece of Israel’s desire and force. (They funneled money to them in order to create an enemy to fight against.) I don’t fault a lion for mistreatment of their prey, but I do fault humans for how we treat livestock. One does it because of the situation in which it lives, and the other does it out of a totally lack of respect, or potentially malice.
Point 0 - that you for engaging with facts and opinion rather than instant accusations.
Point 1 - correct, asymmetrical warfare is very common among weaker forces and is a great way to negate tech advantages. Nothing wrong with it, the issue is where and how they are conducting it.
Point 2 - interesting part of the point you mentioned regarding dressing up to murder civilians in hospitals.
Hamas was doing such things - terrorists dressing up as civilians to access medical care, who took arms into a hospital that removed its protections, who were then killed by an opposing force in a way that minimizes civilian casualties.
I haven’t seen anything on the legality since, but discussions I had when this video came out was that it is probably justified as they did drop the disguise before opening fire. Lack of uniform does make it questionable.
This goes back to my original point - armed combatants aren’t allowed to use civilian infrastructure as it removes its protections. Hamas blatantly used it and yet its Israeli fault for killing them there?
For your last point, im sorry I’ve got a splitting headache and struggling to connect the dots, but you do raise an interesting point. I cant blame Palestine for wanting to fight, but I can blame Hamas for their conduct and choices within the conflict - just like Israel.
Point 2 - interesting part of the point you mentioned regarding dressing up to murder civilians in hospitals.
Hamas was doing such things - terrorists dressing up as civilians to access medical care, who took arms into a hospital that removed its protections, who were then killed by an opposing force in a way that minimizes civilian casualties.
The Israelis didn’t just dress up as civilians, which would be bad, but they dressed up as medics. This is a war crime under the Geneva Convention. This is not acceptable because it leads to a situation where medical workers can’t operate because they can’t be trusted to not be soldiers.
Also, the soldiers there were seemingly brought there and were critically wounded. This does not “remove the protections” of the hospital. Soldiers are allowed to be treated in a hospital without the hospital becoming a valid military target.
I hope i get this across without getting pedantic responses.
So why is Hamas allowed to be excused for using human shields because of the population density where there is no choice, but civilians being killed by Israeli attack are completely unacceptable? Surely if its so density they don’t have a choice then Israel doesn’t either.
Other poster is correct, civilians on both sides are the only innocent ones here. No need to excuse one side as “no choice”.
I’m honestly curious. Have you ever heard of a single Palestinian accusing Hamas of using someone they know as a human shield? Has anyone ever, really?
The only “sources” backing these “well-known facts” are western media and Israeli-say-so. I’ve dealt with many Palestinians personally (I live in Egypt and we have a lot of them living here), and none of them ever complained about their families being used as human shields. Ever. You’d think some Palestinians would speak up about this by now if it were real.
You know who they unanimously consider unnecessarily brutal and cruel though? The IDF which treats them like less than dirt on a good day.
Good question, should clarify.
Standing directly behind someone, using them as a physical shield is not the human shield im talking about. The only direct evidence I’ve seen of this was the original attack when hostages were being taken back… and we know how that went.
Im referring to using protected places (hospitals, mosques, infrastructure) as bases for logistics, planning and operations - doing so removes the protection placed on those places and makes it legal to attack… regardless of what that means for the civilian population. There has been significant evidence of this.
Proportionality does need to be brought into discussion as I do believe much of the response on protected places was excessive - We’ve all seen the damage and suffering that removing the protection on these places has caused.
Going back to my original point, Hamas uses these with the justification of “we don’t have a choice” because there is a significant strength inbalance and everything not breaking the conventions has been destroyed - no where is this considered acceptable. The laws and convention doesn’t just apply when you are winning and its a “fair” fight. Nor does Israeli actions justify it - just like Hamas actions don’t justify Israeli breaches.
Regardless of this claim, the point still stands. No Palestinian I’ve ever met accused Hamas of jeopardising the Palestinian people’s safety. Only Israel does, for obvious reasons.
This is like the police cornering a wanted criminal into a crowded bus and shooting everyone indiscriminately whilst blaming it on them.
I’ve also never met any afgani women who openly accused the Taliban regime since they took back over - lack of evidence isn’t proof of something. Nor do I belive you can just casually say “oh, your point doesn’t matter” and dismiss it out if hand.
