World War III Updates

[Lord Ratner]

2 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

 Terrible situation, Hamas can not be allowed to survive, but you can't kill hundreds of thousands of Palestinians in the process.

More please!

Why not? A supportive population, in fact an actively supportive population, is a part of the war machine. 

 

If we start down this road then we have to retroactively denounce Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Tokyo, Dresden, etc... Easy to do when it's not our own brothers and kids being killed on the frontlines. If I have to choose between their civilians and our soldiers in a war they started, it's a pretty easy calculation for me. No country in the history of combat has spent as much energy, money, and blood protecting the civilians of their enemies, not even the US. 

War is ugly specifically because if requires the mass death of civilians. 

[ClearedHot]

3 hours ago, Lord Ratner said:

Why not? A supportive population, in fact an actively supportive population, is a part of the war machine. 

 

If we start down this road then we have to retroactively denounce Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Tokyo, Dresden, etc... Easy to do when it's not our own brothers and kids being killed on the frontlines. If I have to choose between their civilians and our soldiers in a war they started, it's a pretty easy calculation for me. No country in the history of combat has spent as much energy, money, and blood protecting the civilians of their enemies, not even the US. 

War is ugly specifically because if requires the mass death of civilians. 

Because we, and by extension, Israel, are better than that.  To defeat Hamas you likely don't have to starve a bunch of kids to death.  War is ugly, Total War is even uglier.  Using your logic why we just green flag Israel to drop a nuke on Rafah and get it over nice, clean and quick.  We were pretty upset after 9/11 but I didn't see us firebombing cities in Afghanistan.  Innocents died, but we at least tried to be measured in our response and we most certainly did not purposely starve a population that was supporting the Taliban.

Hamas started the current fight but I hope you are not so Naive as to think Israel has no dirt on their hands.  I FULLY support Israel and their right to exist.  I do not support Hamas in any way, shape, or form but Israel has also done some shitty things to the Palestinians through the years in the name of "survival".  An actively supportive population is a very shallow argument given the living conditions, most have not choice.  Not an excuse, but certainly a consideration.    

[Lord Ratner]

I'll go in pieces:

23 minutes ago, ClearedHot said:

To defeat Hamas you likely don't have to starve a bunch of kids to death.

Israel is not starving anyone. Hamas is. It's not Israel stopping the aid, it's the complete absence of anyone to receive and distribute it. Because Hamas wants more dead Palestinians. They have stolen aid for years, and continue to do so. Those deaths are irrelevant because they have nothing to do with Israel.

23 minutes ago, ClearedHot said:

Using your logic why we just green flag Israel to drop a nuke on Rafah and get it over nice, clean and quick.  We were pretty upset after 9/11 but I didn't see us firebombing cities in Afghanistan. 

Because as you are pointing out, what matters is how you wage the war. What does not matter is how many innocent civilians die as a result. You wage the war ethically, and that's all you can do. Especially in this situation where civilian deaths are specifically being used as a countermeasure to Israeli attempts to destroy Hamas, arguing that the arbitrary number of deaths is somehow relevant is literally playing into their strategy.

23 minutes ago, ClearedHot said:

but we at least tried to be measured in our response and we most certainly did not purposely starve a population that was supporting the Taliban.

 

You seem to have bought the Hamas narrative that Israel is starving the Palestinians. Nonsense.

23 minutes ago, ClearedHot said:

Hamas started the current fight but I hope you are not so Naive as to think Israel has no dirt on their hands. 

Sure, but that's global policy anywhere and anytime. It's not like the Allies didn't have culpability for isolating Germany and turning it into a pariah state. That ended up with World war II, but we still killed a fuck ton of Nazis. The dirt on their hands arguments is always used to draw a moral equivalence between the two belligerents in a war. But there is no moral equivalence here. Israel has never done what Hamas did, and by any rational account would never do what Hamas did. Hamas not only did it, but the vast majority of their population celebrated it. Anyone who has even the slightest difficulty understanding who the good guys and who the bad guys are in this war, and I'm not saying that's you, has no place in the discussion. Ultimately you have to base your judgment of a society on what they do, and what they proclaim. Based on this, I choose 100,000 dead Palestinians today over 100,000 dead Jews over time. I would rather neither, but not all civilians are equal, because not all countries are equal, and not all cultures are equal.

