Israel/Palestine thread
Think this merits its own thread...
Discuss my fellow 2+2ers..
AM YISRAEL CHAI.
[QUOTE=Crossnerd]Edit: RULES FOR THIS THREAD
Posting guidelines for Politics and Soci...
These are our baselines. We're not reinventing the wheel here. If you aren't sure if something is acceptable to post, its better to ask first. If you think someone is posting something that violates the above guidelines, please report it or PM me rather than responding in kind.
To reiterate some of the points:
1. No personal attacks. This is a broad instruction, but, in general, we want to focus on attacking an argument rather than the poster making it. It is fine to say a post is antisemitic; it is not okay to call someone an antisemite over and over. If you believe someone is making antisemitic posts, report them or PM me. The same goes for calling people "baby killers" and "genocide lovers". You are allowed to argue that an action supports genocide or that the consequences of certain policies results in the death of children, but we are no longer going to be speaking to one another's intentions. It is not productive to the conversation and doesn't further any debate.
2. Racist posts and other bigoted statements that target a particular group or individuals of such groups with derogatory comments are not allowed. This should not need further explanation.
3. Graphic Images need to be in spoilers with a trigger warning.
4. Wishing Harm on other posters will result in an immediate timeout.
5. Genocidal statements such as "Kill 'em all" etc, are no longer permissible in the thread.
If anyone has any questions about the above, please PM me. I don't want a discussion about the rules to derail the content of this thread. If anything needs clarifying, I will do that in this thread.
Please be aware this thread is strictly moderated[/quote]
Im military terms the music festival was a target of opportunity, which is a target that presents itself after an operation begins and was not a part of the initial attack plan. Premeditated refers to something that is thought about, planned, and developed prior to the operation beginning. Of course someone has to order the troops to attack a target of opportunity. But that doesnt mean it was premeditated.
If the mission is to attack and
The claim that they really didn't know there was going to be a music festival in the location is pretty hard to believe.
But, even assuming that was correct, it was more like they planned to go out to a general area to kill and kidnap civilians, and happened to find a music festival in that same general area, where the congregation of people made it even easier to kill people. Still seems premeditated to me.
Instead of your analogy, it would be more like they planned to kill whatever few enemies they expected to find on hill 101, but then when they got there, they noticed there were a whole lot of enemies there having a big party. So they took the easy opportunity to kill lots more people than they originally expected to be able to, but they really did nothing different than the original plan.
That's exactly what happened according to Victor's source. They were planning to "infiltrate Re’im and other kibbutzim", saw the music festival and realized they could kill more there so they moved the operation to that.
In a legal context, I believe the intent to commit an illegal act would be the premeditation and the important thing here.
lets all agree to call it a bonus miniholocaust
I'm trying to wrap my head around the military terms and if it applies here.
Hypothetical:
Special forces decide to take out a key objective with the intent to disrupt enemy forces at a certain area. They plan, gather intelligence, and train for a year. Just before they set out they send a drone to survey the area again and see something else which will enable them to disrupt enemy forces at that certain area (their original intent) even more. They evaluate this new information. They decide their planning, intelligence gathering, and training for the past year can easily be transferred to this new objective. The decision is made to attack this new target... once again with the same intent, using the same troops that have planned, gathered intel on the area, and trained for a year.
This is not a premeditated operation?
If a kidnapper planned, gathered intel, and surveyed an area for a year in order to kidnap a specific person, arrived and kidnapped a different target, that's absolutely premeditated.
I'll try and explain the distinction another way. But just to clarify, Im not in anyway engaging in whether that distinction means anything irt what a terrible act it was.
When following the usual planning processes in the military, all the intel is gathered, the mission is defined, individual objectives are identified and the attack plan is prepared. Units are allocated against those objectives, fire support, etc is planned to support operations on the ground. Usually the attack planned is rehearsed with model mock ups, sand tables, or map boards. That's deliberate planning. The attack of those objectives is premeditated.
Once the attack has commenced, and the forces are enroute to their objectives, a target of opportunity is identified. By definition a ToO is an objective or target that was unknown during the planning phase of the operation. Therefore there is no plan to attack that target, no forces allocated against that target, etc. But to take advantage of this ToO, the commander will issue a Fragmentary Order (FRAGO) directing some forces away from their planned target to engage the ToO. It is essentially an "on the fly" mission that was not part of the plan. It was not premeditated.
So that, from a military perspective is the difference. But as I said, that distinction doesnt necessarily mean anything irt the effect. I was simply commenting on the terminology used.
OK, thanks.
If I'm reading that correctly then I was wrong to say that the attack on the October 7th terrorist attack on the Nova Music festival was premeditated, as far as military terminology is concerned.
I'm trying to wrap my head around the military terms and if it applies here.
Hypothetical:
Special forces decide to take out a key objective with the intent to disrupt enemy forces at a certain area. They plan, gather intelligence, and train for a year. Just before they set out they send a drone to survey the area again and see something else which will enable them to disrupt enemy forces at that certain area (their original intent) even more
Yes, it is. Intel is always refined and evaluated right up to attack time. In this example, the new info was made available prior to the attack beginning, was evaluated, and the plan changed prior to H-Hour. That's premeditated
If a kidnapper planned, gathered intel, and surveyed an area for a year in order to kidnap a specific person, arrived and kidnapped a different target, that's absolutely premeditated.
No, it's not, unkess the mission was to go to location X and kidnap whoever you find there. But if the mission was to kidnap Joe, and you deploy forces to kidnap Joe, and when they get there only Tom is there, a person they had absolutely no plan or intention to kidnap, the Toms kidnapping is clearlynot premeditated. They had no idea Tom would be there, so Tom's kidnapping could not ne premeditated.
