• khalic@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    That’s not what I said. There needs to be heavy pressure on them from the world. I’m putting pressure on my political representative exactly for that.

    But a blanket statement like: “all civilian casualties are inadmissible” is just wrong.

    • adderaline@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      all civilian casualties are inadmissible. its not wrong, its a moral imperative, and one that the state of Israel is blatantly disregarding. the framing that “okay, these civilian causalities are okay” is fucking monstrous, and gives a ready made excuse for Israel to escalate violence in Gaza.

      • khalic@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        You’re right, the Israeli should just say “too bad guys, they have hostages, we can’t shoot in that direction, check mate” and let hamas slaughter them

        • adderaline@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          the scenario you’re imagining doesn’t exist. this isn’t a rock paper scissors thing, where Israel either shoots through hostages to kill insurgents or dies themselves. if Hamas is hiding amongst civilians, they aren’t attacking Israel, they’re hiding. if they’re attacking Israel, they aren’t in a crowd of Palestinian civilians. the IDF does not need to have a shootout with civilians in the crossfire to protect its people. the IDF does not need to bomb civilian residences to wage war against an insurgency.

          you are so willing to conflate the two, assume that Israel must kill or be killed themselves. that is a fucking falsehood. there is so fucking much a military force can do to defend against attack that doesn’t involve shelling apartment buildings, shooting into crowds, and otherwise being monsters.

          • alyaza [they/she]@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            for what it’s worth i think we’ve about exhausted what can be said on this topic past your own comment; i don’t think further responses between you and @khalic@beehaw.org will really go anywhere and i’ve already nuked a bunch of the discussion downthread because it devolved completely.

      • teawrecks@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        No one is saying “all these civilian casualties are ok”, stop oversimplifilying the situation.

        I know it’s tempting to make blanket statements about moral imperatives from your armchair, religion has been doing that to us for centuries, but it turns out the real world is actually full of moral dilemmas, where there IS no outcome where no one dies, and all you can do is pick the least bad option.

        “All civilian casualties are inadmissible” is the coldest of cold takes, right there next to, “well I don’t think anyone should have a war at all!” Like, great, thanks, why didn’t anyone think of that?

        • adderaline@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          i don’t think anyone should have a war at all. there, are you happy? i’m frankly uninterested in litigating what hypothetical circumstances under which it might be okay to kill a civilian.