Hamas has no choice. They, along with Palestinian civilians, have been expelled from their homes and locked into the open air prison that is Gaza. They have a valid cause to fight for, and nowhere to go. In contrast, Israel is killing Palestinian civilians because they want to steal the little patch of land that they weren’t able to steal already. It’s not a valid cause and they have no reason to be anywhere near there.
Using your discussion they had no choice but to fight. Fair point.
They absolutely had choices on where to organise, whether or not to kill and capture civilians, or if they should set up in hospitals and key infrastructure that keeps their civilians alive. Do you have a justification for this?
Where should they organize? They’re in one of the most densely populated regions of the world, no place is far from civilians. If they had a larger territory, fighting intentionally close to civilians would be much worse. But given they literally caged in by the enemy they are fighting, there is no other alternative.
As for hospitals and key infrastructure, there is no evidence that they were used in the way that Israel has accused. Israel attacked hospitals and other key infrastructure to dismantle them to prevent the Palestinians they want dead from getting any aid or relief. They lie about Hamas’ presence there only to mask their genocidal actions. If they could prove to the world they were in the right, they would have done so by now.
Because we have strong evidence Israel is not trying to avoid civilian casualties. There’s a difference between the missile attacks on boots on the ground too. When you actually have people in there, it shouldn’t be too hard to avoid killing civilians. Meanwhile, they’re doing things like literally using civilians as human shields or killing civilians collecting aid from an aid convoy.
I can accept some excuses from Israel, if it were accompanied by so much evidence that it’s on purpose. They clearly have no interest in avoiding civilian deaths, and quite probably show an interest in causing them.
Yes - we also have no evidence Hamas is avoiding civilian casualties either. This is the point - why are we excusing one but not the other?
I struggle with any excuses from Israel- you have the manpower, tech and logistic to do soo much better and (regardless of your actual intent) causing excess suffering isn’t going to help your long term position. We learned this in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Three things: We aren’t giving weapons to Hamas to fight, they’re on the defence, and they’re a significantly less organized less advanced force. Gorilla warfare is the stand operating practice of a less advanced force fighting a more advanced one. They can’t hide in jungles though. They only have urban places (or directly next to the border).
Israel has the initiative. They get to choose when and how to take a fight (or to choose not to at all). Even when they put people in the area, they still commit atrocities, like dressing up as civilians and medical workers to assault a hospital and murdering civilians. I haven’t seen Hamas do such things.
I don’t think Hamas is good by any means. They just are. The situation in which they were created is not of their own will. The situation they fight in is not of their design. Their existence is also, in part, a piece of Israel’s desire and force. (They funneled money to them in order to create an enemy to fight against.) I don’t fault a lion for mistreatment of their prey, but I do fault humans for how we treat livestock. One does it because of the situation in which it lives, and the other does it out of a totally lack of respect, or potentially malice.
Point 0 - that you for engaging with facts and opinion rather than instant accusations.
Point 1 - correct, asymmetrical warfare is very common among weaker forces and is a great way to negate tech advantages. Nothing wrong with it, the issue is where and how they are conducting it.
Point 2 - interesting part of the point you mentioned regarding dressing up to murder civilians in hospitals. Hamas was doing such things - terrorists dressing up as civilians to access medical care, who took arms into a hospital that removed its protections, who were then killed by an opposing force in a way that minimizes civilian casualties.
I haven’t seen anything on the legality since, but discussions I had when this video came out was that it is probably justified as they did drop the disguise before opening fire. Lack of uniform does make it questionable.
This goes back to my original point - armed combatants aren’t allowed to use civilian infrastructure as it removes its protections. Hamas blatantly used it and yet its Israeli fault for killing them there?
For your last point, im sorry I’ve got a splitting headache and struggling to connect the dots, but you do raise an interesting point. I cant blame Palestine for wanting to fight, but I can blame Hamas for their conduct and choices within the conflict - just like Israel.
The Israelis didn’t just dress up as civilians, which would be bad, but they dressed up as medics. This is a war crime under the Geneva Convention. This is not acceptable because it leads to a situation where medical workers can’t operate because they can’t be trusted to not be soldiers.
Also, the soldiers there were seemingly brought there and were critically wounded. This does not “remove the protections” of the hospital. Soldiers are allowed to be treated in a hospital without the hospital becoming a valid military target.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
literally using civilians as human shields
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.