[Politics_Observer]

@Godstud @Unthinking Majority

Yeah, I am familiar with the laws of war and the Geneva Conventions and all that. They brief you on all that when you are a soldier. But when the actual shooting starts in a real deal conflict or war, a lot of rules and laws go out the window. This is why I said when the war starts the law falls silent.

The unfortunate soldiers found out to have committed war crimes end up getting charged with war crimes at the time or later on to appease political pressure. When you are a soldier, you are pretty much expendable for the powers that be and your country.

The politicians know a lot of the laws of war and conflict and the Geneva Conventions go out the window when the shooting starts and they will charge a few soldiers with war crimes or throw them under the bus if they have to in cases where political pressure is involved to charge somebody when stories come to light. When you are the soldier, you pay the price and do the dirty work for your country and the powers that be. I think most mature adults know this.

[Godstud]

@Neo It doesn't make it any more right, if there's excuses.

You aren't any better than the person you are fighting, if you are doing the same things.

[Politics_Observer]

@Godstud

That stuff happens in every conflict. Like "disarmed enemy forces" that we used to get around the treatment of enemy prisoners of war regarding the Geneva Conventions during World War II.

[Politics_Observer]

@Godstud

As you know when the Russians started bombing civilians in Ukraine, I wouldn't be surprised if it turned out that some Ukrainians shot a few Russian soldiers who tried to surrender in revenge for losing loved ones in Russia's bombing campaign of Ukrainian civilians. That would be a war crime for those Ukrainian soldiers to do that. But a lot of people would understand it too. It's basically insanity is what is. Plus, in bloody battles where a lot of people have been lost, soldiers are not always in the mood to take prisoners after losing close friends in their unit.

[wat0n]

How much are you aware of the history of this conflict? Serious question. I do not support Hamas and I do not support their attack. However Hamas is not Palestine. At the moment Israel may as well be declaring war with everyone in Palestine given they have cut off power and food for the entire region and forcing displacement. And you also have to understand why Hamas attacked, even if you disagree with it. There is an apartheid in Israel and Israel has been attacking Palestine and killing indiscriminately far before a week ago. This is an historic issue. Palestine should be free. It is what the vast majority of UN members want. Israel doesn't have any claim to the occupied territory and if you don't believe in annexation, then you should be supporting Palestine anyway.

Just provide a straight answer: What's the proportional answer to the killing of 1000+ civilians and kidnapping some 150-200?

I assume you don't mean "proportional" in the international law sense, which is a technical yet fairly vague concept that is open to interpretation.

It was war when something similar happened to USA. This is going to end badly for Israel and Palestine.

Indeed, and we'll have to see what happens after. If Israel, after a lot of bloodshed, ends up reoccupying Gaza (most likely option IMO) the international community and the US above all will need to play a very active role to make sure this doesn't end even worse. I don't think Israel, or most Israelis at least, want to occupy Gaza permanently yet 1) some will want, even if they're a minority, 2) there will need to be international boots on the ground to prevent islamists from ever resurfacing again.

The US has sent 2 carriers to the East Mediterranean, ostensibly to deter anyone trying to spread the conflict into a regional war - but also to have leverage for the post-war.

Who knows, with a bit of luck, active American involvement, Israelis severely punishing the right for failing to prevent the massacre while in charge and the Sunni Arab states (Egypt, Jordan, UAE and Saudi Arabia) pressuring the PA maybe, just maybe, there could be a deal where the PA eventually gets Gaza back and there are two states at last. It would look a lot like an imposed agreement on both Israelis and Palestinians to an extent, yet it does seem to me the current geopolitical realities point to that. Israel and the Sunni Arabs really want to reach an agreement to deter Iran (+ Russia and maybe China?) and its regional allies, the US really wants to be able to let the Middle East (and Europe) go in autopilot and be able to dedicate more attention to China.

