Between both sides, are there any military lor political leaders that care about Palestinian civilian lives in war? This whole thing is fucked.
No. They want the people to stay not because they want to use the Palestinians as human shields. The Palestinians, women and children, were already there and they are bombed anyway. They are no such thing as 'Palestinian human shields' in the Israel government dictionary. So it doesn't make sense Hamas wants them to stay just to be human shields.
They are many reasons. One of the main reason, I think because once the Palestinians leave the place, they'll never get it back. They'll be no more Palestinians' Gaza Strip. Israel is going to make a stern example of the Palestinians for humiliating them. They'll never be allowed to come back.
Here is an post (translated to English using Google Translate) that I got from a very popular Israeli Telegram channel that can summarise the sentiment of what should be done.
Am; Lek: The Israeli response should include the expulsion of Arab settlements (in the Gaza Strip and Judea and Samaria), and resettlement by Israelis. And not just bombing offices and eliminating terrorists.
In detail:
The situation in the country is very disturbing, it seems that the Israeli response is going to be: again bombings of offices, banks, warehouses, etc. in Gaza + several assassinations (perhaps even senior officials) + maybe also a ground entry into Gaza to hit other targets, etc., and finally exit back. And maybe there was a deal at the end of releasing prisoners in exchange for releasing terrorists, and maybe not.
This is dangerous for Israel and a historical miss:
- This will end the campaign that Hamas and all the other enemies around realize that it is possible to harm Israel even with crimes against humanity, and even come out with a "profit".
- Therefore, this will cause more such actions against Israel (and in the future we will also get used to it, just as we got used to terrorist attacks in Israel, just as we got used to rockets from the Gaza Strip, etc.).
- There is no revenge for Arab violence.
- There is a historic opportunity here to turn the situation around, and for Israel to leave in a much stronger state than it entered, and to avoid deaths, etc. in the future. In the future it will be difficult to get legitimacy from the world again.
- This action (especially if it includes ground entry) could cost Israel a heavy price, and in vain.
- If IDF are also released from terrorists, then this will cause more and more acts of terrorism against Israel (also because it shows that the action against Israel pays off. And also releases more terrorists who continue to harm Israel. By the way, this event is also because of the Shalit deal freedmen)
- Defining a goal such as "destroying Hamas" is a non-measurable and not so realistic goal: even if 90% of the Hamas terrorists are eliminated, the rest can rise through the ranks, and new recruits can also join. And there is no "victory picture" and no clear evidence of who won the battle (just as it is not clear who won in any of the previous rounds in Gaza)
What, for example, should be the Israeli response:
- To carry out an action of deporting Arab villages (for example deporting the residents of Hawara to Sinai) to declare that every murdered Israeli will be deported to a village or neighborhood in an Arab city, and henceforth this is Israel's war policy. You can even call these settlements after the names of the murdered. That both illustrates the revenge, and will also help the housing crisis and the financing of the war... For example - if Israel evicts dozens of Arab villages, and sells to the Israelis (at a "price for a settler?") 100,000 houses + land at an average price of NIS 500,000, this is 50 billion NIS in revenue (it is possible to transfer part of the amount to the owners of the land if they vacate willingly and were not involved in terrorist activity against Israel)
- Deport the residents of Gaza to Sinai (it is possible without land entry, for example, open the crossing to Sinai, ensure that there is no water, etc. in Gaza, and start bombing from north to south, and smuggle the Arab population to Sinai. You can even declare that this is the goal. You can also declare that every Arab who rescues prisoners Jews/bringing bodies of terrorists, etc., can enter Israel and obtain citizenship). It is even possible to imply that Israel is going to bomb the Gaza Strip with a nuclear bomb, also to scare and drive away the residents of Gaza. Another advantage: if the most militant side of the government demands it, and there are discussions about whether Israel is going to use nuclear weapons, and at the end of the Israeli action there will be "only" a "disengagement 2" plan in which all the residents of Gaza are deported to Sinai, it will not seem so extreme...
Advantages:
- Only a loss of territory is a loss as far as the Arabs are concerned, and therefore they will not want to initiate any more such actions - if they knew that for every Israeli killed they lose territory. By the way, in Israel's wars, the Arabs refer to the war of liberation and the six-day war as their loss - because they lost territory in those wars, compared to the Yohak war, for example, even though Egypt lost, they refer to it as a victory, because there was no Israeli occupation of territory.
- Revenge for the murderous act.
- Even before the last action, we got used to there being terrorist incidents against Jews every day, and sometimes also seriously wounded and murdered. In this way, it is finally possible to get rid of the nests of murders such as Hvara who are swallowed up inside Israel, and this will save a lot of deaths and security resources in the future.
- There is now a short window of opportunity to do this: also in terms of the legitimacy of the action, in Israel and in the world.
- If the result of the war is that the Gaza Strip is emptied by the West, and they begin to establish an Israeli city there, and in addition, in Judea and Samaria only Ramallah and Taiba remain Arab, and all the rest become Israeli settlements, no one will argue who won and who lost the battle.
good luck!
( Dan Assolin )
I wouldn't be surprised if they want them to die to create bad press against Israel.
Both sites are completely fucked up in the head when it comes to valuing civilian lives in this conflict.
When arned people ask you to not leave it’s called a hostage situation. The mean age in Gaza is 18 years old so we’re talking about kids and parents being told by men with guns to not leave.
When armed people ask you to leave it’s called an illegal invasion. The mean age in Gaza is 18 years old so we’re talking about kids and parents being told by men with guns to abandon their homes forever.
fuck hamas and fuck the idf, but this comment and the one you replied to are quite reductive
no, it's war. you can't attack another country and claim it's illegal when they cross the borders after you
Are you trying to justify the Israeli terrorist bombing on Gaza City? Or are you trying to justify the Hamas terrorist attack of Oct 7?
If we continue to give in to this revenge-driven, bloodthirsty logic then this conflict will never end.
I won't say any war is justified from the comfort of my couch
Crucial missing context: Israel bombed the way out when people tried to take it.
World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link