This would almost certainly be tried as premeditated kidnapping, whether or not the victim was the original target. The intent, readiness, and preparation would be the key factors. They then deliberated changing those plans to the new victim.
So in the Oct 7 example, if the plan was to go to Re’im and kill as many people as possible, and they saw the music festival (in Re’im) and attacked it, then the operation is still premeditated?
They diverted from their original plan on the fly. Part of a premeditated operation but the music festival was an easy soft target that presented itself but not planned for.
Probably since they had close to zero resistance crossing the border and had more resources than they thought they would at that point they were able to complete the main objective and also the music festival.
GG Israeli intelligence
This would almost certainly be tried as premeditated kidnapping, whether or not the victim was the original target. The intent, readiness, and preparation would be the key factors.
So in the Oct 7 example, if the plan was to go to Re’im and kill as many people as possible, and they saw the music festival (in Re’im) and attacked it, then the operation is still premeditated?
Yes. The mission is key. If it is to go to a location (say village X) and kill whoever you find there, then that is premeditated. The fact that they were gathered in one place in village X versus going house to house isnt significant. But if the plan was to go to village X, but you discover there is a gathering outside of village X with people coming from all over the area, then that becomes a target of opportunity.
But again, it can be a distinction without a difference since they ended up killing and capturing the people at te festival anyway, regardless if tat was a premeditated part of the plan
Right, I still have no idea how this makes the terrorist attack less bad. It seems like they intentionally went for the method that would kill the most civilians which would make it worse...
I also don't think I was "spreading misinformation" or "lying" as I was accused of for saying there's no way the terrorists didn't realize the music festival was full of civilians and not soldiers:
If i wanted to kill a bunch of military soldiers i would definitely go to a music festival on shabbat and assume they were soldiers ...
Seems kind of awful of Victor to assume that anyone could be stupid enough to do that tbh.
according to Shin Bet the Israeli intelligence agency, Hamas did not know there was a festival and did not have a plan to attack it in advance.
now I am not going to accuse you guys of being liars or spreading misinformation. but these are basic facts.
It seems like the differentation between "premeditated" or not is mostly focused on mental state for courts. Was the person in a frame of mind where they understood the consequences of their actions before they took those actions. (Directly relevant here imo.)
Military seems to be doing a lot more. While I'm sure there are some situations where mental state could come into play, it seems like the differentiation is probably for various analyses on how effective two different types of operations were. (I'm not too sure how relevant that is here.) It's an interesting distinction, thanks for bringing it up. Would like to know why you think the military differentiates it in this way.
So the conclusion is that the terrorists planned to kill a bunch of israeliis and then found the music festival and were like cool lets I'll them there and victor is like it wasn't premeditated so it ain't that bad
What in the actual ****
OK, thanks.
If I'm reading that correctly then I was wrong to say that the attack on the October 7th terrorist attack on the Nova Music festival was premeditated, as far as military terminology is concerned.
Only if you assume they did a lot of planning to attack a particular area but somehow didn't find out there would be a music festival there.
Doing it on the fly seems worse to me but splitting hairs. Original plan was 9.1 bad and the pivoting to go after a softer target to possibly yield a higher kill count takes it to 9.2 as original intent was off the charts bad to begin with.
IDF dressed up as medics to kill terrorists dressed up as medics in a hospital is pretty peak… not even sure what.
And Victor will still claim Hamas (and other terrorists) don’t hide in hospitals.
But perhaps it’s worth pointing out collateral damage = 0 in this op.
IDF dressed up as medics to kill terrorists dressed up as medics in a hospital is pretty peak… not even sure what.
And Victor will still claim Hamas (and other terrorists) don’t hide in hospitals.
But perhaps it’s worth pointing out collateral damage = 0 in this op.
Was there a link to this? I highly doubt IDF would get that close to the enemy like this. They would just bomb the hospital instead.
IDF dressed up as medics to kill terrorists dressed up as medics in a hospital is pretty peak… not even sure what.
And Victor will still claim Hamas (and other terrorists) don’t hide in hospitals.
But perhaps it’s worth pointing out collateral damage = 0 in this op.
its peak "every accusation is a confession". the only terrorists dressing up like drs are, unsurprisingly, the Israelis.
also lol, it was in the West Bank
its peak "every accusation is a confession". the only terrorists dressing up like drs are, unsurprisingly, the Israelis.
also lol, it was in the West Bank
are they terrorists if they dress up as doctors to kill terrorists? is your claim they shouldn't kill terrorists planning attacks and doing so is a terrorist act, or that the killed people weren't terrorists planning attacks?
according to the palestinian dictionary, or to your own made up meaning of words, or which other source?
if Palestinians dressed up as doctors and nurses and snuck into a hospital to assassinate someone, what would you call them?
oh wait, consistency is not exactly a quality that liberals like yourself possess.
if Palestinians dressed up as doctors and nurses and snuck into a hospital to assassinate someone, what would you call them?
oh wait, consistency is not exactly a quality that liberals like yourself possess.
If palestinians were a democracy under assault from a terrorist-led dictatorship and identified specific terrorist individuals to target murder them, and did so in hospitals, i would only object if there were reasons to believe the targets were wrongly selected.
So i ask again, do you have reasons to believe the people killed by the israeli in that hospital weren't terrorists? or you object regardless of who the people killed were?
The extra judicial killing of terrorists isn't an act of terror. It is something you might dislike for other reasons, disagree with, but it has nothing to do with acts of terror.
