It's not as though Israel had violated a cease-fire in a surprise attack. It's an active war zone. People will die. This should come as no surprise to anyone.

This post from DUer known as "The Magistrate" may help to clarify some things.

HEAVY.

Try perhaps a little reverse structuring of the concept you intended to lay out.



See now? Yes! That makes it ALL better!

* trying to twist or intentionally misrepresent or distort my argument, exaggerating or altering it, or mischaracterizing my view to make it easier to attack. When someone starts "building a straw man," like that, all they're doing is trying to create a false weaker version of the original argument so that they can attack that fabricated position instead of addressing the actual argument or viewpoint.

Yawn.

someone is actually saying.

It is a perfect example to what is termed "cancel culture".

... there was panic at the food distribution (starving people fearful of another missed day's rations get that way) and IDF opened up on them to stop the "rioting". Same kind of situation many times all over the world - Sudan, Eritrea, Congo ... no other peace keeping force has ever found it necessary to machine gun refugees at food distribution. And this is the at least the second time. One time they even shot to death multiple Israeli hostages.

massacre as a war since I see no one firing back when being fired upon.

I DO understand how that can be confusing for some.

to your point of view.

In real "wars" people fight back when they are fired upon. That isn't happening. It's a massacre.

History WILL NOT be kind.

* to inject irrelevant personal information. The suggestion that I lack credibility because I won't provide personal information on whether I've served in the military or "fought in a war" is a form of an "Ad Hominem" attack. As a way to argue one's viewpoint, it's generally viewed as a weak tactic.

>> In real "wars" people fight back when they are fired upon. That isn't happening. It's a massacre.
I'm afraid it's time for someone to reevaluate their definition of what a "real war" is. In a "real war" people in a war zone are killed and injured.

>> History WILL NOT be kind.
It will not be kind to those who support and defend the Hamas terrorists, and who believe that Israel does not have the right to exist, or defend itself.

People get killed in a war. That is a fact.

Maybe I am missing something about why people are shocked.
Guess it has something to do with me being a military kid.

Father, mother, two brothers, uncle were active duty US military.
Uncle killed during WWII.
Two other close family members in US intelligence services.

War is very dangerous, a lesson I learned at 4 years of age when
my then best friend's father was killed, his plane went down during the Korean War.
And I knew my uncle had been killed in WWII.

People expect better from a force that is armed by the USA.

It is a fact people get killed in a war zone.

It doesn't matter how safe they think it will be.
Or what promises are made.

War is about deception and lies.
War is brutal, ruthless and unrelenting.

It's a shame the USA and UK are arming them, though. It's a stain on both governments.

I didn’t see any Palestinian soldiers firing back on the IDF during that food drop massacre video, did you? DID ANYONE SEE PALESTINIAN SOLDIERS FIRING BACK???

It’s NOT a fucking “war zone”.

Yikes, talk about ‘people being naive’..

This is not "genocide". These are civilian casualties and deaths in a war zone.

Hamas is a legitimate target in this war. I suspect that there would be FAR FEWER civilian casualties and deaths if not for the fact that Hamas continues to hide among civilians and shield themselves with civilians. That's the war crime right there.

too much artificial ingredients, like delusion.

By not addressing the substance of my original point and by not engaging in a constructive discussion, this is just a way of dismissing my point of view by attacking me personally and suggesting that I am deluded.

This type of ad hominem attack occurs when someone attacks the character, personal traits, or circumstances of the person making an argument rather than addressing the argument itself. It is a fallacy because it diverts attention from the actual topic under discussion and focuses on attacking the person instead.

For a bit of background, it's been my experience in that past the when people become emotionally invested in a discussion or debate, they may feel attacked or threatened by opposing viewpoints. In response, they may resort to ad hominem attacks as a way to vent their frustration or lash out at their opponent.

Or, I've also seen that ad hominem attacks can sometimes be used as a strategy to divert attention from the weakness of one's own arguments. By attacking the person instead of addressing the argument, they hope to undermine their opponent's credibility without having to provide substantive counterarguments.

