152

Israeli Military Admits Fault in 2 Deadly Strikes in Central Gaza - The New York Times (www.nytimes.com)

submitted 11 months ago by Copernican@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world

53 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] Keeponstalin@lemmy.world 18 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Maybe it's because it was reported by Israel public broadcaster KAN. They also admitted fault when they shot those unarmed civilians holding makeshift white flags which ended up being hostages.

We do know half the bombs dropped are precision and half are 'dumb bombs.' I don't know of any comprehensive report on it but it seems to me that they admit fault when there's no possible plausible deniability.

I don't really see how that weakens the case that they target civilians when they have been repeatedly bombing schools, hospitals, refugee camps, residential areas, and self-proclaimed safe zones for months; justifying it by claiming Hamas combatants were in the area. And that's compounded onto cutting off the food, water, aid, and electricity for Gaza that they already controlled. Why else would you cut those off if not to target civilians?

[+] DarkGamer@kbin.social -14 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Maybe it’s because it was reported by Israel public broadcaster KAN. They also admitted fault when they shot those unarmed civilians holding makeshift white flags which ended up being hostages.

They could have denied it or manufactured evidence that there was a legal target there, yet they didn't. This makes it clear the IDF acts in good faith at least some of the time.

We do know half the bombs dropped are precision and half are ‘dumb bombs,’ and these were precision from the article. I don’t know of any comprehensive report on it but it seems to me that they admit fault when there’s no possible plausible deniability.

Does it? I don't see where it says these were smart bombs, the article says additional buildings were hit because they picked the wrong ordinance, (unless it's been updated since it was archived?)

I don’t really see how that weakens the case that they target civilians when they have been repeatedly bombing schools, hospitals, refugee camps, residential areas, and self-proclaimed safe zones for months; justifying it by claiming Hamas combatants were in the area.

So you're aware they claim they target Hamas, not civilians, and Hamas hides among them. Why don't you find that to be credible? There's lots of evidence Hamas does this.

Why else would you cut [food and water] off if not to target civilians?

The same reason one does not send their supply lines to enemy forces. Gaza declared war on Israel. It would be odd for any nation at war to supply a hostile nation during wartime while it remains belligerent. I believe this is only legally required if the area is occupied, and Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005, (a blockade is not occupation.) Soldiers also run on food and water, and Israel is not responsible for Gazans, their government, Hamas, is.

[-] Keeponstalin@lemmy.world 7 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

I'll retract that these bombs were precision, that doesn't really help the argument since many civilians die when they do use precision bombs on civilian locations.

Israel claims they only target Hamas, in practice the vast majority of who they kill are civilians (mostly women and children). I've only found evidence of Hamas using civilian infrastructure twice in the 2014 war, which I can link if you want, can you share the evidence you've found?

The disengagement was not an end to the occupation, in many cases it became a more brutal form of it. It also highlights that the settlements never ended in West Jerusalem or the West Bank, only Gaza. I'll share sources for why international organizations regard the blockade as a continued form of occupation, it boils down to Gaza still being under Israeli military control with Israel controlling its imports, exports, food, water, electricity, sea access, air space, etc.

https://www.btselem.org/gaza_strip

https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/menasource/gaza-israel-occupied-international-law

https://www.hrw.org/news/2004/10/28/israel-disengagement-will-not-end-gaza-occupation

https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2023/10/israel-opt-israel-must-lift-illegal-and-inhumane-blockade-on-gaza-as-power-plant-runs-out-of-fuel

https://books.google.com/books?id=hYiIWVlpFzEC&pg=PA429

[-] DarkGamer@kbin.social -4 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

in practice the vast majority of who they kill are civilians (mostly women and children)

This is the nature of war. In most conflicts ~90% of the casualties are civilians, in this conflict, only 61% are. Israel is fighting a relatively humane war, (although no war is humane,) so I find it curious that they seem to get more ire than other current conflicts with higher body counts and more civilian deaths.

I’ve only found evidence of Hamas using civilian infrastructure twice in the 2014 war, which I can link if you want, can you share the evidence you’ve found?

I've read a lot of articles and seen a lot of videos with said evidence, too many to list them all. Here's an older NATO report with multiple sources showing that Hamas uses such tactics, here's the wikipedia aritcle about Hamas' use of human shields with many citations, and here's the IDF's youtube channel where they share video evidence.

I’ll share sources for why international organizations regard the blockade as a continued form of occupation, it boils down to Gaza still being under Israeli military control with Israel controlling its imports, exports, food, water, electricity, sea access, air space, etc.

