Serious The Politics Thread

[myowngamertag]

Thank you for outlining the rules for this political discussion thread. I appreciate the emphasis on serious dialogue and credible sources, and I agree that maintaining respect and avoiding generalizations are crucial for productive conversations. I’ll make sure to follow the guidelines and contribute thoughtfully to ensure a respectful and informative discussion.

Welcome to the party pal. Have a seat

 

[S.A.C. Martin]

I was told by a teacher when at school that the difference between a terrorist and a freedom fighter was “your perspective on their aims and position in relation to your world view”.

I dismissed it at the time - now 25 years later…he was spot on. Best teacher I had.

Meanwhile, in the Australian media today we’ve seen a lot of backlash to a particular MP, Peter Dutton, labelling all Palestinians as terrorists - I remain unsurprised that a white Australian conservative male is an unhinged racist.

Disappointed, but not surprised.

https://www.theguardian.com/austral...-visa-ban-with-family-stories-of-asylum-video

 

[dex]

I am Jewish, and I have generally learned that it is often better to just not speak about Israel (or my ethnicity for that matter) because people often automatically conflate the Jewish identity with Israel. But, coming from a family of Holocaust survivors who know to teach their children their history, I know propaganda when I read it.

The IDF and its commanders are a terrorist organization that aims to commit genocide upon the Palestinian people. The IDF and its commanders actively kill civilians and seek the complete erasure of the Palestinian people and culture.

Hamas is a terrorist organization that aims to commit genocide upon the Israeli people. Hamas actively kills civilians and seeks the complete erasure of the Israeli people and culture.

Hamas fighters killed one of my best friends on October 7th, raped his wife, and in doing so, killed their future child. The justification given for these actions was "perhaps they looked like resting soldiers." I have read reports of Israeli fighters acting similarly against Palestinians, with similarly terrifying, flimsy justifications (fortunately, none of my Palestinian friends have been physically affected by the conflict, so I do not have a personal example to give here). The only comparison to be made between the two is that both are groups determined on genocidal paths and policies. Comparing the actions of one to say the other is less brutal is propaganda and genuinely hurtful to read. There is no justification nor comparison for the actions of the IDF upon the Palestinian public and prisoners. There is no justification nor comparison for the actions of Hamas upon the Israeli public and prisoners.

I don't see how supporting either group could be correct, as a foreign party or as a private, foreign citizen. Both have committed atrocities in the name of state and religion. I personally detest the IDF for making it "dirty" to be Jewish again; their horrendous, genocidal actions have set back decades of progress Jewish people have made worldwide in lessening antisemitism in the world. But to say that Hamas soldiers, ordered or no, are more justified in the killing of civilians is upsetting and saddening to read.

 

[lilyhollow]

Hamas is a terrorist organization that aims to commit genocide upon the Israeli people. Hamas actively kills civilians and seeks the complete erasure of the Israeli people and culture.

These are false statements. There is overwhelming evidence supporting what I say, but I don't think it's permissible for me to post the evidence on this site.

Here, at any rate, is one historical example of resistance groups opposed to US Nazi violence being smeared by western media as 'terrorists.' These smears of course sound silly to all people of conscience today.

But to say that Hamas soldiers, ordered or no, are more justified in the killing of civilians is upsetting and saddening to read.

I saved a copy of my post prior to its deletion and am re-reading it right now. I'm sorry, but not a single word of it attempts to justify the killing of civilians in any way, so I'm not sure what you found upsetting or saddening about it. I don't think anyone in this thread has ever tried to justify the killing of civilians.

Actually, let me correct myself. There certainly are posts in this thread that have attempted to justify the killing of civilians... Palestinian civilians, that is (as well as Japanese and Korean civilians). You're welcome to verify this for yourself if you're curious: these posts were allowed by the rules and are still up.

 

[S.A.C. Martin]

I have thought about this carefully and I am prefacing this next message with the following, firm, caveat: nobody who is Jewish should have anything to fear about discussing Israel or Gaza. Nobody here is condoning the murders of anyone Israeli or Palestinian.

Nobody here, I hope, is genuinely antisemitic. Or Islamaphobic.

I would hope that we all just want peace, for everyone, and equal rights and self determination for all people.

These are basic human rights and tenants and this is my creed.

I am Jewish, and I have generally learned that it is often better to just not speak about Israel (or my ethnicity for that matter) because people often automatically conflate the Jewish identity with Israel. But, coming from a family of Holocaust survivors who know to teach their children their history, I know propaganda when I read it.

I will not comment on this other than to say I am a published historian and spotting propaganda can be tricky, because everyone has built in subconscious biases that may stop them from fully appreciating or identifying that something is slanted, particularly when it relates to their own life experience.

So you will forgive me I hope, for being happy that you think about things in these terms but would also caution you that you should be able to say why something is propaganda and back it up with references, citations and explanations too.

The IDF and its commanders are a terrorist organization that aims to commit genocide upon the Palestinian people. The IDF and its commanders actively kill civilians and seek the complete erasure of the Palestinian people and culture.

You are not going far enough here.

