More On Both-Sidesism

On the theme of both-sidesism, let me draw an analogy. During the Great Awokening, there was a common call-and-response: the left would would say "Black Lives Matter," and the right would respond "All Lives Matter." The purpose of this response was obvious: to draw attention to the fact that there are many types of oppression in this world, and it is a mistake to only focus on one race. The response to the response was that "All Lives Matter" was actually racist (what isn't?) and was designed to minimize the oppression faced by black people, in particular. And don't even get started on "Blue Lives Matter." Even thinking about the lives of police officers is enough to get hate-grouped by the SPLC.

In the wake of October 7, we see a similar refrain: "we oppose Anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, and all forms of hate." It wasn't possible to focus on the most horrific act of Anti-Semitism since the Holocaust. Rather the message had to immediately be diluted to include all other types of hate. As we speak, the rate of Anti-Semitic attacks around the world is at record highs. But attention cannot be paid to Anti-Semitism, by itself.

Jew Lives Matter, All Lives Matter.

Comments

[Randal]

Oh my god what a bullshit balloon you are.

There was no point to "All Lives Matter" other than to neutralize the purpose of BLM. BLM was saying "Black lives are especially in danger" and ALM was saying "no they aren't."

The anti-Israeli war contingent are absolutely not simply saying that "we oppose Anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, and all forms of hate." They're explicitly critical of Israel's approach to the war.

Please hear it! It's not antisemitism, it's not moral relativism, it's a plea: Israel! Don't do war crimes and live up to your responsibilities towards the Palestinians!

It barely even relates to Hamas, other than to be critical of Israel for enabling Hamas for 20 years.

When will you, Josh, stop both-sidesing with "Jew Lives Matter" as a pathetic response to the legitimate criticisms of Israel and address Israel's role in all this?

[ReaderY]

Of course, the war crimes Israel is committing in Gaza pale in comparison to the war crimes the Americans committed in Germany in WWII. After all, the Americans brutally slaughtered over 1 million innocent Germans near the village of Auschwitz alone. The Americans sought to occupy Germany. And accordingly, as occupiers, the Americans were as fully responsible for the life of every civilian in German land as Israel is responsible for the lives of the civilians in Gaza. Every single death was solely on their hands. The Americans were entirely responsible. War crimes!

Then there’s the firebombing of Dresden and for that matter dozens of other German cities.

[Sarcastr0]

1. WW2 was the one purely Good War. That does not mean everything we did was morally justified because we were on the winning and good side.

2. The moral analogy between WW2 and this conflict is a bad one due to the asymmetry of the sides in this case.

[Armchair]

Well, you know, aside from that "We want to kill all the Jews" aspect that one of the sides seems to have.

Personally, that clarifies the moral ambiguity for me, and makes it pretty clear which side is the "right" one. In either conflict.

[Sarcastr0]

Yes, we all know your morality is knee-jerk and shallow.

See your analogy below where Israel plays the part of the righteous lynch mob.

[Armchair]

Ah yes, my "knee-jerk and shallow" morality for opposing the Holocaust.

I'm OK with that.

[Sarcastr0]

Are you saying I don't oppose the Holocaust?

[Armchair]

Sorry, are you saying you also have knee-jerk and shallow morality, just like me?

[Sarcastr0]

Are you drunk?

[Armchair]

Well, I said I opposed the Holocaust (ie, "kill all the Jews"), and you accused me of having "Knee jerk and shallow morality" because of this.

But then you appeared to object to not being included in opposing the Holocaust. Which would imply you have the same "shallow morality."

But perhaps you don't. Perhaps you think the Holocaust was righteous. It's really hard to tell, you never actually state what you think. You just issue random questions. That always seem to imply the Jews are bad.

[Alpheus W Drinkwater]

You didn't answer his question.

[Reallynotbob]

1. Jews were victimized in the Holocaust.

2. Israelis (i.e. Jews) may morally do whatever they want to other people for the rest of the century.

3. Israelis may morally do whatever they want to people who hate them and want to kill them.

These are not logically linked statements. And at least one of them is false. I think that's the only point being made here.

[Idihax]

I agree that number 1 in your list doesn't provide justification for 2 or 3. But Israelis may do whatever they want to people who are trying to kill them, even if the Holocaust had not happened.

[TheAmazingEmu]

May Israelis do whatever they want to people who live in proximity to those who are trying to kill them?

[Nige]

The levelling of Gaza and the killing of civilians is not going to reduce the numbers of people on the side that want to kill all the Jews, even if they accidentally take out most of Hamas while doing so. I fact, it's going to swell their ranks. Which is fine, I guess, if you get off on the idea of good-guy versus bad-guy Holy War escalating and spreading.

[Armchair]

Sounds like the same logic used to defend the Holocaust.

"If we let those Jews out of the death camp, then there are more Jews around to hate, and more people are going to hate them. If we just kill the all the Jews, then there will be less people who hate the Jews!"

[Nige]

Who, exactly, used that logic to defend the Holocaust? How does it relate to my comment?

[Sarcastr0]

Mute him.

He's just calling people vile names now.

This whole thing is just an excuse for him to let his asshole flag fly.

[Currentsitguy]

No, but it should serve to push them back from being directly on the border.

[Nige]

Oh, that’s why they’re killng all those civilians.

[Krayt]

Assymetry? So it's a game then. They die while righteousness feel goods course through your neurons.

[Sarcastr0]

Asymmetric warfare is not a game.

[ReaderY]

If over 1000 civilians intentionally masscred isn’t enough to justify vigorous self-defense, then really whatever would be? Let’s get serious and not just mumble nonsense rhetoric to follow the party line.

Reality is, proportionately it’s a far greater percentage of the country’s population than the Americans killed in 9/11. Any response LESS than what the Americans did after 9/11 – completely occupy the country the attackers came from for years and systematically root them out – would be grossly disproportionate, grossly disproportionately low. It you’re asking for a proportionate response, and you’re not asking this in a self-serving echo-chamber kind of way, then you’re really asking for Israel to do more.

[Sarcastr0]

I think the set of ‘vigorous self-defense’ is not a well defined one, and using emotionalism to paper over that imprecision will cover a multitude of sins.

Any response LESS than what the Americans did after 9/11…would be grossly disproportionate, grossly disproportionately low.”

Well good switch of analogy towards something that includes asymmetry, but I don’t think assuming 9-11 as a moral exemplar is going to find many takers outside the right-wing knee jerk nationalist crowd.
And the metric of proportion of the population has no actual moral moment – it’s inhuman to quantify mass deaths in the first place, and insane to pretend that’s one side of a sliding scale of justified ignoring of civilian casualties.

[ReaderY]

Israel is entitled to simply survive, not self-immolate for your concept of moral sainthood. Your rhetoric is based on castigating Israel for not taking a self-sacrificing turn-the-other-cheek moral high ground no other country in the world takes, at least none capable of defending itself. When confronted with this, you systematically find ways to argue the situation is different and other countries are not comparable.

Well then. You are arguing Israel is sui generis, there are no comparators. OK. But dare I point out in the very act of arguing this, you are arguing that Israel is UNIQUELY not morally entitled to defend itself, while every other country in the world is somehow in a morally different situation, for some reason or other that seems valid to you, and is?

[Sarcastr0]

Israel is entitled to simply survive, not self-immolate for your concept of moral sainthood.
There is plenty of room between simple survival and pacifism, you're smarter than that.

You are arguing Israel is sui generis, there are no comparators.
I am not. I'm saying WW2 is a bad comparator. You're a better reader than this.

[jb]

It's reasonable for Israel to make a vigorous response, including re-occupying Gaza to root out Hamas.

It's not reasonable to do so with disregard for civilian life. To continue the analogy with Afghanistan, there was about one civilian killed for each opposition fighter, and that includes civilians killed by the opposition. The US definitely tolerated civilian casualties in order to get at key military targets, but it seems like Israel is being a lot less careful about minimizing civilian deaths, which is what most of the pushback I've seen has focused on.

[Randal]

If over 1000 civilians intentionally masscred isn’t enough to justify vigorous self-defense, then really whatever would be?

It's not like this was some peaceful neighbor who suddenly and inexplicably attacked. This war didn't start on 10/7, it's been going on for like 100 years.

My complaint with Israel is that they didn't do something about Hamas earlier. Israel seems totally happy with the situation as long as it's only Palestinians who are suffering and dying (often at the hands of the IDF).

Has Israel turned over a new leaf? Are they prepared to take responsibility for what they've wrought and actually pursue a workable, stable situation for everyone? So far I'm not seeing it.

Please Israel, do everyone a favor and eliminate Hamas. But if that's all you do, expect to get some shade for the continued suffering of the Palestinians.

[TwelveInchPianist]

“This war didn’t start on 10/7, it’s been going on for like 100 years.”

What does the larger war have to do with the women and babies who were raped and beheaded on 10/7?

"My complaint with Israel is that they didn’t do something about Hamas earlier."

Victim blaming at it finest. What was she doing walking home alone at night anyway?

[Randal]

As I said before...

For example, instead of issuing a full-throated denunciation of the violent attacks by Hamas that have left over 1,300 Israelis dead, one dying woman holding her 6-year-old son who had just been killed in a bombing is said to have doubled down by telling her child she loved him.

... your rhetoric was already mockably tiresome three weeks ago.

As for victim-blaming, your analogy only makes sense if she also happens to be guarding a concentration camp and occasionally takes pot shots.

[Nige]

‘What does the larger war have to do with the women and babies who were raped and beheaded on 10/7?’