 

23 minutes ago, ClearedHot said:

An actively supportive population is a very shallow argument given the living conditions, most have not choice.  Not an excuse, but certainly a consideration.    

Hamas was chosen by and supported by the Palestinians. At a certain point the population has to be responsible for the type of country they create. Again, that doesn't mean you have a green light to intentionally Target civilians. But that's not what's happening, and that's not what I questioned from your first post. The number of dead civilians does not serve as the measure for whether a war is fought ethically. There would be a whole hell of a lot fewer deaths if Hamas didn't purposefully put their military targets under and around civilians. And our long-standing rules of engagement allow for killing those civilians. Doesn't make it fun, but it doesn't make it unethical either.

Edited April 11 by Lord Ratner

[ClearedHot]

7 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said:

I'll go in pieces:

7 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said:

Israel is not starving anyone. Hamas is. It's not Israel stopping the aid, it's the complete absence of anyone to receive and distribute it. Because Hamas wants more dead Palestinians. They have stolen aid for years, and continue to do so. Those deaths are irrelevant because they have nothing to do with Israel.

The facts and reporting would say otherwise.  Fewer crossing points, random rejections, extended inspections.  Also, Israel striking an aide convoy doesn't help the situation.

10 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said:

Because as you are pointing out, what matters is how you wage the war. What does not matter is how many innocent civilians die as a result. You wage the war ethically, and that's all you can do. Especially in this situation where civilian deaths are specifically being used as a countermeasure to Israeli attempts to destroy Hamas, arguing that the arbitrary number of deaths is somehow relevant is literally playing into their strategy.

Review your own statement...ETHICALLY.  Again, they could do far more.  I believe they have gone to great lengths but they can still do better...see aide convoy above.

11 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said:

You seem to have bought the Hamas narrative that Israel is starving the Palestinians. Nonsense.

Not at all, I've read the reports from the ground, the number of crossing points, the number of trucks Israel lets through, the rejections without cause.  Israel does not get all of the blame, but they certainly get some.

13 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said:

Israel has never done what Hamas did, and by any rational account would never do what Hamas did. Hamas not only did it, but the vast majority of their population celebrated it. Anyone who has even the slightest difficulty understanding who the good guys and who the bad guys are in this war, and I'm not saying that's you, has no place in the discussion. Ultimately you have to base your judgment of a society on what they do, and what they proclaim. Based on this, I choose 100,000 dead Palestinians today over 100,000 dead Jews over time. I would rather neither, but not all civilians are equal, because not all countries are equal, and not all cultures are equal.

Of course Israel would never do what Hamas has done.., see my they (we), are better that that argument above.  However, if you are being intellectually honest you have to look at the situation holistically and over time.  Since 1948 Israel has conservatively killed 66,000 Palestinians.  Don't get me wrong, I know who the good guys are here but when viewing conflict it helps to view the history and the long game. 

25 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said:

Hamas was chosen by and supported by the Palestinians. At a certain point the population has to be responsible for the type of country they create. Again, that doesn't mean you have a green light to intentionally Target civilians. But that's not what's happening, and that's not what I questioned from your first post. The number of dead civilians does not serve as the measure for whether a war is fought ethically. There would be a whole hell of a lot fewer deaths if Hamas didn't purposefully put their military targets under and around civilians. And our long-standing rules of engagement allow for killing those civilians. Doesn't make it fun, but it doesn't make it unethical either.

If you believe the Palestinians had a choice when it comes to Hamas you truly don't understand what has happened there.  Not saying they are right, but they are a complete pawn and victim of other interests and players. 

Again, Hamas is EVIL and MUST be destroyed.  You are dead on to point out they want the casualties (which kind of proves my entire argument about having a choice), and intentionally placing civilians (and hostages), in, near and under targets has drastically increased the civilian casualties.  Those facts are a sad fact of war and something that can't be helped.  However, what is happening the with aid is a completely different story and if you pause to do a little research you will see BOTH sides hold some blame. 

[Lord Ratner]

1 hour ago, ClearedHot said:

The facts and reporting would say otherwise.  Fewer crossing points, random rejections, extended inspections.  Also, Israel striking an aide convoy doesn't help the situation.

You remember where 1200+ Israelis were literally raped, tortured and murdered? Sorry but the hunger of the supportive population does not trump the security of the attacked population. Anything else would be an abdication of responsibility to the Israeli people. And a friendly fire accident is another regular feature of war. Sucks. We sure had our fair share.