Members of the Israeli Knessett including the prime minister, president, finance minister, defence minister, and more, have all called for resettlement of Gaza and the West Bank, and more genocidal statements. People in Israel - Israelis - are currently, according to polls, in favour of raping Palestinian prisoners:

https://www.haaretz.com/opinion/202...al-decay/00000191-1e71-d534-a9f9-7f7949a00000

We are talking about a society that in ten months has managed to go from what some experts have called apartheid, to full blown genocide and annexation. Virtually all experts in history, politics and international humanitarian law agree on Israel‘s current status and where it is heading. It is a dark place, and I would hope we all here would want it to stop what it is doing, and to move back towards a path of peace.

Hamas is a terrorist organization that aims to commit genocide upon the Israeli people. Hamas actively kills civilians and seeks the complete erasure of the Israeli people and culture.

https://www.wilsoncenter.org/article/doctrine-hamas

In 2017, a revised Hamas manifesto included three departures from the 1988 charter, former U.S. diplomat Aaron David Miller told The Islamists. First, Hamas accepted the establishment of a Palestinian state separate from Israel —although only provisionally.

Its statement on principles and policies said, “Hamas rejects any alternative to the full and complete liberation of Palestine, from the river to the sea. However, without compromising its rejection of the Zionist entity and without relinquishing any Palestinian rights, Hamas considers the establishment of a fully sovereign and independent Palestinian state, with Jerusalem as its capital along the lines of the 4th of June 1967, with the return of the refugees and the displaced to their homes from which they were expelled, to be a formula of national consensus.”

Second, it attempted to distinguish between Jews or Judaism and modern Zionism. Hamas said that its fight was against the “racist, aggressive, colonial and expansionist” Zionist project, Israel, but not against Judaism or Jews. The updated platform also lacked some of the anti-Semitic language of the 1988 charter. Third, the document did not reference the Palestinian Muslim Brotherhood, from which Hamas was originally an offshoot.

The ICJ gave their advisory opinion which made it abundantly clear that Hamas and any other groups in Gaza DO have the right to defend themselves from the occupying power - Israel - and from apartheid policies.

https://www.icj-cij.org/node/204176

E. The question of self-determination (paras. 230-243)
Having found that Israel’s settlement policy, its acts of annexation, and its related discriminatory legislation and measures are in breach of international law, the Court turns to the aspect of question (a) that enquires as to the effects of Israel’s policies and practices on the exercise of the Palestinian people’s right to self-determination.

The Court has already affirmed, in its Wall opinion the existence of the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination. In the present proceedings, the Court first determines the scope of this right and then examines the effects, if any, that Israel’s policies and practices have on its exercise.

In light of its analysis, the Court is of the view that the prolonged character of Israel’s unlawful policies and practices aggravates their violation of the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination.

As a consequence of Israel’s policies and practices, which span decades, the Palestinian people has been deprived of its right to self-determination over a long period, and further prolongation of these policies and practices undermines the exercise of this right in the future.

For these reasons, the Court is of the view that Israel’s unlawful policies and practices are in breach of Israel’s obligation to respect the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination. The manner in which these policies affect the legal status of the occupation, and thereby the legality of the continued presence of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, is discussed later in the advisory opinion.

Hamas fighters killed one of my best friends on October 7th, raped his wife, and in doing so, killed their future child. The justification given for these actions was "perhaps they looked like resting soldiers."

I am sorry to hear that and you have my sympathies. However, I would urge you to not say that again on the open forum as your friend may not wish for his life story to be shared in this forum, and also the legal ramifications of you being identified by this story.

I have read reports of Israeli fighters acting similarly against Palestinians, with similarly terrifying, flimsy justifications (fortunately, none of my Palestinian friends have been physically affected by the conflict, so I do not have a personal example to give here).

That should not stop you from being able to conduct research and provide evidence and sources?

The only comparison to be made between the two is that both are groups determined on genocidal paths and policies. Comparing the actions of one to say the other is less brutal is propaganda and genuinely hurtful to read.

I am sorry to say but there is no comparison.

The ratio of dead Palestinians to Israelis (some of which were killed by the IDF, see here: https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news...-captive/00000190-89a2-d776-a3b1-fdbe45520000) is 40 to 1.

Approx 40,000 to 1100 Israelis.

That number doesn’t take into account 10,000 estimated to have been killed and buried under rubble, nor is it reflective of the conditions of starvation, dehydration and disease that has been enforced onto an entire population of 2.3 million people, who have been displaced multiple times and even killed in cold blood during “rescue operations” (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cw44ve90dppo), waving a white flag to reach family members (https://www.itv.com/news/2024-01-30...ates-idf-were-behind-gaza-white-flag-shooting) and even going out to get flour to feed their families (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/gaza-aid-convoy-deaths-al-rashid-israel-idf-hamas-rcna141497).

For every Israeli life taken on 7 October 2023, 40 Palestinians have been killed, the majority of which are women and children. 16,500 children killed. There are 17,000 orphans without any surviving family, and a significant number (thousands) have lost at least one or two limbs to enforced amputation.

There is no justification nor comparison for the actions of the IDF upon the Palestinian public and prisoners.

There is certainly no justification.

You have quoted your family’s history. I would urge you to think on that, and look at what the last 76 years have been like for the Palestinian people. Think on the parallels that may or may not exist.

I say this as an observation, and in no way intending to cause discomfort - but perhaps we should all feel great discomfort when 2.3 million mostly, if not completely, unarmed people are being bombed daily, starved to death and are dying of easily preventative diseases due to all medical facilities being severely damaged or destroyed.

There is no justification nor comparison for the actions of Hamas upon the Israeli public and prisoners.