Like history ended when the Wall fell, it only began again suddenly on 10/7

‘Victim blaming at it finest’

They literally supported Hamas. It is also their job, since they’re being all gung-ho and hardline about it, to ensure the security and safety of their citizens. Or are they completely absolved of all responsibility if the atrocity is bad enough? They’re a nuclear power with a standing army and an infamously effective intelligence service, not a woman walking home alone at night.

[Scooter]

Your support of child rape is duly noted.

Guess they shouldn't have worn their skirts so short.

[Bob from Ohio]

"asymmetry of the sides"

Why does that matter? Hamas can't be Nazis because they are don't run an industrial power like Germany?

[Sarcastr0]

It matters regarding collateral damage and the justification for total war.

[Joe_dallas]

Reader -

Israel doesn’t occupy Gaza

Tell us when 1m Germans were killed in the village near auschwitz . Auschwitz is in Poland and US bombers couldn’t reach any parts of Poland & still return to base even when flying from Italy.

[ReaderY]

Hamas’ defenders say Israel is legally the occupier of Gaza notwithstanding the fact that it withdrew and Hamas took over, and as the occupier is responsible for everything Hamas does and everything that happens to Gaza’s population.

You could just as easily say America was legally the occupier of Germany even when it wasn’t actually physically there.

[Commenter_XY]

Legally, as I understand it, Gaza is a territory in dispute. Not occupied. I think that legal distinction (disputed, not occupied) is going to matter very much in the years after this war, ReaderY.

[JasonT20]

Legally, as I understand it, Gaza is a territory in dispute. Not occupied. I think that legal distinction (disputed, not occupied) is going to matter very much in the years after this war, ReaderY.

I don't know about that. Until Israel pulled out its forces in 2005, it was occupied. If it is a territory in dispute, then who is it in dispute with? Not Egypt, I don't think, as they don't seem to want it. If it is in dispute, it would only be in dispute between Israel and the people of Gaza themselves.

Israel clearly did not simply wash its hands of Gaza and leave it to its own devices, or else it would not have any right to blockade or interfere with trade with Gaza other than across its own borders or its territory in the Mediterranean Sea. The ports of Gaza would have to remain open to international trade. Blocking trade with a sovereign nation by force is an act of war,

Israel may not be physically occupying Gaza, but it is still keeping it from governing itself. This limbo status is either something that hasn't concerned the Israeli governments much for the last 18 years, or it has served the interests of those governments. Either way, that puts substantial responsibility on Israel for the welfare of the people of Gaza.

[Joe_dallas]

Reader y - you comments have zero relationship with actual facts.

Simply a delusional rant

Just like your comments that 1m innocent Germans were killed at the village near auschwitz

[Idihax]

Sorry, but when you start a war, you don't get to set the parameters. Israel has every right to annihilate the Palestinians, even if it means civilians.

[Nige]

I doubt most Israelis want to be genocides. But YOU want them to be. I wonder why.

[Randal]

Uh... Israel started the war. So I guess by your logic, the Palestinians have every right to annihilate Israel?

Anyhoo, you're genocidal advocate #4. All right-wingers. No one on the left is calling for genocide around here. So... I feel like Josh's hand-wringing is misplaced (if you didn't already know).

[grb]

ReaderY : “After all, the Americans brutally slaughtered over 1 million innocent Germans near the village of Auschwitz alone”

Can we focus on this a sec? Where the hell does it come from? In what dark corner of the internet can it be found? For that matter, what were one million innocent Germans doing around a Polish village anyway?

As for the remainder of ReaderY’s comment, two points: First, the U.S. occupation of post-war Germany can’t be described as ideal, but it wasn’t criminal either. And German self-rule was phased in fairly quickly – to a degree some found objectionable. I’m not sure how apt an anology that is to this situation.

And, yes, the U.S. committed war crimes in WWII. All sides did. Somewhere before sixty million dead, all standards and rules were washed away in a tsunami of blood. Pure madness reigned. The U.S. and Britian were capable of incinerating sixteen square-miles of a city center and killing 100,000 civillians without being sure any military objective was gained. However imprefectly followed, there were rules of war before & after WWII. That charnel house was an arberation.

[Bob from Ohio]

"rules of war before"

Poison gas was used in WWI. Germans sank passenger ship without warning.

[grb]

Bob from Ohio : “Poison gas was used in WWI. Germans sank passenger ship without warning”

You just prove my point. Poison gas was banned by international agreement in 1925 and that prohibition was strong enough to survive throughout the WWII bloodbath. As for submarine warfare, there have always been questionable targetings, whether the Lusitania of WWI or the Wilhelm Gustloff of WWII.

That’s a whole world apart from killing hundreds of thousands of civillians with indescriminate bombing.

[Abdul Abulbul Amir]

What war crimes is Israel committing. Assertions from Hamas are not verified.

[Noscitur a sociis]

Speaking of a bullshit balloon…

[Randal]

... you've suddenly become self-aware?

[Commenter_XY]

LOL, no, you inadvertently performed a remarkable self-diagnosis = bullshit balloon

Heal Thyself.

[Scooter]

John's Hopkins could heal that.

[Sarcastr0]

He's right about all sides matter being more a slogan for 'I hate and don't understand BLM' than actually analogous to today.

[Michael P]

He's only right insofar as "All Lives Matter" is not actually analogous today, and the truth is reflected in Josh R's comment below about "Palestinian Lives Matter".

The leftist push-back against "All Lives Matter" is because it accurately covers the scam at the heart of BLM.

[Sarcastr0]

You make my point really well.

[Michael P]

You having a point would be a refreshing change.

[Nige]

"All Live Mater" supported the cops, not the people whose lives were at risk. It was deliberately set up in opposition to black people not liking being killed by cops.

[Krayt]

BLM felt like an attack, so that was the response.

They quickly explained it wasn't, just calling for more attention to the problem, but by that point the ship had sailed.

[Sarcastr0]

BLM felt like an attack

That says a lot about you. Both that it felt like an attack, and that you think such a feeling justifies what you admit to be past and current mischaracterizations.

[grb]

Sarcastr0 : “That says a lot about you”

Yep. That’s what stands out in the Right’s response to race: Their seething unfocused all-encompassing emnity. I fiound “All Lives Matters” to be more pathetic than racist. A bunch of White people so tore-up with hatred and jealousy over a slogan that they tried to cancel it out! The mentality behind that is 100% embarassing.

But that’s their response to any issue of Black-White. There’s only one tone, one response, and always to the maxed-out extent. I don’t agree with every position of civil right’s leaders. Sometimes they have a point; sometimes they don’t. But I can disagree without being triggered into choking irrational rage.

An awful lot of right-wingers can’t, Krayt being a prime example.

[Brett Bellmore]

You know what? I'll gladly admit that "all lives matter" was an obvious bit of baiting. But, man, they struck that bait and swallowed it hook, line, and sinker.

The sensible reply would have been, "Exact. Including black lives!"

But they couldn't reply that way, because they didn't really want agreement that all lives mattered. Organizations like BLM live off the conflict, after all.

[grb]

Brett Bellmore : ” …. they didn’t really want agreement that all lives mattered ….”

Do you honestly believe something so braindead stupid? Here’s your problem, Brett – diagnosed free of charge: You are obssessed with the idea any Black-White issue is completely zero sum game. Therefore if Black people have their own slogan, they must be stealing from you! Something must be done about it!

And that pretty much your take on all Black issues. Their leaders are enemies. Their complaints are attempts to rob you. Their slogans are evil conspracies in disguise. At any moment you face looming oppression from the Black hoards!

Which is hilarious. In my sixty-plus plus years, I’ve never had a single moment’s “opression” because I’m a White male. Even granting you’re 10X the snowflake I am, I doubt whether you have either. Yet you twist yourself in anguished knots and believe imbecilic conspiracy theories over this phasmagorical danger.

[Brett Bellmore]

BLM was an attack, which is why it felt like an attack.

It was founded by Marxist agitators with terrorist connections, remember. The various riots were not shocking, they were kind of the point.

[Sarcastr0]

What was it an attack on?

Not capitalism, even if you redbait like mad.

[Brett Bellmore]

You're incapable of being parodied, Sarcastr0. They literally came out and SAID that they were Marxists attacking capitalism! But that's inconvenient to your "No enemy to the left" perspective, so you deny it.

[Sarcastr0]

Who is they, Brett, the High Illuminated of Black Lives? Your nutpicking has been pointed out as ridiculous multiple times, but you gotta gotta have BLM be dag nasty evil so you don't care.

I'm sorry I'm not following the causality between 'cops should stop shooting unarmed people' and bringing down capitalism.

“No enemy to the left”
I criticize the left plenty of times on here. ACAB, Antifa (though not your Dem conspiracy Antifa), whitewashing the USSR. Even on this very thread ("I’m not with SimonP or anything")).

But everyone is a cartoon in your smooth and righteous world.

[Brett Bellmore]

"They" are the actual historical founders of BLM. You keep trying to pretend that it's not a Marxist organization, even with the people who created it contradicting you.

[Sarcastr0]

Your nutpicking is wrong, but I speak to that below.

Here, I want to know: what is the Marxism in the limits of police violence?

You're like that sign holder saying 'RACE MIXING IS COMMUNISM.'

[grb]

Oh for God’s sake, Brett, quit being so clownish. BLM was a nationwide movement that had widespread local support. Do you honestly think it can be reduced to some ancillary belief of some barely known founder? When that belief has ZERO to do with the message seen across the country?

Maybe you do. You seem to be able to twist your mind into pretzel knots whenever convenient to believe some new impossible thing. But you’re just making a spectacle of yourself.

[bernard11]

Don't be an idiot, Brett.