1 hour ago, ClearedHot said:

Again, they could do far more.  I believe they have gone to great lengths but they can still do better...see aide convoy above.

Unless you are arguing that the WCK convoy was intentional, then just saying "do better" is horseshit. Hamas could do better too. Everyone could do better. Lets make this useful and say how many dead Israeli soldiers are a fair exchange for how many dead Palestinian "civilians." Until then it's just sideline commentary. The Palestinians have a government, that's who should be worried about their hunger and safety. Instead it is up to Israel to move hundreds of thousands of people who cheered the rape and torture of their wives and daughters so the terrorist psychopaths they are protecting can be hunted and killed. But sure. Do better. Funny how the standard is always "do better" up to and past the point that the objective can no longer be accomplished. 

 

1 hour ago, ClearedHot said:

However, if you are being intellectually honest you have to look at the situation holistically and over time.  Since 1948 Israel has conservatively killed 66,000 Palestinians.  Don't get me wrong, I know who the good guys are here but when viewing conflict it helps to view the history and the long game.

And how many of those were sheltered over or around the many varieties of Islamic militants? Subtract those. How many were storming the border fences or checkpoints? Subtract those. How many were civilians killed as the primary target, not collateral damage in response to direct attacks on Israel? That's the more relevant number. 

 

Once again, do you believe we were wrong for Hiroshima? Dresden? Because we did blockade Japanese oil, and most of Europe made Germany into a pariah state after WWI. Holistically is a cop-out. There is a line between geopolitical competition and outright acts of war. Hamas, not Israel, started this war, to the cheering of their poor, hungry population. It is Israel's responsibility to it's people to end the threat. When Israel starts raping Palestinians, bombing apartments, or dumping humanitarian aid into the sea to "make a point," then we will have the beginning of a basic equivalence. 

 

1 hour ago, ClearedHot said:

If you believe the Palestinians had a choice when it comes to Hamas you truly don't understand what has happened there.  Not saying they are right, but they are a complete pawn and victim of other interests and players

They are humans with free will. Yes, pawns. Yes exploited. So too was every population in history that eventually found their way to peace and freedom. And they elected Hamas in 2006. Hamas has since taken total control, but since when did Americans decide that populations are no longer responsible for their destiny?

Once again, how many Israelis should die to save the lives of people who want Jewish blood in the streets more than they want their children to eat or survive?

 

Americans and Westerners have a really tough time understanding religious fanaticism. When death is a reward for killing your enemies, you can't freedom and compassion your way to changing hearts and minds. How we haven't learned this after the last 20 years is mystifying. 

[FourFans]

I know, I know, two seasoned veterans having a serious discussion about ethics and yes, innocents dying is legitimately never good and it's a tough situation...but all I keep hearing is:

 

[tac airlifter]

19 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

 We were pretty upset after 9/11 but I didn't see us firebombing cities in Afghanistan. 

And we lost. 

can you provide an example of a war that was won by the side that respected and protected civilians when the other side doesn’t?  I think you’re expecting the impossible from Israel.

[SurelySerious]

And we lost. 
can you provide an example of a war that was won by the side that respected and protected civilians when the other side doesn’t?  I think you’re expecting the impossible from Israel.

Another important distinction is that while losing Afghanistan, it wasn’t an existential threat so we had the luxury of pretending to avoid civilian casualties more than we actually did. So it’s pretty ridiculous that Biden has the nerve to try to tell Israel how to conduct war after losing two urban wars. The only one that we “won” was bombing every city block to exterminate ISIS.

Hamas (and by proxy Iran) are an existential threat to Israel that embed themselves in the local population as shields. They’re honestly doing a great job limiting their impact to civilians. All the numbers are dubious in the news because it relies on what Hamas reports. Definitely trust those guys.

[HeloDude]

We might as well finally make severe cuts to our military if half the country isn’t going to be ok with civilians dying in the next conflict.

[brabus]

6 minutes ago, SurelySerious said:

They’re honestly doing a great job limiting their impact to civilians.

They really aren’t. CDE basically doesn’t exist. Now that said, they absolutely aren’t purposely targeting civs and I find little sympathy for the ton of civs there that actively support Hamas. And I do blame Hamas solely for putting legit mil targets purposely under/around/next to as many civs as possible. Could Israel do better, yes, but are they between a massive rock and a hard place, also yes.