In the military and I don't see it that way.

This is part of the genocidal warpath of israel and bibi; if the israelis weren't in agreement with him there would be few in the military willing to carry out the genocide. Some do it with glee. Why is it so hard to see that? I see a lot of excuses and equivocation in favor of israel and little human respect for the Palestinians.

Starvation is a weapon of genocide and that has been the intent all along, since last October they were touting starvation as a useful tool.

I no longer have any respect for isreal and those who won't remove bibi from leading this genocide, I'll leave it at that.

I learned the harsh lessons of war quite early.
Uncle killed in WWII.
Friend's fathers killed or missing during Viet Nam and Korea.

A student of WWII history.
Deception, lies, gaslighting, brutal relentless deaths are common.

Any one in a combat zone can be killed at any time
That is a fact.

You recite yet others have suffered as much and don't have that perspective. Seeing it up close and personal, where you can smell the fresh blood and flesh and dirt, it's quite evident that death is the prime item on the menu.

That being said, it appears that israel has a lengthy history of killing journalists and aid workers, they don't get a pass from me on this or any day of the week that ends in "y'".

I didn’t see any Palestinian soldiers firing back on the IDF during that food drop massacre video, did you? DID ANYONE SEE PALESTINIAN SOLDIERS FIRING BACK???

It’s NOT a fucking “combat zone”.

... particularly when nobody fired on the IDF.

This is genocide. Those starving kids aren't attacking anyone. Who's fighting back?

and would have called them terrorists in modern times because of the early small raids and murders against colonists.

The Native Americans never stood a chance. Colonists kept INVADING their designated lands over and over again. Then re-designateing the native's land. "White man speak with forked-tongue", right?

be lost on people here unfortunately.

... when the IDF is there to keep order. It's not as if anyone in the crowd fired on IDF.

Name one case of peacekeepers from any other nation murdering aid workers at a food distribution without being fired on first or being over run by panicked refugees.

The genocidal maniac will claim that the others were justified deaths because the one Palestinian was allegedly hamas. And the antisemitism police will be along soon enough to back up that claim because screaming about antisemitism drowns out all truth about the facts.

It's genocide whether you used to like the perps or not.

I don't see it. I see terrorists who attacked Israelis who were going about their business. After they massacred people at a music festival and doing their every day jobs, they took hostages.

The screaming is about the word "genocide." Palestinian supporters want to change the word to suit their purposes. They are trying to force everyone from AOC to the man in the street to say the war against Hamas is genocide. There is no genocide. It is war. Unfortunately, civilians die in wars.

Genocide? Six million is genocide.

Ninety percent of the Palestinians support Hamas.

You would rather quibble about the meaning of a word than face the reality that Israel is guilty of serious war crimes.

I don't care how you define your words. Israel has stooped to the lowliness of Hamas.

"Never again" seems not to apply when Israel is the one doing the "again."

Palestinians and their supporters are very picky about having everyone agree that the war is "genocide."

It is important how we define our words. The right-wing has gotten away with having their definition of truth accepted, because we have gotten sloppy about how we use our words. We have allowed them to define the terms for too long.

Quibble? This is no quibble.

That's how I define it.

Genocide refers to the intentional and systematic destruction of a particular ethnic, racial, or religious group. It involves deliberate acts aimed at exterminating or significantly reducing the targeted group's population. The term carries immense gravity and is reserved for situations where there is evidence of a specific intent to destroy a group in whole or in part.

Using "genocide" to describe civilians being killed in a war-zone actions (primarily caused by Hamas hiding among civilians; markets; schools; hospitals; homes; food distribution centers, etc.) would be an exaggeration and a misuse of the term. It can distort the understanding of the severity and unique nature of actual genocidal acts.

It's important to use language accurately and responsibly, particularly when discussing serious matters such as war crimes or human rights abuses. Applying extreme labels without proper justification can undermine the clarity and accuracy of the discussion.

Blame Hamas for hiding among civilians and putting them in harm's way. Using civilians as human shields is a war crime.

Use language precisely?

>> Genocide refers to the intentional and systematic destruction of a particular ethnic, racial, or religious group. It involves deliberate acts

This absolutely applies to Israel's actions in Gaza. You make my point with this empty rhetoric.

Last edited Tue Apr 2, 2024, 06:00 PM - Edit history (1)

* it also is not very flattering for those who do such things or use fallacious tactics

>> Do you remember saying "Aldi sucks"? You are not someone I consider eloquent.
Honestly, I have no particular recollection of saying "Aldi sucks" but it's very probably that I did say that, because I do think it sucks. I guess I'm flattered, surprised (perhaps a little amused??) that anyone would remember my feelings about the Aldi grocery store chain and how cluttered and disorganized there stores are, and their sub-standard brands.

See ya round!

This reminds me of the saying among lawyers, "Argue the law when the facts are not on your side."

The point of view that Israel is just defending itself is laughable in the face of the ostensibly intentional bombing of the aid workers in their clearly marked cars.

I see it as terrorism, genocide, and murder all for the purposes of revenge, desire for more land, and Netanyahu's political survival.

The destruction of Gaza will result in future generations of Hamas fighters and more antisemitism in the present. It is not resulting in the return of hostages. Rather, I fear they suffer all the more as the Gazans suffer.

Whether appropriate or not, what Israel does reflects on Jews everywhere, and that just "sucks" for us all.

As for Aldi, I remember how stupid and condescending your remarks were because you couldn't deal with the shopping carts. I deleted my comment before you responded because it is impertinent to the points about needless death and destruction.

* it's Hamas who are the terrorists. The hostages are as good as dead anyway. It will be a bonus if any are returned alive, but at this late date, it seems unlikely... and it also seems that this is not the "carrot & stick" that Hamas had hoped it would be. That ship has sailed long ago. The "future generations" argument is a tired old chestnut/threat that serves no valid purpose other than to terrorize Israel into submission. (Whaaaa! Stop killing our terrorists or we'll make-more-terrorists!) Please.

>> As for Aldi, I remember how stupid and condescending your remarks were because you couldn't deal with the shopping carts.
Well... "couldn't deal with" is your characterization and that's not entirely accurate (I think you know that too) it was just one of many annoying aspects of their business model. It's so bizarre to me that such a thing would take hold in anyone's mind from so many months ago. It's also unusual that anyone here at DU would take such offense at whether or not I liked (or disliked) a fn grocery store. Good grief. LOL! --- So, even though those personal attacks may have edited "before" I responded, it wasn't before I saw them... and that's all that matters isn't it? That's the important part, right?

I know that Hamas is the target? Even though I state otherwise, you say you know my thoughts?

Hamas is obviously not the only target. The aid workers were targeted intentionally. Just look at MSNBC's reporting. Three cars, three separate incidents. The roofs of all three cars were visibly marked. The cars were cleared for transport by the IDF. Now, they're dead.

I remember the Aldi bit because it seemed so absurd to me.

You couldn't deal with returning the cart. It was too much work for you. Of course, all you had to do was give up the quarter.

I'm glad you saw my remarks about how laughably condescending your statements are.

* and that it was over such a trivial matter as my preference regarding a grocery store's inferior quality or how it's organized and laid-out. Astounding: 231 days ago!

>> I remember the Aldi bit because it seemed so absurd to me. You couldn't deal with returning the cart. It was too much work for you. Of course, all you had to do was give up the quarter.
Actually, that's not entirely true. I was able to locate my comments about Aldi (link) wherein I gave an organized and concise explanation of why Aldi sucks. Here's what I actually wrote:

At Aldi, customers typically need to deposit a quarter to use a shopping cart, which is refunded when the cart is returned. I don't carry loose change with me. But a house key works.

