Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

> Israel will get shot at and not be allowed to shoot back.

The logic doesn't really follow

What shots exactly? the missiles? Attack the launch sites. They're pretty clear as they expose themselves. Israel has 24/7 surveillance it shouldn't be a challenge. Can you support your claim by showing evidence that a hospital was used to launch missiles?

You likely don't have evidence that Israel is targeting anything. It seems every street in the city was indiscriminately bombed, every hospital was distroyed, and tens of thousands of civilians were murdered. That's a massacre not a "response".




> What shots exactly?

I would be referring to all forms of military violence, whether that be guns, rockets or something else.

I also believe if the facility was being used to conduct the war in a significant capacity, e.g. as an ammunition store or as a command and control center then it becomes fair game. Just waiting around for someone to open fire, shoot back only when they are firing, and letting them escape back to their base of operations is not a way to prevent future attacks and puts the defender at an unreasonable disadvantage.

This should still be subject to the doctrine of porportionality and discrimination of course.

> Can you support your claim by showing evidence that a hospital was used to launch missiles?

I never claimed that. It is especially impossible to show since hamas has not been using missiles in this conflict as far as i know. Perhaps you mean rockets?

My main claim is that if the hospital is being used in any significant capacity to conduct military operations it is reasonable that it could be targeted. Whether any specific instance in this war is justified - i don't know, i don't have the full picture of what happened and i don't know what Israel knew at the time of targeting (intent matters). More to the point, i do not believe that allowing hamas impunity so long as they co-locate their activity near civilians is reasonable.

> You likely don't have evidence that Israel is targeting anything.

Only circumstantial based on the civilian death ratio being much lower in this conflict than in other wars where the military bombed indiscriminately.

Generally crimes have an innocent until proven guiltly element. The onus is on evidence is the other way around.

> That's a massacre not a "response".

Whether or not it is ever justified to bomb a hospital is a very different conversation than whether the actions in this specific conflict are justified. For the latter the details matter a lot.


> What shots exactly? the missiles? Attack the launch sites.

What if those launch sites are top of hospitals or media buildings?


> What if those launch sites are top of hospitals or media buildings?

Is that a claim or just a hypothetical scenario? If it's a claim, please provide evidance that supports hospitals were used to launch rockets.

You know what is not hypothetical? the fact that Israel bombed hospitals, UN schools, churches, mosques, civilian shelters, ambulances, and killed tens of thousands of innocent civilians: women, children, journalists, UN staff, Red Crescent members. You know what else isn't hypothetical? Israeli minister's call to wipe out a Palestinian village. It's not about a hospital here or there. Just me typing that sentence makes me sick. The fact that we're past the point where a hospital bombing makes a difference in illustrating the crimes committed. Sadly, the attrocities are far greater.

Here are some not hypothetical Massacres and war crimes committed by Israel:

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Massacres_committed_b...

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_war_crimes

- https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2017-07-16/ty-article-ma...


There is plenty of proof of Hamas running their war from schools, hospitals and mosques.

But you will probably not accept them as they usually come from IDF who's on the ground filming these things.


[flagged]


Same as Hamas is fighting an asymmetrical warfare at a disadvantage by IDF, IDF is at the same disadvantage on the journalistic side. They have the monopoly on reporting their side while Hamas is every person with a camera creating whatever narrative they want.

So yeah I can see why you choose not to take their word when they say that they have evidence.

But trust me bro :-)

But seriously now, I don't really understand why it would be shocking to discover Hamas is operating from hospitals, mosques and schools. They are fighting a war and will do anything they can to gain an advantage.

It's very convenient to deploy your base under a hospital, for so many seasons, that I really don't understand why people find it hard to believe...


> it would be shocking to discover Hamas is operating from hospitals, mosques and schools.

I don't think you're wrong, but I think its wrong when the response is "lets bomb them" instead of figuring out something else.


What is the something else? There is an extensive tunnel network that likely allows insurgents to travel from the hospital to elsewhere. So you can't lay siege to it.

You could send troops in, but now you're in disadvantaged close quarters combat, which is horrific and guaranteed to get many of your troops killed.

The only reasonable strategy is to bomb the hospital. It saves the loves of your troops. Will there be civilian casualties? Yes. Is that preferred to losing your own citizens? Absolutely.


There is no proof that ever happened... And even if, no, you do not bomb hospitals if you do not want to be the baddy.


And when has there been a shred of credible evidence to suggest such a thing?


A lot of evidence, if you choose to believe videos coming out of IDF.

But to take a step back, why would Hamas operating from hospitals, schools and mosques surprise you in any way ? Would you then think anything different of them ? This is asymmetrical warfare. Of course they would use anything they can to create an advantage. Let's not kid ourselves. It's the same as using human shields. That's just how this type of war works.

You work with what you have to survive and gain an advantage


The attack sites are in civilian areas.


Why did 500 Israeli soldiers die in Gaza from your perspective?


> Why did 500 Israeli soldiers die in Gaza from your perspective?

Are saying you committed massacres and bombed hospitals, UN schools, mosques, churches, and ambulances, as some sort of retaliation?

leveling the entire place, displacing a million, and killed tens of thousands of innocent civilians most of whom were women, children, medical staff and red cross members because...? enlighten me please




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: