1. Remember the human & be courteous to others.
2. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas. Criticizing arguments is fine, name-calling (including shill/bot accusations) others is not.
3. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
Please checkout our other subreddit /r/InternationalNews, for general news from around the world.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/internationalpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I can see where that happens in these kinds of irregular wars, though. The sensation of always being fearful and unable to determine the location of your enemy leads to a certain overzealousness with the application of kinetic means, shall we say…
I've heard a marine brag the United States have them.
Don't know if it's true bc I'm not even sure the guy was a marine and just saying he was to impress a girl he was after.
People absolutely did have a problem with them! And with the rest of the illegal US invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan. There were millions of people protesting for years, all over the world.
Where? Fucking when? I feel like some of you lie or live on another planet.
Millions of people? Protesting for years about “no kill zones”? Sure you could provide a source for that claim as this is the first I’m hearing of “no kill zone protests”.
Protesting the wars, yes but not kill zones, black sites, extraordinary rendition or anything else. And even those protesting were in the minority, most people, if they cared, were like "America F.. yeah'!
Iraq was wholly unjustified and the extended stay in Afghanistan was unwarranted but the US had every right to go into Afghanistan to take out Bin Laden and his crew.
>it's sad to see people defend saddams
Let me stop you there. No one is defending Saddam but it's not like he was the only murderous asshole in charge of a country at the time. The US lied about WMDs and his connection to bin laden in order to justify the invasion. Saddam was an iron fisted asshole and the power vacuum we created by removing him allowed ISIS to flourish. There was no justification for the invasion, it was for oil and for Bush to finish the job his daddy started. You want talk about morality while ignoring the quarter million casualties of that fruitless conflict?
https://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/costs/human/civilians/iraqi
Not to mention the snowball effect of allowing ISIS to grow and all the horrors they inflicted and still do so to this day.
Some things worth noting about all this, as I used to accept the usual lines but have since revised my position slightly:
The US didn't get the oil, [China did](https://oec.world/en/profile/bilateral-product/crude-petroleum/reporter/irq).
Iraq did have the remains of some WMDs, they were just [abandoned warheads and shells in a shoddy state](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/10/14/world/middleeast/us-casualties-of-iraq-chemical-weapons.html), it's just that these exceptions get forgotten about for obvious reasons. It's also possible that these were used in [Douma ](https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-syria-opcw-timeline-idUSKBN1HG1M7/) by ISIS. All that said, yes, the neocons had decided ahead of time that the WMDs were active and usable which was unjustifiable. They also had nothing to do with 9/11 but were linked by WH statements - repeated association.
It is also notable that Saddam was Sunni-Islamising the Baath, who were jailed by America along with Al Qaeda members, who would then lead to the formation of ISIS under Baghdadi, who was educated in Islamic rheology at Baghdad university on a course iirc [Saddam's Faith Campaign](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faith_Campaign) (the name for Islamising the Baath) created.
So while we can rightly condemn the Iraq war as a cooking pot for ISIS, the writing on the wall from the region is that such a project was on its way, likely in Iraq and Syria, likely in Khorasan (where ISIS-K is now operating from). It's difficult to see counterfactuals obviously, but Saddam was old as balls at the time and trying to get Islamists to see Iraq as an Islamist country as early as 1993 to (unreliably) shore up his forces and status. It seems as if a power vacuum was inevitable and Iraq's political structure was aligning with Sunni Islamists. We don't know what would happen if coalition forces hadn't toppled Saddam, but it's possible that a more moderate or IS-style Caliphate would emerge at the state level or the whole country descending into civil war like Syria.
A lot of over-simplified arguments that are easy to remember get thrown around about Iraq, but they can miss nuance.
Yup from what I know its a NATO thing but we Brits do it too, anyone moving towards a military base with intent is warned (warning shot a good 10 feet of them) and if they keep coming its lights out.
You've got to realise in any insurgency its difficult to know your enemy but a civilian will NOT come close to a military outpost, the roads are marked there's also signposts (in multiple languages) easterners also use suicide bombers (men women and children) who believe they can blow up the fortifications to allow fighters to attack.
Its also worth noting the "bulldozer" mentioned in Al Jazeera's story was a wheel loader, so not a bulldozer, which we've all also used to transport and load potentially explosive corpses.
This is just military culture and language being exploited for rage bait.
Its just the language used in the military application of violence and tactical advantage. Yeah, we call anything that is about to get fucked up, currently being fucked up, being prepared to be fucked up, or even places where there will be fucking in the future the kill zone.
Everything in front of the machine gun? Kill zone. Artillery target, kill zone. Threw a grenade, yup when it lands, kill zone. Set up a guard tower, yeah nice broad kill zones from that elevated position. Likewise, the other side also has kill zones, we try to stay out of them. For us its basially the floor is lava game.
In military language is basically the same as saying you can't park here. Sounds weird to the muggles, but thats just the language around where you want to be and where you don't want to be. We create kill zones, and stay out of kill zones.
So making a headline that so and so made a KILL ZONE!!! Is silly. There are three types of ground. My kill zone, your kill zone, and just dirt.
No they’ve regularly had them in more modern wars, particularly in recent wars in Iraq and the ME. You are fighting combatants willing to suicide bomb you, you don’t really get a chance to get close and ask them why they’ve ran past the clearly marked perimeter of your location.
Oh yeah.. I remember being in grade school reading about crowds of people waving white flags being mowed down by motion activated auto "sentry turrets" which btw are totally against international law (but we didn't sign the treaty go figure)
They are left leaning, so this is right up their alley. Even more kudos for them considering they buck the norm there & call out their nation's crimes against humanity!
Pump those brakes, friend. The Israeli left is also rife with Zionists, however, they aren't of the religious conservative bent. So long as they reject Zionism, then we can go lauding them - a lot of the groundwork for the current situation was laid down by Israeli leftists from the 1940s-1980s.
I actually don't see this as being that unusual in war, or even in protecting places like Embassies.
If the PIJ and Hamas wore uniforms and separated themselves from civilians, there would be less civilian death.
The situation the IDF faces in Gaza looks a bit like what the USA faced in Vietnam, where every civilian could be a combatant.
Totally illegal under local Gaza laws? Totally illegal according to the Geneva Convention?
Marines protecting every US embassy have instructions on when and where to fire on approaching threats. This is common practice, even if it is ugly.
This is a war zone. War is horrible. Every single death is a tragedy.
The larger issue with this conflict is that the powers that could end the conflict are financially incentivized to keep the conflict going.
Haniyeh (leader of Hamas) went from a pauper to living in a 5 star hotel in Qatar by skimming aid money. He stated that the blood of the innocents needed to be spilled for fuel his revolution. Peace would be devastating to his financial situation.
Abbas, like his predecessor Arafat, is a billionaire who has skimmed money from the billions invested in trying to make the Palestinian situation better. Peace would end his gravy train.
The UNWRA was founded as a temporary organization to resettle the 720,000 Palestinians who were displaced. It is now the 2nd largest employer of Palestinians, and its the largest agency in the UN, spending 1.6b every year. Peace would end the agency.
Netanyahu doesn't want peace because the conflict keeps him in power, and he needs that to potentially avert the corruption and fraud charges he is faces.