I will point out the 4th Geneva convention states the following:

Article 4
Persons protected by the Convention are those who, at a given moment and in any manner whatsoever, find themselves, in case of a conflict or occupation, in the hands of a Party to the conflict or Occupying Power of which they are not nationals.

Nationals of a State which is not bound by the Convention are not protected by it. Nationals of a neutral State who find themselves in the territory of a belligerent State, and nationals of a co-belligerent State, shall not be regarded as protected persons while the State of which they are nationals has normal diplomatic representation in the State in whose hands they are.

The provisions of Part II are, however, wider in application, as defined in Article 13.

Persons protected by the Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field of August 12, 1949, or by the Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked Members of Armed Forces at Sea of August 12, 1949, or by the Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War of August 12, 1949, shall not be considered as protected persons within the meaning of the present Convention.

Since the ICJ has established that:

Israel is occupying the Palestinian territories and continued to do so despite the ”withdrawal” from 2005 in Gaza, and the nature of the occupation, Palestinians and indeed, Hamas, do have the right to defend against the actions of Israel. Israel does not have the right to defence, as the occupying power.

Hamas should not commit war crimes in their resistance, which is also against the Geneva conventions, and rightly, their leaders are wanted by the ICC for those crimes.

I don't see how supporting either group could be correct, as a foreign party or as a private, foreign citizen. Both have committed atrocities in the name of state and religion.

This is demonstrably false.

The Palestinian factions are doing it because they are subject to apartheid, annexation of their lands, and genocide by Israel.

Israel is doing it in the name of their state and use religion as means to justify their actions.

I personally detest the IDF for making it "dirty" to be Jewish again

I don’t believe that they have.

Anyone who thinks this is about religion is a fool.

Palestinians do not see it along religious lines: it is explicitly against their oppressors, the Israelis. Jews across the world have protested FOR Palestine and are in the majority. They do not see it as along religious lines either.

The IDF and Israel have explicitly dehumanised the Palestinians, and some of it at times is undeniably Islamaphobic.

their horrendous, genocidal actions have set back decades of progress Jewish people have made worldwide in lessening antisemitism in the world.

I don’t believe that it is true. Partly because, with respect, antisemitisim has absolutely been weaponised for political reasons instead of being used in the right circumstances.

Example: claims of antisemitism at student protests in the United States. Closer examination of virtually every student protest finds minimal actual cases of antisemitism happened, but a huge amount of police brutality against pro Palestine Jewish protestors did happen. Repeatedly. https://www.reuters.com/world/us/co...ave-swift-response-by-authorities-2024-04-25/

It is not antisemitic to call for divestment from Israel on the basis of its actions in Gaza. That has been the key message of the protests - divest from a country that they think is committing genocide.

By the way - the comparisons with the protests against apartheid South Africa and the western response to those who wanted to sanction South Africa - stark and obvious, virtually the same reaction and attempt to stop the protests through accusations and police briutality.

But to say that Hamas soldiers, ordered or no, are more justified in the killing of civilians is upsetting and saddening to read.

No one here has said that Hamas are justified in killing civilians, and with respect, I think you are playing with fire by saying that and I would urge you to retract it.

They are, under the fourth Geneva convention, justified and have the right to self determination and to defend themselves from their oppressors.

That is why the leaders of Hamas are potentially getting arrest warrants from the ICJ due to the nature of their resistance against Israel.

It is also why Netanahyu and Gallant on the Israeli side are potentially getting arrest warrants for their actions in offensive, oppressive and destructive practices on the occupied Palestinian territories.

 

[Dead by Daylight]

These are false statements. There is overwhelming evidence supporting what I say, but I don't think it's permissible for me to post the evidence on this site.

Here, at any rate, is one historical example of resistance groups opposed to US Nazi violence being smeared by western media as 'terrorists.' These smears of course sound silly to all people of conscience today.

I know you're likely not a bad person and I'd like to hear the "overwhelming evidence" supporting what you say, but the fact of the matter is that I cannot, in good faith, say an organization guilty of murdering over 1,000 civilians and committing war crimes is "not a terrorist organization". I'd be happy to change my stance if you provide me with evidence that justifies this.

EDIT: I don't understand why it's so difficult to understand that yes, the IDF is a genocidal force that is guilty of committing crimes against humanity due to its horrific actions in Gaza, and that yes, Hamas is a terrorist organization that is guilty of killing civilians in an orchestrated attack. Responding to someone's post about how Hamas affected their friend's life with "oh, the organization that massacred over a thousand civilians isn't actually a terrorist organization" and linking an article that quite literally starts its first paragraph by saying "Since its creation in December 1987, Hamas has invoked militant interpretations of Islam to spearhead a Sunni extremist movement committed to destroying Israel" does not help prove your point. Have some humanity.

https://www.wilsoncenter.org/article/doctrine-hamas

 

[SittinGamer]

I don't understand why it's so difficult to understand that yes, the IDF is a genocidal force that is guilty of committing crimes against humanity due to its horrific actions in Gaza, and that yes, Hamas is a terrorist organization that is guilty of killing civilians in an orchestrated attack. Responding to someone's post about how Hamas affected their friend's life with "oh, the organization that massacred over a thousand civilians isn't actually a terrorist organization" and linking an article that quite literally starts its first paragraph by saying "Since its creation in December 1987, Hamas has invoked militant interpretations of Islam to spearhead a Sunni extremist movement committed to destroying Israel" does not help prove your point. Have some humanity.