You owe the Gazans an apology, and one to people who shop at Aldi.

Can't pack your own bag? Can't carry a quarter?

The rest of it ain't true.

* and my key was released in the same way that quarters are released.

Please tell me... where was the thievery? Who loses out?

…and then returned by the store upon customer’s return of the cart. The store is not profiting by the use of this mechanism — they merely want their expensive carts returned to them, and a 25 cent refundable deposit seems to remind customers to do so.

Get a grip. Please.

Sadly all these hyperbolic calls of "genocide-genocide-genocide" actually serve no good purpose and in fact it dilutes, distorts and muddies the waters of what actual literal genocide truly is. In the future, if/when (sadly) there are other instances of genuine genocide... nobody will believe it because today's Hamas supporters and Houthis sympathizers/supporters have "genericised" and misused the word so much that it loses all meaning and nobody will care when there are genuine instances of genocide. --- Congrats guys! Nice work!

>> there must be a proven intent on the part of perpetrators to physically destroy a national, ethnical, racial or religious group.

I've seen enough proof that the intentions of Netanyahu and the IDF go well beyond the defense of Israel.

There are complex politics at play and they are spilling onto Biden. The Israel-Gaza war is a factor in his reelection. It's pretty obvious that Bibi would rather see Trump win than Biden.

Since it risks the death of many members of the group.

Stick your head in the sand if you want, but they're serious arguments.

Link to tweet

They are being political, but not truthful.

It is sheer absurdity to state publicly that we disapprove of Israel's aggression while giving them more weapons. Yet, this is where we are at in a modern world where one of our closest allies is becoming a pariah state.

Biden is between the proverbial rock and hard place. I don't envy his position. And Kirby seems uncomfortable.

What does make sense is when he says, we need more investigation.

But, to think three car bombings in a row was not intentional is absurd.

Your finger-wagging makes you look silly. Is there one with a middle finger?

They are also my people, which adds to my dismay. (I do not identify with the religion.)

Bombing those aid workers was terrorism. (Oh, I guess I shouldn't define that either. Maybe we shouldn't even use words.)

They give the definitions, not me.

BTW, I am not Jewish.

This is a war. People die in wars. Innocent people die in wars. There would be a lot fewer innocents dying if Hamas would stop using innocent people as human shields. If Hamas would stop hiding in residential areas, and cowering under hospitals, staging their operations in schools, scurrying around like rats in tunnels beneath food markets, storing weapons in hospitals and daycare.

>> You would rather quibble about the meaning of a word
Because words have actual meanings and legal definitions. Why not use accurate words instead of the ones that don't apply?

israelis seem to think they OWN the term "genocide" but they don't. Whether a population of a people is 1,00 or 6,000,000, if the intent is to wipe them out, it's genocide, period. The number isn't what make the reality.

I used to support israel, shit 75% of my ancestors were jews, but I don't anymore. Now it leaves me contemplate just what was the reason for the conflict where antisemitism became a thing so many centuries ago. Is history repeating itself in this case?

I ask because it seems there is an outsized sentiment for those who suffered in WWII such that no other atrocity could ever equate to a similar case.

And I question your claim that 90% of Palestinians support hamas. That, to me, is pejorative claim at best.

Sorry, israel has no support from me, probably won't gain it back in this lifetime. And no, I am not hamas nor a supporter of hamas, just for the record.

What would you call it when nobody else is allowed to use the word except in reference to the holocaust? In what I see that would be the definition of ownership.

Hell, look how long it's taken, 100 years, for genocide to be applied as the descriptive term for what happened in Armenia, and what about the Holodomor? What about the Native Americans? Not genocide? But gawd forbid we use that term to describe actual genocide. Just because IDF is doing it, it can't be THAT. Amiright?

So which is it? Am I condemning every individual in israel for bibi? Not necessarily but I could, it's exactly what you are saying about the Palestinians, that they all deserve to be bombed into oblivion because of hamas. See how that works?

