Israel says no humanitarian break to Gaza siege unless hostages are freed

originally posted by: nickyw
a reply to: putnam6

lets not ignore Egypt here as its the only other party with an ability to act unilaterally.

Egypt says Israel seeks to empty Gaza, rejects corridors for civilians

None of the Hamas terrorist defenders will have anything to say about Egypt, unless it's to blame the Jews for Egypt's position. This was on display in the longer thread.

It's asinine to expect one party in a war to support humanitarian aid to the party they're fighting.

If they want support, surrender.

Their suffering is the fault of Hamas, and most Palestinians support Hamas.

And to be clear, none of that means I support deliberately targeting innocent civilians.

a reply to: putnam6

JUST BASIC humanitarian aid, food, water and electricity, medical supplies

The complicated part about this all is Palestine has always wanted to be free, yet they have always relied on Israel for a lot of basic things.

They’ve had a level of autonomy for some time and their own government, yet they haven’t found a way to become more self reliant.

Obviously this is a wartime situation and things are different. And on a human level we have to consider civilian needs no matter the circumstances of their governments…

But i do find it relevant considering Hamas’s demands, and the urgency in which they want them (a free Palestine).

Also odd that the governing bodies of Palestine are able to find assistance in the form of weapons, but they have a piss poor infrastructure, and they’re reliant on their self proclaimed biggest enemy.

a reply to: face23785

And to be clear, none of that means I support deliberately targeting innocent civilians.

that you felt you had to say that highlights what was wrong with the liberal world we live in, as I can not imagine anyone bar a bad faith player taking your words to mean otherwise.

I'm using the past tense as liberalism died during this attack, it sent up a flare to show us that multiculturalism is dead in the water.. Wembley is refusing to light up the stadium in Israel's colours so as to not offend certain communities is as much a bad faith decision as the bbc refusing to call Hamas terrorists. it tries to pretend its not taking sides while taking sides.

eta to clarify what i meant by liberalism

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: putnam6

JUST BASIC humanitarian aid, food, water and electricity, medical supplies

The complicated part about this all is Palestine has always wanted to be free, yet they have always relied on Israel for a lot of basic things.

They’ve had a level of autonomy for some time and their own government, yet they haven’t found a way to become more self reliant.

This is a point I was making yesterday. The billions in international aid that has flowed to them over the years, why haven't they made themselves self-sufficient?

Their internal power lasted just two days once Israel cut off what they were giving them.

There is no excuse for that. They have only themselves to blame.

Let's not forget, the Palestinians have been at war with Israel for decades.

Your enemy in a war is not responsible for your wellbeing, yet Israel was providing for them.

Egypt shares a border with Gaza. They weren't giving them power. Jordan shares a border with the West Bank. What do they do for the Palestinians?

originally posted by: nickyw
a reply to: face23785

And to be clear, none of that means I support deliberately targeting innocent civilians.

that you felt you had to say that highlights what was wrong with the liberal world we live in, as I can not imagine anyone bar a bad faith player taking your words to mean otherwise.

I'm using the past tense as liberalism died during this attack, it sent up a flare to show us that multiculturalism is dead in the water.. Wembley is refusing to light up the stadium in Israel's colours so as to not offend certain communities is as much a bad faith decision as the bbc refusing to call Hamas terrorists. it tries to pretend its not taking sides while taking sides.

eta to clarify what i meant by liberalism

Liberalism died a long time ago. Most of the people identifying as liberals in the West these days are authoritarians. "Listen, Liberal," a book by liberal writer and activist Thomas Frank, details pretty well how the end of liberalism went down in the US. The Democrats sold out to Wall Street, Big Tech, Big Pharma and other elitists. They haven't been the party of the people for decades, but Big Media keeps the average Democrat voter on the hook for them. There are relatively few real liberals in the US now.

a reply to: face23785

Egypt shares a border with Gaza. They weren't giving them power. Jordan shares a border with the West Bank. What do they do for the Palestinians?

Exactly. I can appreciate how small Palestine is and that they actually couldn’t produce everything they need, many big powers can’t… But they’ve had time to build other relations aside from Israel.