I cannot believe the literal first two responses to someone who's friend was (allegedly) one of the thousand innocents who lost their lives to Hamas was "uhm actually"-ing that it isn't that bad, actually.

 

[lilyhollow]

I know you're likely not a bad person and I'd like to hear the "overwhelming evidence" supporting what you say, but the fact of the matter is that I cannot, in good faith, say an organization guilty of murdering over 1,000 civilians and committing war crimes is "not a terrorist organization". I'd be happy to change my stance if you provide me with evidence that justifies this.

I just checked, and about two months ago you and I already had this conversation in this thread. You read and reacted to the posts that I wrote on this topic. The posts are still there and can currently be read by any member who wants to do so.

Not only did you not change your position, but you didn't even revise your knowledge of elementary facts--a bare-minimum requirement for us to have a productive dialogue. For example, in your post just now, you state that Hamas murdered "over 1000 civilians." Even Wikipedia, a source which typically holds a heavy bias towards the west, debunks that particular statement. It is in fact common knowledge for anyone who is sincerely following the issue.

Another thing which is common knowledge, and which has been presented to you in this thread multiple times, is the fact that Israel killed many of its own civilians on October 7th as a matter of policy. This information has been provided as recently as SAC's post immediately preceding your own. Yet you seem to remain "unaware" of this basic fact--one which has even been confirmed by Israeli sources.

The current official count of dead civilians from October 7th is 797. Of these, an unknown number, but possibly hundreds, were killed by IDF forces, not by Hamas. We must be careful not to spread inflated numbers, which help to directly justify the ongoing massacres of Palestinians.

Can you explain why you have not changed your understanding of even the most basic of facts when corrected? To me it would indicate that you are ideologically inclined to believe Hamas is a terrorist group regardless of any evidence provided to you. If you're committed ideologically in this way, it makes my job of convincing you a whole lot harder.



Israel has precise, advanced technology which allows them to identify targets with ease. They know where every bullet, every bomb lands. They target civilians knowingly and as a matter of policy. Even when Palestinians peacefully protested, IDF snipers would maim and murder children, medics, and disabled people at will.

Hamas does not have any of that. The idea of a Hamas militant easily, consistently distinguishing between IDF militants, security forces, armed civilians, and regular civilians--in the midst of a chaotic ground operation where the Israeli security apparatus collapsed in a way that nobody anticipated--is simply ridiculous. They also have no good reason as an organization to kill civilians.

Is it possible that individual Hamas militants knowingly killed some civilians? Yes, that is of course possible, even likely. In many cases we are talking about orphans who watched their parents murdered before their eyes. I can only be realistic and say that there are probably some cases of that happening. But "there were probably some individuals in the organization who went against policy by killing civilians on purpose" is not an acceptable standard for defining something as a "terrorist group." It would be an absurdly broad definition to the point of uselessness.

Hamas as an organization has no interest in killing civilians. They reject killing civilians and have stated this clearly. You can say "oh they're just lying of course," but you don't have to believe them--just look at what their motivations are.

The goal of Al-Aqsa flood was pretty basic and is obvious for anyone who has read recent reports. They wanted to capture as many enemy combatants as possible in order to trade them for all of the Palestinians held in Israeli prisons. I wrote a post earlier providing an overview of Yahya Sinwar, the current head of Hamas' political wing. The post references a prisoner exchange in which Hamas rescued 1000 Palestinian prisoners in exchange for just one Israeli soldier.

This goal should not shock us. It is of the utmost importance that all Palestinian prisoners be released immediately. These prisons are possibly the worst place anyone could ever exist in the entire world. Israeli men and women mass rape, torture, and kill Palestinians in these prisons. This is not some hypothetical thing that is 'probably happening,' it is literally confirmed over and over again, including video proof which I believe SAC has discussed in an earlier post (with Israeli society seemingly encouraging these abuses).

Literally any person in this thread with any dignity would immediately join an armed resistance group if we found out about this systematically happening to our own people, our own families. Our first goal beyond anything else would be to get everyone released from those fucked up rape dungeons. And, wouldn't you know it, just as we would expect of a rational actor, that was exactly what Hamas tried to do:

At the start of the war, Hamas offered to release all hostages in exchange for Israel releasing all Palestinian prisoners. By October 2023, Israel held 5,200 Palestinians (including 170 juveniles) in its prisons.

So, we have:

• Any normal group of functioning people, including anyone in this thread, would obviously conclude that we must release as many of our people as possible from Israel's sadistic rape prisons.
• Hamas's stated goal just so happens to align perfectly with that goal, the goal we would expect any rational actor to have.
• The actions of Hamas (repeatedly offering to exchange prisoners, continuing to capture more prisoners during ground operations since then, etc) just so happen align exactly with all of that.
• Israel, not Hamas, does militarily benefit from intentionally killing Israeli civilians, as has been 100% confirmed with sources in this thread multiple times.
• But we are supposed to throw all of that away and simply conclude that Hamas just went in there with orders to 'terroristically' murder civilians, for no military purpose. Please tell me how this is supposed to make sense.