But the case here is that there are many israelis who are actively, and gleefully, blocking aid to purposely starve an entire population while the miilitary bombs civilians and kills one hamas guy for every 500 civilians but let's not call it what it is so as not to disturb the sensibilities of the israelis because nobody can be as victimized as they for the rest of eternity because someone did it to them.

I'm done with this thread.

Your comment was clear;

First of all, it "took 100 years for 'genocide' to be applied as the descriptive term for what happened in Armenia" in large part because the Armenian massacres by The Young Turks predate the coining of the term "genocide".

Link to tweet

Great info!

* and including their most ardent fans/followers, are some of the ones who most loudly describe the Israel/Gaza War is "genocide".

Why did they choose the name "The Young Turks" anyway? Did someone think it sounded "edgy" and "cool" in a rebellious and anti-establishment kind of way? 🙄

The number of slaughtered, are not a criteria in the UN’s definition of genocide.

In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with
intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as
such:
(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its
physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

My opinion is that C is clear as day.

The popular understanding of what constitutes genocide tends to be broader than the content of the norm under international law. Article II of the Genocide Convention contains a narrow definition of the crime of genocide, which includes two main elements:

============================

The intent is the most difficult element to determine. To constitute genocide, there must be a proven intent on the part of perpetrators to physically destroy a national, ethnical, racial or religious group. Cultural destruction does not suffice, nor does an intention to simply disperse a group. It is this special intent, or dolus specialis, that makes the crime of genocide so unique. In addition, case law has associated intent with the existence of a State or organizational plan or policy, even if the definition of genocide in international law does not include that element.

Importantly, the victims of genocide are deliberately targeted - not randomly – because of their real or perceived membership of one of the four groups protected under the Convention (which excludes political groups, for example). This means that the target of destruction must be the group, as such, and not its members as individuals.[/b] Genocide can also be committed against only a part of the group, as long as that part is identifiable (including within a geographically limited area) and “substantial.”
https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/genocide.shtml

Anonymous opinion found at WaPo.

Reality check: It has never been about "destroying Hamas". That's absurd. IDF officers are very smart people. They know better than anyone that military force cannot destroy a social and political movement deeply embedded in Gazan society. That's just the cover story they put out to those gullible enough to believe it. And there are many. No, the real, underlying story is simply genocide: to destroy Gaza itself, its institutions, its medical care system, its schools, its economy, its religious and cultural sites, its infrastructure, and of course its people.

That's why you deliberately kill writers, professors, doctors, aid workers, ambulance drivers, journalists, photographers, to crush the spirit of resistance in its people. It's to randomly kill enough Gazans to terrify and demoralize the rest , and herd the survivors into a much smaller space to control them better. That's ethnic cleansing with genocidal intent.

When you murder entire extended families sleeping in their beds; when you destroy bakeries providing precious bread to starving people(lots of Hamas hiding in those bakeries!); when you repeatedly bomb UN schools where people are sheltering from your bombs; when you attack hospitals and destroy the medical care system; when you bomb helpless fleeing people on the very road you told them to use to evacuate; when you cut off basic necessities of life (food, water, fuel, power) to an entire population; you have only one purpose, and it’s not to “target” Hamas. It’s to terrorize, demoralize and punish the entire population of Gaza. That is genocide.

This is not the "Israel-Hamas war", it's a war upon the entire people of Gaza. A rogue State that believes it is above the law is bombing and killing tens of thousands of women and children, who are helpless and trapped, with nowhere to run to. War crimes. Crimes against humanity. Starvation as a weapon of war. Ethnic cleansing.. Believe it. it's real. Cop to it. America, you are complicit.

IDF eliminating another source of food for Gazans.

Is Israel trying to kill global sympathy for their existence?

They knew exactly what they were doing. They are getting the result they were seeking!! Like you said, MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!