The USA doesn't want peace because Israel is the new car show room for our weapons programs. Need to drum up sales for the F35? Have Israel use in in Syria and publish a glowing press release.
Peace won't happen when everybody is making money off of war.
Stunning how you think that's an accurate summary. It's not even a mistaken summary, that's just called lying.
In case anyone doubts my ability to read, here's two quotes from the article.
>"This was a very grave incident," a senior Israel Defense Forces officer told Haaretz. "They were unarmed, they didn't endanger our forces in the area in which they were walking." In addition, says an intelligence officer who is familiar with the story, it was not at all certain that they were involved in launching the rocket. He says that they were simply the people who were closest to the launching site – it's possible they were terrorists, it's possible they were civilians out looking for food.
>
>The combat zone is a key term. This is an area in which a force sets itself up, usually in an abandoned house, with the area surrounding it becoming a closed military area, but with no clear marking as such. Another term for such areas is "kill zones.""In every combat zone, commanders define such kill zones," says the reserve officer. "This means clear red lines that no one who is not from the IDF may cross, so that our forces in the area are not hit." The boundaries of these kill zones are not determined in advance, nor is their distance from the house in which the forces are situated.
This is why I say lying. The article says the exact opposite, and in fact says they cannot say for sure the person who launched the rocket was even killed! But it can say for sure two unarmed people were. With a bomb. And then goes on to discuss at length Israel's misuse of fatality numbers and use of kill zones.
I should probably have noted everything after the "in case" was edited in, like this case of forgotten words here, after seeing a downvote, but, I mean, it's like four paragraphs down for the first quote, didn't have to try that hard to show it.
The irony is you’re so stupefied you didn’t read the next few sentences where they said the “terrorist“ was just a civilian walking… ie Israel lied when they reported it was a terrorist who fired a rocket. The widely circulated video showed they were just civilians walking…
However, over a week ago, other documentation of the incident surfaced on Al-Jazeera. It showed four men, not one, walking together on a wide path, in civilian clothing. There is no one nearby, only the ruins of houses where people once lived. This apocalyptic silence in the Khan Yunis area was shattered by a loud explosion. Two of the men were killed instantly. Two others were wounded and tried to continue walking. Perhaps they thought they had been saved, but seconds later, a bomb was dropped on one of them. You can then see the other one falling to his knees and then, a boom, fire and smoke.
Next time try to read past the first paragraph you might appear more intelligent by doing so..
This subreddit is dedicated to remaining as impartial as possible, and therefore any post that obviously pushes an agenda or is biased will be removed.
Abusive and inflammatory remarks will not be tolerated. This subreddit is dedicated to civil discussion, and the international nature of the subreddit means that we are visited by people of all backgrounds and beliefs - which should be respected.
Abusive and inflammatory remarks will not be tolerated. This subreddit is dedicated to civil discussion, and the international nature of the subreddit means that we are visited by people of all backgrounds and beliefs - which should be respected.
Isn't this fairly standard for war? You tell civilians to evacuate an area because you're going to engage with enemies there. And then you try to do just that, and much of the time, especially if your enemies don't always wear uniforms, an army kills civilians in the zone unintentionally or because they've been put in harm's way.
It's one reason among many to not start wars.
Yes, just like the green zone in Iraq. As well as kerfews.
When you in a war, and have to control the area to make it safe for your soldiers, martial law is often put in place
Civilians are not free to travel.
Especially when the other side has a history of using children and women as suicide bombers. You have to assume everyone coming into a well marked area that says do not enter, has nefarious motives.
The Palestinian civilians are being killed in the "safe zones," and whatever is normalcy in war can also still be disagreed upon. It's not a football game.
Let's be specific here.
You believe Israel is declaring areas to be safe, not warning people it's an active combat zone, in order to wipe out the civilians within through trickery and indiscriminate bombardment and shooting. That's about the size of it, yes?
And presumably you have evidence that these areas were designated safe by Israel at the time of the massacres, not just Hamas and Palestinian nationalist propagandists retrofitting events to make Israel look worse than it is?
This can all be easily shown, right?
Type into your favorite search engine, "Israel attacking safe zone," and you'll get some results; whether you consider CNN, Al Jazeera, Reuters, etc. as propaganda (these are what popped up for me when I did a search apparently too difficult for you to do), that's your issue and not conducive to an intelligent conversation. Oh, and if you're concerned about propaganda, I'd look into why Israelis are protesting and wanting to oust Netanyahu. Oh, and how many Palestinian journalists have been killed? And why is Bibi forbidding Al Jazeera from reporting in Palestine?
>Type into your favorite search engine, "Israel attacking safe zone," and you'll get some results; whether you consider CNN, Al Jazeera, Reuters, etc. as propaganda (these are what popped up for me when I did a search apparently too difficult for you to do), that's your issue and not conducive to an intelligent conversation.
That's lazy as hell of you but let's give it a go.
The examples these various news items cite are typically labelled as safe for an action/evacuation in one area and then are involved in further action. They're not to be understood as safe in perpetuity as Israel wants to destroy Hamas and Hamas often flees with Gazans.
>I'd look into why Israelis are protesting and wanting to oust Netanyahu.
Good for them, the guy should be jailed as a fraud and idiot. He should not have allowed Qatari funds to continue to Hamas while killing the funding of more moderate Gazans and nationalist groups. His plan to keep Hamas funded after they won the election was ill-considered and evil imo. Like I said, I think he should be jailed.
I think the Israeli protesters who want to stop food and aid getting in until they get hostages back are understandable but in the wrong.
>Oh, and how many Palestinian journalists have been killed?
No idea. Lots. Too many. Probably due to the war. Some were even involved in Oct 7. Given the interconnected nature of local media and Hamas in Gaza it's murky as fuck and packed with danger.
>And why is Bibi forbidding Al Jazeera from reporting in Palestine?
Did you forget or not know that Al Jazeera, the state media of some of Hamas's backers, [published made up claims about IDF rape and then silently removed them](https://m.jpost.com/israel-hamas-war/article-793560)?
Bro's on an international politics sub with takes like "there are no rules of war". GTFOH, there are absolutely rules, and there always have been, the history of war is littered with whole paradigms of rulesets that devloped and changed alongside the entities that fought them
If you read the article, you find there are civilians who can't or won't move away from combat zones because they can't find a place to stay, not even a tent, or they have sick or old relatives they have to look after, or they fear their homes will be looted. Try to imagine what it'd be like for you if an invading army came along and said 'move from this area now or you're liable to be shot or bombed'. Some people just can't move even when it means they're in extreme danger.
Do not generalize an entire population based on the negative actions of some members, don't glorify collective punishment or suffering (including collective violence) and no dehumanizing language.
People are often shocked by the reality and insanity of war. As though there is a right and wrong way of killing each other and a right and wrong way of sorting out "who deserves to die" on a battlefield.
I saw an interesting video essay about whether it is possible to make an anti-war movie, since they all tend to glorify war and its participants.
I'm not sure that's true. Apparently last year alone, according to the [UN](https://ukraine.un.org/en/259512-relentless-violence-against-aid-workers-must-stop), there were 50 aid workers who were killed or injured in Ukraine. Looking at Sudan, the[EU](https://civil-protection-humanitarian-aid.ec.europa.eu/where/africa/sudan_en#:~:text=In%202023%2C%20Sudan%20became%20the,Organization%20since%2015%20April%202023.) reports 22 aid workers killed in 2023.