Do you really think that all those who support BLM are Marxists, following the commands of some people who created a website, trying to overthrow capitalism?

Your conspiracy-mongering and wild generalizations are absurd.

[Brett Bellmore]

No, of course I don't think they're all Marxists. Just a key portion of the leadership. There aren't enough actual Marxists around to make a sizeable movement.

[Sarcastr0]

BLM is not an organization with leadership. As has been pointed out to you lots of times. But that's not good for your conspiracy, so now they're a top down institution.

[Nige]

Oooh, an anti-anti-semitic right-wing guy likes the idea of a tiny cabal pulling the strings of a huge movement.

[Brett Bellmore]

Will you never get tired of that "they're not an organization, they have no leadership" bullshit? I mean, Antifa at least is organized as cells to conceal their leadership, but BLM didn't even bother with that!

[Sarcastr0]

You haven’t supported your claim Antifa and BLM are nationwide coordinated institutions. Just got mad that lots of people have pointed out that isn’t true.

[Randal]

BLM never attacked capitalism. Your delusions are really getting the best of you, Brett. It's sad watching your downward spiral into dementia.

[Social Justice is neither]

You mean the group that wanted the destruction of the nuclear family was "thought if" as an attack? Shocking.

[Idihax]

Which is exactly why the Muslim fanatics, homosexuals and Marxists are all aligned. They all seek the destruction of the nuclear family and the West.

[Nige]

It's politic right now to cut out the anti-semitic foundations of your favourite 'war on civilisation' conspiracy theory. I wonder when it'll get put back in?

[Frank Drackman]

"Black lives are especially in danger"??
Mostly and especially from the acts of other Blacks (hey that rhymes!)
and I might be coming over to the Pro-Death side, as bad as they are now, imagine Amurica with 50 million more Blacks (OK, it'd be cool to have 100 NBA teams) Go ahead, keep killing your next generation, I won't be getting "Replaced" by a dead black fetus

Frank

[Michael P]

Yes, the antisemites are explicitly critical of Israel's attempts to defend itself from atrocities. They focus on Israel's real or imagined violations and seldom if ever mention that Israel's attackers do far worse, or propose any solution other than for Israel to sit quietly while its citizens are raped, dismembered and killed.

[VinniUSMC]

Israel is at fault for merely existing. Randal won't be happy so long as Jews exist. Fuck off Nazi scum.

[Frank Drackman]

It's a tell when they pull out the Bold font. I suspect "Randal" has callused knees (I know, from "Praying") and doesn't spend much time on personal hygiene.

[Frank Drackman]

So when you pray to Moe-hammad(see link to Image) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlie_Hebdo_issue_No._1178 how do you determine which direction is facing Mecca? Using a Mercator map, which while inaccurate, does represent most Moose-lums world view, the heading for a “Great Circle” route? or is there some website where you enter your address and it tells you? Or do you just realize it’s bullshit and face the way the other terrorists are facing?

Frank “Hopefully some Offense taken”

[Scooter]

Is English your first language?

LOL

[Rossami]

The comments here often set a high bar for "stupidest comment of the day" but I think you grabbed the prize in the very first comment of this thread.

Your denigration of the "All Lives Matter" based on your own preconceptions and prejudices is, well, I'd like to say it's astonishing but from your other comments, it's par for the course. It also represents a disturbing degree of revisionism.

Let's recap that history:
1. Some bad cops did some bad things.
2. A substantive police reform movement started.
3. Activists hijacked that reform movement and tried to remake it exclusively about race. The BLM slogan was part of that.)
4. The original police reformers resisted (ineffectually as it turned out) by trying to return attention to the root problem. The ALM slogan was part of that.
5. The diversion into racial issues distracted and diluted the original discussion such than no actual reform ever happened. Yes, I blame the race-baiters for that failure.

[Sarcastr0]

No one I saw who used ALM was using it to say anything more than 'I don't know much about BLM but I hate it and would like to do Slogan War against it.'

[Rossami]

I’m not responsible for your failures of awareness. Several of the commenters right here made clear and cogent arguments against the BLM slogan as a distraction from the nascent police reform movement. Those arguments were made at the time (and I personally remember you participating in those discussions) and are still being made today in some of these very threads. Your inability to credit their motivations to anything but racism is your problem, not theirs.

[Sarcastr0]

No one can hold a candle to the left when it comes to bad slogans, but BLM was not a bad one.

You need to add in 'only' in order to get mad. Which a lot of people did. But that was something they brought in, not BLM.

'There are still arguments on the Internet' is not really something even the best slogan ever would avoid.

[Nige]

Yeah, lots of people disliked it because it had 'Black' in it. Unacceptable.

[Randal]

Your revisionist history is unconvincing.

Even if there was some sort of police reform movement, they could've had a slogan like Pigs Eat Shit or whatever. No, they decided they needed to shut down BLM also. There's no need to do that if they had, as you suggest, the same goals.

So no. Even if they had some sort of additional police reform ideas going on the side, ALM was about undercutting BLM. Obviously.

[Nige]

'The ALM slogan was part of that.'

Never saw a single ALM person support even mild police reform. ALM support for the police was unequivocal. Black people were being uppity.

[Rossami]

re: "Never saw a single ALM person support even mild police reform."

Oh, bullshit. It happened right here in Volokh comment threads. And it happened a lot. If you didn't see it, that has to be due to your own willful blindness.

[Sarcastr0]

No, it really didn't happen in the VC comments. If you backed Trump, you were against BLM and against police reform.

And if you went on with 'All Lives Matter' you were MAGA. Not a lot of dissonance between those sets.

[Nige]

Nope. Lots of people here complain about the cops. EXCEPT in relation to BLM. BLM bad cops good.

[Bored Lawyer]

Why don't you delineate, with specificity, what "war crimes" Israel has committed in the last three weeks. Cite international law that you claim is violated, and specific acts that violate them.

Otherwise, your post is so much twaddle.

[ObviouslyNotSpam]

Why bother? But, here's how much I appreciate your considered position:

"During its assault, on Black Saturday, Hamas broke numerous laws of war, starting with its rocket fire into Israel, which made no attempt to discriminate between military and civilian targets, breaking article 13 of protocol II of the Geneva conventions. Its fighters murdered, tortured and raped, breaking common article 3 of the Geneva conventions and articles 27 and 32 of the fourth convention. They also engaged in pillage and terrorism (33, fourth convention) and the taking of hostages (34, fourth, and article 8 of the Rome statute). Hamas clearly intends to use these hostages as bargaining chips, exacerbating the crime.

Though this is harder to prove, these acts might have been motivated by genocidal intent, arguably also putting Hamas in breach of the genocide convention. Any of the people responsible who are captured should be tried for crimes against humanity.

In responding to this attack, Israel has also broken several laws of war. These crimes begin with the use of collective penalties against the people of Gaza (article 33 of the fourth convention and article 4 of protocol II). One aspect of this punishment appears to be the pattern of Israel’s bombing and shelling of Gaza. “The emphasis is on damage and not on accuracy,” a spokesperson for the Israel Defence Forces announced, which looks to me like stated intent to commit a war crime. The war crime in this case is the damage to property: article 50 of the first Geneva convention, article 51 of the second Geneva convention and article 147 of the fourth Geneva convention.

Many of the buildings hit, including numerous schools and health facilities, do not appear to qualify as military targets, despite Israeli claims that Hamas uses people as human shields. Such indiscriminate attacks contravene article 13, protocol II and article 53, fourth convention. The bombing of mosques breaks article 16 of protocol II.

Human Rights Watch claims that Israel has fired white phosphorus shells at Gaza and Lebanon in the course of its counterattack, although this has been denied. White phosphorus munitions can legally be used on battlefields to make smokescreens, mark targets or burn buildings, but it is considered an indiscriminate and terrible weapon, whose use in such cases might constitute a breach of the chemicals weapon convention.

The Israeli government has admitted cutting off essential supplies to Gaza. On 9 October, the defence minister, Yoav Gallant, stated: “I ordered a full siege on the Gaza Strip. No power, no food, no gas – everything is closed.” This too looks like collective punishment. The energy minister, Israel Katz, appeared to confirm this when he wrote: “No electrical switch will be turned on, no water hydrant will be opened and no fuel truck will enter until the Israeli abductees are returned home.” The siege also appears to breach articles 55, 56 and 59 of the fourth convention and article 14 of protocol II, which protects “objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population”.

While the Israeli government could argue that instructing the people of Gaza City to leave is an attempt to protect them from bombardment, this directive might constitute a breach of article 17 of protocol II, forbidding the forced movement of civilians, and of article 49 of the fourth convention on deportations and evacuations. Again, to judge by the statements of some officials, in the siege and attacks on Gaza there could be evidence of genocidal intent. The current fighting, of course, takes place in the context of Israel’s illegal occupation of Palestinian land, and the many subsidiary crimes associated with it."

So, there have been quite a few allegations of war crimes already. Most of them are very serious and they should all be investigated and, if appropriate, charges should be brought against those persons found liable to prosecution under the applicable law. How hard was that?

[mulched]

So you've got several well documented war crimes by the Palestinians and bombings that you allege are crimes by Israel.

Bring proof, not say-so. Was there no Hamas asset in those locations? Show your work, don't just hope you're right.

[Kazinski]

Good analogy as far as it goes but it kind of misses the point, that Black Lives Matter was always bullshit.

Leaving aside the fact that the founders were grifters, the movement was based on the 1% of Black men shot every year by the police, and ignores the 90% of Black men shot every year by other Black men.

And it even more tragically ignores the tragedy of inner city school systems run by grifting politicians and teachers unions that spends in many cases double what is spent on rural districts in the same state and yet has entire schools where not a single student can read or do math at grade level.

