• DarkGamer@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    8 months ago

    Then she chanted, “When people are occupied, resistance is justified” which in context is clearly in defense of October 7th, despite her denial.

    Let’s remember that the purpose of this protest was to stop Israel from defending themselves against their explicitly genocidal attackers via political pressure. Stopping Israel before they depose Hamas keeps Hamas in power.

    Although she absolutely has the right to take controversial positions and peacefully protest, freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequence. There is no right to anonymity when publicly protesting.

    • SatansMaggotyCumFart@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      8 months ago

      When people are occupied, resistance is justified

      Resistance take a lot more forms than what happened Oct. 7th which almost nobody is trying to justify.

      the purpose of this protest was to stop Israel from defending themselves against their explicitly genocidal attackers via political pressure

      Israel has murdered at least 33,000 Palestinians, over 2/3 being civilians by their own count.

      Israel has passed ‘defending themselves’ a long time ago.

      This protest is to stop killing innocent civilians.

      • Passerby6497@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        8 months ago

        I really hate how many people on this site really push to equate what amounts to ethnic cleansing as dEFeNdIng ThEmSeLvEs. Like the thousands upon thousands of women and children they murdered were all fucking Hamas.

        But racists always support racists…

      • ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        8 months ago

        over 2/3 being civilians by their own count

        People often bring this up without noting that such a ratio would not be unusual in urban warfare against a well-prepared enemy even when the attacking army is doing what it reasonably can to reduce civilian casualties. Compare it to Mariupol, an example of what happens of the attacking army is unconcerned about civilian casualties: 25/26 of Ukrainians killed were civilians according to Ukrainian estimates. (8/9 were civilians if we use the Ukrainian numbers for how many of their soldiers were killed but the more conservative Human Rights Watch numbers for civilian deaths.)

          • ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            If you trust the casualty numbers that the UN Is using, then they imply approximately 3.7 civilians killed for every combatant (with the assumptions that children make up half the population and that children are never combatants). I don’t trust those numbers but I admit that if I did, I would think they didn’t look good for Israel. I suppose we’ll have a better idea of what the truth is years from now when historians reach a consensus, but until then I’m going to reluctantly trust Biden’s judgement because the US government probably has secret information unavailable to the public. (Biden is biased by his need to be re-elected, but I don’t get reports from the CIA so that’s the best I can do.)

            As for justification: Israel should make reasonable efforts to minimize civilian casualties while accomplishing its legitimate military objectives, but Israel should not sacrifice its ability to accomplish those objectives in order to protect civilians. In other words, Hamas doesn’t get to hold Palestinian civilians as hostages against Israel. If they try, then they are to blame for the resulting civilian casualties. The alternative is simply unworkable in practice, because the ability of Hamas to put Palestinian civilians at risk is almost total.

            • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              7 months ago

              What is the maximum number of children that it acceptable for Israel to kill in order to accomplish its objectives? Is there no ceiling? Any number of children is acceptable as long as Hamas is wiped out?

              • ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                7 months ago

                If you present me with a trolley problem in which the only way to destroy Hamas also kills a million children, I won’t know what the right answer is. I suppose it would depend on what would happen to Israel if Hamas wasn’t destroyed.

                However, the moral calculus for nations is not the same as it is for individuals. The standard established the last time the Western world fought a war it took seriously does seem to be “as many as it takes” and I suspect that this would still be the standard if such a war happened again. (All those nuclear missiles we have ready aren’t precise weapons…) In that context, demanding that Israel should show restraint that other countries haven’t and wouldn’t seems like hypocrisy.

                • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  If you present me with a trolley problem in which the only way to destroy Hamas also kills a million children, I won’t know what the right answer is

                  Seriously? You don’t know?

                  Because I would say most people on this planet would say don’t kill the million children.

                  • ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    7 months ago

                    It’s easy to act self-righteous when that has no consequences, but in practice most people on this planet live in countries (including democratic countries) that probably would actually kill the children in an analogous scenario.

      • DarkGamer@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        8 months ago

        Israel has murdered at least 33,000 Palestinians, over 2/3 being civilians by their own count.

        • Collateral damage is not murder, nor are successful attacks against Hamas militants.
        • It’s interesting you cite that figure as evidence of Israel’s recklessness when it’s actually an astonishing accomplishment that they got the civilian casualty ratio so low, especially considering Hamas hides among civilians in densely populated areas. The commonly cited average in modern war is ~90% civilian casualties. This seems to be evidence that the great lengths they go to to reduce civilian casualties are paying off, not evidence they are being reckless when it comes to civilians. You’d never know it from the protesters, or comments like yours though.
        • Hamas has not surrendered nor have they been deposed. That’s when attacks would stop being self-defense.
        • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          8 months ago

          Please do explain how murdering thousands of children is self-defense against Hamas. Were they strapping suicide vests to the babies and letting them crawl over to IDF troops?