[tac airlifter]

18 minutes ago, brabus said:

They really aren’t. CDE basically doesn’t exist.... Could Israel do better, yes, but are they between a massive rock and a hard place, also yes.

Disagree, I think Israel is doing good WRT CDE considering they actually need to win.  They haven't leveled Gaza which is exactly what we did in Kobani.
 

what precisely should they do differently?  "Do better" is feedback I've received alot in life and I must say, it's unhelpful.  Again, can you give an example of a war won while respecting/protecting civilians against an enemy who does neither?  And given our own track record, are we really in position to be giving advice of how to win?

[ClearedHot]

19 hours ago, Lord Ratner said:

You remember where 1200+ Israelis were literally raped, tortured and murdered? Sorry but the hunger of the supportive population does not trump the security of the attacked population. Anything else would be an abdication of responsibility to the Israeli people. And a friendly fire accident is another regular feature of war. Sucks. We sure had our fair share.

Of course I know 1200 1410 Israelis have been killed since this latest conflict started, many more since 1948. At no point have I ever said "the hunger of the supportive population does not trump the security of the attacked population", AT NO POINT.  The safety and security of Israel should come first, I have never wavered from that.  However, you seem to be arguing Israel has no choice but to starve the population in order to defeat Hamas.  If that is true why not advocate to take a flamethrower to the 68 refugee camps and end this once and for all?  Lets just burn them all so there will never be another generation to fight Israel.  Total victory right, Machiavelli for all my friends!

19 hours ago, Lord Ratner said:

Unless you are arguing that the WCK convoy was intentional, then just saying "do better" is horseshit. Hamas could do better too. Everyone could do better. Lets make this useful and say how many dead Israeli soldiers are a fair exchange for how many dead Palestinian "civilians." Until then it's just sideline commentary. The Palestinians have a government, that's who should be worried about their hunger and safety. Instead it is up to Israel to move hundreds of thousands of people who cheered the rape and torture of their wives and daughters so the terrorist psychopaths they are protecting can be hunted and killed. But sure. Do better. Funny how the standard is always "do better" up to and past the point that the objective can no longer be accomplished.

Of course the WCK convoy was not intentional.  Fratricide is a horrible outcome of war, having been personally brought up (and exonerated), on charges I might have a reasonable understanding of the implications.

19 hours ago, Lord Ratner said:

Once again, do you believe we were wrong for Hiroshima? Dresden? Because we did blockade Japanese oil, and most of Europe made Germany into a pariah state after WWI. Holistically is a cop-out. There is a line between geopolitical competition and outright acts of war. Hamas, not Israel, started this war, to the cheering of their poor, hungry population. It is Israel's responsibility to it's people to end the threat. When Israel starts raping Palestinians, bombing apartments, or dumping humanitarian aid into the sea to "make a point," then we will have the beginning of a basic equivalence.

I do not believe we were wrong, but this is a different situation and a different time.  Starving 68 refugee camps is not the same as trying to get a nation state to capitulate.  Dropping Nukes on Japan saved countless American lives and likely saved many Japanese lives as well.

You seem to be caught up in equivalence..."well johnny did it to me so I am gonna do worse to Johnny"...no.  And lets be VERY clear, I have never said don't attack and clear Rafah, that must happen, but I am willing to bet there is a nuanced way to accomplish that goal.

19 hours ago, Lord Ratner said:

Once again, how many Israelis should die to save the lives of people who want Jewish blood in the streets more than they want their children to eat or survive?

Obviously you are intelligent and I don't mean this to be an insult..I don't know your career background or MDS, but I am guessing it is/was support and you've never been on the kinetic front end, you've never killed someone, let alone hundreds of people.  Turning humans into hamburger is not a puss game, I stopped counting when I got to 700.  I have ZERO regrets, they were all bad people that meant harm to do harm to America and out Allies.  That being said, I have zero desire to kill babies...if you think that is cool and just part of war, they have free will, good for you, whatever keeps you warm at night.  I will always believe we are better than that and can find a way to defeat/destroy HAMAS without starving a bunch of innocent babies.

18 hours ago, FourFans said:

I know, I know, two seasoned veterans having a serious discussion about ethics and yes, innocents dying is legitimately never good and it's a tough situation...but all I keep hearing is:

 

Sadly, I have seen people like this in person. 

