[wat0n]

No, you can't make that call without seeing the evidence. And of course Israel won't publish intelligence while hostilities are still ongoing.

[Pants-of-dog]

If there is no evidence, then the argument that the dead humanitarian aid workers are actually militants is an argument from ignorance.

It is a fact that the IDF and Israeli government killed UNRWA workers and their families.

It is also a fact that they have not provided any evidence that the dead people and their families were justified targets.

[wat0n]

It is not an argument from ignorance, it is simply that one should wait until the war ends to make these assessments because publishing what you are requesting (intelligence) may provide Hamas with an objective military advantage (catching spies).

[Pants-of-dog]

If the reason why you have no evidence is because there is none, you are explaining why you made an argument that cannot be supported by evidence and must be an argument from ignorance. That is how logic works.

There is the very real possibility that these UNRWA workers were targeted simply because the AI algorithm said so.

[wat0n]

Or maybe there is evidence, just like it was in the case of the UNRWA worker who was filmed taking a corpse, but sharing it now would jeopardize Israel's spy network in Gaza.

I know that you believe Israel just wants to kill people, it's just a case of projection after all, but one would expect that accusations of criminal behavior are accompanied by evidence.

[Pants-of-dog]

Speculation is boring and useless. Speculation is, by its nature, unverifiable.

There is no dispute of the facts mentioned.

For example, it is a fact that the IDF deliberately targeted the homes of humanitarian aid workers. This is not speculation.

[wat0n]

It is also speculation to say these humanitarian workers were targeted illegally.

[Pants-of-dog]

The claim that the IDF deliberately targeted humanitarian aid workers is a fact, not speculation.

The claim that the IDF deliberately targeted the family home is also a fact and not speculation.

The claim that the Israeli government had opportunity to provide evidence and did not is also a fact.

[wat0n]

And yet it is still speculation to say they were targeted illegally. It is not illegal to target combatants.

[Pants-of-dog]

If the actual claims are being ignored and we are discussing a speculation that is not being argued, we can ignore the strawman and agree that the IDF deliberately targeted and killed humanitarian aid workers and their families and then did not provide evidence when they had the opportunity.

[MadMonk]

If the actual claims are being ignored and we are discussing a speculation that is not being argued, we can ignore the strawman and agree that the IDF deliberately targeted and killed humanitarian aid workers and their families and then did not provide evidence when they had the opportunity.

Speculation is kind of what we do. Israel claims that UNRWA has been infiltrated by Hamas members. Donors panicked and in response the UN launched several independent investigations into the matter.

"An independent panel released its much-awaited report on Monday about the UN relief agency for Palestine refugees (UNRWA), providing 50 recommendations and noting that Israeli authorities have yet to provide proof of their claims that UN staff are involved with terrorist organizations."

The implication being that they have found little or no evidence for these accusations. I do find this part interesting:

The report’s recommendations include creating a centralised “neutrality investigations unit”, rolling out an updated Code of Ethics and associated training to all staff, and identifying and implementing additional ways to screen UNRWA applicants at an early stage of the recruitment process.

Additional ways could be their codeword to settle skittish donors. It also implies that previous screenings were insufficient. Whichever the case, recruiting 30'000 employees from the Palestinian population will likely result in hiring some Hamas sympathizers regardless. I can only imagine this is going to be even more challenging going forward.

Big picture, I don't blame Palestinians for being radicalized. I would be for far less than they have suffered.

Independent review panel releases final report on UNRWA

[wat0n]

UNRWA is clearly pro-Palestinian and not neutral at all, but being pro-Palestinian is one thing and supporting/participating in terrorism or associating with Hamas is another. UNRWA needs to be merged with UNHRC and Palestinian refugees have to be treated like any other refugees, but this is one of the many post-war discussions. Cutting UNRWA funding was not a good idea, not with ongoing hostilities at least.

[late]

And yet it is still speculation to say they were targeted illegally. It is not illegal to target combatants.

Politics involves give and take. You act like you can still dominate the discussion.

You can't.

There's no politics to be found in your words, or in Gaza.

Which is kinda the problem..

[wat0n]

Politics involves give and take. You act like you can still dominate the discussion.

You can't.

There's no politics to be found in your words, or in Gaza.

Which is kinda the problem..

That's because politics is being done through other means right now.

And yes, it is a problem things have gotten to this point. But we can at least agree that the pre-war status quo isn't (and wasn't) sustainable?

[late]

That's because politics is being done through other means right now.

And yes, it is a problem things have gotten to this point. But we can at least agree that the pre-war status quo isn't (and wasn't) sustainable?

Self awareness is not your strong suit.

Your grandparents were much, much better at this.

[Pants-of-dog]

The report clearly states that the Israeli government had access to UNRWA employee data at all times before and during the war.

This means that the IDF and Israeli government could have stopped Hamas from infiltrating UNRWA at any time (if Hamas was actually trying to do so) and chose not to.

[wat0n]

How could have Israel stopped Hamas from infiltrating UNRWA? It's not like it vets UNRWA hires.

Self awareness is not your strong suit.

Your grandparents were much, much better at this.

Are you talking about yourself?

[late]

Are you talking about yourself?

Missing the people I looked up to, when I was younger.

Comedians like George Burns, movie makers like Mel Brooks, intellectuals beyond counting, and writers by the hundred.

It was America's Golden Age.

[Pants-of-dog]

The Israeli government could have simply told UNRWA that the employees are suspected militants and to have more stringent employment policies,

[QatzelOk]

...you can't make that call without seeing the evidence. And of course Israel won't publish intelligence...

So if you were to ask Israel for evidence, they would say "No," and shoo you away?

Prove it.

**"Shoo! Go away!" ?**TM

You are demanding that I prove proof that you will acknowledge, while hand-waiving away any proof that Israel might have needed to prove it was acting in good faith.




My lie-detector app was right all along about you. So since you live on lies, let me explain why I don't require any proof ever by using a huge lie:

"It's because I am racially superior to everyone that I am debating with."

Is that a convincing argument (lie) that you can stand behind?

What if you were paid to stand behind it?