And if they definitely could have negotiated more aid deals if they’re going to be the tip of the proxy spear for some of those countries. But the governing arms of Palestine don’t actually seem interested in the governing aspects aside from militaristic.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

I was thinking about that as well. It's a relatively small piece of land. Power generation doesn't just happen by magic. But at the very least they could have built a few coal power plants with stockpiles of coal. They didn't even have enough diesel stockpiled to keep power on for longer than 2 days.

How do the people put up with this #? Their leaders are their real enemy, not Israel.

a reply to: face23785

How do the people put up with this #? Their leaders are their real enemy, not Israel.

Even with the strained relationship, it’s evident Israel was helping them up until days ago.

And since they’re so small, it’s actually easier to have infrastructure like power since you’re not having to deal with vast territory. It’s easier to distribute other services too as it’s so central. I’m sure there’s other challenges, but Hamas showed their hand, they had decades to plan for this moment, and the citizens weren’t factored anywhere into the equation.

If you look at Russia, they have been planning their current posture since 2014. They unloaded a bunch of their debt, brought home a lot of domestic reliance, and made relationships for the impending global isolation upon their decision to take a war footing. I won’t sit here and act as if Putin has his peoples needs at the top of his priority list, but at least he understood other goals can’t be achieved if you don’t have a basic level of human needs met at home.

But I suppose the stark difference is when you have religious extremists who find death against the enemy the ultimate honor. They tend not to think about the living aspect here on earth. Not really someone you want in power when death is more attractive than life.

originally posted by: nickyw
if feels like when hamas pushed the needle of public opinion its not going to be easy to shift it back..

I have a mostly lefty female sm feed, even a couple of sjws and its more "never again is now" as the brutal rape abuse, torture and murder of women and kids has found a very unforgiving home.

on that feed its more a prisoners freed first.. which I'm inclined to agree with.. especially if they are not with hamas but rather with other operators.. so hamas needs to get them and free them..

Talk about a window of opportunity. Israel has a period of time now where nobody can say schite about anything they do. Even the fervent joooo-haters.
Only Hamas is left to say stupid stuff -
“Hey, be kinder to our people ! ….. while we beat on these hostages some more !”

originally posted by: face23785
a reply to: CriticalStinker

I was thinking about that as well. It's a relatively small piece of land. Power generation doesn't just happen by magic. But at the very least they could have built a few coal power plants with stockpiles of coal. They didn't even have enough diesel stockpiled to keep power on for longer than 2 days.

How do the people put up with this #? Their leaders are their real enemy, not Israel.

The electrical generation / distribution of 1920 would be a big improvement for Gaza. It’s not rocket science. All the money goes to weapons.

In the very near future there will no longer be a Gaza strip Israel just got all the reason they need to take the entire strip

Anyone living there should start running now even if it's not the directive of Israel I doubt the soldiers who have dead loved ones are going to care and there won't be many people coming to make Shure they dont kill civilians

originally posted by: mikell
Good, and don't give an inch to your enemy. Send in the B-52 's and see how they like being carpet bombed. For peace they need to eliminate a generation or two.

Sad but true.

Your advocating a genocide...
Carpet bombing women and children who are being held captive in a cage in hopes of killing a small violent minority among them is not honorable. It's tyranny.

Those responsible for this heinous attack against the innocent people of Israel need to be held accountable, but this isn't the way. If Isreal goes through this they will be regarded in the same light as the nazis who killed millions of Jewish people during WWII.

If they flatten Gaza Isreal will see attacks from every direction and will like be flattened in turn. This **** has to stop!

In the mean time I suggest you educate yourself. Start with Isreal and Americas removal of Yasser Arafat and the creation of HAMAS. You might be surprised to learn where HAMAS really came from.

a reply to: putnam6

all the politics aside , it doesnt seem like its a fair bargain
how many hostages do they have 150 according to BBC ?
and whats the population of gaza 2,375,259 at 2022 estimate

so they are basically stating that unless you release 150 people
we will risk harming potentially 2 million people?

its a #in # show no matter what, governments (state sponsored terror) /and political groups (terrorists) call it what you want bargaining with people's lives like this is barbaric
the most humane thing to do is get back on the path to peace by ending all hostilities and asking everyone involved to de-escalate to avoid further loss of life regardless of how bad the tensions are
asking humanitarian groups to step in, or the UN or whoever to stop the bloodshed

these human beings on both sides are nothing more than political pawns and cannon fodder
but its never going to happen because the MIC gravy train is still rolling , and there is some major money to be made for everyone with a share in the MIC, and I can guarantee there are share holders on both sides cashing in on the death.

