Show Navigation
Conversation
Notices
-
Israel has the right to defend itself, but not to bomb cilvilians. Please sign this Petition:
At least 55 children killed. Mothers dead. Hundreds injured. We are on the brink of a full-scale war. Sanctions on South Africa helped free its Black people - it’s time for sanctions on Israel to free Palestinians. Join the call. #GazaUnderAttack secure.avaaz.org/campaign/en/p…
secure.avaaz.org/campaign/en/p…
- LinuxWalt (@lnxw48a1) {3EB165E0-5BB1-45D2-9E7D-93B31821F864} repeated this.
-
@vegos_f05 You do know that they are being used as human shields, right? Hamas launches missiles from housing areas, hospitals, schools to intentionally put vulnerable people in danger for propaganda purposes.
Your petition should condemn this tactic and hold Hamas responsible for the civilians whose deaths they caused.
-
From the petition text:
"Possibly the only way to stop this horrific cycle of Israel’s violent displacement of Palestinians from their homes, daily punishment of innocent families, Hamas firing rockets, and Israel bombing Gaza is to make the economic cost of this conflict too high to bear."
Does this say, it is OK when Hamas fires rockets to Israel? - This shit there will not stop as long as we apologize for Israel and condemn Palestinians as they were all terrorists. Israel on the other hand uses every chance it gets and Hamas delivers them, to respond with full force. This escalates which is politically quite good for Netanjahu ATM, who may even face prison for corruption.
You could find a lot of Jews and Rabbis from all over the world and from Israel, who look different at this conflict. Of course Hamas is not OK. Sadly, Netanjahu is driving too much Palestinians to support them. A good magazine from Israel to read is 972mag.com/
-
So tell me again how boycotting one side of a conflict isn't absolving the other side of responsibility for the damage partly caused by their actions?
If we really want this conflict to end, we have to bring Israel, the Palestinian Authority, and Hamas to the negotiating table. (Hint: only one party has refused to negotiate.) And we have to start with a few ground rules:
(1) That all parties have a right to live in the land. Claims that group X illegally occupies group Y's land are harmful. (NOTE: Even Zimbabwe, Namibia, and South Africa agreed that the other group also belonged there.)
(2) That the results of negotiation should be peaceful coexistence between independent nations of Israel and Palestine (and optionally, a separate Gaza nation if Hamas and the PA cannot agree to a unified government).
(3) That holy sites of the three major Abrahamic faiths should be accessible to pilgrims of those faiths regardless which nation controls those spots.
(4) That none of the resulting nations shall practice or allow ethnic cleansing, religious cleansing, or apartheid.
If I see a petition that stops pretending one side is pure evil and the other is pure good, one which seeks negotiations according to the above principles, I'd sign it immediately. But this one is harmful to the welfare of both groups.
-
would you say it's ok for the police to invade densely populated slums shooting everyone who happens to be in the vicinity of a dangerous criminal who lives there? or would it be better if the police were more cautious to avoid killing the innocent in the pursuit of their goal of neutralizing the aggressor?
-
@lxo I would not say it is okay. But at the same time, if country X is receiving rocket fire launched from a schoolyard, I'm not going to be surprised when they blow up the school to try to stop it.
Try to imagine if one of your country's neighbors was shooting missiles into Rio de Janeiro. Wouldn't your nation's military do whatever was necessary to stop the attacks? Would they let the missiles continue if it turned out that a hospital was being used as a launch site?
Also remember that hiding behind civilian populations while launching attacks is frowned upon (but unfortunately, not completely forbidden).
> The term ‘human shields’ is used in international humanitarian law (‘IHL’) with respect to civilians or other protected persons, whose presence or movement is aimed or used to render military targets immune from military operations. The history of armed conflicts knows many examples of efforts to shield military targets with civilians, mostly women and children, with prisoners of war, or with members of peacekeeping forces, taking advantage of the proximity of their presence or moving to them with the purpose of harbouring, or directly using them in military...
https://opil.ouplaw.com/view/10.1093/law:epil/9780199231690/law-9780199231690-e2111
-
@lnxw48a1 @vegosf05
None of these people who come up with this petition came up with one when the Kurds were slaughtered by Turkish and Iraqi forces, when Palestinian civilians were slaughtered by the Syrian army, when the Tibetans were oppressed, the Uyghurs put into re-education camps, the Rohingya violently surpressed and expelled by Myanmar forces and Buddhist monchs, or when the people of Tigray were slaughtered by both the Ethiopian and Eritrean armies. Only when the percevied oppressor is Jewish do they come out with their petitions.
-
@lnxw48a1 @vegosf05
(It's not even clear who started this avaatz campaign as there is no person or group named as author. That's just shady.)
-
> whatever was necessary to stop the attacks
is firing missiles into civilian buildings supposed to be analogous with the above?
is it necessary? does it stop the attacks?
it's too simplistic to swallow the story of retaliation or defense. nina paley's "the land is mine" goes back centuries of "they did it first". it's not like israel has been treating palestinians decently and they have no reason to be unhappy; see e.g. https://alirezahayati.com/2021/05/18/israeli-apartheid/
what I expect of the strongest force in the area is self-moderation and setting a good example, even when defending from attacks. responding to rocks with nukes is not proportional; handmade explosives vs military missiles isn't either, just to a lesser degree
-
It occurred to me that not everyone can see the entire conversation, so I've repeated ("boosted") everything I can see.
-
@lxo I don't see anyone defending Israel's behavior toward the Palestinians. What I see is @simsa03 pointing out that it is not a one-sided issue, and yet, despite days of discussion, even fair-minded people such as yourself cannot bring themselves to admit that Palestinian leaders' policies are as much to blame for their people's situation as the Israelis' policies are.
The closest thing to a defense was me pointing out upthread that in an elected democracy, the leaders cannot ignore repeated attacks, or they will be replaced by leaders who will respond to them unless they were already completely helpless against the attackers. That would be true in Israel, in Brazil, and even in uber-peaceful nations like Canada and Sweden.
VegOS ✅ ♋ ? ?
LinuxWalt (@lnxw48a1) {3EB165E0-5BB1-45D2-9E7D-93B31821F864}
Alexandre Oliva
simsa03
All Arkwood Pond Social content and data are available under the