Also SittinGamer, please don't try to use those kinds of debate strategies of making pro-Palestinian members seem 'insensitive.' It simply will not work, ever, I'm afraid. We are talking about Palestinians being collected in 70kg sacks of ground up meat and bone. If your goal in this thread is to condemn the one force doing the most to stop that from happening, I will oppose you, and there is no emotional appeal you can make that will get me to compromise on that.

 

[Dead by Daylight]

I just checked, and about two months ago you and I already had this conversation in this thread. You read and reacted to the posts that I wrote on this topic. The posts are still there and can currently be read by any member who wants to do so.

The conversation started with you complaining that a Hamas pamphlet that you used as a source for Hamas's intention behind the Al-Aqsa Flood was deleted from the thread. You then say that in order to learn and form an analysis on Hamas, we need to learn about perspectives from people who are not enemies of Hamas. I then tell you that numerous countries according to the Center for Human Rights have designated Hamas as a terrorist organization, then give you a few sources of countries.

(For anyone wishing to see the conversation, it starts here.)

For example, in your post just now, you state that Hamas murdered "over 1000 civilians." Even Wikipedia, a source which typically holds a heavy bias towards the west, debunks that particular statement. It is in fact common knowledge for anyone who is sincerely following the issue.

Another thing which is common knowledge, and which has been presented to you in this thread multiple times, is the fact that Israel killed many of its own civilians on October 7th as a matter of policy. This information has been provided as recently as SAC's post immediately preceding your own. Yet you seem to remain "unaware" of this basic fact--one which has even been confirmed by Israeli sources.

The current official count of dead civilians from October 7th is 797. Of these, an unknown number, but possibly hundreds, were killed by IDF forces, not by Hamas. We must be careful not to spread inflated numbers, which help to directly justify the ongoing massacres of Palestinians.

Hamas does not have any of that. The idea of a Hamas militant easily, consistently distinguishing between IDF militants, security forces, armed civilians, and regular civilians--in the midst of a chaotic ground operation where the Israeli security apparatus collapsed in a way that nobody anticipated--is simply ridiculous. They also have no good reason as an organization to kill civilians.

Is it possible that individual Hamas militants knowingly killed some civilians? Yes, that is of course possible, even likely. In many cases we are talking about orphans who watched their parents murdered before their eyes. I can only be realistic and say that there are probably some cases of that happening. But "there were probably some individuals in the organization who went against policy by killing civilians on purpose" is not an acceptable standard for defining something as a "terrorist group." It would be an absurdly broad definition to the point of uselessness.

Hamas as an organization has no interest in killing civilians. They reject killing civilians and have stated this clearly. You can say "oh they're just lying of course," but you don't have to believe them--just look at what their motivations are.

I'll admit that I misread my source. However, if we have a look at a few sources:

The Associated Press: 260 civilians died after the Hamas massacre at the Nova Music Festival. "Many" of the 1,400 killed were civilians.
Human Rights Watch: "Agence France-Presse cross-referenced numerous data sources to determine that 815 of 1,195 people killed on October 7 were civilians."
The New York Times: "According to Israeli police, health officials have identified at least 846 civilians killed in the fighting."

Where are you getting the 797 number from?

I am also aware that Israel killed some of its own civilians on October 7th (in fact, here are some reports).

That doesn't take away from my point that Hamas is a terrorist organization because they organized a full-scale surprise attack on Israel, leading to the deaths of hundreds of people, a majority of which were civilians. They may have "no good reason" to kill civilians, but they did indeed kill a significant majority of civilians.

If Hamas's goal isn't to kill civilians, then the October 7th attack wouldn't have had a significant majority of civilian deaths over military deaths.

Can you explain why you have not changed your understanding of even the most basic of facts when corrected? To me it would indicate that you are ideologically inclined to believe Hamas is a terrorist group regardless of any evidence provided to you. If you're committed ideologically in this way, it makes my job of convincing you a whole lot harder.

I've just given you some sources that say Hamas killed many civilians - a majority of the deaths on October 7th, in fact. I'll also acknowledge that the IDF killed its own civilians and soldiers with the Hannibal directive that it issued, since that is indeed factual. I am not, as you claim, "ideologically committed" to Hamas being a terrorist group, I'm just formulating my own opinion off of what sources on the attack are currently saying.


Your points on Palestinian prisoners being tortured and abused horrifically in Israeli prisons are valid, and I agree that getting Palestinian prisoners out of Israeli jails should be a priority. I don't, however, see the benefit that killing civilians provides to this cause.

Also SittinGamer, please don't try to use those kinds of debate strategies of making pro-Palestinian members seem 'insensitive.' It simply will not work, ever, I'm afraid. We are talking about Palestinians being collected in 70kg sacks of ground up meat and bone. If your goal in this thread is to condemn the one force doing the most to stop that from happening, I will oppose you, and there is no emotional appeal you can make that will get me to compromise on that.

I'm sorry, but you cherrypicked a line from a post that stated a user's (very personal, mind you) account of the October 7th massacre and how it affected his world to use as a springboard to push your points. The IDF is a horrific organization and the world would be better without it and Netanyahu / sympathizing Israeli officers in power. That does not give you the right to use someone's personal experience about the Hamas attacks in order to expand on a point of yours.

Also, you aren't being moderated specifically because you're posting links that go against the general consensus on Hamas. You're being moderated because you are posting links directly from Hamas. I'm sure if you find a report from a news source or an interview, you would be able to present it here without it being deleted. Moderators, please do not delete these sources.

