This is a crime situation. A war crime situation where millions of lives are held forfeit due to the action of hundreds to thousands.
There is a way to go after these people without blowing up every innocent nearby but the conversation has been so poisoned you seemingly think it’s either do nothing or bomb everything.
And as a final thing, this isn’t a self defense thing. Reprisals aren’t defense, they’re revenge after the option for defense is over. You seem a bit mixed up on that.
There’s a really good reason that nations should comply with international law and not do shit like deliberately put military targets in civilian buildings.
Because then the nation economically crippling them will shoot those innocents and commit more war crimes?
When a robber takes a hostage you don’t shoot them through the hostage unless you’re a deranged sociopath.
All these equivocations and just like last time you avoid the actual point. Which is that Israel is inflicting collective punishment on Palestinians, a literal flagrant war crime.
What I described is collective punishment, something you denied was happening. So stop being a coward and say you support it instead of making excuses for why it’s not that bad/justified.
You think that because Hamas exists the lives of everyone in their vicinity is forfeit. You have a ghoulish perspective.
It’s also very clear we will never see eye to eye on this so I’m not going to bother continuing this.
Yes they do:
Collective punishment is a punishment or sanction imposed on a group for acts allegedly perpetrated by a member of that group, which could be an ethnic or political group, or just the family, friends and neighbors of the perpetrator.
So when Israel cuts off water and food to 2.2 million people because an extremist org that is a minority of the population attacks them, how is that NOT collective punishment? When they callously bomb hundreds of women and children, including hostages, to get to a handful of actual fighters, how is THAT not collective punishment? When they bomb bakeries and hospitals and refugee camps, how is that not collectively punishing them? When they restrict their freedom of movement so they’re stuck in the equivalent of an open air prison? When they snipe journalists giving unfavorable coverage, children at a protest, and go in to brutalize religious practitioners in their place of worship?
I hope that you can learn from your own advice.
Ok? You said the West Bank refused treaties. Hamas doesn’t run the government there. The only reason the actions of extremists would affect negotiations with moderates is if you’re negotiating in bad faith and want to break the agreement while posturing as moral. Which I’m pretty sure is the Likud party’s policy given all the actions they’ve taken.
The Gazan blockade happened after decades of literal occupation and colonization. Ironically enough Hamas was the reason Israel stopped stealing territory.
It wasn’t a response to terrorism. It was a continuation of their own apartheid policy under a more internationally favorable lens.
It sounds like you’re using the existence of terrorists to justify the conditions that empowered these terrorists. Which is asinine and circular reasoning. Why not blame the people doing everything they can to create the scenario keeping hamas in power?
Also, why do you think not being a sovereign state affects the fact that Israel is starving millions of people, a majority of them children?
It’s mind numbing the lengths people will go to downplaying the abuse of innocents and try to push all the blame onto them and the extremists that thrive in the conditions they live within. It shows a complete lack of humanity or ability to understand human nature, wrapping your judgements up in geopolitical narratives spun to keep you busy.
You stop an extremist group by showing those at risk that your group will give them peace and stability. Not by treating the entire region like criminals.
No matter what you say to obfuscate, collective punishment on this scale is unequivocally a war crime.
Why are you blaming an extremist militia for the circumstances that created them? Hamas didn’t exist before Israel started colonizing both Gaza and the West Bank. Not to mention the resources Zionists like Netanyahu funneled towards Hamas to help them get more powerful than the moderate coalition.
If Israel didn’t have Gaza under such an inhuman blockade/siege Hamas would be just as equipped, yet average citizens wouldn’t be starving in the streets.
To not acknowledge the direct hand Israeli military and government has had in causing this is frustratingly naive.
Why is Hamas affecting a treaty between two parties that aren’t Hamas? You keep restating the premise but you haven’t justified why your premise is valid. The reality is that Hamas is a great excuse for Likud and the Zionist coalition to push for the one state solution they want without as bad of a pr storm.
Hamas can’t refuse a treaty for a territory they do not rule. Your argument is still ridiculous on its face.
The West Bank isn’t ruled by Hamas, they have zero presence there. You have a very limited perspective on this.
This is the manipulative framing people love to use but anyone with even a passing understanding of what’s happening can see how manipulative it is.
You’re referring to Gaza which has been under blockade/siege since Israel withdrew. By framing it how you have you ignore the reality that even without a direct occupation Israel is crushing Gaza from a health perspective, a social perspective, and a financial perspective.
Not to mention Gaza isn’t the only Palestinian territory. In the time since Israel began sieging Gaza, the West Bank has seen upwards of fifty Palestinians killed per year by Israeli settlers, all backed by IDF soldiers. This is in a territory without Hamas by the way.
It takes some serious ignorance to act like Israel isn’t directly responsible for the abject poverty of Palestinians.
Ok so now that we know how little you value human life my follow up question is, why not use techniques that would separate the hostage from the perpetrator? Why is it important that the criminal dies right that second?
Because a criminal exists any life they stand behind is forfeit so you can get to them? Sounds less like justice and more like blood thirst. This is the same mindset fueling police abuse around the world, so hopped up on militant “justice” they disregard the citizens they claim they want to protect.