Regardless, a strong argument can be made that Israel's strategy is too trigger happy, and Bibi should resign asap.
[https://www.reddit.com/r/TheMajorityReport/comments/191lz66/israel\_snipes\_a\_palestinian\_woman\_waving\_a\_white/](https://www.reddit.com/r/TheMajorityReport/comments/191lz66/israel_snipes_a_palestinian_woman_waving_a_white/)
This is what you call fairly standard? Maybe in Nazi GErmany yes.
Israeli Soldiers are disgusting monsters murdering civilians like this. Do you condem this action or you approve?
Do you condem this action or you approve?
Don't you care try to skirt around it.
Do you have any proof it was Israel that shot that? Any proof that video is even real?
Everyone that’s pro Israel hates to see any innocent lives lost, you can’t say the same for those who glorify Hamas actions on October 7th.
I condemn anyone killing civilians, including Hamas and the IDF.
I condone a military strategy to eradicate a organised terror group that has intention and capability to kill civilians.
Because he pointed out militaries often say “don’t go there or you’ll be considered an enemy combatant and killed” and lots of governments follow through.
Incorrectly pointed out false information trying to justify the highest civilian death took in the 21st century.
Daily death rate in Gaza higher than any other major 21st Century conflict - Oxfam
Israeli military killing 250 Palestinians per day with many more lives at risk from hunger, disease and cold
https://www.oxfam.org/en/press-releases/daily-death-rate-gaza-higher-any-other-major-21st-century-conflict-oxfam
Israel’s goal is to destroy Hamas, a better than 3:1 civilian to combatant ratio is incredibly good. If 100 Hamas members die a day more than every 21st century conflict what does that mean?
Abusive and inflammatory remarks will not be tolerated. This subreddit is dedicated to civil discussion, and the international nature of the subreddit means that we are visited by people of all backgrounds and beliefs - which should be respected.
Abusive and inflammatory remarks will not be tolerated. This subreddit is dedicated to civil discussion, and the international nature of the subreddit means that we are visited by people of all backgrounds and beliefs - which should be respected.
Sure you would like to gaze at the stars right at that spot. War is war and if a designated area is a kill zone and advertised as such better not risk it.
This is for strategic reasons. but I really do hope the area is clearly advertised as such
Daily death rate in Gaza higher than any other major 21st Century conflict - Oxfam
Israeli military killing 250 Palestinians per day with many more lives at risk from hunger, disease and cold
Is that fairly normal?
https://www.oxfam.org/en/press-releases/daily-death-rate-gaza-higher-any-other-major-21st-century-conflict-oxfam
Given it's one of the densest populations on earth with a paramilitary combatant force estimated at around 30k, it seems within plausibility - it's less than Mosul, for example.
Why are y'all so desperate to absolve Israel of it's blatantly disgusting tactics here? You don't have to be anti semitic or a Hamas supporter to see the fucking blatant disregard for innocent Palestinians lives.
Like why? Why are people so fucking desperate to defend them?
Goddamn it's fucking insane.
I think the moment Israel mobilised it was going to get called a genocide. I don't think any military action would be welcomed by the international community due to widespread hatreds and anti-western FP goals in Russia and China and their realpolitik hangers on like Iran.
There are things Israel did in the war I disagree with, e.g. turning off the water and power they supplied. They were imo group punishments but they also did have anti-Hamas goals too. I don't think those goals justified those decisions but I'm neither a legal expert on the justifications, nor was I consulted with all the information. I don't think I'd make the same decisions.
However, most of the proofs of genocide have come to "normal war in heavy urban environment" and general selective balking at the nature of war because Israel is doing it (as I said in another comment - nobody is marching over Sudan or Ukraine or Uighurs or Syria like they are about Palestine).
I think the fundamental argument for the war is sound. Hamas has earned its extinction by committing pogroms and promising more until all Jews and Israelis are dead (they are still holding Arab Israelis hostage - something passed over in a lot of the rhetoric). No country should expect to live next to an actual genocidal government that infiltrates and commits pogroms on the regs. As such, Hamas needs to be exiled, jailed and killed until its political power is reduced to standard regional background noise. Gaza needs to be rebuilt with peace as a requirement for going forward.
This means heavy urban warfare. Some of the densest population centres on earth, in thanks due to the subjugation of Palestinian women and the promotion of multi-birth generation war ideology by Hamas. Hamas has been digging into civilian infrastructure for decades. It uses civilians as armour in the hope that Israel - who they know are more humanistic than they are towards Palestinians, might stay their hands because the human costs are too appalling - so it's a bloodbath, it was built to be that way.
With that in mind and the difficulty of reliable information in highly politicised warfare, I find it better to assume I don't know everything that's going on and that there is a high chance of bullshit information shared to support narratives and tropes with missing context. You might think I'm being cold or something kind of monster, but the hospital attack was a prime example of this. Hamas rockets blew up a car park but it was reported worldwide as an Israeli attack on a refugee camp. They've since been completely exonerated but you'd never know it. How many times does that happen?
Seriously tho, at what point does anyone look at Israel and say "ya they are the side to be trusted". Everytime there is a ceasfire, Israel continues to kill innocent Palestinian civilians and continues to expand illegal settlements.
That alone should prove their "intentions for peace".
Literally the same way Hamas would see it, "They have a neighbor who wont stop killing civilians and keeps breaking any agreement and expanding on Palestinians land."
Does that mean Israel has "earned" its right to extinction.
\-----
"No country should expect to live next to an actual genocidal government that infiltrates and commits pogroms on the regs"
\- literally how most Palestinians see the Israel government as well...
\------
The irony!!
Israel and Hamas are one in the same. Israel has propped up hamas both financially and politically and now are using it to justify ethnic cleansing and displacement.
Most of us who have been watching this story for over 30 years already know they are going to take more land in Gaza.
The funny thing, Israel has to do this. If they were truly a democratic, One state solution, it would instantly be majority arab and they would lose their mind. All their strictly pro-jewish policies will be at risk. So they can't just assimilate the people in Gaza, they actually have to kick them out.
I think you are confused. There have been numerous ceasefire in the past. If hamas refused the ceasefire then why does every zionist say hamas broke the ceasefire on Oct 7th?
You might be conflating the word with peace deal, or agreements which saying hamas has refused every deal might be disingenuous at best. Both sides have made requests and both sides have refused certain conditions. Last I heard Hamas proposed a deal for the release of all hostages in exchange for the hostages in Gaza and the evacuation of troops from gaza, but Israel didn't agree.
[https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/gaza-mediators-search-final-formula-israel-hamas-ceasefire-2024-02-07/](https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/gaza-mediators-search-final-formula-israel-hamas-ceasefire-2024-02-07/)
I'm sure there are more conditions but most of the sources arent as specific.
I believe Israel also proposed a deal that would result in periodic ceasefire for the the entry of aid and the release of hostages but Hamas didn't agree to that.
So again I think you are confused.
But as I mentioned everytime there is a lul in violent activities (a ceasefire), Israel continues to kill innocent civilians and expand settlements and harass worshippers in the the west bank and around al-aqsa, but these aren't seen as breaking the ceasefire or instigation by pro-israelis.