        • Silverseren@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          8 months ago

          Question: Is it appropriate for those civilians to get weapons and fight back against the IDF that is killing them?

          • DarkGamer@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            8 months ago

            That’s a matter of opinion. I can understand why many Palestinians do find it appropriate, especially given the intense indoctrination that Palestinian children experience, and the lack of available unbiased credible information there.

            Given my own experience and information, I find it a lot more appropriate to fight back against Hamas, the oppressive regime that instigated this war, hides among civilians to maximize casualties, and has refused to surrender to end the war, which they could do at any time. I believe they are the primary cause of all of this death and destruction and suffering, not Israel defending itself.

            Would I feel the same way were I in their shoes? Hard to say.

            • bamboo@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              8 months ago

              You dodged the question. When the IDF is attacking and murdering Palestinians, do those Palestinians have a right to take up arms and fight back? It’s a simple yes or no question.

              • DarkGamer@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                8
                ·
                8 months ago

                Some questions cannot be fairly answered with a simple yes or no, like, “Have you stopped beating your wife?”

                There’s a lot of bias packed into your question. If the IDF is in fact MURDERING, as in, illegally killing people, yes they do. However, if the IDF is acting within the law they absolutely do not. Either way, I’d say it’s probably a bad move to do so and likely to get one shot.

                • Silverseren@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  I’m talking about right now. For example, for the people in Rafah. Do the Palestinians in Rafah have the right to fight back against the IDF that is shelling them and attacking their homes with tanks?

                  • DarkGamer@kbin.social
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    arrow-down
                    7
                    ·
                    8 months ago

                    No, that’s a legal attack on Hamas. If they take up arms they are defending Hamas as a militant.

        • Bipta@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          8 months ago

          Collateral damage is not murder

          This is exactly how Hamas justifies October 7th…

          • DarkGamer@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            7 months ago

            Then they are lying. I encourage you to watch the Oct 7 attack footage, (Content warning: violence, cruelty, death,) if you have the stomach for it, which clearly disproves any such claims. This is not collateral damage. They target civilians. Full stop.

            • Bipta@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              7 months ago

              They’re the same concept to Hamas, and it seems that they’re the same concept to the IDF as well.

        • tearsintherain@leminal.space
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          Can only be described as psychopathic response disguised as intellectual arguments. There aren’t enough dead babies, women and children that will move this person so long as they’re Palestinian.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      8 months ago

      stop Israel from defending themselves against their explicitly genocidal attackers

      Yeah, all those babies and toddlers they killed were genocidal maniacs.

      • DarkGamer@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        8 months ago

        Sadly, there are no magical munitions that don’t cause collateral damage, nor is Israel infallible. They still have a right to self-defense and to eliminate the threat against them.

        • ShittyBeatlesFCPres@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          8 months ago

          Do Palestinians have a right to self defense or just Israelis? Because there’s a whole lot of settler attacks in the West Bank and mass graves full of kids in Gaza.

          I’m not defending Hamas, who are just as shitty as the settler parties but you might logically expect violent resistance if you put a people under your boot for decades.

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          8 months ago

          How exactly are they defending themselves by bombing areas full of children?

          If your answer is “Hamas is there,” well they were somehow able to raid a hospital without killing everyone inside it and still get a whole bunch of Hamas people, so maybe they should do that instead of dropping bombs on children.

          You are justifying child murder.

          • DarkGamer@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            8 months ago

            If your answer is “Hamas is there,” well they were somehow able to raid a hospital without killing everyone inside it and still get a whole bunch of Hamas people, so maybe they should do that instead of dropping bombs on children.

            As you acknowledge, they are targeting Hamas, who often attacks them while hiding in areas full of children. Going in without air support into a well prepared guerilla fighter’s den is likely to cause a lot of casualties. Even though that is acceptable every now and then like in the hospital that does not imply that’s a viable strategy for all of Gaza.

            Hamas counts on this “think of the children!” and the bad PR it causes, that’s why they do this. They also want Israel’s hands to be bound so they can do Oct 7 over and over again.

            The right move is to minimize civilian casualties but not stop until the job is done, and that’s exactly what I believe Israel is doing.

            • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              8 months ago

              who often attacks them while hiding in areas full of children.

              Please present evidence of this. Or is this just a guess on your part?

              Going in without air support into a well prepared guerilla fighter’s den is likely to cause a lot of casualties.

              They don’t go in, they just bombs.

              that’s why they do this.

              They are not killing the children.