If Black Lives Matter the answer wouldn't be burning down the neighborhoods where the kids are at war with each other and nobody cares if the kids can read.

[Brett Bellmore]

Exactly. BLM clearly and unambiguously didn't care about black lives. They just found a tiny subset of them useful.

[Commenter_XY]

There was antipathy toward Israel (and America) from BLM from the very start. The overt support of Judeocide by a large number of BLM chapters is no surprise. It is not like BLM is hiding it.

The question to Fortune 500 CEOs is why did you give money and support to an organization that overtly supports Judeocide? I am pretty sure that question has already been asked a few times, prompting changes.

[Brett Bellmore]

Because the left has had control of large parts of academia for at least a generation now; We're looking at CEOs who've already been through the indoctrination mill, and have to work with middle management who are products of it, too. They're riding the tiger here, and when you're riding the tiger, you either go where the tiger wants to go, or get eaten.

[bernard11]

More conspiracy-mongering.

You think the business schools are full of Marxists, and that CEO's are secret revolutionaries?

Seek treatment.

[Frank Drackman]

Blacks buy lots of Beer/Malt Liquor/Cars/Cell Phones/TV's/Batteries for those ankle monitors/Guns, Bull-wets
I think Lenin (Vladimir, not John) said something about this

Frank

[Sarcastr0]

I can criticize Israel's prosecution of this war without siding with Hamas.

You can type Judeocide all you want (and you do type it a lot!) but no amount of emotion and drama will make 'you're with us or you're against us' more than a shallow and counterproductive position to take.

[Commenter_XY]

Make your critique = I can criticize Israel’s prosecution of this war

[Sarcastr0]

First, you're the one who says Gazans deserve what they get, because you don't think of them as humans with agency at all. Because schooling is destiny I guess.
So submitting my criticism to your judgement is not going to result in a meeting of the minds.
I'm not with SimonP or anything, but I'm also not with you.

As to how Israel should prosecute the war, I think bombing refugee camps to get at a Hamas leader but killing a bunch of refugees is a pretty bad move. I think cutting off resources to a region mostly full of civilians is a bad idea.
You want good ideas? Check out our COIN tactics in Iraq and Afghanistan. It's a dirty matter, and would involve occupation, but it gets the job done and at least attempts not to make more embittered hardliners.

I also don't need to be an expert to call out the Israeli government's tactics, doctrine, and rhetoric going well beyond Hamas while not even bothering to claim it's the only way, just appealing to emotion.

[Commenter_XY]

Sarcastr0, I am the one who says:

If palestinian civilians in Gaza value their lives, obey the directives of the IDF and you will live.That doesn’t sound very ‘you deserve what you get’ to me. The innocent should live.

Any palestinian who puts themselves in physical proximity of a Hamas member today is making a spectacularly bad lifestyle choice. And be real — Israel has told palestinians in Gaza to head south to Rafah for two weeks. Anyone now ambulatory in Gaza remaining in proximity of a Hamas member wants to be there. Very well. There probably isn’t a future for you in Israel anyway.

It is a matter of fact that palestinians did vote Hamas into power in Gaza, and Hamas enjoys significant support in palestinian society today, post-pogrom (Gaza, Judea, and Samaria). Why deny it?

I am correctly pointing out:

One: The biggest post war question, for Israel, is what to do with a people steeped and stewed (actively and passively) in Judeocide. (Note, I have a completely non-violent alternative. Precisely because I think palestinian lives actually matter)

Two: The policies of Oslo (and two states), Disengagement and Conflict Management (mowing the lawn) have utterly failed.

COIN tactics. ???? Um, ok. Afghanistan ended so well. I guess. /sarc

note: Humanitarian aid is getting in every day via Rafah.

[Sarcastr0]

The issue is people have heard 'If XX group value their lives, obey the directives of the soldiers and you will live' before. Many times. Sometimes with XX group being Jews!

It is a matter of fact that palestinians did vote Hamas into power in Gaza
And you use that to dehumanize them. It's fucking awful of you.

I'm not fan of Afghanistan, but COIN would be effective at the goal you claim to have of targeting Hamas.
But at this point I question your good faith regarding non-Hamas Palestinians.

[Commenter_XY]

Dehumanize...Oh please. I have literally encouraged palestinians to act to save their lives and obey the directives of the military of a country at war.

You sound like a climate denialist when you attempt to respond to my point one. It is actually pretty amusing.

[Sarcastr0]

Lately you have said that Palestinians are so marinated in hatred they are an organism optimized for Judencide with no hope for redemption.
Except for the very young.

You have been quite clear you don't much care how many of them die.
Saying encouraging them to Obey is evidence you care about their lives is laughable.

[Nige]

'I have literally encouraged palestinians'

Condescension to a people being blown to smithereens really is adding insult to injury.

'You sound like a climate denialist'

Do you accept that climate change is real?

[Don Nico]

"you use that to dehumanize them. It’s fucking awful of you."
You comment is obnoxious and typical of you. You have no ewal answer and so you make a highly insulting ad hominem statement.

Even worse than when you use you usual rhetorical of knees jerking, goal posts moving and conspirators whispering.

Try being honest and tell every one what the Wise One recommends for Israel that is not just putting up with Hamas terror.

And skip, the "I condemn Hamas, but..."

[Idihax]

I believe it's a "one side must destroy the other" or there will always be unrest. Israel has a moral right to destroy the Palestinians, even if it means mass genocide.

[Sarcastr0]

YOU are the one claiming ignoring civilians casualties is necessary. The burden should be on you to show that as a first step.

The rest of your post is just personal attacks on me. Which used to be below you, but not lately.

[Commenter_XY]

Don Nico, I am amused at the twisting and contorting our friend Sarcastr0 has to do. It would be hilarious, if it weren't so pathetically misinformed. It is not a good look.

I have not even started to ask Sarcastr0 (and his Fellow Travelers) how they can support a people that are homophobic and transphobic. And act on it. I mean, they do actually toss gays and trannies off rooftops in Gaza (and Judea and Samaria) and post it on social media. And hang them from cranes so that the birds of the air can consume their dead bodies. That is who Sarcastr0 supports....a people who wants to summarily kill gays and trannies (and do so with gleeful abandon).

Last I checked, there were Pride Parades in Tel Aviv, with government support. I think I found the term I was looking for: useful idiot.

[Sarcastr0]

Commenter, I can be against the wanton killing of Palestinians without thinking they're swell folks.

Just an awful strawman.

[Jason Cavanaugh]

Hey there, Mr. Poster Child for Hamas recruitment:

"Trannies" is a derogatory term. You should go back to your calls for genocide, rather than dishonestly pretend like you care about people whom you only reference with slurs.

[Nige]

'I have not even started to ask'

Asked and answered.

[Nige]

'And skip, the “I condemn Hamas, but…”'

Condemning Hamas means supporting the mass killing of civilians, apparently.

[Randal]

That doesn’t sound very ‘you deserve what you get’ to me.

You were saying Gazan civilians deserved to all be killed, like, three weeks ago. I'm glad you've changed your mind, but Sarcastr0's not wrong that you were saying it.

[Michael P]

First, you’re the one who says Gazans deserve what they get, because you don’t think of them as humans with agency at all.

You can't even keep your straw men straight. Arguing that X deserves Y presumes that X has agency and exercised it, and asserts that Y is a reasonable (or just) result of (or response to) that exercise of agency.

[Sarcastr0]

To fill in the blanks here in your anodynized model:

[Gazan civilians] deserve [to be collateral damage] because they have agency and exercised it [by voting bad, ignore the polling], and [being collateral damage] is a reasonable result of their actions.

Yeah, seems about right.

[Brett Bellmore]

Yes, it does seem about right.

Remember that poll the other day: Hamas support in Gaza being limited because so many Gazans actually prefer other genocidal organizations, some of which are worse?

[Sarcastr0]

Yes, it does seem about right.

No breaks on Brett's civilian death train.

I remember that poll, but rather differently than you.

[Randal]

Oh Brett, do I have to add you to my list of genocidal maniacs? Ok, #5.

[Nige]

Polls are apparently the key to knowing when it's okay to slaughter civilians.

[Michael P]

I didn't endorse the argument, I just pointed out that "Gaza citizens deserve to be collateral damage because they have no agency at all" is a nonsensically stupid straw man even for you.

[SimonP]

I'm not quite sure how I got identified with Antifa, in your mind, but you can go choke on a dick, I suppose.

[Bob from Ohio]

"refugee camps to get at a Hamas leader but killing a bunch of refugees "

Its not 1948, its just an urban area. Almost everyone there was born in Gaza so cannot be a "refugee".

It gets called a "refugee camp" purely for propaganda.

There was a tunnel complex with munitions that collapsed causing buildings to fall and secondary explosions. It was a military target.

[SimonP]

Bob, we're all quite capable of seeing what the right-wing propaganda sphere is putting out on this, we don't need you to repeat what they're saying verbatim, like you've put any independent thought into it yourself.

[Sarcastr0]

Denying the refugee camp exists via a definition no one else uses is a bizarre choice I don't even see Israel trying.

[Brett Bellmore]

What do you mean "a definition no one else uses"?

The UN: "Temporary facilities built to provide immediate protection and assistance to people forced to flee. "

Wikipedia: "A refugee camp is a temporary settlement built to receive refugees and people in refugee-like situations."

Cambridge: "a place where people who have escaped their own country can live, usually in bad conditions and only expecting to stay for a limited time"

Gaza hasn't had any actual refugee camps for decades. They just call the urban areas that for PR purposes.

