Israel/Palestine thread

So the IDF's war crimes are justified?

In Sinwar's world, that's called "getting off very easy"

In Sinwar's world they beat you to a pulp, then strangle you with a Kaffiyeh (actually!)

Sinwar once blew up a bomb inside Shifa just to see how it would work (actually!)

So if I have to be on team plunger, for now, I take that side hoping they can be better, eventually. Long term there is no choice but moderation in some spots. If they're going to fail as bad operationally as they did Oct 7th, while being like this....it means they can soften and be a bit smarter in my books.

They are not (depending on which you mean). But it's the toughest neighborhood on the planet, that much is clear. Of the bunch, they are still among the best. They can and need to be much better.

I am not an expert in Israel law.

There aren't war crimes proven by courts or sources that aren't anti-Israel .

If you want to talk about specific events that we both agree happened we can discuss. Generic claims of war crimes based on the opinion of Anti-Israeli institutions are irrelevant to me.

Might i suggest the death penalty next time ?

Anyway don't give up on the fact that some of the claims are completly unproven. While the use of nudity to humiliate is proven, the sexual violence as torture isn't at all. It's just what anti-Israel UN investigators heard from palestinians in refugee camps and report without corroboration.

Fact is just that even if it was true (and we have no reason to believe it is), it would still be not that terrible anyway, and not even close to mass rape of civilian women

Frankly I don't get the issues with the nudity in those spots we see photos of. The Americans and Brits would have saved themselves many dead and disfigured if they had done the same. The purpose is to make sure nobody has a weapon or detonator, in a spot nobody can go frisk 50+ guys up close. This is done to survive.

This stuff is born of necessity. Nothing else. Fight clean and give yourself up as a prisoner as per the convention, you won't be stripped looking for bombs.

Prisoners who truly safely give themselves up don't need this form of treatment. But that is not a jihadist.

so you are on team terrorism/rape. got it. at least youre honest

this is weird

the systematic raping carried out by hamas against israeli civilians was reported in all reputable media outlets months ago. why are the UN spending time and resources on things we already know

If a terrorist is gonna get punched in the balls once in a while to find out where a toddler is, yeah man I guess that's my team.

If you think ANY country in the middle east isn't using way worse than that....Or Russia for that matter. Or the USA when it was down there...

Have you ever considered what your personal ethics are?

Forum exercise:

You have credible intel from the Americans, the Brits, and your own intelligence agency that another Oct 7th is planned for somewhere. You lose track of 30 dudes, and at least 2 have cellphones pinging in your country.

You've got a guy very credibly connected to the attack in custody. What do you do? What's the limit?

Real tough spot. And once you escalate that up to an explosive or chemical device, equally tough spot. I don't know how you arrive at an absolute answer. But it's not as black/white as some in here are saying. And definitely not if you believe that walking into a Kibbutz and slaying everyone makes even a bit of sense.

PW, you believe, like the NYC Nova protestors believe, that the Nova victims had that coming due to the location of the festival. You've said as much many many times in here, so I don't have to feel like I'm taking a moderation risk.

I believe that once you catch the dudes who did THAT, you can rough them up to an extent (and we can discuss "extent"). Specially in the context of a group promising more such attacks.

We are not the same.

The absolute answer is very easy and it is that what works is ethical, what helps you is moral, definitionally. That's the first and only principle. Problem is repeated game, in other cases (something can help you at the present but cause damage in the future) which can make it complicated to determine what actually helps you in aggregate.

But given the example doesn't have a repeated game problem (if all terrorists are tortured, only they suffer) there is no ethical limit.

With foreigners i don't even see why there could be a problem, a nation exists exclusively to serve the interest of its citizens to begin with, ie what a nation does ethically is striclty always and only about the wellbeing of it's citizens (or should be) , the utility function of foreigners should never enter any ethical decision making.

Now if it's a citizen it's more complicated (which is why you should be VERY careful about naturalizing people).

Too many people have a disconnected, uncertain idea of what they consider ethics, but when you cut through the chase and define as ethical what benefits you (or your organization and so on), moral clarity is easy (Except in the rare circumstances where it's not so clear what actually benefits you).

Is that a yes or a no? It's odd that you need such a roundabout answer for what seems like a rather easy question.

I'm not asking you for a legal definition? I'm trying to figure out what "rape" means in your world. Because most people would say that sexually violating detainees qualifies.

could you go into this further please

No I dont believe that. And I considered this when I was at edc. If the russians attacked the local airforce base, I wouldnt expect that I would be spared because I was at a rave. Its my responsibility not to live around legal military targets, why would I be mad or surprised if I got killed partying near people that do wars?

I believe in following the laws we have made up. The same laws that protect you from people beating you up are the same laws that protect civilians from the torture.

Do you think people should be able to beat you up because they feel like it, regardless of the laws?

Maybe you didn't know this, but according to people whose mission in life is to stop torture, torture of suspects can be legal in Israel

https://www.omct.org/en/resources/blog/i...

Israel’s Supreme Court has recently clarified, this time explicitly, that interrogational torture is lawful in certain circumstances in Israel’s legal system. The clarification came in seemingly marginal, perhaps even obiter, dicta within two decisions by that Court whilst dismissing yet another complaint on the torture of a Palestinian by interrogators from the Israel Security Agency (ISA, also known as the Shabak, or Shin-Bet), the Israeli body in charge of security intelligence in Israel and the Occupied Territories.

///

So i guess, just learn the laws of a country before commenting on the legality of actions in that country?

are you aware of the concept of human rights? how about international law?

Trolly, do you want me to screenshot this and post it every time you do this going forward? Because I think you'll find that suddenly this thread will be me just posting that half the time you post. Are you at least aware that you do this among the most of any poster in here?

You are aware Israel isn't a signatory of the Rome Statute right, so the ICC has no jurisdiction in Israel?

Do you know anything about the topics you talk about?

I don't understand what's going on here

he claims that people who got raped, killed or kidnapped by hamas on 10 7 deserved it because they were near a military target. Not particularly useful to engage such a person on the topic methinks

PW, word for word, this post is for you.