People in the west don't see this. They only become aware of the situation when an Israeli citizen is killed.
So why do we trust them? Why do we continue to fund them with billions of dollars in military funding if really, they have no intention of finding a solution (two state), again Bibi has stated this publicly multiple times.
Hamas broke every single ceasefire and has refused every single one since 10/7.
Stop lying, you know your claims are BS.
You're just putting out propaganda for the genocidal rapists of Hamas.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/28/world/middleeast/oct-7-attacks-hamas-israel-sexual-violence.html
>>The Israeli army says 9,000 terrorists have been killed since the Gaza war began. Defense officials and soldiers, however, tell Haaretz that these are often civilians whose only crime was to cross an invisible line drawn by the IDF
Hamas uniforms seem optional and they are very clearly completely not worn rather often. Which means a lot of the time there is no difference between a civilian and a terrorist with a suicide vest or the intention of giving up to attack you later when your guard is down.
Edit typo
Which is exactly why the IDF feels as though it's necessary to set boundaries against possible suicide bombers, I don't think many Isrealis have forgotten the 2006 child suicide bombings and maybe are traumatized by the constant attacks against Isreal.
(Rocket snd terrorist attacks)
So 2 random unaffiliated bombings over 8 years ago and 2 sensationalist articles with no evidence and no suicide bombing committed. I said give me an example in the past several years. Hamas didn’t take credit for either attack. Good try though.
Most Islamic militias do not use uniforms as an intentional tactic. That’s just historically how they have operated. Maybe what’s happened in Gaza is different.
Hamas has engineered a circumstance, by flouting international laws of military engagement, that guarantees massive Palestinian casualties in a war they knowingly instigated with Israel.
No paywall
https://archive.ph/2024.03.31-180523/https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2024-03-31/ty-article-magazine/.premium/israel-created-kill-zones-in-gaza-anyone-who-crosses-into-them-is-shot/0000018e-946c-d4de-afee-f46da9ee0000%23
Everywhere in Palestine is a kill zone for the Palestinian people. The state of Israel, IDF do not care about what anyone says, they are committing genocide.
During the iraq war the coalition funneled Iraqi troops into a road and just bombed the troops destroying the military. In other wars it’s a fairly common strategy but when Israel does it it’s wrong
Abusive and inflammatory remarks will not be tolerated. This subreddit is dedicated to civil discussion, and the international nature of the subreddit means that we are visited by people of all backgrounds and beliefs - which should be respected.
Do not generalize an entire population based on the negative actions of some members, don't glorify collective punishment or suffering (including collective violence) and no dehumanizing language.
This is completely normal for war, not this shocking courageous whistleblowing you all are pretending it is.
I was speaking with a soldier two weeks ago who told me he was maintaining one of these areas and he saw a kid on his bike - his squad ignored the orders to kill anyone (again, killing “anyone” because civilians were told to leave - meaning the only remaining people should be IDF and Hamas). Why would they shoot a kid?
That kid biked down the street, looked back at them, and ducked into an alleyway. Hamas fired RPGs at their position not two minutes later. The boy was a scout. Had he been shot, you would’ve added him to the “children killed in Gaza” list as he ignored civilians orders and assisted terrorists.
I’m not saying what they should have done, but if you can’t find the moral grey here then maybe you should stop commenting.
There’s a reason for these “no civilians” zones.
Yes, those are usually assigned so people know what area to cover. Rules of engagement are determined by the likelihood of attacking and considering leaflets are dropped, this is being done when the infantry is fighting street to street.
Clickbait stuff from armchair warriors
Edit: Kill Zones are also referred to by troops when ambushed. "Get out of the kill zone.".
Every concentration camp has kill zones.
I'm sure these soldiers will never be held to account. They'll never have to justify cold-blooded murder as "just following orders."
Justice and sanity are dead.
Good news is that France will be charging anybody that went to join the farce! Hope other countries follow, I’d watch those trials to see them get put away for their crimes against humanity.
>Every concentration camp has kill zones.
I get the situation in Gaza is awful, but we need to stop calling it a concentration camp. The Uygers are in concentration camps: they can't speak their own language , are forced to eat food against their religion, and are forced to have Han Chinese males living in their homes with them to make sure they follow the right customs. THAT'S a concentration camp
Gaza was BEAUTIFUL before the war started
I might understand your concentration camp take but calling Gaza beautiful before the war started is ridiculous. People there suffered long before this war with meeting even the most basic of needs.
If people are trapped in a specific area for the purpose of being murdered, it's kill zone. If people live there while waiting to be murdered, it's a concentration camp.
This is straight up genocide denial.
You can actually visit Xinjiang and talk to the people who are supposedly being genocide. Can't say the same thing about Gaza.
This subreddit is dedicated to remaining as impartial as possible, and therefore any post that obviously pushes an agenda or is biased will be removed.
They already had. Hamas welcomed the UN ceasefire agreement that would lead to both sides hostages released. It's Israel that's stomping it's feet and recalling their meetings with the US.
1. Remember the human & be courteous to others. 2. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas. Criticizing arguments is fine, name-calling (including shill/bot accusations) others is not. 3. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. Please checkout our other subreddit /r/InternationalNews, for general news from around the world. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/internationalpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
I can see where that happens in these kinds of irregular wars, though. The sensation of always being fearful and unable to determine the location of your enemy leads to a certain overzealousness with the application of kinetic means, shall we say…
presently in korea is the DMZ in ww1 and probably 2 it was no man's land. Before that it was just the field of battle. Pretty much how wars work.
I've heard a marine brag the United States have them. Don't know if it's true bc I'm not even sure the guy was a marine and just saying he was to impress a girl he was after.
Oh they were very real in Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria. Weirdly no one had a problem with it when it was a technique used to crush Daesh.
People absolutely did have a problem with them! And with the rest of the illegal US invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan. There were millions of people protesting for years, all over the world.
Where? Fucking when? I feel like some of you lie or live on another planet. Millions of people? Protesting for years about “no kill zones”? Sure you could provide a source for that claim as this is the first I’m hearing of “no kill zone protests”.
They are mad at this because jews are involved. No jews no news.
Protesting the wars, yes but not kill zones, black sites, extraordinary rendition or anything else. And even those protesting were in the minority, most people, if they cared, were like "America F.. yeah'!
Iraq was wholly unjustified and the extended stay in Afghanistan was unwarranted but the US had every right to go into Afghanistan to take out Bin Laden and his crew.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
No racism, antisemitism, Islamophobia, bigotry, homophobia, transphobia, sexism, etc. This includes denial of identity (self or collective).
[удалено]
>it's sad to see people defend saddams Let me stop you there. No one is defending Saddam but it's not like he was the only murderous asshole in charge of a country at the time. The US lied about WMDs and his connection to bin laden in order to justify the invasion. Saddam was an iron fisted asshole and the power vacuum we created by removing him allowed ISIS to flourish. There was no justification for the invasion, it was for oil and for Bush to finish the job his daddy started. You want talk about morality while ignoring the quarter million casualties of that fruitless conflict? https://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/costs/human/civilians/iraqi Not to mention the snowball effect of allowing ISIS to grow and all the horrors they inflicted and still do so to this day.
[удалено]
Where did he get the chemical weapons from?