Hamas' rule over Gaza has made negotiations not particularly appealing from Israel's perspective (it's not like signing a peace treaty with the PA for the West Bank would solve the Gaza situation at all, a peace treaty with the PA would have only been that and not an actual end to the conflict), maybe there could be some actual progress if Hamas is finally toppled.

[B0ycey]

Just provide a straight answer: What's the proportional answer to the killing of 1000+ civilians and kidnapping some 150-200?

I assume you don't mean "proportional" in the international law sense, which is a technical yet fairly vague concept that is open to interpretation.

Firstly, the correct response was to answer the Palestine question properly and not just ignore it and bomb indiscriminately before the strikes took place. But to answer your question more directly, I have no idea why the Iron Dome failed so catastrophically and why Israel ignored Egypts warnings that an attack was imminent. Had the Iron dome not failed and a warning was adhered to, Israel could have prevented a disaster and been aware to counter such a strike. Once a strike has taken place however, Israel is allowed to take a proportional response which in my opinion is to strike where the missiles were fired and to strike the decision makers locations and any warehouses ammunition is stored. That's it. And then they should improve the Iron dome which is suppose to be the best air defence there is. What isn't a proportional response is to blockage food, water and aid to the innocent and to displace people. It is also not proportionate to plan a ground offensive which will kill tens of thousands of innocent people and destabilised the region.

Also, if we have any respect for the UN charter and UN law, we should be making Israel just as accountable as Hamas. It is not OK for Hamas to go against UN law and the same should be true for Israel. Israels current response is against UN law. I have no idea why the US is backing this so hard given they are trying to make friends and given it is illegal. The US has leverage over Israel and they should be using it to end the madness.

[wat0n]

Firstly, the correct response was to answer the Palestine question properly and not just ignore it and bomb indiscriminately before the strikes took place. But to answer your question more directly, I have no idea why the Iron Dome failed so catastrophically and why Israel ignored Egypts warnings that an attack was imminent. Had the Iron dome not failed and a warning was adhered to, Israel could have prevented a disaster and been aware to counter such a strike. Once a strike has taken place however, Israel is allowed to take a proportional response which in my opinion is to strike where the missiles were fired and to strike the decision makers locations and any warehouses ammunition is stored. That's it. And then they should improve the Iron dome which is suppose to be the best air defence there is. What isn't a proportional response is to blockage food, water and aid to the innocent and to displace people. It is also not proportionate to plan a ground offensive which will kill tens of thousands of innocent people and destabilised the region.

Also, if we have any respect for the UN charter and UN law, we should be making Israel just as accountable as Hamas. It is not OK for Hamas to go against UN law and the same should be true for Israel. Israels current response is against UN law. I have no idea why the US is backing this so hard given they are trying to make friends and given it is illegal. The US has leverage over Israel and they should be using it to end the madness.

Hamas has been firing its rockets from (and storing them within) residential neighborhoods and one of the goals of this pre-incursion bombing campaign is to kill as many of Hamas' leadership as possible. Yet it's impossible to get rid of all of these with bombings alone, a ground incursion is quite evidently necessary as well.

"Answering the Palestine question properly", whatever that means, won't make islamists just disarm and go home. Neither will telling them they're violating international law.

As for the Iron Dome, any air defense system will be overloaded by just launching large enough salvos.

At last, the US is backing Israel not just because it's a traditional ally but also because it understands all the above. The US aereal bombings against ISIS have killed thousands of civilians ever since it joined the campaign to destroy it, even though ISIS has never done anything similar to what Hamas did last week on US soil. The same can be said about the UK. France understands Israel even more since ISIS has carried large attacks in its soil in the past.

[B0ycey]

Hamas has been firing its rockets from (and storing them within) residential neighborhoods and one of the goals of this pre-incursion bombing campaign is to kill as many of Hamas' leadership as possible. Yet it's impossible to get rid of all of these with bombings alone, a ground incursion is quite evidently necessary as well.