We are trained professionals who will execute combat to protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic, but that doesn't mean you have to trade your humanity in the process.  That is what I have been trying to say by "do better."   We have gone to EXTRAORDINARY lengths to limit CDE, that is NOT what I am talking about.  All I am saying is in 2024 we can probably help find a way to defeat/destroy HAMAS, protect Israeli soldiers and civilians without starving a bunch of babies.

[ClearedHot]

1 hour ago, tac airlifter said:

Disagree, I think Israel is doing good WRT CDE considering they actually need to win.  They haven't leveled Gaza which is exactly what we did in Kobani.

Exceptionally good at CDE, I believe at last count more than 50% of the munitions they have dropped do not have explosives.

1 hour ago, tac airlifter said:

what precisely should they do differently?  "Do better" is feedback I've received alot in life and I must say, it's unhelpful.  Again, can you give an example of a war won while respecting/protecting civilians against an enemy who does neither?  And given our own track record, are we really in position to be giving advice of how to win?

Do better in my context does not refer to combat operations, I would not trade a single Israeli life...however, they can probably find a way to make the refugee camps more viable.  If nothing else it will help disarm some of the narrative against them.

[tac airlifter]

4 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

 they can probably find a way to make the refugee camps more viable.  If nothing else it will help disarm some of the narrative against them.

You’re probably right in that context, and I think they’re already making efforts towards assisting the refugee camps (despite knowing Hamas will be advantaged by such a move): https://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2024/04/idfs-new-phase-of-operations-in-gaza-to-include-pinpoint-raids-increased-aid.php

That said, I’m not sure Israel can disarm the existing narrative; the Palestinians have an incredible international propaganda machine hence all the “genocide” claims by students protesting in the US.  I agree with you they should make an effort, but the truth is many people will criticize them no matter what.  

[Lord Ratner]

4 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

That being said, I have zero desire to kill babies...if you think that is cool and just part of war, they have free will, good for you, whatever keeps you warm at night.  I will always believe we are better than that and can find a way to defeat/destroy HAMAS without starving a bunch of innocent babies.

What the fuck are you talking about? 🤣😂

 

I'm sure I haven't called you a Muslim extremist. There is only one group involved in this conflict that outright desires the death and starvation of babies. That is Hamas. Not Israel, not the US, not you, not me. Only the Islamic fundamentalists are deranged enough to believe that the death of their own children is a good thing.

 

You just keep repeating a bunch of points that imply that Israel is somehow intentionally starving people. They have done more in this war to protect the civilians of their enemy population than any organization, the United States included, has ever done in the history of humanity. There is not a single example that comes close.

 

Considering your background, I surprised at your minimization of the unfathomable difficulty of distributing aid to a population who hates you, under the governance of a terrorist regime that is not only actively engaged in military combat against you, but has and continues to steal the aid in an effort to intentionally exacerbate the humanitarian catastrophe in the hopes, sadly successful it seems, of convincing westerners that somehow Israel is in the wrong here.

The Washington Post article does a remarkable job showing why the aid is so difficult to distribute, though it conveniently starts with Palestinian allegations, easily ignored, glosses over Egypt's regular to accept refugees, then covers the many different Palestinian factions that steal, riot, or refuse to distribute the aid. There are two countries with larger gdps than Israel, and nearly every country with more space and people, yet somehow these Muslim countries aren't responsible for the Muslim humanitarian crisis. It's Israel, the attacked, who are responsible.

It would be nice if Israel wasn't fighting an enemy that used years and years of humanitarian aid repurposed as weaponry and used to construct defensive tunnels.

 

Even the notion that Israel 's historical stance towards the Palestinians somehow created this mess is laughable. What were they going to do? Integrate the Palestinians into one country, immediately creating a majority voting block that openly calls for the immediate genocide of all Jews? Recognize Hamas in a two-state solution and solidify a militaristic terrorist government next door, with even more undeserved rights given to them by the UN?

Do more is meaningless. Do better is meaningless. Saying this is somehow different, or a different time, without explaining exactly how, is meaningless. More Israeli participation in Gaza means more dead Israelis. Doing more or doing better means more dead Israelis. We incinerated tens of thousands of civilians to protect American lives. And we would do it again in a heartbeat if any country strapped GoPros to their chest and fucked the bleeding corpses of our wives and daughters.