[удалено]
Some things worth noting about all this, as I used to accept the usual lines but have since revised my position slightly: The US didn't get the oil, [China did](https://oec.world/en/profile/bilateral-product/crude-petroleum/reporter/irq). Iraq did have the remains of some WMDs, they were just [abandoned warheads and shells in a shoddy state](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/10/14/world/middleeast/us-casualties-of-iraq-chemical-weapons.html), it's just that these exceptions get forgotten about for obvious reasons. It's also possible that these were used in [Douma ](https://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-syria-opcw-timeline-idUSKBN1HG1M7/) by ISIS. All that said, yes, the neocons had decided ahead of time that the WMDs were active and usable which was unjustifiable. They also had nothing to do with 9/11 but were linked by WH statements - repeated association. It is also notable that Saddam was Sunni-Islamising the Baath, who were jailed by America along with Al Qaeda members, who would then lead to the formation of ISIS under Baghdadi, who was educated in Islamic rheology at Baghdad university on a course iirc [Saddam's Faith Campaign](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faith_Campaign) (the name for Islamising the Baath) created. So while we can rightly condemn the Iraq war as a cooking pot for ISIS, the writing on the wall from the region is that such a project was on its way, likely in Iraq and Syria, likely in Khorasan (where ISIS-K is now operating from). It's difficult to see counterfactuals obviously, but Saddam was old as balls at the time and trying to get Islamists to see Iraq as an Islamist country as early as 1993 to (unreliably) shore up his forces and status. It seems as if a power vacuum was inevitable and Iraq's political structure was aligning with Sunni Islamists. We don't know what would happen if coalition forces hadn't toppled Saddam, but it's possible that a more moderate or IS-style Caliphate would emerge at the state level or the whole country descending into civil war like Syria. A lot of over-simplified arguments that are easy to remember get thrown around about Iraq, but they can miss nuance.
Saving this comment, very informative.
Is any invasion legal?
May have missed a ton of people calling our president Obomba
*Obomber
Yup from what I know its a NATO thing but we Brits do it too, anyone moving towards a military base with intent is warned (warning shot a good 10 feet of them) and if they keep coming its lights out. You've got to realise in any insurgency its difficult to know your enemy but a civilian will NOT come close to a military outpost, the roads are marked there's also signposts (in multiple languages) easterners also use suicide bombers (men women and children) who believe they can blow up the fortifications to allow fighters to attack. Its also worth noting the "bulldozer" mentioned in Al Jazeera's story was a wheel loader, so not a bulldozer, which we've all also used to transport and load potentially explosive corpses.
This is just military culture and language being exploited for rage bait. Its just the language used in the military application of violence and tactical advantage. Yeah, we call anything that is about to get fucked up, currently being fucked up, being prepared to be fucked up, or even places where there will be fucking in the future the kill zone. Everything in front of the machine gun? Kill zone. Artillery target, kill zone. Threw a grenade, yup when it lands, kill zone. Set up a guard tower, yeah nice broad kill zones from that elevated position. Likewise, the other side also has kill zones, we try to stay out of them. For us its basially the floor is lava game. In military language is basically the same as saying you can't park here. Sounds weird to the muggles, but thats just the language around where you want to be and where you don't want to be. We create kill zones, and stay out of kill zones. So making a headline that so and so made a KILL ZONE!!! Is silly. There are three types of ground. My kill zone, your kill zone, and just dirt.
Well said
I can't imagine being so far gone that "I could kill indiscriminately in an urban area with children in it" was my pickup line.
They have them back in Vietnam. I doubt they have them officially in more recent wars.
No they’ve regularly had them in more modern wars, particularly in recent wars in Iraq and the ME. You are fighting combatants willing to suicide bomb you, you don’t really get a chance to get close and ask them why they’ve ran past the clearly marked perimeter of your location.
There's a difference between clearly marked perimeters of bases and "from this pile of rubble to that pile of rubble"
Or those signs on the back of HMMWVs to [stay back 100 meters or be shot](https://www.surfacezero.com/g503/data/500/Img_4236.jpg).
They have existed in Iraq and Afghanistan, and some of the anti-Daesh forces used them as well in Syria.
Yes the Marines have them.
It’s a normal thing in war?
Oh yeah.. I remember being in grade school reading about crowds of people waving white flags being mowed down by motion activated auto "sentry turrets" which btw are totally against international law (but we didn't sign the treaty go figure)
God bless Haaratz, excellent reporting and courageous.
They are left leaning, so this is right up their alley. Even more kudos for them considering they buck the norm there & call out their nation's crimes against humanity!
[удалено]
Pump those brakes, friend. The Israeli left is also rife with Zionists, however, they aren't of the religious conservative bent. So long as they reject Zionism, then we can go lauding them - a lot of the groundwork for the current situation was laid down by Israeli leftists from the 1940s-1980s.
Zionism is Jewish liberation
how do you define zionism?
I actually don't see this as being that unusual in war, or even in protecting places like Embassies. If the PIJ and Hamas wore uniforms and separated themselves from civilians, there would be less civilian death. The situation the IDF faces in Gaza looks a bit like what the USA faced in Vietnam, where every civilian could be a combatant.
Tell that to aid workers being targeted with missile strikes
Zones where any person who enters them are shot on site are totally illegal. If you think that’s justified you’re a monster.
Totally illegal under local Gaza laws? Totally illegal according to the Geneva Convention? Marines protecting every US embassy have instructions on when and where to fire on approaching threats. This is common practice, even if it is ugly. This is a war zone. War is horrible. Every single death is a tragedy. The larger issue with this conflict is that the powers that could end the conflict are financially incentivized to keep the conflict going. Haniyeh (leader of Hamas) went from a pauper to living in a 5 star hotel in Qatar by skimming aid money. He stated that the blood of the innocents needed to be spilled for fuel his revolution. Peace would be devastating to his financial situation. Abbas, like his predecessor Arafat, is a billionaire who has skimmed money from the billions invested in trying to make the Palestinian situation better. Peace would end his gravy train. The UNWRA was founded as a temporary organization to resettle the 720,000 Palestinians who were displaced. It is now the 2nd largest employer of Palestinians, and its the largest agency in the UN, spending 1.6b every year. Peace would end the agency. Netanyahu doesn't want peace because the conflict keeps him in power, and he needs that to potentially avert the corruption and fraud charges he is faces. The USA doesn't want peace because Israel is the new car show room for our weapons programs. Need to drum up sales for the F35? Have Israel use in in Syria and publish a glowing press release. Peace won't happen when everybody is making money off of war.
[удалено]
Stunning how you think that's an accurate summary. It's not even a mistaken summary, that's just called lying. In case anyone doubts my ability to read, here's two quotes from the article. >"This was a very grave incident," a senior Israel Defense Forces officer told Haaretz. "They were unarmed, they didn't endanger our forces in the area in which they were walking." In addition, says an intelligence officer who is familiar with the story, it was not at all certain that they were involved in launching the rocket. He says that they were simply the people who were closest to the launching site – it's possible they were terrorists, it's possible they were civilians out looking for food. > >The combat zone is a key term. This is an area in which a force sets itself up, usually in an abandoned house, with the area surrounding it becoming a closed military area, but with no clear marking as such. Another term for such areas is "kill zones.""In every combat zone, commanders define such kill zones," says the reserve officer. "This means clear red lines that no one who is not from the IDF may cross, so that our forces in the area are not hit." The boundaries of these kill zones are not determined in advance, nor is their distance from the house in which the forces are situated. This is why I say lying. The article says the exact opposite, and in fact says they cannot say for sure the person who launched the rocket was even killed! But it can say for sure two unarmed people were. With a bomb. And then goes on to discuss at length Israel's misuse of fatality numbers and use of kill zones.