"Answering the Palestine question properly", whatever that means, won't make islamists just disarm and go home. Neither will telling them they're violating international law.

As for the Iron Dome, any air defense system will be overloaded by just launching large enough salvos.

At last, the US is backing Israel not just because it's a traditional ally but also because it understands all the above. The US aereal bombings against ISIS have killed thousands of civilians ever since it joined the campaign to destroy it, even though ISIS has never done anything similar to what Hamas did last week on US soil. The same can be said about the UK. France understands Israel even more since ISIS has carried large attacks in its soil in the past.

God, you're such a talking head for CNN.

Bombing never works. It only fuels more anger which in turn recruits more insurgents. If Israel continues this, they will be in a worse position than they are currently in. The casualty rate of a ground offensive, even for Israelis, will be high and then they would struggle to control the area anyway which is why they left in the first place. They would also loose any allies they have in the ME and it would also draw in Hezbollah and perhaps Iran turning this into a global conflict. The US should also look in the mirror because their reputation right now is worse than it has ever been. The US is trying to find allies for its war in Ukraine and what, they want more hostilities? The US cannot lose SA as an ally and what is worse, they will lose Turkey as well if they continue to back this. The US has a very very good reason to have a ceasefire right now. They are in no position for another conflict trust me.

As for dialogue not solve this issue, you are wrong. People said the same thing with NI and the Good Friday agreement still holds despite the religious fundamentalists fueling hostilities every so often. A solution to Palestine will end most of the hostilities. Not all because some people are fanatics. But most of it. It certainly will end most of the funding Hamas would get to attack Israel indefinitely.

[wat0n]

God, you're such a talking head for CNN.

And you are such a talking head for Al Jazeera it's hilarious.

Bombing never works. It only fuels more anger which in turn recruits more insurgents.

You bet it did work to destroy ISIS' so called "Caliphate".

If Israel continues this, they will be in a worse position than they are currently in. The casualty rate of a ground offensive, even for Israelis, will be high and then they would struggle to control the area anyway which is why they left in the first place. They would also loose any allies they have in the ME and it would also draw in Hezbollah and perhaps Iran turning into a global conflict. The US should also look in the mirror because their reputation right now is worse than it has ever been. The US is trying to find allies for its war in Ukraine and what, they want more hostilities? The US cannot loose SA as an allie and what is worse, they will lose Turkey as well. The US has a very very good reason to have a ceasefire right now. They are in no position for another conflict.

You're completely delusional if you think Turkey or Saudi Arabia will change their alliances just because the US is following with its commitments to Israel.

The US sent 2 carriers to the East Mediterranean precisely to tell Iran and others it will respond to any attempts to escalate the conflict further. In any event, Hezbollah and Syria have thus far not chosen to escalate, if they did they would be fighting a 2-front war just like Israel since they are still fighting in the Syrian civil war. Hence Hezbollah has not made any massive attacks against Israel, preferring to trade shelling with Israeli positions in the north. If it did, chances are it would also risk an Israeli invasion of Lebanon (and this is also why Israel called for a general mobilization, it's ready to do so if Hezbollah chooses to escalate).

As for dialogue not solve this issue, you are wrong. People said the same thing with NI and the Good Friday agreement still holds despite the religious fundamentalists fueling hostilities every so often. A solution to Palestine will end most of the hostilities. Not all because some people are fanatics. But most of it. It certainly will end most of the funding Hamas would get to attack Israel indefinitely.

There is no reason at all to believe Iran, Qatar and Turkey would stop funding Hamas if Israel signed an agreement with the Palestinian Authority. OTOH UN can't just stop sending humanitarian aid to Gaza even if they know much will fall in the hands of Hamas.

Everyone knows Hamas isn't all that popular in Gaza yet it has managed to cling to power regardless, by brutally repressing the opposition whenever it protests (something Western leftists conveniently ignore, because Palestinian lives only matter when they die because of something Israel does).

