There's a point here, but probably not the one The Nation intends to make:
Denigrating the sea change in policy represented by the threat to withhold weapons shipments to Israel as “too little too late” runs the risk of undermining the great historical achievement of the anti-war and pro-Palestinian movement.https://t.co/T8HRwY4Aas
— The Nation (@thenation) May 13, 2024
Has the pro-Palestinian movement really won a great historical achievement? There's little evidence for that.
This kind of pronouncement hinges on the belief that most people have always been pro-Palestinian, and the recent protests have simply shaken them out of their stupor and succeeded in pressuring Joe Biden to do what he's always known was right.
But this bowls right past the obvious fact that Biden—like lots of people—have long been ardently pro-Israel and were appalled by the October 7 Hamas attacks. That's the attitude he thinks is right, and what changed it weren't a few messy protests on college campuses. That is, after all, pretty routine stuff.
What changed it were the grotesque actions of Israel itself. A campaign of indiscriminate bombing. The casual slaughter of thousands of civilians. Complete destruction of Gaza's buildings and infrastructure. The routine murder of journalists and aid workers. The forced starvation of Gaza's people. A plan to continue doing all this in Rafah with no apparent goal other than bloody revenge. And all of it without even a rhetorical pretense that Israel gives a shit about 21st century humanitarian concerns in the slightest way.
No one needs a bunch of protesters to draw their attention to any of this. It's all in broad daylight. Any decent person—and Joe Biden is a decent person—would be having second thoughts at the very least by this point. The reality of what Israel is doing changed both public opinion and Biden's mind. Protests likely had nothing to do with it.
I think a role of young people is to share their (often) black-and-white view of the world. We need some idealism! At the least, they help us test and reconsider our beliefs. They are a vital part of the national conversation. If I were president, I would at least be listening.
Yes. Remember one of the lessons of that old fable, "the Emperor's New Clothes", was that only a child was able to voice the truth about the ruler's nakedness. Everybody else was so concerned about maintaining propriety, keeping their place in court, believing the nonsense that "only the smart people could see that special magical cloth", maybe not being hauled off to jail or whipped.
You know, the standard "adult" concerns that little kids are too naive to comprehend. Same as it ever was!
US students, once again, have led the way. Now we must all stand up for Palestinians-Osita Nwanevu
https://bit.ly/3yl05bu
"The student left is the most reliably correct constituency in America. Over the past 60 years, it has passed every great moral test American foreign policy has forced upon the public, including the Vietnam war, the question of relations with apartheid South Africa, and the Iraq war. Student activists were at the heart of the black civil rights movement from the very beginning. To much derision and abuse, they pushed for more rights, protections and respect for women and queer people on their campuses than the wider world was long willing to provide. And over the past 20 years in particular, policymakers have arrived belatedly to stances on economic inequality, climate change, drug policy and criminal justice that putative radicals on campus took up long before them."
If the anti-war movement can't take credit for pointing out when something is awful when something is, in fact, awful, then what point does anything serve?
On October 7, Hamas invaded Israel. Whether or not you think it is justified based on past history, that is a fact.
Israel has a right to self defense, as stated in the UN charter. Self defense includes going after your attacker to prevent further attacks. Whatever you think of Israel, it is a member of the UN so it has that right.
So Israel has a right to go into Gaza with the military objective of preventing Hamas from attacking again.
(One could argue that Hamas had the right on October 7 to go into Israel with the military objective of preventing Israel from attacking Gaza again. But one would be wrong for several reasons, one of which is because October 7 had no military objective.)
So the actual question here is whether Israel is doing "indiscriminate bombing", "casual slaughter", "routine murder", with no "pretense... about 21st century humanitarian concerns"
That's a lot of adjectives from Kevin. But who is he comparing to? Indiscriminate compared to what bombing campaign where the enemy is in tunnels 100 ft deep? Casual compared to what war fought in an urban environment? What army has shown more humanitarian concern? What sources does he cite?
Here's a source. "John W. Spencer currently serves as the chair of urban warfare studies at the Modern War Institute [West Point], co-director of the Urban Warfare Project, and host of the Urban Warfare Project Podcast. He is also a founding member of the International Working Group on Subterranean Warfare."
You could not come up with a more qualified person if you tried.
And here's what he says:
"In my long career studying and advising on urban warfare for the U.S. military, I've never known an army to take such measures to attend to the enemy's civilian population, especially while simultaneously combating the enemy in the very same buildings. In fact, by my analysis, Israel has implemented more precautions to prevent civilian harm than any military in history—above and beyond what international law requires and more than the U.S. did in its wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. "
https://www.newsweek.com/israel-has-created-new-standard-urban-warfare-why-will-no-one-admit-it-opinion-1883286
He has written many articles, been interviewed, and has a podcast that reiterates this over and over. This is not an isolated quote out of context.
He also explains that Israel is killing combatants to civilians at a ratio of 1:1.5.
Sounds horrible, until you compare that to everyone else in similar environments. When the US attacked Isis in Mosul, it was 1:2.5. Many wars are 1:9. Based on updated data (the UN estimate of women and children fatalities is now half of what Hamas claimed) the Israeli number is likely lower.
Those are the facts. Those are the expert opinions, with quantification.
Israel is doing a reasonable job of fighting off a terrorist organization that is living on their border, bent on their destruction. It is better than other countries in similar situation.