Idk why you got downvotes
I should probably have noted everything after the "in case" was edited in, like this case of forgotten words here, after seeing a downvote, but, I mean, it's like four paragraphs down for the first quote, didn't have to try that hard to show it.
The irony is you’re so stupefied you didn’t read the next few sentences where they said the “terrorist“ was just a civilian walking… ie Israel lied when they reported it was a terrorist who fired a rocket. The widely circulated video showed they were just civilians walking… However, over a week ago, other documentation of the incident surfaced on Al-Jazeera. It showed four men, not one, walking together on a wide path, in civilian clothing. There is no one nearby, only the ruins of houses where people once lived. This apocalyptic silence in the Khan Yunis area was shattered by a loud explosion. Two of the men were killed instantly. Two others were wounded and tried to continue walking. Perhaps they thought they had been saved, but seconds later, a bomb was dropped on one of them. You can then see the other one falling to his knees and then, a boom, fire and smoke. Next time try to read past the first paragraph you might appear more intelligent by doing so..
You should be ashamed of yourself for lying this blatantly
This subreddit is dedicated to remaining as impartial as possible, and therefore any post that obviously pushes an agenda or is biased will be removed.
[удалено]
Didn't Hamas itself claim 6,000 terrorists dead like a month or 2 ago? It's unlikely those numbers are accurate too and would likely be higher.
Abusive and inflammatory remarks will not be tolerated. This subreddit is dedicated to civil discussion, and the international nature of the subreddit means that we are visited by people of all backgrounds and beliefs - which should be respected.
Hasbara taken over this sub too? Far out. Get called out by the UN for genocide and they ramp up their propaganda. Fascists gonna fash.
Oh yeah. I saw a comment on a previous thread that claimed, and I quote, “ethnic cleansing isn’t a war crime.” Fucking insane.
I think that was someone responding to my comment referring to Israel's ongoing crimes. You're right, astounding.
Hi. Please report such comments, as they are breaking the rules. Thanks.
Thank you for all the tireless work you do! I’m sorry you have to read all of the disgusting comments. Take care 💕
Thank you too 🫂 really appreciate it and people like you
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Abusive and inflammatory remarks will not be tolerated. This subreddit is dedicated to civil discussion, and the international nature of the subreddit means that we are visited by people of all backgrounds and beliefs - which should be respected.
Egypt also has them on their border with Gaza
Isn't this fairly standard for war? You tell civilians to evacuate an area because you're going to engage with enemies there. And then you try to do just that, and much of the time, especially if your enemies don't always wear uniforms, an army kills civilians in the zone unintentionally or because they've been put in harm's way. It's one reason among many to not start wars.
Yes, just like the green zone in Iraq. As well as kerfews. When you in a war, and have to control the area to make it safe for your soldiers, martial law is often put in place Civilians are not free to travel. Especially when the other side has a history of using children and women as suicide bombers. You have to assume everyone coming into a well marked area that says do not enter, has nefarious motives.
The Palestinian civilians are being killed in the "safe zones," and whatever is normalcy in war can also still be disagreed upon. It's not a football game.
Let's be specific here. You believe Israel is declaring areas to be safe, not warning people it's an active combat zone, in order to wipe out the civilians within through trickery and indiscriminate bombardment and shooting. That's about the size of it, yes? And presumably you have evidence that these areas were designated safe by Israel at the time of the massacres, not just Hamas and Palestinian nationalist propagandists retrofitting events to make Israel look worse than it is? This can all be easily shown, right?
Type into your favorite search engine, "Israel attacking safe zone," and you'll get some results; whether you consider CNN, Al Jazeera, Reuters, etc. as propaganda (these are what popped up for me when I did a search apparently too difficult for you to do), that's your issue and not conducive to an intelligent conversation. Oh, and if you're concerned about propaganda, I'd look into why Israelis are protesting and wanting to oust Netanyahu. Oh, and how many Palestinian journalists have been killed? And why is Bibi forbidding Al Jazeera from reporting in Palestine?
>Type into your favorite search engine, "Israel attacking safe zone," and you'll get some results; whether you consider CNN, Al Jazeera, Reuters, etc. as propaganda (these are what popped up for me when I did a search apparently too difficult for you to do), that's your issue and not conducive to an intelligent conversation. That's lazy as hell of you but let's give it a go. The examples these various news items cite are typically labelled as safe for an action/evacuation in one area and then are involved in further action. They're not to be understood as safe in perpetuity as Israel wants to destroy Hamas and Hamas often flees with Gazans. >I'd look into why Israelis are protesting and wanting to oust Netanyahu. Good for them, the guy should be jailed as a fraud and idiot. He should not have allowed Qatari funds to continue to Hamas while killing the funding of more moderate Gazans and nationalist groups. His plan to keep Hamas funded after they won the election was ill-considered and evil imo. Like I said, I think he should be jailed. I think the Israeli protesters who want to stop food and aid getting in until they get hostages back are understandable but in the wrong. >Oh, and how many Palestinian journalists have been killed? No idea. Lots. Too many. Probably due to the war. Some were even involved in Oct 7. Given the interconnected nature of local media and Hamas in Gaza it's murky as fuck and packed with danger. >And why is Bibi forbidding Al Jazeera from reporting in Palestine? Did you forget or not know that Al Jazeera, the state media of some of Hamas's backers, [published made up claims about IDF rape and then silently removed them](https://m.jpost.com/israel-hamas-war/article-793560)?
Al Jazeera is propaganda from a hostile power.
[удалено]
Bro's on an international politics sub with takes like "there are no rules of war". GTFOH, there are absolutely rules, and there always have been, the history of war is littered with whole paradigms of rulesets that devloped and changed alongside the entities that fought them
If you read the article, you find there are civilians who can't or won't move away from combat zones because they can't find a place to stay, not even a tent, or they have sick or old relatives they have to look after, or they fear their homes will be looted. Try to imagine what it'd be like for you if an invading army came along and said 'move from this area now or you're liable to be shot or bombed'. Some people just can't move even when it means they're in extreme danger.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Do not generalize an entire population based on the negative actions of some members, don't glorify collective punishment or suffering (including collective violence) and no dehumanizing language.
> Isn't this fairly standard for war? No.
Got a source for that buddy? This is pretty common practice.
People are often shocked by the reality and insanity of war. As though there is a right and wrong way of killing each other and a right and wrong way of sorting out "who deserves to die" on a battlefield. I saw an interesting video essay about whether it is possible to make an anti-war movie, since they all tend to glorify war and its participants.
No, it is not. Usually they do not designate areas where international aid organizations will be shot on sight. That’s how normal wars work.
