A US-based aid group admitted Friday that a group of individuals — who the Israeli military says were armed — took control of an aid convoy in the southern Gaza Strip the day before, without the organization having vetted them or coordinated the matter with the Israel Defense Forces.

The military said Thursday that it struck the gunmen, killing them while not harming aid workers.

According to the IDF, Hamas operatives frequently try to hijack aid deliveries.

The IDF had said on Thursday that a convoy of aid trucks from the American Near East Refugee Aid (Anera) organization entered the southern Rafah area with Israeli coordination. It said that during the drive, it identified a group of gunmen taking over a vehicle at the front of the convoy and beginning to lead it. The IDF described the act as a hijacking attempt.

Shortly afterward, the IDF said it was able to determine that it could strike just the car with the gunmen, without harming the rest of the convoy, and so it carried out a strike, killing at least four.

  • Count042@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    4 months ago

    Then why are you trying to provide cover for a country actively engaged in systemized rape, torture, and Genocide?

    • oberstoffensichtlich@feddit.orgOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      4 months ago

      There’s no genocide going on. It’s a war against an extremely deeply entrenched enemy in a densely populated urban environment.

      systemized rape, torture

      Rape and torture have happened, but are not systemic.

      Israel does questionable and bad things, for sure. However it’s not the most evil state ever, that it’s often depicted as.

      Nuance, truth, and perspective of the other side are important in this conflict.

      • Count042@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        Any country that intentionally withholds food, medicine, and potable water from a population it considers problematic is a nation intentionally committing genocide.

        It is, in fact, the most common, and efficient, form of genocide ever.

        That is just one of the reasons the ICC, the organization literally with the legal authority to determine of some thing is genocide or not determined that Israel is plausibly committing genocide.

        You like to talk about truth and nuance a lot. Forgive me if I trust the literal genocide determining organization and not the self confident black and white statement og some asshole on the internet that loves to talk about nuance except when it comes to their own statements.

        As to the systemic system of rape and torture, why don’t you read Israels OWN fucking reporting on Sde Teiman.

        Any nation that murders at least 100,000 children is fucking evil. And those are not Hamas’s numbers. Those are the Lancet medical journals numbers. I’m not saying they are the most evil, as that would maybe be the British Empire, off the top of my head.

        • oberstoffensichtlich@feddit.orgOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          Any nation that murders at least 100,000 children is fucking evil. And those are not Hamas’s numbers. Those are the Lancet medical journals numbers.

          That number is an estimate in an opinion piece, not a peer reviewed article. There’s no factual basis. The authors have already regretted putting the numbers in there.

          People under 18 are not all children. Young adults of 17 definitely aren’t children like 3 year olds. Plenty of teenagers in Gaza are members of armed groups and participating in the fighting.

          • Count042@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            It’s not an opinion piece. It was labeled a correspondence, and isn’t peer reviewed, but the methodology for measuring dead in conflicts where the ability to make such counts is, and they used the conservative side of those calculations. The authors didn’t express regret, merely that some people made claims the article didn’t make.

            Such methods are required, because Israel has intentionally bombed every hospital in Gaza to make counting the dead difficult, if not impossible, then insulting the methods required to actually estimate the dead. It sure would be nice if Israel didn’t intentionally destroy all civilian medical infrastructure and send many of the doctors to a torture camp so we could have some actual numbers.

            But, that’s the point, isn’t it? That’s also the point of my comment you didn’t bother addressing at all because you know there is no moral defense, even though you’re willing to try and justify the murder of children.

            Concentrating people in an enclosed area, and removing their access to food, water, and medicine is both the most common and the most efficient method governments have used historically engaged in the process of genocide.

            And starvation kills children first, with the youngest dying the earliest.

            It isn’t astounding that you (presumably, based on your instance) are from a country whose highest proportion of people charged with antisemitism are Jewish people protesting the genocide.

        • oberstoffensichtlich@feddit.orgOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          4 months ago

          That is just one of the reasons the ICC, the organization literally with the legal authority to determine of some thing is genocide or not determined that Israel is plausibly committing genocide.

          That is a misrepresentation of what the ICJ ruled. You can’t even tell apart the ICJ and the ICC, it seems. You can’t even get the organization right.

          Here you can hear the President of the ICJ explain what is meant by plausible.

          “At this stage of the proceedings, the Court is not called upon to determine definitively whether the rights which South Africa wishes to see protected exist,” said the ICJ. “It need only decide whether the rights claimed by South Africa, and for which it is seeking protection, are plausible. “In the Court’s view, the facts and circumstances… are sufficient to conclude that at least some of the rights claimed by South Africa and for which it is seeking protection are plausible.”

          Plausible only refers to the right of South Africa to bring this case to the ICJ.

          the ICJ had only ruled that Gaza Palestinians had a plausible right to be protected from genocide - in other words, that it had been dealing with a complex and somewhat abstract legal argument.

          A day later, Joan Donoghue - now retired from the ICJ - appeared on the BBC’s HARDtalk programme and explicitly tried to end the debate by setting out what the court had done. “It did not decide - and this is something where I’m correcting what’s often said in the media… that the claim of genocide was plausible,” said the judge. “It did emphasise in the order that there was a risk of irreparable harm to the Palestinian right to be protected from genocide. But the shorthand that often appears, which is that there’s a plausible case of genocide, isn’t what the court decided.”

          • Count042@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            You’re right about the ICJ vs ICC which is a mistake I don’t ordinarily make. My only execute for that is I woke up in the middle of the night from a migraine.

            Your quotes however are extremely cherry picked, and your description of what they mean is absolutely wrong.

            Part of the case was about establishing South Africa’s right to bring the case, but part of it was to determine the plausibility of the charge.

            https://www.npr.org/2024/01/26/1227078791/icj-israel-genocide-gaza-palestinians-south-africa

            The International Court of Justice has found it is “plausible” that Israel has committed acts that violate the Genocide Convention. In a provisional order delivered by the court’s president, Joan Donoghue, the court said Israel must ensure “with immediate effect” that its forces not commit any of the acts prohibited by the convention.

            Donoghue said the court cannot make a final determination right now on whether Israel is guilty of genocide. But she said that given the deteriorating situation in Gaza, the court has jurisdiction to order measures to protect Gaza’s population from further risk of genocide.

            But, I’m sure NPR is Hamas, right?

            • oberstoffensichtlich@feddit.orgOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              Since when does the West Bank have restrictions on Journalists entering?

              You don’t believe the president of the court you cite, okay then.

              • Count042@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                4 months ago

                I literally posted a link, so others don’t have to determine of over cherry picked my quote that shows my assertion.

                You don’t believe anything that goes counter to your love for an apartheid government.