I'm not accusing you of supporting Hamas, or even the Palestinians. But this strange Western tendency to reflexively build moral equivalence between two diametrically opposed populations is being exploited by the real bad guys to continue on to the next rape or murder. And as unfortunate as decades or centuries of human history can be, the Israelis alive today should not have to sacrifice themselves because of what a bunch of dead people did decades ago.

There are poor and hungry populations all over the world, but only certain ones are participants in a religious death cult that glorifies the shedding of blood, be it their own or their enemies, in the pursuit of eternal Paradise. Treating those civilians the same as civilians who believe in fundamental human rights and dignities is an immoral stance.

Edited April 12 by Lord Ratner

[ViperMan]

Well said. It's a sad thing, but our modern concept of urban warfare and being able to solve these problems without massive human casualties is a pipe dream - and honestly, Hamas' strategy takes direct advantage of the fact that it's a pipe dream.

Someone else said it best, which was that Hamas gave Israel two bad choices. Israel is making the less bad choice. People who honestly think there's a good way out of this are deluding themselves. The entire population of Gaza is will likely need to be displaced in order to solve this conflict. That's a sad thing to confront, but it is what it is, and it's not Israel's fault.

[ClearedHot]

 What the fuck are you talking about? 🤣😂

45 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said:

You just keep repeating a bunch of points that imply that Israel is somehow intentionally starving people. They have done more in this war to protect the civilians of their enemy population than any organization, the United States included, has ever done in the history of humanity. There is not a single example that comes close.

You are very good at twisting other people's words but you will NOT twist mine.  Not once did I ever say or imply that Israel was intentionally starving people.  I said they could try to do better.

46 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said:

Considering your background, I surprised at your minimization of the unfathomable difficulty of distributing aid to a population who hates you, under the governance of a terrorist regime that is not only actively engaged in military combat against you, but has and continues to steal the aid in an effort to intentionally exacerbate the humanitarian catastrophe in the hopes, sadly successful it seems, of convincing westerners that somehow Israel is in the wrong here.

The Washington Post article does a remarkable job showing why the aid is so difficult to distribute, though it conveniently starts with Palestinian allegations, easily ignored, glosses over Egypt's regular to accept refugees, then covers the many different Palestinian factions that steal, riot, or refuse to distribute the aid. There are two countries with larger gdps than Israel, and nearly every country with more space and people, yet somehow these Muslim countries aren't responsible for the Muslim humanitarian crisis. It's Israel, the attacked, who are responsible.

It would be nice if Israel wasn't fighting an enemy that used years and years of humanitarian aid repurposed as weaponry and used to construct defensive tunnels.

I have not minimized anything, unfortunately I've been in the middle of situations very similar and it sucks to high heaven.  Likely derailed my career by yelling at Army Two Star Army prick who added even more friction to a situation like this, got four of my people shot, then ran off to the states two days later after having refused to meet with anyone who flew the mission or was wounded.  I 1000% agree with you with regard to Egypt and the others players in the region, their concern and support fades when they have to put skin the game.

To be clear, I am not talking about the fighting areas or the tunnels...horrific fighting and conditions.  I am referring to the 68 camps and the slow progress getting aid to those areas.

58 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said:

Even the notion that Israel 's historical stance towards the Palestinians somehow created this mess is laughable. What were they going to do? Integrate the Palestinians into one country, immediately creating a majority voting block that openly calls for the immediate genocide of all Jews? Recognize Hamas in a two-state solution and solidify a militaristic terrorist government next door, with even more undeserved rights given to them by the UN?

I in no way shape or form think what Hamas did was anything but horrific and despicable.  Israel is in an impossible situation but if you think they are pure you simply don't understand what has happened.

Certainly they were not going to integrate and let the Palestinians vote but 70+ years of expanding settlements, complete economic suppression, and a decades long blockade left 80% of the population dependent on international aid. 

People living in Gaza need permits to move in and out of the strip through two land crossing points controlled by Israel.

Restrictions on the movement of people and goods, destruction of productive assets in frequent military operations and the ban on the importation of key technologies and inputs have hollowed out Gaza’s economy.

Living in Gaza in 2022 meant confinement in one of the most densely populated spaces in the world, without electricity half the time, and without adequate access to clean water or a proper sewage system.

It meant a 65% probability of being poor, 41% probability of dropping out of the labor force in despair, and for those looking for work, a 45% probability of being unemployed.