[Sarcastr0]

You don't think anyone in Gaza is displaced from their homes nowadays?!

Good lord. It was a refugee camp. This has been long accepted if you look it up.

[Bob from Ohio]

"You don’t think anyone in Gaza is displaced from their homes nowadays?!"

But they aren't fleeing to that area. It is a "refugee" "camp" for supposed refugees from Israel, most of the residents have never been in Israel!

[SimonP]

The point of the nomenclature game is to say, "These were legitimate civilian targets."

It was the same game they were playing with the hospital bombing, before it became clear that PIJ was responsible. "See, the hospital's still standing!" The victims were next to the hospital, you see.

[mulched]

Since PIJ did the hospital explosion, parking lot vs building isn't relevant to Israel at all.

[Frank Drackman]

My only critique is Israel's Procrastination at the Prosecution of this Wah, should have been done in 1972 or at least 1987.

Frank

[David Nieporent]

Exactly. BLM clearly and unambiguously didn’t care about black lives. They just found a tiny subset of them useful.

Sort of like how pro-lifers aren't actually pro-life at all, don't care whether people — including babies — die, as long as there's no abortion involved? They just find a tiny sliver of deaths useful?

[Michael P]

A lot of prominent pro-lifers also oppose things like the death penalty, on the same principles that lead them to oppose abortion. (See, for example, Pope John Paul II's "The Gospel of Life".) An analogous focus by BLM leaders or organizations on simple inner-city and gang violence is notably absent.

[Brett Bellmore]

And a lot of pro-lifers don't, because they understand themselves to be defending innocent lives.

[Nige]

Maybe if there was a poll taken and they supported something you don't like, then you'd drop a bomb on them.

[Sarcastr0]

Both of you are kinda missing the point about movement names and movement doctrine/goals here.

[Michael P]

We entirely understand that the point of BLM was a Marxist effort to stir up a racist, anti-bourgeoisie revolution, that the movement's name revealed that purpose, and they were too blinded by their revolutionary fervor to anticipate being countered by "All Lives Matter".

[Sarcastr0]

Black Lives Matter reveals it was Marxist? And it was foiled by the marshalling of “All Lives Matter?”

You're fucking cuckoo for racist puffs.

[Religion and Politics, my life]

Makes no sense to inform a dead person's argument with an analogy they could never have made anyway !!
A lot of pro-lifers are atheist or non-religious and make the case on Reason, which ;you leave out in almost all your posts.

SECULAR PRO-lIFE

PRO-LIFE ALLIANCE OF GAYS AND LESBIANS +
HUMAN RIGHTS START WHEN HUMAN LIFE BEGINS

THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF
PRO-LIFE OBSTETRICIANS AND GYNECOLOGISTS
BOARD CERTIFIED. PROFESSIONAL.
MEDICAL EXPERTS IN THE PRO-LIFE MOVEMENT SINCE 1973

Democrats for Life

PRogressive Anti-abortion Uprising

Feminsts for Life
LEARN HOW TO WRITE.....an analogous focus ??? BY WHO ???

[grb]

Michael P : “A lot of prominent pro-lifers also oppose things like the death penalty”

But most don’t. Just like a handful of “pro-lifers” are against IVF clinics, but most aren’t. That fact alone negates Brett’s feeble attempt at spin, but you also have the overwhelming support for rape-incest exceptions, which cuts deep into the anti-choice side.

The answer to these contradictions is simplicity itself. The root of the movement is based on one thing alone: That women shouldn’t be able to easily escape the consequences of their harlotry. Wanna know why the faux-pious weep anguished tears over abortion and shrug at the millions of eggs destroyed at IVF clinics? Because one involves some slut trying to “get away with it” and the other concerns maidens trying to fufill their womanly duty.

It’s like one of those binary compounds. The pretend-concern over “unborn life” needs to be mixed with a wanton slattern’s villiany. Only with both compounds does hypocritical righteousness bloom.

[SimonP]

Haha, yeah - Catholics are ideologically self-consistent on the pro-life question. But not Supreme Court justices, Texas legislators, Republican governors, etc., etc., etc.

[Sarcastr0]

BLM clearly and unambiguously didn’t care about black lives. They just found a tiny subset of them useful.

Clearly! For fuck's sake talk to one black person in your life.

Black people have agency. They both supported and spearhead the movement. It didn't get accomplished what they wanted to get accomplished, but it did move the needle on public opinion.

Yes, BLM didn't deal with all issues of black mortality. They didn't really talk about sickle cell for instance. That's a spurious reason to attack them and you would know it if BLM make you super angry for...some reason.

[Frank Drackman]

What's the problem with the Sickle Cell? it's an "Evil-utionary Advantage" if you believe in Evil-ution, like I'm sure all you woke fucks do.

Frank

[Brett Bellmore]

Very little makes me super-angry, Sarcastr0. If anything my temper is over-controlled. I dislike BLM because they are, though it may sound dramatic, an evil organization. They're exploiting problems, not trying to solve them, because they need those problems to be bad, they would have no power without those problems, and power is their goal.

So, cynically, they concentrate on 'solutions' that actually make things worse, like de-policing. Like many left-radical groups, they live by Lenin's principle that "worse is better", they set out to make problems worse, not solve them, because a peaceful society isn't ripe for revolution.

[Sarcastr0]

Brett you're tops in the drama department around here, even if you don't think so.

Your habit of writing political thriller fiction includes plenty of pulpy drama, where your ideals are ratified again and again by shit that didn't happen and secret agendas that aren't real.

BLM is nothing like what you made up here. But your detailed telepathy really says a lot about how the actual BLM of reality makes you feel.

[Brett Bellmore]

BLM is exactly like what I'm describing here. They were founded by revolutionary Marxists! Their founders came right out and BRAGGED about being revolutionary Marxists! How can you persist in ignoring that? Their actions are perfectly explicable given that.

Sure, left-wing revolutionaries with deep connections to terrorist organizations like the Weathermen are going to be benignly trying to solve problems. Happens all the time, the riots and looting are just some weird aberration. [/sarc]

[Sarcastr0]

They were founded by revolutionary Marxists!
You have a quote by one person who co-founded one non-profit among many.

You've from that woven a whole imaginary BLM that has nothing to do with the hashtag-to-movement that BLM is in reality.

deep connections to terrorist organizations
No drama.

[Nige]

There are more Nazis and white nationalists hanging around the Republican Party than there were Marxists in BLM.

[David Nieporent]

BLM is exactly like what I’m describing here. They were founded by revolutionary Marxists!

Sigh. As I keep explaining to you, these boogeymen you fear are not even things. BLM is a movement. Was one organization that supported the movement founded by Marxists? Sure. So what? The civil rights movement had communist roots too. It's fine to dislike communists, but that doesn't describe the entire movement.

[Jason Cavanaugh]

Tell me you're a racist looking to define things you don't understand solely through your racism without actually saying as much...

[Kazinski]

Sarcastro always thinks everyone who disagrees with him is super angry, maybe he is projecting.

Maybe he's worked up thinking about fucking chickens.

[damikesc]

BLM was a grift for money. Nothing more. They gave two shits about black folks. Which is why the leaders bought houses...in decidedly non-black locales.

[Nige]

No, YOU don't care about black lives therefore don't believe anyone else can.

[mydisplayname]

The cited analogy highlights the non-Godlike-dichotomy humans exhibit: like a chef, we select an atrocity du jour, foolishly focusing our attention on a single course of the meal, one facet of existence.

In his book _The Story of My Experiments with Truth_, Mohandas Gandhi writes of a (non-Biblical) cliché that "Hate the sin and not the sinner is a precept which, though easy enough to understand, is rarely practiced, and that is why the poison of hatred spreads in the world."

How does one condemn the murders committed by a band of Hamas militants without in the slightest bit impugning all Gazans or all Arabs as complicit? Likewise, how does one condemn the multitude of illegalities and atrocities committed by those euphemistically "building a greater Israel" without impugning all Israelis or all Jews as complicit?

Perhaps the task involves revealing all the wrongdoing, supporting those directly affected by the murders, illegalities, and atrocities, and actively seeking a detente within the ancient dispute.
Christians have been instructed both to expose the evil deeds of darkness rather than participating in them (Ephesians 5:11) and to love our enemies, to bless those who curse us, to do good to those who hate us, and to pray for those who despitefully use and persecute us (Matthew 5:44). The Christian teachings stem in part from the venerable Hebrew (e.g., Proverbs 25:21 "If your enemies are hungry, give them bread to eat; and if they are thirsty, give them water to drink."), so perhaps the task involves a revival, rather than a perversion, of the Abrahamic precepts known to Jews, Muslims, and Christians alike.

[mydisplayname]

M. L. King was most eloquent when he penned a sermon (see https://kinginstitute.stanford.edu/king-papers/documents/mans-sin-and-gods-grace) including "There is within all men this bundle of stuff that keeps us in a dichotomy, a dualism, so that we have enough in us to be both good and evil. There is enough in us to make both a gentleman and a rogue. This is a dimension of life. H. G. Wells said one day, 'I’m not so much of a human being as a civil war, and every man confronts this civil war within himself.' There is the complying North of his soul always in conflict with the recalcitrant South. And there is that continual battle, that civil war, the South of the soul breaking out against the North of the soul. This is man’s plight. Man discovers that he has this division, this very tension at the center of his nature. Just look hard enough, and you’ll discover that something. ... It’s very seldom that a man by himself will lynch anybody, but a mob will lynch somebody. Individual men won’t do the things that a nation will do. ... And I can never be what I ought to be until you are what you ought to be, and you can never be what you ought to be until I am what I ought to be."
[see also Reinhold Niebuhr's _Moral Man and Immoral Society_]

[Brett Bellmore]

Hate the sin and not the sinner is a precept that better applies to inward looking sins, rather than sins against others. Coveting your neighbor’s wife, as opposed to kidnapping and raping her.