You're as delusional as those people who said the US had to leave Afghanistan so the Taliban would have no reason to keep fighting. How did that end?

[B0ycey]

Well you have taken the side of hostilities @wat0n. When this turns into a clusterfuck, just remember this. I have explained my position of dialogue and why it is so important. And I have also explained that Israel have their own skeletons, but you just ignore that for some reason. I do find it ironic that those who support Israels right to self defence the loudest seem to ignore everything that has happened in Palestine before 7 days ago as if Palestine is the epicentre of peace, doves, flowers and love.

[Rich]

The Israelis, the Zionists, the Jewish Supremacists, what ever you call them doesn't change what they have done. They have kept the people of Gaza in a semi prison camp for over five and a half decades. The vast majority of the population were born into this prison camp. If things just carry on they will die in it, maybe sooner, due to desiccation, starvation, denial of medicines, bombings and shootings, maybe later because of the beneficent intervention of "the international community".

Since 2005 Israel has had a policy of letting this prison camp run itself. Israel just controls its borders. And then they complain because the resistance group that emerges and takes leadership in this prison camp doesn't abide by "the rules of law".

[Politics_Observer]

@Rich

Well, in case you haven't noticed, the "laws of war" went out the window when Hamas butchered innocent civilians willfully and intentionally. That was a war crime.

[Politics_Observer]

The Israelies are going to have to contend with tunnel warfare. Probably one of the reasons why Israel is laying complete siege to Gaza is to starve Hamas out of their tunnels.

It's probably better to simply starve them out rather than giving Hamas a fighting advantage by going into the tunnels to try to eliminate Hamas networks.

Basically, Israel will need to prevent Hamas from resupplying and maintaining food and water in those tunnels to force Hamas out of the tunnels and into the open where Israel can easily eliminate them.

[wat0n]

Well you have taken the side of hostilities @wat0n. When this turns into a clusterfuck, just remember this. I have explained my position of dialogue and why it is so important. And I have also explained that Israel have their own skeletons, but you just ignore that for some reason. I do find it ironic that those who support Israels right to self defence the loudest seem to ignore everything that has happened in Palestine before 7 days ago as if Palestine is the epicentre of peace, doves, flowers and love.

No one said that.

Yet even though some in the West try to hard to exonerate Hamas for its responsibilities, it is still there and will not go away just because you want it to.

[B0ycey]

No one said that.

Yet even though some in the West try to hard to exonerate Hamas for its responsibilities, it is still there and will not go away just because you want it to.

Then what have we even been discussing? What the hell do you calling what is happening now and the potential ground offensive and what you seem to support? I am calling for dialogue to resolve this issue. How are you asking Israel to respond given what is going on?

[wat0n]

Then what have we even been discussing? What the hell do you calling what is happening now and the potential ground offensive and what you seem to support? I am calling for dialogue to resolve this issue. How are you asking Israel to respond given what is going on?

Dialogue between whom?

You're talking as if Hamas would be swayed by negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority. Yet Hamas, if anything, regards them as usurpers of power and their enemies - sometimes people forget Palestinians have been in their own frozen civil war since 2007.

The only dialogue to solve the Israel-Gaza issue that could have happened these last few years was between Israel and Hamas, but:

1) Hamas doesn't want to discuss any sort of final agreement with Israel, permanent struggle with Israel is one of the things they offer to Palestinians who may wish to support them (the other one being an Islamic form of government).
2) Such dialogue would have severely undermined the Palestinian Authority and the PLO. I recall many were against Israel's unilateral disengagement of Gaza in 2005 arguing this would be one of its consequences (I still think it was necessary).
3) Such agreement would imply either that Palestinians would be separated into two different states, one in Gaza and another one in the West Bank - something the majority of Palestinians is against - or that Hamas would have been let by Israel to take over the West Bank, implementing the Shari'a law across the territories.