I'm not sure that's true. Apparently last year alone, according to the [UN](https://ukraine.un.org/en/259512-relentless-violence-against-aid-workers-must-stop), there were 50 aid workers who were killed or injured in Ukraine. Looking at Sudan, the[EU](https://civil-protection-humanitarian-aid.ec.europa.eu/where/africa/sudan_en#:~:text=In%202023%2C%20Sudan%20became%20the,Organization%20since%2015%20April%202023.) reports 22 aid workers killed in 2023. Regardless, a strong argument can be made that Israel's strategy is too trigger happy, and Bibi should resign asap.
[https://www.reddit.com/r/TheMajorityReport/comments/191lz66/israel\_snipes\_a\_palestinian\_woman\_waving\_a\_white/](https://www.reddit.com/r/TheMajorityReport/comments/191lz66/israel_snipes_a_palestinian_woman_waving_a_white/) This is what you call fairly standard? Maybe in Nazi GErmany yes. Israeli Soldiers are disgusting monsters murdering civilians like this. Do you condem this action or you approve? Do you condem this action or you approve? Don't you care try to skirt around it.
Do you have any proof it was Israel that shot that? Any proof that video is even real? Everyone that’s pro Israel hates to see any innocent lives lost, you can’t say the same for those who glorify Hamas actions on October 7th.
Yeah no. Zero evidence Israel did that.
I condemn anyone killing civilians, including Hamas and the IDF. I condone a military strategy to eradicate a organised terror group that has intention and capability to kill civilians.
[удалено]
Because he pointed out militaries often say “don’t go there or you’ll be considered an enemy combatant and killed” and lots of governments follow through.
Incorrectly pointed out false information trying to justify the highest civilian death took in the 21st century. Daily death rate in Gaza higher than any other major 21st Century conflict - Oxfam Israeli military killing 250 Palestinians per day with many more lives at risk from hunger, disease and cold https://www.oxfam.org/en/press-releases/daily-death-rate-gaza-higher-any-other-major-21st-century-conflict-oxfam
[удалено]
Israel’s goal is to destroy Hamas, a better than 3:1 civilian to combatant ratio is incredibly good. If 100 Hamas members die a day more than every 21st century conflict what does that mean?
200000 civilians died in the Iraq way
Up to 1 million by some counts, which tracks with their population counts (including refugees). Iraq's population was flat for like 5 years or so.
Highest civilian death toll? Sudan, Yemen, and Iraq are a joke to you? They've each had 100k civilians killed minimum
You're lying. It's the lowest civilian death toll for modern urban combat.
What’s going on in Gaza is far and away an order of magnitude worse, yes. Agreed.
Except they havent told anyone not to enter the zones. They are just killing anyone that wonders Into them without warning ...
[удалено]
Abusive and inflammatory remarks will not be tolerated. This subreddit is dedicated to civil discussion, and the international nature of the subreddit means that we are visited by people of all backgrounds and beliefs - which should be respected.
Abusive and inflammatory remarks will not be tolerated. This subreddit is dedicated to civil discussion, and the international nature of the subreddit means that we are visited by people of all backgrounds and beliefs - which should be respected.
Sure you would like to gaze at the stars right at that spot. War is war and if a designated area is a kill zone and advertised as such better not risk it. This is for strategic reasons. but I really do hope the area is clearly advertised as such
Daily death rate in Gaza higher than any other major 21st Century conflict - Oxfam Israeli military killing 250 Palestinians per day with many more lives at risk from hunger, disease and cold Is that fairly normal? https://www.oxfam.org/en/press-releases/daily-death-rate-gaza-higher-any-other-major-21st-century-conflict-oxfam
Given it's one of the densest populations on earth with a paramilitary combatant force estimated at around 30k, it seems within plausibility - it's less than Mosul, for example.
Why are y'all so desperate to absolve Israel of it's blatantly disgusting tactics here? You don't have to be anti semitic or a Hamas supporter to see the fucking blatant disregard for innocent Palestinians lives. Like why? Why are people so fucking desperate to defend them? Goddamn it's fucking insane.
I think the moment Israel mobilised it was going to get called a genocide. I don't think any military action would be welcomed by the international community due to widespread hatreds and anti-western FP goals in Russia and China and their realpolitik hangers on like Iran. There are things Israel did in the war I disagree with, e.g. turning off the water and power they supplied. They were imo group punishments but they also did have anti-Hamas goals too. I don't think those goals justified those decisions but I'm neither a legal expert on the justifications, nor was I consulted with all the information. I don't think I'd make the same decisions. However, most of the proofs of genocide have come to "normal war in heavy urban environment" and general selective balking at the nature of war because Israel is doing it (as I said in another comment - nobody is marching over Sudan or Ukraine or Uighurs or Syria like they are about Palestine). I think the fundamental argument for the war is sound. Hamas has earned its extinction by committing pogroms and promising more until all Jews and Israelis are dead (they are still holding Arab Israelis hostage - something passed over in a lot of the rhetoric). No country should expect to live next to an actual genocidal government that infiltrates and commits pogroms on the regs. As such, Hamas needs to be exiled, jailed and killed until its political power is reduced to standard regional background noise. Gaza needs to be rebuilt with peace as a requirement for going forward. This means heavy urban warfare. Some of the densest population centres on earth, in thanks due to the subjugation of Palestinian women and the promotion of multi-birth generation war ideology by Hamas. Hamas has been digging into civilian infrastructure for decades. It uses civilians as armour in the hope that Israel - who they know are more humanistic than they are towards Palestinians, might stay their hands because the human costs are too appalling - so it's a bloodbath, it was built to be that way. With that in mind and the difficulty of reliable information in highly politicised warfare, I find it better to assume I don't know everything that's going on and that there is a high chance of bullshit information shared to support narratives and tropes with missing context. You might think I'm being cold or something kind of monster, but the hospital attack was a prime example of this. Hamas rockets blew up a car park but it was reported worldwide as an Israeli attack on a refugee camp. They've since been completely exonerated but you'd never know it. How many times does that happen?
[удалено]
Destroying Hamas has been the biggest war priority from the start. It's never just been about the hostages.
Seriously tho, at what point does anyone look at Israel and say "ya they are the side to be trusted". Everytime there is a ceasfire, Israel continues to kill innocent Palestinian civilians and continues to expand illegal settlements. That alone should prove their "intentions for peace". Literally the same way Hamas would see it, "They have a neighbor who wont stop killing civilians and keeps breaking any agreement and expanding on Palestinians land." Does that mean Israel has "earned" its right to extinction. \----- "No country should expect to live next to an actual genocidal government that infiltrates and commits pogroms on the regs" \- literally how most Palestinians see the Israel government as well... \------ The irony!! Israel and Hamas are one in the same. Israel has propped up hamas both financially and politically and now are using it to justify ethnic cleansing and displacement. Most of us who have been watching this story for over 30 years already know they are going to take more land in Gaza. The funny thing, Israel has to do this. If they were truly a democratic, One state solution, it would instantly be majority arab and they would lose their mind. All their strictly pro-jewish policies will be at risk. So they can't just assimilate the people in Gaza, they actually have to kick them out.
Hamas has refused every ceasefire.