Or perhaps I should say that it's vastly easier to do for inward looking sins.

[VinniUSMC]

the murders committed by a band of Hamas militants

vs

the multitude of illegalities and atrocities

That's why posts like this by Josh exist. Hamas murders, Jews commit atrocities. Yup, no equivocation here.

[Bob from Ohio]

Just some murders versus a "multitude" of crimes.

Both-side-ism is just pro Hamas.

[Social Justice is neither]

And if you bother to look beyond the Hamas propaganda you find the atrocity consists of Hamas hiding military targets among civilians Israel warning a site they're going to be bombed and demanding the civilians evacuate, civilians refuse, military target is bombed and useful idiots whining about war crimes.

[Nige]

Wonder how you 'warn' a building in a war zone with no electricity or communications. Wonder how much time you're giving them? After all you're also warning the single second-tier Hamas guy living there at the same time.

[Sarcastr0]

Hey don't you lot talk about not letting women who got raped get abortions because that punishes an innocent who didn't do anything?

Suddenly Hamas taking human shields mean those human shields' lives are forfeit.

Contingent morality isn't very moral at all, dude.

[Josh R]

Jew Lives Matter. All Lives Matter.

That's a straw man. The response has been Palestinian Lives Matter.

[Kazinski]

Its more like the response is that none of the lives matter, but its all the Jews fault, at least from some quarters.

You can't celebrate Hamas suicide missions and praise the martyrs if you think Palestinian lives matter.

[Sarcastr0]

Is Josh celebrating Hamas suicide missions?

[Kazinski]

See my comment below quoting a Hamas spokesman to see who is celebrating Hamas suicide missions.

[Frank Drackman]

They certainly don't to Ham-Ass

[Armchair]

If you really believe that, then you know Hamas needs to go.

[Josh R]

I agree and I also agree with Kazinski and Drackman that to some, Jewish lives don't matter. But, that's besides the point that Blackman's argument is without merit as applied to most people who have complained about Palestinian lives.

[Nige]

Nobody who supports the current bombing campaign cares about Jewish lives. They're just bloody flags they can wave for a while.

[Armchair]

I like to use an analogy.

Think of a particularly hateful KKK member. He's got a wife and kids, who he beats regularly. He griped about the uppity black people who came into town years ago and stole his job. One day, he goes and decides to rape a few black girls, and maim one of them, then runs back to his house.

Well, the black families and cops come for him, but his wife won't let them in the house, and she tells the kids to make a line to protecting him. And as the cops are about to physically move the wife, we get the response from the liberal left dude...

"What about the kids? Yeah, what this guy did was wrong, but if you take away the father, the kids won't have a father, and they won't have the income he provides! They're going to have worse outcomes. Plus you may need to use violence to move the kids and wife away from the dad, and that's wrong. Maybe...just not take the father away. Call it a cease fire."

[Frank Drackman]

Nice story but Robert KKK Bird's been dead for 13 years now.

[Sarcastr0]

Well, the black families and cops come for him

You seem to be describing a legally sanctioned fucking lynching in your attempted analogy here.

[Armchair]

Trust Sarcastro to defend the racist rapist in this scenario.

[Sarcastr0]

'if you don't like the lynching, then you must love the bad guy!'

Grade school level argument.

[Armchair]

At least grade schoolers have a sense of morality that you seem to lack.

[Sarcastr0]

Says the guy trying to defend Israel via a righteous lynch mob analogy.

[Nige]

‘Lynch mobs are ok actually’ is not moral. You could just have the guy arrested by the cops. It happens all the time to really bad people. Then quote the real liberal guys who say the stuff you made up. But it DOESN'T WORK BECAUSE IT HAS TO BE A LYNCH MOB. You just compared the bombing campaign to a lynch mob. On second thoughts it's a good analogy so far as that goes.

[Armchair]

Didn't read the OP, did you?

[Nige]

Didn't think your analogy through, did you? Or maybe you did.

[Michael P]

Where is the lynching in this hypothetical? Strictly in your imagination?

[Sarcastr0]

"the black families and cops come for him" sure doesn't sound like there's gonna be a trial!

Armchair doesn't even bother to defend it.

You continue to be unable to read when it's your own side shitting the bed.

[Armchair]

If I defended every strawman you made, I'd be here forever.

Keep defending Hamas though.

[Sarcastr0]

I quoted your words, Armchair. If I misinterpreted then explain how.

'Keep defending Hamas.'
Grade school nonsense.

[Armchair]

You did. Not sure how you automatically assumed "lynching" when cops come for someone.

Wait I do. You're Strawman0.

[Sarcastr0]

Armchair, you said ‘the black families and cops.’

Everyone can read it, so why are you lying about it?

[Armchair]

There's a reason he's called Strawman0.

But being called out for "shallow and knee-jerk morality" for opposing the Holocaust took the cake.

There's a reason we all believe Sarcastr0 is really a Jew hater.

[Sarcastr0]

There’s a reason we all believe Sarcastr0 is really a Jew hater.

You don't speak for 'we all.' You speak for yourself. And this shit says more about you than it does about me.

[Commenter_XY]

I am unsparing in my assessment of Sarcastr0 at times. I will be the first to say that. I cross swords frequently.

Sarcastr0 is many things, but he is not a Jew hater.

[Sarcastr0]

TY

[Armchair]

If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck Commenter.

I tried nailing down Sarcastr0 the other day on whether he supported banning material support for terrorist organizations. I asked him three times. Each time, he dodged the question. And now he's objecting to the image of Hamas being lynched (his own strawman). And objecting to other methods to kill Hamas.

You gotta wonder, given all that...

[Sarcastr0]

No, you don't gotta wonder.

Making accusations like that doesn't help anyone.

Asshole.

[Idihax]

The left does use that exact argument to oppose imprisoning black men.

[Kazinski]

Transcription of a interview in Arabic for a Lebanese audience:

HAMAD: Israel is a country that has no place on our land. We must remove that country because it constitutes a security, military, and political catastrophe to the Arab and Islamic nation, and it it must be finished. We are not ashamed to say this, with full force. … [cut]

… We must teach Israel a lesson, and we will do this again and again. The Al-Aqsa Flood is just the first time, and there will be a second, a third, a fourth, because we have the determination, the resolve, and the capabilities to fight. Will we have to pay a price? Yes, and we are ready to pay it. We are called a nation of martyrs, and we are proud to sacrifice martyrs.

HAMAD: We did not want to harm civilians, but there were complications on the ground, and there was a party in the area with (civilian) population … It was a large area, across 40 kilometers …

HAMAD: The occupation must come to an end.

Q: Occupation where? In the Gaza Strip?

HAMAD: No, I am talking about all the Palestinian lands.

Q: Does that mean the annihilation of Israel?

HAMAD: Yes, of course. [cut] … The existence of Israel is illogical. The existence of Israel is what causes all that pain, blood, and tears. It is Israel, not us. We are victims of the occupation. Period. Therefore, nobody should blame us for the things we do. On October 7, October 10, October 1,000,000 — everything we do is justified.

https://hotair.com/ed-morrissey/2023/11/01/hamas-spox-well-do-10-7-time-and-again-until-israel-is-annihilated-n589191

Video with subtitles:
https://x.com/MEMRIReports/status/1719662664090075199?s=20

[Frank Drackman]

You can hear the same thing on any Cab (OK, I’m old, add “Uber” too) in any American City >100K population (Arbitrary cut off but I did hear this on a cab in Albany NY Population 100,826, surprisingly (or not), Albany GA, population77,434 (Pronounced “All-Binny) is less Anti-Semitic)

Frank

[Commenter_XY]

And yet, there are those who call for a cease fire? LMAO. There is nothing whatsoever to negotiate with Hamas.

Hamas members will die violently, when a darkness that can be touched overtakes them: The tunnels entrances and exits will be collapsed one by one. Hamas members will be buried in the tunnel rubble, in eternal darkness, unlamented and forgotten. The world will be a safer place when they are gone.

That should spare the lives of many, many palestinian civilians. Keep in mind, Hamas had significant support among those same palestinians whose lives have been spared in Gaza.

Post war, the biggest question is what to do with those very same palestinian civilians who have been fed a steady diet of Judeocide for their entire lives (actively and passively).

[Kazinski]

They should feed carbon monoxide into the tunnels, it would only take 400ppm in the tunnels to kill everyone, and its quite painless. And where it leaks out it will dissipate quickly and be harmless and not cause any civilian casualties.

But if they don't want to use that, then flood the tunnels enough propane which is non toxic, ignite it to kill everyone in flash zone and use all the oxygen and kill them that way.

[Sarcastr0]

Hamas sucks.

Not a great excuse to indulge in bloodlust fantasies on clever ways to kill them.

[Armchair]

So...we shouldn't kill Hamas? That's what you're saying?

[Sarcastr0]

Yes, that's what I said, "we shouldn’t kill Hamas."

You're dumber than usual this morning.

[Brett Bellmore]

I mean, if we had a way to just harmlessly capture them at low risk, so they could be put on trial and imprisoned, sure, that would be better than killing them. You have some suggestion to that end?

No? Then let's just kill them.

[Sarcastr0]

Naw, dude, I've made it quite clear I want everyone in Hamas to die.

Plenty of room between 'harmlessly capture them at low risk' and 'lets pretend Gazan civilians are all in Hamas.'