 

[SittinGamer]

If your goal in this thread is to condemn the one force doing the most to stop that from happening, I will oppose you, and there is no emotional appeal you can make that will get me to compromise on that.

Sure is a good thing that is not my goal of this thread.

 

[lilyhollow]

Where are you getting the 797 number from?

Wikipedia states 797

That doesn't take away from my point that Hamas is a terrorist organization

Really? "Hamas killed 1400 civilians intentionally" being revised down to "about 800 civilians died on October 7th, and we know for a fact that Israel killed some, possibly a great many of them" doesn't take away from your point?

If Hamas's goal isn't to kill civilians, then the October 7th attack wouldn't have had a significant majority of civilian deaths over military deaths.

We don't even know if Hamas killed the majority of the civilians who were killed. That is part of what I have been trying to tell you! What we are certain of is that Israel intentionally targeted its own civilians as a matter of policy. We will probably never know exactly how many were killed by whom. Of the ones killed by Hamas, we will probably never know how many were killed by Hamas soldiers with intent to kill a civilian, how many were killed because they were armed, or how many were killed in the confusion of a very chaotic ground operation.

I know that that is not a fun thing to hear. I know it will make me sound like a 'bad actor' to many people in this thread, or like I am 'justifying killing civilians.' Israel likes to say that they're targeting Hamas when they kill civilians, and it's bloodboiling, because obviously they are lying and justifying what they really want to do, which is kill Palestinians with impunity. So I get it, that narrative sounds like a bullshit justification. But here is the thing: we know the Israelis are lying. They have an overwhelming track record of lying and have the most precise and sophisticated weapons technologies in the world. We know for a fact, and they have even explicitly stated, that they 'know where every bullet lands.' They are liars who clearly are targeting civilians, and have continued stating over and over and over again that they are doing so.

Hamas does not have a track record of lying about these things. It does not have advanced sophisticated technologies. They do not constantly boast as an organization about killing unarmed civilians. And not only is it against their policy to kill unarmed civilians, but it makes exact perfect sense why they would have that policy if we assume that they are rational. There is no actual reason to simply assume they are lying bullshitters other than "the western media told me so" or decades of anti-Arab indoctrination.

I get being skeptical, skepticism is great. Saying "we don't know for sure" about some things is great! But that is not what people are doing. They are simply concluding as a matter of course that "lol no they are confirmed irrational terrorists who want to kill Jews just for being Jewish," even as evidence mounts, and will continue to mount, that that is not the case. And they will do so 11 months into a genocide where this group is the only thing between Palestinians and complete extermination. It is a complete absurdity.

I don't, however, see the benefit that killing civilians provides to this cause.

Neither does Hamas. That is why their goal was to capture as many militants as possible and exchange them for Palestinian prisoners who are being raped and tortured systematically by Israel. It probably could have worked much better, too, but they apparently did not count on Israel being psychopathic enough to blow up their own people in order to avoid having to exchange them for any of the Palestinian victims they starve and torture in prison daily.

The conversation started with you complaining that a Hamas pamphlet that you used as a source for Hamas's intention behind the Al-Aqsa Flood was deleted from the thread.

I don't think I've ever complained about that pamphlet being deleted. At the time, I actually expected the whole post to be deleted, so I was pleasantly surprised that it wasn't. What I took issue with is that the moderator added an edited comment to the post which misrepresented the Hamas packet as "supporting the deaths of civilians." In reality, the Hamas packet specifically rejects killing civilians--the exact opposite of what the mod edit says, and indeed one of the main points I'm trying to make in our current conversation.

I'm sorry, but you cherrypicked a line from a post that stated a user's (very personal, mind you) account of the October 7th massacre and how it affected his world to use as a springboard to push your points. The IDF is a horrific organization and the world would be better without it and Netanyahu / sympathizing Israeli officers in power. That does not give you the right to use someone's personal experience about the Hamas attacks in order to expand on a point of yours.

Dex was replying to me, friend. I was continuing the conversation--the post he was replying to, mine, was deleted. In my reply to him, I even made a point of avoiding replying to the entire paragraph in which he discusses his account. To suggest that I was speaking out of turn there simply makes no sense.

Also, you aren't being moderated specifically because you're posting links that go against the general consensus on Hamas. You're being moderated because you are posting links directly from Hamas. I'm sure if you find a report from a news source or an interview, you would be able to present it here without it being deleted. Moderators, please do not delete these sources.

The post I wrote (which would have been post #1826, if you want to know where it originally appeared in the context of this conversation) did not come directly from Hamas, it came from The Cradle. To be fair, I don't even really know much about The Cradle. Is The Cradle Hamas? To me, it was simply the source I happened to get the information from. I checked to see if the same information was being reported by the Western media, which it was, but chose to post The Cradle's tweet version because it was concise and included a picture of Abu Obeida. I assumed that the post was deleted because my additional commentary happened to upset some people, which is fine. Whatever the reason, I'm not really concerned, but I feel it's good to know for context that there used to be a post there, since that's what triggered this conversation in the first place

 

[S.A.C. Martin]

I cannot believe the literal first two responses to someone who's friend was (allegedly) one of the thousand innocents who lost their lives to Hamas was "uhm actually"-ing that it isn't that bad, actually.

That’s a pretty appalling misrepresentation of what I wrote. Please retract that statement.