It will kill support for Netanyahu. The world has asked Israel to hold the fighting and now this instead. It is as if Netanyahu thumbs his nose at the world. Americans are sick of this war, and eventually politicians will have to pay attention or this will be a factor in the election.

I would like to see the US withhold their support. 100%. And then see what happens. My guess is a vote of no confidence in Netanyahu.

There are protesters who feel that Bibi isn't aggressive enough.

https://www.jpost.com/israel-hamas-war/article-783850

Protesters block Kerem Shalom crossing despite US demands
Demonstrators, including families of hostages, are once again blocking aid trucks from entering the Gaza Strip in Kerem Shalom, despite US demand that aid enter unhindered.

Becoming a pariah is much easier than getting rid of that dubious title.

and have the ensuing civilian deaths "kill global sympathy for (Israel's) existence."

need global sympathy for their existence? What other countries and ethnicities need to prove their right to exist? This is just one more element that shows that Jewish people and Israelis have been the victims of genocide. We don't decide who else, what other countries, have the right to exist!

so Israel can set them up and bomb them!

Israel crossed the line when settlers started invading designated Palestinian lands.

How can anyone defend this genocide?

Bomb, kill, and maim people, then bomb the hospitals and refugee centers you made them flee to, then open fire and bomb anyone trying to feed the starving who are starving because you bombed them out of their homes and cities and you cut off food.

It is genocide.

And the US has to STOP supporting it NOW.

Hamas is a legitimate target in this war. I suspect that there would be FAR FEWER civilian casualties and deaths if not for the fact that Hamas continues to hide among civilians and shield themselves with civilians. That's the war crime right there.

The only murders involved are the idf and those that support them

And the vehicles were clearly marked as aid transport. The Israelis were informed of the convoy and, as a former military official just said, it should have been a no-strike zone and there is no way it should have happened with the type of technology they have. This is part of a pattern.

But Hamas, Hamas, Hamas makes any and every horrible act Israel commits ok with you. I would add a "yawn" like you do but since these courageous seven aid workers are dead - along with 33,000 other Gazan civilians - I won't demonstrate the same cavalier attitude .

I understand that people can become emotional or frustrated when having to deal with people who have differing opinions, but that's no reason for anyone to lash out or get snippy or to insinuate that I'm some sort of "fan" of warfare.

>> But Hamas, Hamas, Hamas makes any and every horrible act Israel commits ok with you.
I've never said that. I've never said that war is okay, or desirable. I've also never cheered when civilians are killed.

What I have done is pointed out the reality of what war is, and violent things happen in a war-zone, and that Hamas is to blame for the deaths of civilians. When Hamas hides among civilians (hospitals, schools, markets, food distribution centers, residential areas, etc.) and used them as human shields... well, these tragic deaths will continue. Hamas are legitimate targets and they are being targeted. The war crime being committed is by the cowardly Hamas.

But, as we all know that accidents happen and that even today's modern warfare can have flawed information. These recent civilian deaths are no less tragic, nevertheless. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Israel “deeply regrets” the incident, while the IDF said the strike was a “grave mistake” and the result of a “misidentification.” (This is likely to be the closest thing to an apology that we'll see.)

In the end, none of this would be happening but not for Hamas. The civilian deaths would not be happening but not for Hamas. Hamas is to blame.

You are the one who uses "yawn" all the time, so I included it in my reply. As with your constant refrain of YOU being the only one who knows "reality" as if others who disagree are in some unreal world is a personal attack on them. Then you complain here about personal attacks on you.

Your mistaken, not-tied-to-reality belief that Hamas is solely responsible for what has happened in Gaza of course ignores Israel's many actions that led to this conflict and to the ongoing slaughter that continues. Try listening to military experts who say this type of wanton slaughter is not necessary for a military like Israel possesses that has the capability to determine with much greater accuracy targets than it is doing. You can reply with well shit happens. But that would not be looking at what's going on in a compassionate-for-civilians, honest, reality-based view of the situation.