This all seems reasonable to me given that they remain belligerent. If Gaza were not actively violent all this would seem inhumane and would violate many laws, but this is a nation at war with Israel that refuses to pacify itself and lay down arms. Letting supply lines be open and uncontrolled to a government whose stated purpose is Israel's destruction, a genocide of Jews, and ethnic cleansing of the levant, is absurd. Many international organizations are clearly biased against Israel and are holding them to unreasonable standards.

[-] Natanael@slrpnk.net 8 points 11 months ago

"only 61% civilian casualties" require you to believe all men above 16 who were killed were hamas

[-] galloog1@lemmy.world -4 points 11 months ago

I'm still waiting on someone to provide for me a single source where Hamas or the Palestinian Authority admitted that one of Israel's strikes hit something that wasn't civilian.

[-] Keeponstalin@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

A few things about the civilian casualty statistics: the statistic that 90% of casualties in wars are civilians don't seem to be supported from what I can tell. It varies a lot but for example the civilian casualty ratio for WWII was like 67%. For the 2008 Gaza war the civilian casualty ratio was more like 74% (noncombatants) and 64% for the 2014 war (unless you only look at IDF sources, then it's more like 40%). I can't really get details on the 61%, are they counting all males 14+ as combatants? Even then it comes to 69% civilian casualties. I don't see how they got to 61%, which is still very high for modern conflicts as stated in the article you linked.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_casualty_ratio

https://gwern.net/doc/politics/2010-roberts.pdf

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Gaza_War

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Israeli_strikes_and_Palestinian_casualties_in_the_2014_Gaza_War

You find collective punishment reasonable? You seem to believe Gaza is somehow its own nation despite being an occupied territory. Gaza, the West Bank, and East Jerusalem have always been under Israeli military control since 1967, when Israel aimed to take those territories by initiating the six-day war. Previously, Israel ethnically cleansed Palestine during the civil war and war for independence in 1947-48 with Plan Dalet and its previous iterations. After independence, the remaining Palestinians within now Israel were subject to harsh military law, until eased to 2nd class citizens they are today. Meanwhile, those military practices have been implemented on the West Bank, Gaza, and east Jerusalem since 1967. Except Gaza with the unilateral disengagement and blockade, which in many respects is harsher than the brutal martial law ongoing in east Jerusalem and the west bank. Palestinians have had no civil or human rights under Israeli military control. This is an apartheid state. Popular resistance began as nonviolent with the 1st intifada, until violence escalated after the IDF responded with lethal force. Violent resistance to the apartheid did not come out of nowhere. Before 1948, while early Zionists like Ben Guerion were advocating for partition, Palestinian officials were advocating for a unitary state instead of partition. Israel has never been interested in peace because they covet the Palestinian land but without the Palestinians. Keep in mind Israel as it exists today, is an apartheid state for the Palestinians. Not only do you ignore the 2017 Hamas charter, but that article doesn't represent the 1988 charter quite right. Yeah of course the 1988 charter is super terrible, it was created by a fundamentalist resistance group under occupation and had no popular support. That doesn't reflect the will of Palestinians at all. The two most popular goals are sovereignty and right to return, not genocide. This has been a cycle of violence between the Colonizer/Occupier and Colonized/Occupied. A one state solution with equal rights for all is what needs to happen with international pressure for this cycle of violence to end.

https://imeu.org/article/plan-dalet

https://forward.com/news/470923/israel-land-conquest-1967-occupation-six-day-war-plans/

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martial_law#Israel

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_prisoners_in_Israel

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018%E2%80%932019_Gaza_border_protests

https://www.hrw.org/report/2019/12/17/born-without-civil-rights/israels-use-draconian-military-orders-repress

https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/campaigns/2017/06/israel-occupation-50-years-of-dispossession/

https://en.m.wikisource.org/wiki/Cablegram_from_the_Secretary-General_of_the_League_of_Arab_States_to_the_Secretary-General_of_the_United_Nations

https://www.encyclopedia.com/humanities/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/palestinian-arab-congresses

https://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/hamas.asp

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/middle-east/israel-palestine-one-state-solution

https://mondoweiss.net/2018/01/examining-myths-israel/

https://theintercept.com/2023/11/28/israel-palestine-history-peace

this post was submitted on 29 Dec 2023

152 points (93.7% liked)

World News

39153 readers

1381 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.