If you disagree, provide facts relevant to the points above
------
Ad hominem attacks show that you have no facts, so please don't waste everyone's time. Repetition of slogans, or unsupported accusations, or statements of colonialism, past crimes, etc. are irrelevant, and again show you can't make your argument.
I do not support Netanyahu, settlements, anti-Palestinian Israeli politicians. I do support a two-state solution with both states being mutually recognized and with secure borders. So don' t use that as part of your argument.
It's late and this is an unserious challenge given the abundance of war crimes so I won't provide citations. There is nothing hard to find with google if you want sources and details. So how about these relevant facts:
- complete destruction of every university in Gaza
- complete destruction of many major hospitals and the crippling of the remaining healthcare system.
- mass graves with hundreds of bodies uncovered at Nasser Medical Complex in Khan Younis and al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza City
- enforced famine
- cutting off supply of fuel and electricity to civilian populations
- cutting off access to potable water to civilian populations
- mass arrests of non-combatants
- an open policy of green lighting many dozens of civilian deaths to kill mid and low level commanders not engaged in combat.
Isreal has not even denied most of that, some of it was announced in advance of carrying it out.
The statement from your expert: "Israel has implemented more precautions to prevent civilian harm than any military in history" is laughably transparent propaganda. Don't drink the kool-aid.
"The statement from your expert: "Israel has implemented more precautions to prevent civilian harm than any military in history" is laughably transparent propaganda. Don't drink the kool-aid."
So this is an ad-hominem attack with slogans and unsupported accusations - you win the trifecta!
However, you did not actually address a single one of his facts, so no prize for you.
Destruction of infrastructure that is on top of military objectives is not a war crime.
Mass graves are not a war crime.
Israel allowed over 380,000 tons of food into Gaza and 34,000 tons of water.
https://govextra.gov.il/cogat/humanitarian-efforts/home/
Gazans have a few hours of electricity a day,
Hamas has plenty of fuel, electricity and water. Why don't you condemn them for withholding it?
Are mass arrests a war crime during a war?
If military targets are behind human shields, it is not a war crime if the number of civilians is low enough and the value of the targets is high enough. Give me specifics and we can talk. Or given the abundance of something or other, you don' t feel the need to provide citations?
And even if every one of these was a war crime, you have not provided a scintilla of evidence to disprove the fact that Israel is doing better than other countries in avoiding civilian casualties in a similar situation.
You know, Steve, we can all read just above all the context you stripped from what you quoted. I presented a list of factual statements contradicting your source's laughable and transparently propagandistic statement. You stripped it (and did not even reply in thread) and posted my conclusion as if none of that list existed.
Can you please provide us with some context for those numbers? They need to be compared to the population's needs and the flow of those commodities prior to the conflict.
"And even if every one of these was a war crime..."
This is quite the tell, Steve.
I have no interest in trying to convince a sociopath that mass graves with hundreds of bodies left beside the utter destruction of a major hospital is inconsistent with "taking extraordinary measures to protect civilians".
If you are okay with that and the mass arrests of non-combatants including on duty surgeons and other medical personnel you have no moral compass whatsoever.
The context of the 380,000 tons of food is that it is not something that is done when trying to "enforce famine". That seems to be obvious.
In wars, hundreds of people die. But you know that. Many of them die in hospitals. You know that too. None of that is a war crime. But apparently you think burying them in a mass grave apparently is a war crime, no matter how they died.
I am not "ok" with anything going on in Gaza. I never said I was. It is a war.
You can't comment on my moral compass by misrepresenting what I actually write.
But back to the facts, which you keep avoiding.
As horrible as the situation in Gaza is, as horrible as the death and destruction and hunger and disease is, the question is not "is it bad". The answer is undeniably yes, because war, even defensive war, is horrible.
The question is "have other countries, when fighting against a neighbor who viciously attacked them, in a similar urban and underground conflict, done better?"
I provided quotes from an acknowledged expert in this very question, who has been on the ground and studied this extensively.
Your rebuttal, in its entirety, consists of calling his writings "laughably transparent propaganda."
The point is Israel does better than other countries. If Israel cuts electricity, but everyone else cuts more, then Israel is better. So your long list of "it is bad" is irrelevant. War is bad, and this is war. What is relevant is comparing it to how other countries have done. If Israel is doing significantly better, then get the hell off its case.
You can't compare destruction of schools or hospitals, because in Gaza they are right over military installations, to an extent unseen in other conflicts.
The only hard number we have is the ratio of casualties. And on that quantitative measure, you have not made even the slightest scratch in my argument. So have a go at that, and try coming up with something better than merely calling it propaganda.
" campaign of indiscriminate bombing. The casual slaughter of thousands of civilians. Complete destruction of Gaza's buildings and infrastructure. The routine murder of journalists and aid workers. The forced starvation of Gaza's people. "
Yes, Israel has been doing all of these for decades. The world is starting to wake up.
They can keep repeating the same sentences, but mcdriud and Coby are dancing around my point, because they have no data to refute it.
*The question is "have other countries, when fighting against a neighbor who viciously attacked them, in a similar urban and underground conflict, done any better?"*
There are plenty of other countries who have fought wars and been much less careful. There is evidence that you have not even attempted to dispute, yet you continue to focus exclusively on Israel.
Why is that?