 

[S.A.C. Martin]

I know you're likely not a bad person and I'd like to hear the "overwhelming evidence" supporting what you say, but the fact of the matter is that I cannot, in good faith, say an organization guilty of murdering over 1,000 civilians and committing war crimes is "not a terrorist organization". I'd be happy to change my stance if you provide me with evidence that justifies this.

EDIT: I don't understand why it's so difficult to understand that yes, the IDF is a genocidal force that is guilty of committing crimes against humanity due to its horrific actions in Gaza, and that yes, Hamas is a terrorist organization that is guilty of killing civilians in an orchestrated attack.

If we’re going by your logic, maybe the IDF should be described as a terrorist force then?

Given that prior to October 7th 2023, they had killed multiples of thousands of Palestinians in various bombing raids, “mowing the lawn” and other actions since Hamas took control of the Gaza Strip.

The ICJ advisory opinion of last month made it explicitly clear: Gaza and the West Bank and the Occupied Palestinian Territories are illegally occupied by Israel and they must now retreat back behind the 1967 agreed borders.

Any group that is fighting back against occupied rule IS BY DEFINITION in the Geneva conventions a resistance movement.

Resistance movements should also not commit crimes against humanity. That is clear, that is why the ICC has arrest warrants requested for Hamas’ leaders.

NUANCE is necessary for difficult topics such as this and being informed and ready to have that difficult conversation is the academic thing to do. In short, be adult.

Responding to someone's post about how Hamas affected their friend's life with "oh, the organization that massacred over a thousand civilians isn't actually a terrorist organization" and linking an article that quite literally starts its first paragraph by saying "Since its creation in December 1987, Hamas has invoked militant interpretations of Islam to spearhead a Sunni extremist movement committed to destroying Israel" does not help prove your point. Have some humanity.

I did have some humanity:

I am sorry to hear that and you have my sympathies. However, I would urge you to not say that again on the open forum as your friend may not wish for his life story to be shared in this forum, and also the legal ramifications of you being identified by this story.

I also pointed out that recounting it when potentially you can be linked to it, and targeted, is not the best decision.

Respectfully, I thought of the poster’s own safety when I wrote that last night, given some of the madness we have seen with protest and counter protest arguments on the internet.

 

[S.A.C. Martin]

Final one from me today - an interview from a Norwegian journalist interviewing Mark Regev, a spokesperson for Benjamin Netanyahu.

This is why it is important to have journalistic freedoms, integrity, and above all, factual sources and an academic approach to things.

 

[Dead by Daylight]

Wikipedia states 797

Not sure I'd trust Wikipedia on that one, but sure.

Really? "Hamas killed 1400 civilians intentionally" being revised down to "about 800 civilians died on October 7th, and we know for a fact that Israel killed some, possibly a great many of them" doesn't take away from your point?

No, because my point is that Hamas is a terrorist group that killed civilians in an orchestrated attack.

I'd like to leave you with one question: why would Hamas attack the Re'im music festival, the city of Sderot, the villages of Nir Oz and Netiv HaAsara, and the civilian populace of Sufa, if they are diametrically opposed to attacking civilians and were specifically focused on killing IDF military forces? Perhaps Hamas states that its goal is not to kill civilians, but its actions on October 7th in at least these places go against that stated goal. I'd love to hear your explanation.

If we’re going by your logic, maybe the IDF should be described as a terrorist force then?

Yep, it should be described as a governmentally-approved and supported terrorist force due to its actions in Gaza.

Any group that is fighting back against occupied rule IS BY DEFINITION in the Geneva conventions a resistance movement.

Sure. That doesn't mean that resistance movements cannot be terrorist in nature anyways - they can often commit terrorist acts, as Hamas did on October 7th, and international law states that "Ultimately, any Palestinian right to resist does not negate criminal liability for widespread killing of civilians, either by suicide bombing or by indiscriminate rockets [which are both tactics Hamas has used significantly in the past]". Using methods that are considered illegal under international law as their main way of resistance against Israeli occupation is why Hamas's legitimacy is in doubt in the first place.

Resistance movements should also not commit crimes against humanity. That is clear, that is why the ICC has arrest warrants requested for Hamas’ leaders.

I'm glad we agree on this.

 

[Cancel cult]

Not sure I'd trust Wikipedia on that one, but sure.

Don't believe everything you are taught in school.

These are false statements. There is overwhelming evidence supporting what I say, but I don't think it's permissible for me to post the evidence on this site.

Here, at any rate, is one historical example of resistance groups opposed to US Nazi violence being smeared by western media as 'terrorists.' These smears of course sound silly to all people of conscience today.

I saved a copy of my post prior to its deletion and am re-reading it right now. I'm sorry, but not a single word of it attempts to justify the killing of civilians in any way, so I'm not sure what you found upsetting or saddening about it. I don't think anyone in this thread has ever tried to justify the killing of civilians.

Actually, let me correct myself. There certainly are posts in this thread that have attempted to justify the killing of civilians... Palestinian civilians, that is (as well as Japanese and Korean civilians). You're welcome to verify this for yourself if you're curious: these posts were allowed by the rules and are still up.

I cannot believe the literal first two responses to someone who's friend was (allegedly) one of the thousand innocents who lost their lives to Hamas was "uhm actually"-ing that it isn't that bad, actually.