As I stated, and is obvious, you have insinuated your claims about reality numerous times. I have read many of your posts and not one had any concern or compassion for the people in Gaza. Maybe they are there, but your first response to anything such as the points made about Israel having the technical ability to be more precise and reduce the number of civilian casualties is met with the same old deflections seen here. Or you just don't address reality-based facts. Such as - once again for the hundredth time on this site - well, Hamas started it so the casualties are their fault. Again, absolving Israel for any and everthing it has done. Which it does not, of course, especially in this age of technology. Or you just don't address reality-based facts like the fact the vehicles were marked and not one Hamas member was among the convoy, or that Israel knew the convoy was on the road. And, no, "yeah but Hamas" and "they started it" do not answer those points. And neither does playing the innocent victim.

Living in the West Bank and Gaza.

There are or were about 25K members of Hamas.

There have been approximately 30-33K killed.

That number killed does not look like a mass planned genocide.

This is so simple - send in a UN / AU Mission to get the hostages and / or their remains out. South Africa and the Republic of Ireland should be able to provide the soldier power. Let the relief get through. Get the Palestinians to turn over any surviving members of Hamas to the International Court for trial as terrorists.

That should prevent genocide.

Pretty simple - but nope! Hamas - the political leadership refuses to hand over the people they kidnapped.

If I'm ever kidnapped - my husband better not pay ransom until he sees me walking towards him.

Source
https://arabcenterdc.org/resource/brief-report-on-the-population-of-palestine-at-the-end-of-2021/#:~:text=The%20estimated%20number%20of%20Palestinians%20at%20the%20end,in%20Arab%20countries%20and%20750%2C000%20in%20foreign%20countries%29

https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/who-governs-palestinians

https://www.dni.gov/nctc/ftos/hamas_fto.html

we have desperate, hungry people hoping to get food, but nervous and panicky because mean eyed armed IDF thugs are watching them.

On the other side, we have conscripted Israelis who see the crowd panic as a thread to them, and are likely to 'defend' themselves from the crowd, who are all most likely HAMAS supporters anyway.

Poor little IDF personnel!

A perfect set-up to 'eradicate' more Palestinians.
You couldn't write a fictitious script as perfect as this if you wanted to kill off undesirables on land you really want to claim as your own. (*)

Of course 'accidentally' killing a few do-gooders who try to feed the starving people helps Israel too.

History will note this on a page of its own.
It will have a black border and be noted as not only mourning the death of civilians, but the death of the ideals that set up Israel originally.

(*) The last bit is my summation of what the motivation is really behind all of this action.

Reading this thread and the DU apologists for this horror really out themselves.

1. People call a field-of-slaughter a genuine and legitimate war zone.

2. People quote inaccurate numbers for the dead, then assume most of them were the 'enemy' anyway, so it doesn't matter.

3. Using one act of violence to justify subsequent acts of much greater violence.

4. Other nations unable to intervene effectively to stop the indiscriminate use of war machinery.
Worse, supplying that war machinery.

5. One side is using high tech weaponry for medieval siege tactics - lobbing bombs indiscriminately, destroying infrastructure, medical facilities, blocking aid to the beleaguered civilian population.

Sad? More than that, if you have family over there, unable to escape the carnage, and you have lost contact.
Not to mention the deaths of reporters and aid workers. Accidentally or deliberately caught up in the carnage.

Behind all this is more than just revenge, a need to wipe out HAMAS.
Is the motivation religion based, or just a land grab?

What really riles me up are some of the inflammatory posts on DU.
Bad all round.

Israel has some of the best arms in the world a lot of the reason is because we sold them to them. It seems like they could shoot the eye out of a fly if need be and instead there's all of this carnage against civilians it's like shooting fish in a barrel and I just don't understand.
I mean I get why they're doing it the October 7th attack are you telling me the best equipment in the world couldn't see on their cars which were labeled that they were food organization or can't see large numbers of civilians trying to get food I just don't get it I just don't get it.