Again you have solid points about who the Palestinians support and elected, they carry a great amount of responsibility, but in the grand scheme of great power competition they are simply pawns. 

1 hour ago, Lord Ratner said:

Do more is meaningless. Do better is meaningless. Saying this is somehow different, or a different time, without explaining exactly how, is meaningless.

I am specifically saying they (and we), could do more to get relief supplies to those 68 refugee camps.  I said nothing about changing things on the battlefield...I actually acknowledged the Israelis have gone to great lengths to limit CD.  I've seen the video, horrible house to house, room to room fighting. 

1 hour ago, Lord Ratner said:

I'm not accusing you of supporting Hamas, or even the Palestinians. But this strange Western tendency to reflexively build moral equivalence between two diametrically opposed populations is being exploited by the real bad guys to continue on to the next rape or murder. And as unfortunate as decades or centuries of human history can be, the Israelis alive today should not have to sacrifice themselves because of what a bunch of dead people did decades ago.

Understood, I just don't know what you are advocating at this point.  All I've said is try to get food to some starving kids in refugee camps and you've bounced back to incinerating people...that is the failed moral equivalency. 

[Lord Ratner]

31 minutes ago, ClearedHot said:

Understood, I just don't know what you are advocating at this point.  All I've said is try to get food to some starving kids in refugee camps and you've bounced back to incinerating people...that is the failed moral equivalency. 

 

On 4/11/2024 at 5:06 AM, ClearedHot said:

Terrible situation, Hamas can not be allowed to survive, but you can't kill hundreds of thousands of Palestinians in the process.

This is where we actually started. Nothing about starvation. You then jumped to this strawman:

On 4/11/2024 at 11:06 AM, ClearedHot said:

Using your logic why we just green flag Israel to drop a nuke on Rafah and get it over nice, clean and quick.

Also:

33 minutes ago, ClearedHot said:

Not once did I ever say or imply that Israel was intentionally starving people.  I said they could try to do better.

 

On 4/11/2024 at 11:06 AM, ClearedHot said:

Innocents died, but we at least tried to be measured in our response and we most certainly did not purposely starve a population that was supporting the Taliban.

 

Emphasis mine. Exactly how is this not implying that Israel *is* purposely starving the Palestinians. This was a comparison between something the US dealt with and what Israel is dealing with, yes?

 

I don't have to twist your words, dude. I'm just quoting what you literally wrote yesterday.

[ClearedHot]

12 hours ago, Lord Ratner said:

Parsing words and quotes without context...

You probably missed a few of my posts from the late 90's when I was banging BQZips, maybe you could go grade that homework out of context as well.

You are right, kill all the Palestinians, especially the ones in the refugee camps, that will save all the Israeli's and create peace in our time.

[Lord Ratner]

30 minutes ago, ClearedHot said:

You probably missed a few of my posts from the late 90's when I was banging BQZips, maybe you could go grade that homework out of context as well.

You are right, kill all the Palestinians, especially the ones in the refugee camps, that will save all the Israeli's and create peace in our time.

Hey man, if I gotta ignore what you said on the same page in the thread, one day ago, in the same conversation, because that's too long ago for you to remember saying, then yeah, we're not gonna get anywhere. This isn't War and Peace, it's literally five posts each.

 

🤷🏻‍♂️

[ClearedHot]

1 hour ago, Lord Ratner said:

Hey man, if I gotta ignore what you said on the same page in the thread, one day ago, in the same conversation, because that's too long ago for you to remember saying, then yeah, we're not gonna get anywhere. This isn't War and Peace, it's literally five posts each.

 

🤷🏻‍♂️

We were never going to get anywhere.  🤷‍♂️

[Boomer6]

[McJay Pilot]

9 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

You probably missed a few of my posts from the late 90's when I was banging BQZips, maybe you could go grade that homework out of context as well.

Wait… what? It’s one thing to joke about bangin’ his Mom, but that’s AGGRESSIVELY establishing dominance! 😳 

[ClearedHot]

48 minutes ago, McJay Pilot said:

Wait… what? It’s one thing to joke about bangin’ his Mom, but that’s AGGRESSIVELY establishing dominance! 😳 

 

[McJay Pilot]

In other news, OSINT is showing multiple countries closing their airspace, reports of drone launches from multiple areas towards Israel and IAF-1 “Wing of Zion” scrambled and airborne… shits about to get real proportional.