              More children were killed in Gaza by March than children in conflicts in the rest of the world over the past four years.

              And you would have us believe that Israel’s hands are free of their blood.

              • DarkGamer@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                8 months ago

                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use_of_human_shields_by_Hamas

                According to a New York Times report, “Hamas has long been accused of using civilians as human shields and positioning underground bunkers, weapon depots and rocket launchers under or near schools, mosques and hospitals.”[63]

                DW military analyst Frank Ledwidge has said that “it’s been described… as ‘common knowledge’ that many of the headquarters [of Hamas] are located under hospitals… [with] entries and exits in places like mosques or schools… [or even] UN facilities… that’s why we’ve seen… so many non-combatant casualties so far”.[64]

                John Spencer has said that "[Hamas has] built many of their tunnel entrances and exits and passageway underneath protected sites like hospitals, schools, mosques, because it restricts the use of force that the IDF can take without going through the… laws of war calculation.[65]

                According to Daphne Richemond-Barak, associate professor of counter-terrorism at Reichman University and author of the 2017 book Underground Warfare, Hamas militants operate under Al-Shifa Hospital gain “the highest level of protection available under the laws of war”, as well as a “unique opportunity to operate far from surveillance drones, GPS, and other intelligence-gathering technology”. She added that “in Gaza, tunnels are dug in civilian homes, pass under entire neighbourhoods, and lead into populated areas inside Israel… [which] enables Hamas to conceal entry and exit points, and facilitates undetected movement and activity.”[66]

                Avi Issacharoff has said that Hamas militants are “under the houses and neighborhoods of Gaza City, hoping that Israel won’t attack them because they’re hiding underneath human shields, and that if Israel will attack those neighborhoods, it’ll kill many civilians, and the whole world is going to accuse Israel for war crimes”. “The sad thing about all this”, Issacharoff said, “is [that] Hamas doesn’t care about their own people” and aims “not only to kill Israelis but for as many Palestinian civilians [casualties as well]”.[67]

                It’s almost like starting a war when most of your population is children, then hiding among civilians and under schools endangers them. But I guess that’s Israel’s fault. Why can’t they just send in soldiers without air support? They make easier targets that way.

    • kaffiene@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      “In international law, the right to resist is closely related to the principle of self-determination. It is widely recognized that a right to self-determination arises in situations of colonial domination, foreign occupation, and racist regimes that deny a segment of the population political participation.”

    • einkorn@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      Let’s remember that the purpose of this protest was to stop Israel from defending themselves against their explicitly genocidal attackers via political pressure.

      Israel is well past the stage where it defends itself against the attack. They could very well stop their operations right this moment and no further harm would come to them for the foreseeable future. What they are doing now is a deliberate attack to cleanse Gaza of everything and everyone they consider anti-Israeli.

      Stopping Israel before they depose Hamas keeps Hamas in power.

      How long ago has the West pulled out of Afghanistan? Apparently it’s long enough that people have forgotten what an utter failure the whole thing was and why. One doesn’t create a lasting peace by steamrolling a place and shoot a bunch of people. Instead Israel is breeding the next generation of Hamas terrorist right now.

      • DarkGamer@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        8 months ago

        Israel is well past the stage where it defends itself against the attack. They could very well stop their operations right this moment and no further harm would come to them for the foreseeable future. What they are doing now is a deliberate attack to cleanse Gaza of everything and everyone they consider anti-Israeli.

        On what basis do you make this claim? I read credible citations.

        Hamas has stated that they intend to do Oct 7 attacks over and over again. Stopping now while they are still in power and still have significant military assets just gives them a chance to rebuild, regroup, and carry out their stated genocidal intentions. Perhaps not tomorrow, but eventually.

        Israel has cleared most of the surface of Gaza, once they clear Rafah, the last place that has not been purged of Hamas, I suspect that will be the end of this campaign. Stopping them before they completely excise this tumor ensures metastasis.

        How long ago has the West pulled out of Afghanistan? Apparently it’s long enough that people have forgotten what an utter failure the whole thing was and why. One doesn’t create a lasting peace by steamrolling a place and shoot a bunch of people. Instead Israel is breeding the next generation of Hamas terrorist right now.

        Afghanistan isn’t really comparable nor are other western military adventurism defeats. Israel can’t leave and go somewhere else, this is a battle for safety in their home country. It is existential. As such, I highly doubt Israel will completely withdraw like they did in 2005, which arguably directly led to Oct 7. Gaza will probably be occupied until it stops choosing violence.

        I’m sure animosity will remain, but letting Hamas take over again and indoctrinate children to make another generation of intifada supporters will breed the next generation of Hamas fighters far more surely than Israel successfully defending itself will. For them, this is about safety, and safety is non-negotiable.