turn gaza strip into a rubble pile and then offer up fat reconstruction contracts for that prime real estate
working class humans all over the earth are nothing more than cash cows for the authorities of each nation to work to death and steal their wealth and their land no matter where you live
thats all we are

originally posted by: sapien82
a reply to: putnam6

all the politics aside , it doesnt seem like its a fair bargain
how many hostages do they have 150 according to BBC ?
and whats the population of gaza 2,375,259 at 2022 estimate

so they are basically stating that unless you release 150 people
we will risk harming potentially 2 million people?

The Palestinians chose to be Israel's enemy in a war.

Israel is not responsible for their well-being. As has been noted in other threads, the Palestinians have received billions in international aid over the years and have done absolutely nothing to make their territory self-sustaining.

The choice is actually release 150 people or we'll let you harm yourselves.

It is the Palestinians own fault they cannot survive without power and water from Israel. And Israel has been providing that for years while Palestinians have been at war with them.

Cutting off that extraordinarily generous olive branch from Israel is not the same as deliberately harming them. Again, Israel is not responsible for supporting their enemy in a war.

If they want support, they can surrender. But they won't, because killing Jews is more important to them than their own safety and the wellbeing of their children.

a reply to: face23785

civilians arent anyone's enemy in a war they are civilians the definition is obvious
regardless of your political affiliations or beliefs, by the Geneva Convention civilians aren't combatants
or am I wrong ?

In the case of armed conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties, each Party to the conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, the following provisions:

1. Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria.

and last time I looked both Israel and the state of Palestine agreed to the conventions

originally posted by: JAY1980
Carpet bombing women and children

No one is 'carpet bombing' the Gaza. Strategic weaponry is being used to bomb Hamas. Civilians are going to get hurt and killed. They were told to leave by Israel but Hamas, who doesn't care about Palestinians, told them to stay.

Americas removal of Yasser Arafat and the creation of HAMAS.

At the time of his death, Yasser Arafat was worth one billion dollars.
Guess where he stole that money from. The Palestinians.

originally posted by: sapien82
a reply to: face23785

civilians arent anyone's enemy in a war they are civilians the definition is obvious
regardless of your political affiliations or beliefs, by the Geneva Convention civilians aren't combatants
or am I wrong ?

It's not that simple. Civilians can be lawful targets in a war. For example, bombing a civilian factory that produces tanks or missiles is permitted.

It's also a common tactic in war to bomb an enemy's power plants and communications facilities, which are civilian targets, but obviously can be used by your enemy to support their war effort.

And that's with an enemy that has a more defined country and delineated targets.

In this case, you're not fighting a uniformed army. You're fighting coward terrorists that deliberately mix themselves in with civilians as human shields, hoping their own civilians get killed.

Israel does more than most countries to limit civilian casualties. They issue warnings before bombing some targets to give innocent people a chance to get out. That's tactically unsound from a military perspective. It gives enemy combatants a chance to get out as well. Israel does that purely to try to avoid civilian casualties. Almost no other military in the world goes to such lengths which actually benefit their enemy to try to avoid civilian casualties.

As for cutting off their power and water, no that is not against the Geneva conventions either. It's preposterous to say that your enemy in a war is responsible for sustaining your population. We were not responsible for making sure citizens of Nazi Germany had access to power, water, and food. Nor should we have been. That's absurd.

I'm sorry the world isn't all rainbows and unicorns. War is hell. That's why the Palestinians should stop choosing war.

so both the state of Palestine and Israel are in breach of the conventions
because they have violated most of the conventions in Article III

so what now , what comes of a breach from both sides
who steps in to mediate or end the hostility

is there a penalty from the international community in the form of sanctions?

a reply to: face23785

and you stating that its all on Palestine is extremely nieve because there are two sides to a war
and the conflicts have been ongoing for decades
its tit for tat no one side is the just or good


anyone who pays attention to conflicts of history knows that its not black and white
there is no good vs evil
the only evil is that innocent people suffer for the authorities of the day