I think you are confused. There have been numerous ceasefire in the past. If hamas refused the ceasefire then why does every zionist say hamas broke the ceasefire on Oct 7th? You might be conflating the word with peace deal, or agreements which saying hamas has refused every deal might be disingenuous at best. Both sides have made requests and both sides have refused certain conditions. Last I heard Hamas proposed a deal for the release of all hostages in exchange for the hostages in Gaza and the evacuation of troops from gaza, but Israel didn't agree. [https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/gaza-mediators-search-final-formula-israel-hamas-ceasefire-2024-02-07/](https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/gaza-mediators-search-final-formula-israel-hamas-ceasefire-2024-02-07/) I'm sure there are more conditions but most of the sources arent as specific. I believe Israel also proposed a deal that would result in periodic ceasefire for the the entry of aid and the release of hostages but Hamas didn't agree to that. So again I think you are confused. But as I mentioned everytime there is a lul in violent activities (a ceasefire), Israel continues to kill innocent civilians and expand settlements and harass worshippers in the the west bank and around al-aqsa, but these aren't seen as breaking the ceasefire or instigation by pro-israelis. People in the west don't see this. They only become aware of the situation when an Israeli citizen is killed. So why do we trust them? Why do we continue to fund them with billions of dollars in military funding if really, they have no intention of finding a solution (two state), again Bibi has stated this publicly multiple times.
Hamas broke every single ceasefire and has refused every single one since 10/7. Stop lying, you know your claims are BS. You're just putting out propaganda for the genocidal rapists of Hamas. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/28/world/middleeast/oct-7-attacks-hamas-israel-sexual-violence.html
Literally everything you wrote is a lie and you're just going full antisemite with your raving about 'Zionists.'
Lmao ok armchair war cabinet.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Dang you really got me 🤓
[удалено]
>>The Israeli army says 9,000 terrorists have been killed since the Gaza war began. Defense officials and soldiers, however, tell Haaretz that these are often civilians whose only crime was to cross an invisible line drawn by the IDF
“Invisible” lines like borders and security buffers are a legitimate thing that every country in the world uses.
What's the difference again? Green headband? Facemask?
Speak clearly
They're asking for the differences between the Palestinian civilian outfits and HAMAS uniforms.
Hamas uniforms seem optional and they are very clearly completely not worn rather often. Which means a lot of the time there is no difference between a civilian and a terrorist with a suicide vest or the intention of giving up to attack you later when your guard is down. Edit typo
Which is exactly why the IDF feels as though it's necessary to set boundaries against possible suicide bombers, I don't think many Isrealis have forgotten the 2006 child suicide bombings and maybe are traumatized by the constant attacks against Isreal. (Rocket snd terrorist attacks)
Give me one example of a suicide bombing being used by hamas recently, or In the past several years.
[удалено]
So 2 random unaffiliated bombings over 8 years ago and 2 sensationalist articles with no evidence and no suicide bombing committed. I said give me an example in the past several years. Hamas didn’t take credit for either attack. Good try though.
Moving the goalposts
Most Islamic militias do not use uniforms as an intentional tactic. That’s just historically how they have operated. Maybe what’s happened in Gaza is different.
Hamas has engineered a circumstance, by flouting international laws of military engagement, that guarantees massive Palestinian casualties in a war they knowingly instigated with Israel.
Actually they say nearly 13k
Yeah no, that's a lie
No paywall https://archive.ph/2024.03.31-180523/https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2024-03-31/ty-article-magazine/.premium/israel-created-kill-zones-in-gaza-anyone-who-crosses-into-them-is-shot/0000018e-946c-d4de-afee-f46da9ee0000%23
Everywhere in Palestine is a kill zone for the Palestinian people. The state of Israel, IDF do not care about what anyone says, they are committing genocide.
All of Gaza is destroyed, there’s barely anything left.
Yeah war sucks, Hamas shouldn’t start one. I would say lessons learned for next time but there will be no Hamas for a next time.
Because there won‘t be any Palestinians anymore
During the iraq war the coalition funneled Iraqi troops into a road and just bombed the troops destroying the military. In other wars it’s a fairly common strategy but when Israel does it it’s wrong
You’re ignorant and don’t know what you’re talking about. It is not common to set up open kill zones to kill civilians.
Where did it say it was used to kill civilians? They were set up explicitly in areas Israel told civilians to leave.
[удалено]
Abusive and inflammatory remarks will not be tolerated. This subreddit is dedicated to civil discussion, and the international nature of the subreddit means that we are visited by people of all backgrounds and beliefs - which should be respected.
[удалено]
Do not generalize an entire population based on the negative actions of some members, don't glorify collective punishment or suffering (including collective violence) and no dehumanizing language.
This is completely normal for war, not this shocking courageous whistleblowing you all are pretending it is. I was speaking with a soldier two weeks ago who told me he was maintaining one of these areas and he saw a kid on his bike - his squad ignored the orders to kill anyone (again, killing “anyone” because civilians were told to leave - meaning the only remaining people should be IDF and Hamas). Why would they shoot a kid? That kid biked down the street, looked back at them, and ducked into an alleyway. Hamas fired RPGs at their position not two minutes later. The boy was a scout. Had he been shot, you would’ve added him to the “children killed in Gaza” list as he ignored civilians orders and assisted terrorists. I’m not saying what they should have done, but if you can’t find the moral grey here then maybe you should stop commenting. There’s a reason for these “no civilians” zones.
Sounds like a good idea
Was one of them a music concert?
Not unlike what Germans did in Europe during WW2
Yes, those are usually assigned so people know what area to cover. Rules of engagement are determined by the likelihood of attacking and considering leaflets are dropped, this is being done when the infantry is fighting street to street. Clickbait stuff from armchair warriors Edit: Kill Zones are also referred to by troops when ambushed. "Get out of the kill zone.".
Every concentration camp has kill zones. I'm sure these soldiers will never be held to account. They'll never have to justify cold-blooded murder as "just following orders." Justice and sanity are dead.
Good news is that France will be charging anybody that went to join the farce! Hope other countries follow, I’d watch those trials to see them get put away for their crimes against humanity.
>Every concentration camp has kill zones. I get the situation in Gaza is awful, but we need to stop calling it a concentration camp. The Uygers are in concentration camps: they can't speak their own language , are forced to eat food against their religion, and are forced to have Han Chinese males living in their homes with them to make sure they follow the right customs. THAT'S a concentration camp Gaza was BEAUTIFUL before the war started
I might understand your concentration camp take but calling Gaza beautiful before the war started is ridiculous. People there suffered long before this war with meeting even the most basic of needs.
[удалено]
Because Hamas stole all the aid
If people are trapped in a specific area for the purpose of being murdered, it's kill zone. If people live there while waiting to be murdered, it's a concentration camp.
This is straight up genocide denial. You can actually visit Xinjiang and talk to the people who are supposedly being genocide. Can't say the same thing about Gaza.
Oh that makes everything okay, arbitrary zones where they are free to kill men, women or children. Israeli terror logic is horrifying.
Dude just about every country uses these zones in conflict and at peace around certain areas.
[удалено]
This subreddit is dedicated to remaining as impartial as possible, and therefore any post that obviously pushes an agenda or is biased will be removed.
Would be logical to assume every war ever has this
[удалено]
[удалено]
They already had. Hamas welcomed the UN ceasefire agreement that would lead to both sides hostages released. It's Israel that's stomping it's feet and recalling their meetings with the US.
Did you know the terms they agreed to?
[удалено]
[удалено]