[Brett Bellmore]

Sure, and if Israel were on the latter end of that extreme, they'd be carpet bombing Gaza into a parking lot.

But, there isn't any way to kill Hamas without a lot of non-Hamas casualties, just like during WWII, there wasn't any way to kill Nazis without killing Germans. So you either accept that there will be a lot of innocent casualties, while trying within reason to minimize them, or you give up.

[Sarcastr0]

Israel could be worse (something Hamas can't lay claim to). But that does not mean they are above reproach.

[Brett Bellmore]

No, I don't think they're above reproach. They do all sorts of things they shouldn't.

Suppose Israel were located between France and Germany, right next to Luxembourg. They'd absolutely be the bad guys in the neighborhood, their usual behavior would be outrageous and inexcusable.

But they're not. They're located in the Middle East, where ongoing genocides are normal, slavery is common, and there's only one place you'll find anything even vaguely resembling a liberal democracy: Israel.

I don't think they're perfect, but I do think they're approximately as nice as is survivable in the neighborhood, though the not nice tends to bleed over into actions that aren't actually necessary for their survival.

[Sarcastr0]

It's a nice sounding story. But I think these arguments from necessity don't contain a lot of actual analysis or substance. They seem more like arguments from revenge. Which I understand, but cannot condone.

[ObviouslyNotSpam]

Perhaps Israel, due to its unfortunate location, should have a looser set of international laws to abide by?

Think of it as "affirmative action" for war crimes.

[Kazinski]

Well once again you are making things up nobody said.

Targeting only the tunnels would target just Hamas. There shouldn't be any civilians in Hamas tunnels, and not going down there and engaging them will keep firefights from moving and popping up here and there as they go in and out of their bolt holes and secret entrances.

[Sarcastr0]

Saying Hamas should all die is one thing.

Laying out badly thought out but detailed plans on novel ways to kill them is some sick shit.

[Commenter_XY]

The primary war aim of Israel is to physically obliterate Hamas within Gaza. It would be great if there was a magical 'Hamas Hose' that would obliterate all Hamas members, and spare everyone else. It doesn't exist.

Hamas helpfully told the world that they would happily repeat the Simchat Torah pogrom a million times over. Kudos to Kazinski for posting it. Hamas then went on to tell the world that they did not build the tunnels to protect their palestinian civilian 'constituents' (you know, the people who voted Hamas into power). No! They built the tunnels to protect Hamas fighters. Brilliant! Thanks Hamas, for letting us all know. The IDF will certainly make good use of that. 🙂

There is no fantasy here. Burying Hamas in their tunnels spares the lives of countless palestinian constituents (I'm sorry, I meant civilians) who would otherwise be caught in the crossfire.

Hamas can end the war today by:
- releasing the hostages; and,
- unconditional surrender to Israel and face justice

The alternative is violent death, or experiencing a darkness that can be felt as they are buried in the tunnels.

Funny, one thing I just do not get, Sarcastr0. The civilized world recoiled at the Simchat Torahj pogrom. I heard not a word of condemnation from the 'peace partner' palestinian authority. Not one. In fact, PA leaders are seen handing out candies to children in Jenin, Nablus, Hebron to glorify the great 'victory' (meaning, the slaughter of Jews...Judeocide). Priceless.

Post war, the biggest question for Israel is what to do with an entire society steeped and stewed (both actively and passively) in Judeocide. The policies of the past have failed.

[Sarcastr0]

I'm not arguing with the war aim, my issue is the methods you seem enthusastic about endorsing.

As to the PA. Yeah they're showing their ass. Israel may have killed the 2 state solution once and for all, but PA is responsible for a ton of missed opportunities there - they've been a bad advocate and steward for the Palestinians.
That doesn't mean Palestinians deserve death.

[Commenter_XY]

So in other words, doing it Sarcastr0's way (oslo, two states, disengagement, conflict management) is how we got here, policy-wise, and Sarcastr0 want to keep doing the same thing over and over again. That 'enlightened thinking' is the true insanity.

There is no peace partner to be had in Gaza, Judea and Samaria. So now we have war.

Sarcastr0, I at least have something I can put forward as a humane, non-violent alternative to give palestinians some hope: incentivized, voluntary emigration. You offer nothing but misery and death, Sarcastr0.

You want to argue methods again. Don't be a chump.

[Sarcastr0]

Me: "Israel may have killed the 2 state solution once and for all, but PA is responsible for a ton of missed opportunities there"

You: "Sarcastr0’s way (oslo, two states, disengagement, conflict management)"

I not only didn't say any of that shit, I've said the opposite.

Saying your ethnic cleansing plan is humane is, again, something I've heard before. Oftentimes aimed at Jews. You should know better.

[Commenter_XY]

voluntary, incentivized emigration =/= ethnic cleansing

What alternative do you have? More of the same. Just more misery and death.

[Sarcastr0]

The penalty for not following your 'voluntary, incentivized emigration' is death though.

While maintaining the burden is not on my to show the necessity of devaluing Palestinian causalities, an occupation would be more effective and surgical.
Also more dangerous to the IDF. But that's part of the military's job in modern conflicts, especially asymmetrical ones.

[Commenter_XY]

The penalty for not voluntarily emigrating will be you get to live in Israel, free of the endemic corruption and criminality that living under PA and Hamas rule brings, under Israeli sovereignty.

Of course, palestinians will have to accept the fact that Israel exists, and Israel is here to stay. So Judeocide is not acceptable. Obey the law, and you can live a rich, fulfilling life.

[Sarcastr0]

You can call it awesome (not sure I'm with you on that, but it's not a can of worms we need to open here), but it's not voluntary if it's effectively at the point of a gun.

[Nige]

'free of the endemic corruption and criminality'

Someone's not up on Netanyahu.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Sarcastr0, I at least have something I can put forward as a humane, non-violent alternative to give palestinians some hope: incentivized, voluntary emigration.

Humane, non-violent, incentivized, voluntary emigration could work with respect to Israelis, too. The United States could benefit greatly from the immigrants. It would be far easier and less costly (in many ways) to protect the Israelis within America's borders. Many Israeli citizens would be far better off in American than they are in Israel. Israel's current trajectory seems unsustainable; this would offer a better one.

Are you interested, or is your interest a one-way (and predictably partisan, or perhaps superstition-driven) ticket?

[Commenter_XY]

So Arthur, shall I put you down as being open to voluntary, incentivized emigration, post war?

If Hamas can win the war, the Israelis will take the money and leave. Deal? Otherwise, I think it will be the palestinians who will be emigrating (with money).

[Nige]

To the US?

[Commenter_XY]

I can envision...more worthy candidates for entry to the US. The Uighurs, for example.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Why not solve the problem now by incentivizing Israelis to move to the United States? That seems the best course,

[bacchys]

Among the policies of the past which have failed were Netanyahu's of propping up Hamas as a way of weakening Fatah.

[Brett Bellmore]

"And where it leaks out it will dissipate quickly and be harmless and not cause any civilian casualties."

That's not a very smart idea: CO is a cumulative toxin which permanently locks up hemoglobin, which has to be gradually replaced over time. It kills you quickly at high concentrations, but will gradually kill you even at very low ones. You'd be bound to get a LOT of collateral victims near tunnel ventilation shafts.

I'd suggest just inert gas, which kills by displacing oxygen, but otherwise does no damage.

[Nige]

These Hamas tunnels are getting to 'Bin Laden's mountain fortress' levels of mil-fic fantasy.

[Sarcastr0]

"Please hear it! It’s not antisemitism, it’s not moral relativism, it’s a plea: Israel! Don’t do war crimes and live up to your responsibilities towards the Palestinians!

It barely even relates to Hamas, other than to be critical of Israel for enabling Hamas for 20 years."

1. Israel and a lot of folks around here seem quite willing to collective guilt their way into Hamas and those living in Gaza being the same thing, if not all Palestinians.

2. I'm not walking with plenty of the commenters on here, but the 'agree with Israel's actions or you're with Hamas' is some bullshit. We went through that after 9-11 and it was bullshit then as well.

[Ben_]

Sarcastr0 (or anyone else): [words]

Israel: Wow, we never thought of it that way before. I guess we’ll let Hamas (or the next group) launch raids and cut the heads off our children every few years.

[Sarcastr0]

You're saying posting my opinion on the Internet won't change things?

Holy shit I had no idea!!

[Ben_]

Anyone’s words in any context aren’t likely to change things.

But people can use words to start new fights that hurt even more people. That’s the pattern.

[Sarcastr0]

Words can't help and might hurt.

Seems like you should quiet down, then.

[Nige]

They let Hamas launch one raid. Are they so incompetent and helpless that they couldn't take steps to prevent future raids?

[Michael P]

Bullshit balloon redux.

1. "Seem" does most of the work in that claim.

2. What do you propose Israel do? Turning the other cheek doesn't count. Bonus points if they haven't already tried it in the last two decades.

[Sarcastr0]

1. Yes, I know you don't like to read anyone on your side. Or statements by the Israeli government.

2. There is a ton of middle ground between laying flat and total war that you are pretending doesn't exist.

[ObviouslyNotSpam]

Besides which, it's not Israel's critics in this matter which have signed up to international law relating to war crimes--Israel did that.

If Israel cannot figure out how to live up to its own promises in that regard, it can always resile. What it cannot do is pretend.

[mulched]

They are. Prove they're not if want to say it.

[Ben_]

The problem with BLM was always that it was just another attempt to divide and tear down America. Single race promotion movements are incompatible with promoting equality.

BLM worked really well. America is in bad shape.

[bacchys]

That's just ignorant nonsense.

[ObviouslyNotSpam]

I think you give a popular slogan slightly too much credit.

[tkamenick]

How self-blind is Josh? Adding "All lives" to BLM - good! Adding "All hate" to criticisms of anti-semitism? Well that's diluting the message.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

That’s how to remain mired at one of the shittiest law schools in America.

[Longtobefree]

As shown by Northern Ireland, the Crusades, etc, logic and reason have no place in a religious conflict.

[Religion and Politics, my life]

What a stupid thing to say, as if in any contest where a adherent-of-X enters all contestants must be on the same level. Just stupid
As for the Crusades, there were 9 over 200 years, uninformed clown. Rodney Stark, not a Catholic, showed the stupidity fo what you say
The four myths:

Myth #1: The crusades represented an unprovoked attack by Western Christians on the Muslim world.Myth #2: Western Christians went on crusade because their greed led them to plunder Muslims in order to get rich.Myth #3: Crusaders were a cynical lot who did not really believe their own religious propaganda; rather, they had ulterior, materialistic motives.Myth #4: The crusades taught Muslims to hate and attack Christians.
as to the Inquisition, try the BBC documentary.
The problem is uninformed hate-filled morons...

[SRG2]

The Rhineland massacres of the First Crusade were not myths, however.

[Nige]

Remember the Crusade that started it all where everyone marched off to find Jerusalem and they all just died?
Remember the Crusade that ended up sacking Constantinople?

[Religion and Politics, my life]

This is like saying you can't give extra attention to your child in great need because that implies lack of attention to others. Yes, say only that Israel must be saved and defended --- because there is no counter-answer to sending missiles against civilian populations. How wrong you are.

[SimonP]

Josh, let’s think this through.

You note the phenomenon of how “All Lives Matter” and “Blue Lives Matter” tended to attract widespread ridicule and valid accusations of racism, right? So that, responding to “Black Lives Matter” with those slogans only helped to polarize sentiment and stake out sides?

Can you therefore see how your repeated attempts to follow the same model, now with “Jewish Lives Matter” (NB that “Jew Lives Matter” seems like a strangely pejorative way to put the slogan, but far be it from me to critique the skills of a talented wordsmith like yourself), will only help to polarize the issue, in exactly the same way?

People who are trying to criticize anti-Semitism while in the same breath condemning Islamophobia are trying to maintain some kind of unity on the issue. They are trying to say, “We can all agree that this is awful, no matter who’s specifically victimized.” Responding to that broad claim by setting out stakes and saying, “No! Anti-Semitism must be singled out and condemned in isolation” is polarizing the issue and setting up the very “both-sidesism” you claim to be opposed to.

The same goes for your extremely tacky showboating of your Jewish heritage. You pretty much never mentioned it here, before the Hamas attacks. It wasn’t even a central part of your posts on the Jewish RFRA claims against abortion bans. But ever since October 7, you can’t get enough of foregrounding your Jewish heritage – which, as near as I can tell, is about as authentic as Warren’s claims to Native American heritage. That is, claimed, but not lived – until you put an ostentatious mezuzah on your office door.

[VinniUSMC]

People who are trying to criticize anti-Semitism while in the same breath condemning Islamophobia are trying to maintain some kind of unity on the issue. They are trying to say, “We can all agree that this is awful, no matter who’s specifically victimized.”

“Islamophobia”!?! Fucking EL OH EL. Hamas terrorists target civilians to maim, dismember, rape, torture, and take hostages. “But Israel!” the Nazis exclaim, happy to support Judeocide. “Hamas is kinda bad, but Israel is totally worse. What? Why do you keep calling us Nazis? You’re Islamophobic!”

Good old simple Simon. Thanks for the laughs. You're not Nazi scum, just a Nazi sympathizer.

[SimonP]

If you want to see who the "Nazis" are, you might look for the people who are constantly trying to dehumanize one side of the battle. Amalek, anyone?

[VinniUSMC]

Not like your attempts to paint people as "Islamophobes" though, right? One side wants to erase Jews from existence. The other side just wants to live.

Fuck your terrorist sympathies.

[SimonP]

You need to drop this habit of attributing to everyone you slightly disagree with on one thing every imaginable sin you've ever inveighed against.

I haven't accused anyone of being Islamophobic. As a matter of fact, I don't know who people have in mind, when they are calling for everyone not to engage in Islamophobia, when they are also denouncing anti-Semitism. I just don't see any problem in doing so.

You're the one who has a hair trigger on that.

[VinniUSMC]

I haven’t accused anyone of being Islamophobic. As a matter of fact, I don’t know who people have in mind, when they are calling for everyone not to engage in Islamophobia, when they are also denouncing anti-Semitism. I just don’t see any problem in doing so.

Why?

"I'm not anti-semitic but ..."

Hence Josh's post about "both-sidesism". I'm not sure why you're so keen on minimizing and deflecting if it's not because you "support Palestine from the river to the sea".

[SimonP]

Are you capable of grasping that, employing this reasoning, you're essentially describing people who proclaim "All Lives Matters" and "Blue Lives Matter" as the "Hamas sympathizers" in the Black Lives Matters discourse?

[Nige]

Whole lot of completely invented quote required to make that point.

[Aunt Teefah]

I actually agree with Josh on one thing - there is no room to "both-sides" this issue. Just as there was no room to "both-sides" the issue of slavery, even in the weeks following Nat Turner's rebellion, in which a group of slaves brutally murdered every white person they could find, including women and children. Israel keeps 2 million Gazans trapped in a concentration camp, and has done so for nearly twenty years. It blockades them, keeping Gazans - half of whom are children - from getting enough food, medicine, electricity, housing, or clean water. It bombs and kills innocents with impunity. It shoots anyone who tries to leave.

Unfortunately, Hamas' brutality provided a short-term propaganda victory to the Zionists, just as Turner's did to the southern planter class. But anyone who would dismiss or ignore the inhuman conditions that brought about that brutality cannot be taken seriously.

[VinniUSMC]

"Gazans trapped in a concentration camp"... you're not serious? Fucking Nazi scum.

[Aunt Teefah]

I am absolutely serious. Here's your chance to go to school, so you can come correct and not continue to beclown yourself with that "Nazi" shit:

https://theintercept.com/2018/05/20/norman-finkelstein-gaza-iran-israel-jerusalem-embassy/
GAZA, “THE WORLD’S LARGEST CONCENTRATION CAMP”
The son of holocaust survivors talks about war crimes, “cowardly” Israel, possible war with Iran, and his new book, “Gaza: An Inquest into its Martyrdom.”

[Commenter_XY]

AT, I have wonderful news for you. You know how the palestinians in Gaza elected Hamas? Yeah I know, seems pretty fucking crazy voting for avowed Judeocidal terrorists, but....stranger things have happened. Consider: The US elected Donald Trump, followed by Joe Biden as POTUS (now THAT is fucking crazy - be honest). Now the world can see what a truly shitty job Hamas has been doing ruling over Gaza, and making their constituents miserable. Hamas made Gaza what it is today. Great job Hamas!

Now for the good news. AT...Israel will be replacing Hamas with much better governance. You can cross off shitty governance by Hamas from your list of objections about Gaza. I know you feel strongly about that. Israel is fixing that now. It will take a while, but Hamas won't be a problem when Israel is done.

AT, the other thing that should make you feel better is that Israel will put an immediate stop to the common palestinian practice of throwing gays and trannies off rooftops, and hanging their dead bodies from cranes so the birds can eat them. That is a terrible thing to do, and Israel will end that revolting and barbaric practice. You're happy about that right....?

[Jason Cavanaugh]

Look at the real you come out! One would think that someone of your background might avoid using derogatory slurs.

I'm aware of at least one for Jews, and yet I haven't seen anyone use it around here. Doesn't seem to stop you from throwing your own around though.

October 7th sure emboldened your genocidal and derogatory nature.

[Aunt Teefah]

You seem to think it’s a foregone conclusion that Israel just marches in and win this thing in a cakewalk. I wouldn’t be so sure. I mean, they have all the air superiority and fancy tech gadgets money can buy, but that only does so much in urban and subterranean fighting. This could very well end up being Israel’s Vietnam. We shall see.

In terms of Hamas’ ideology, I think it’s worth pointing out, once again, that they are the Palestinian leadership that Israel wanted. It wanted to deal with religious fanatics instead of secular nationalists. It helped found Hamas, it helped them beat Fatah, and has continued to fund them til the present day. Do you really think they’re going to let secularists win now? Why?

[Commenter_XY]

AT...Hamas is going to be obliterated in Gaza (and hopefully hunted down and killed one by one worldwide, outside of Israel).

Gaza = Confined area, desert climate, no where to run, huge tactical error putting themselves in the tunnels; good setup for the IDF. Hamas will be hunted down and violently killed above ground, or buried in the tunnels below ground (thereby experiencing a darkness that can be touched).

It will take some time (could be a couple years), but Hamas will be obliterated in Gaza.

I hear those heroic Hamas warriors are now pushing women and children in front of them as human shields, using them as cover when they are located and engaged by the IDF. Nice video on social media. Hey Arab World, look at your brave Hamas fighters cowering behind women and children, and still get obliterated; honor culture, my ass.

The sooner Hamas is obliterated, the sooner this war is over.

[Randal]

Aunty, don't engage with this genocidal loon. He can't think straight beyond his crazed bloodlust. He knows deep down that Israel is largely responsible for Hamas and that Israel has no plan for Gaza post-Hamas. But he's not able to process that just yet because of the genocidal yearnings.

[skeptical scientist]

Palestinian lives matter. Jewish lives matter. Hamas does not respect either.