this post was submitted on 12 Oct 2023
260 points (100.0% liked)

World News

22058 readers
89 users here now

Breaking news from around the world.

News that is American but has an international facet may also be posted here.


Guidelines for submissions:

These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.


For US News, see the US News community.


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] khalic@beehaw.org 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That’s not what I said. There needs to be heavy pressure on them from the world. I’m putting pressure on my political representative exactly for that.

But a blanket statement like: “all civilian casualties are inadmissible” is just wrong.

[–] ondoyant@beehaw.org 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

all civilian casualties are inadmissible. its not wrong, its a moral imperative, and one that the state of Israel is blatantly disregarding. the framing that "okay, these civilian causalities are okay" is fucking monstrous, and gives a ready made excuse for Israel to escalate violence in Gaza.

[–] teawrecks@sopuli.xyz 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No one is saying "all these civilian casualties are ok", stop oversimplifilying the situation.

I know it's tempting to make blanket statements about moral imperatives from your armchair, religion has been doing that to us for centuries, but it turns out the real world is actually full of moral dilemmas, where there IS no outcome where no one dies, and all you can do is pick the least bad option.

"All civilian casualties are inadmissible" is the coldest of cold takes, right there next to, "well I don't think anyone should have a war at all!" Like, great, thanks, why didn't anyone think of that?

[–] ondoyant@beehaw.org 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

i don't think anyone should have a war at all. there, are you happy? i'm frankly uninterested in litigating what hypothetical circumstances under which it might be okay to kill a civilian.

[–] teawrecks@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 year ago

No one was asking you to.

[–] khalic@beehaw.org 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You’re right, the Israeli should just say “too bad guys, they have hostages, we can’t shoot in that direction, check mate” and let hamas slaughter them

[–] ondoyant@beehaw.org 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

the scenario you're imagining doesn't exist. this isn't a rock paper scissors thing, where Israel either shoots through hostages to kill insurgents or dies themselves. if Hamas is hiding amongst civilians, they aren't attacking Israel, they're hiding. if they're attacking Israel, they aren't in a crowd of Palestinian civilians. the IDF does not need to have a shootout with civilians in the crossfire to protect its people. the IDF does not need to bomb civilian residences to wage war against an insurgency.

you are so willing to conflate the two, assume that Israel must kill or be killed themselves. that is a fucking falsehood. there is so fucking much a military force can do to defend against attack that doesn't involve shelling apartment buildings, shooting into crowds, and otherwise being monsters.

[–] alyaza@beehaw.org 7 points 1 year ago

for what it's worth i think we've about exhausted what can be said on this topic past your own comment; i don't think further responses between you and @khalic@beehaw.org will really go anywhere and i've already nuked a bunch of the discussion downthread because it devolved completely.