The alternative would have been for Israel to reach a peace deal with the Palestinian Authority. I agree, that would be great - but after that, it would still need to do what it's about to do i.e. retake Gaza and disarm any and all armed groups. There would have been no massacre like that of October 7th, but the war we're witnessing would have happened regardless and would've been fought like it is now if (as one can reasonably suspect) Israel intends to retake Gaza.

[MadMonk]

Then what have we even been discussing? What the hell do you calling what is happening now and the potential ground offensive and what you seem to support? I am calling for dialogue to resolve this issue. How are you asking Israel to respond given what is going on?

Dialogue only works if there are enough voices on both sides who desire it. I can imagine finding this on the Palestinian side, but on the Israeli side there will be none for the foreseeable future. The Israeli public are enraged and are demanding blood by the thousands. They hold everyone in Gaza responsible and so this will be another chapter of 'Fuck it, let's just keep digging. We might reach actual hell someday, right?'.

[B0ycey]

@wat0n

Israel have already negotiated via consortium's many ceasefires with Hamas. I'm assuming they can do one more. Also a settlement for Palestine would have to involve many nations, especially Qatar who finance Palestine. You are getting boring now. Do you support a ground offensive or not?

Dialogue only works if there are enough voices on both sides who desire it. I can imagine finding this on the Palestinian side, but on the Israeli side there will be none for the foreseeable future. The Israeli public are enraged and are demanding blood by the thousands. They hold everyone in Gaza responsible and so this will be another chapter of 'Fuck it, let's just keep digging. We might reach actual hell someday, right?'.

I agree with this. The UN overwhelmingly supports a Palestine state. Israel and their backers do not. I am thankful on here that I am not the only user to realise and explain that Palestine may as well be an open prison. It is an apartheid state. Israel is not completely innocent. If we can address these issues, the conflict ends because there is no reason for it. Hamas (in its current form) can only exist with it backers. I don't know why I have to keep repeating this and then get BS back that nothing will change. Why? Things change all the time with negotiation settlements.

[wat0n]

Dialogue only works if there are enough voices on both sides who desire it. I can imagine finding this on the Palestinian side, but on the Israeli side there will be none for the foreseeable future. The Israeli public are enraged and are demanding blood by the thousands. They hold everyone in Gaza responsible and so this will be another chapter of 'Fuck it, let's just keep digging. We might reach actual hell someday, right?'.

I actually think the Israeli right will be severely damaged by failing to prevent the largest massacre of Israeli civilians to date.

They aren't just enraged against Hamas but against Netanyahu and the far right as well. And that rage can only grow as an inquiry commission is formed and figures from the security establishment start confirming on the record what they've been saying this past week, e.g. that one of the reasons for the slow IDF response is that it was understaffed in Gaza, with the government opting to send more men to protect the settlements instead against the advice of the IDF. Because, even if there's an intel failure, the military is expected to have backup plans and soldiers in place to allow for a quick reaction to an infiltration, I'm fairly sure the plans exist but the resources just weren't there.

Israel is at war right now, but once things stabilize there will be a time for the domestic political fallout to materialize and it will end badly for the right. The fallout of the Yom Kippur war led to the splintering of the Israeli Labor Party for the Knesset elected right after the war, and the election of the first right wing government since 1948 in 1977. This coalition is far, far less stable than Golda Meir's before the Yom Kippur War.

[Istanbuller]

The Israelies are going to have to contend with tunnel warfare. Probably one of the reasons why Israel is laying complete siege to Gaza is to starve Hamas out of their tunnels.

It's probably better to simply starve them out rather than giving Hamas a fighting advantage by going into the tunnels to try to eliminate Hamas networks.

Basically, Israel will need to prevent Hamas from resupplying and maintaining food and water in those tunnels to force Hamas out of the tunnels and into the open where Israel can easily eliminate them.

Israel loses its fire and airstrike ability if it launches a ground operation. It can't bomb like previously if Israeli soldiers involved in to the combat.

The rest depends on how well Hamas freedom fighters are trained.