Also SittinGamer, please don't try to use those kinds of debate strategies of making pro-Palestinian members seem 'insensitive.' It simply will not work, ever, I'm afraid. We are talking about Palestinians being collected in 70kg sacks of ground up meat and bone. If your goal in this thread is to condemn the one force doing the most to stop that from happening, I will oppose you, and there is no emotional appeal you can make that will get me to compromise on that.

Alright, I'm not saying anything you said is wrong, and Im not saying anything you said is right. Im just saying that you making a post in response to someone venting their loss consisting only of corrections is very insensitive. I am not saying this to judge you, but I don't understand how someone can read that post and only reply with a rebuttal. I'm not saying anything in your response was wrong, but not addressing the persons pain and only correcting them comes across as sociopathic. I think you should reflect on your actions.

 

[MrHands]

Wikipedia says 1,200 were killed. ~800 civilians and ~400 security forces. On top of this ~200 Israelis were taken as hostages. Wikipedia's numbers are pretty consistent with basically every other source that isn't literally Hamas.

Ignoring security force deaths and hostages (most of which are dead) to promote Hamas as "not so bad" by making the death total in a civilian massacre look smaller is absolutely disgusting.

 

[S.A.C. Martin]

Wikipedia says 1,200 were killed. ~800 civilians and ~400 security forces. On top of this ~200 Israelis were taken as hostages. Wikipedia's numbers are pretty consistent with basically every other source that isn't literally Hamas.

Ignoring security force deaths and hostages (most if which are dead) to promote Hamas as "not so bad" by making the death total in a civilian massacre look smaller is absolutely disgusting.

Nobody has said “not so bad” - everyone is asking for accurate reporting and citing of sources.

And just a point of order on your numbers:

https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news...-captive/00000190-89a2-d776-a3b1-fdbe45520000

Unrestricted fire


One case in which it is known that civilians were hit, a case that received wide coverage, took place in the house of Pessi Cohen at Kibbutz Be'eri. 14 hostages were held in the house as theIDF attacked it, with 13 of them killed. In the coming weeks, the IDF is expected to publish the results of its investigation of the incident, which will answer the question of whether Brig. Gen. Barak Hiram, the commander of Division 99 who was in charge of operations in Be'eri on October 7, was employing the Hannibal procedure. Did he order the tank to move ahead even at the cost of civilian casualties, as he stated in an interview he gave later to the New York Times?


Over all the months that have passed, the IDF has refused to say whether this procedure was employed against civilians who had been taken hostage. It now seems that even if the answer is positive, the question may have been only a partial one. The actions of Hiram may have simply been congruent with the way the IDF operated that day.

There are huge questions for Israel and the IDF to answer on October 7 - but as all independent investigations have been summarily blocked by Israel, we will likely never know the true figures or the extent to which the Hannibal directive was carried out.

Two things are certain: Hamas had no tanks or apache helicopter gunships - ever - and the amount of devastation including destroyed cars and houses were caused by artillery shells and missiles, not gunfire.

So whilst it is accurate to say approx 1200 people died, and Hamas undoubtedly killed some of them, and took others hostage, it is also true to say that it is suspected that much of the devastation and the killing of civilians and soldiers may have been part of the IDFs response by way of the Hannibal directive.

These are uncomfortable things to discuss, for sure, but a properly academic discussion must sometimes be uncomfortable.

 

[S.A.C. Martin]

Alright, I'm not saying anything you said is wrong, and Im not saying anything you said is right. Im just saying that you making a post in response to someone venting their loss consisting only of corrections is very insensitive.

In a highly charged discussion such as this, it is really important that at a bare minimum, facts and articles are cited, evidenced, and explained in context.

Nobody is making light, or denigrating, anybody’s loss, but it is imperative for the purposes of a better informed discussion that we have accurate reporting. If only because that is fair to both Israeli and Palestinian victims of this unfathomably brutal onslaught.

I am not saying this to judge you, but I don't understand how someone can read that post and only reply with a rebuttal. I'm not saying anything in your response was wrong, but not addressing the persons pain and only correcting them comes across as sociopathic. I think you should reflect on your actions.

I think you’re over egging this and with respect maybe you should stand down the pitchforks?

Tone is difficult to ascertain on the internet through words in the first place.

There is a lot to cover in the topic and it’s difficult to talk through it all for everyone.

And again, with respect - approximately 41,200 Palestinians and Israelis have died - outside of the known military casualties. They all deserve respect and we best show that by accurately reporting what is happening.

 

[S.A.C. Martin]

Not sure I'd trust Wikipedia on that one, but sure.



No, because my point is that Hamas is a terrorist group that killed civilians in an orchestrated attack.

I'd like to leave you with one question: why would Hamas attack the Re'im music festival, the city of Sderot, the villages of Nir Oz and Netiv HaAsara, and the civilian populace of Sufa, if they are diametrically opposed to attacking civilians and were specifically focused on killing IDF military forces? Perhaps Hamas states that its goal is not to kill civilians, but its actions on October 7th in at least these places go against that stated goal. I'd love to hear your explanation.



Yep, it should be described as a governmentally-approved and supported terrorist force due to its actions in Gaza.



Sure. That doesn't mean that resistance movements cannot be terrorist in nature anyways - they can often commit terrorist acts, as Hamas did on October 7th, and international law states that "Ultimately, any Palestinian right to resist does not negate criminal liability for widespread killing of civilians, either by suicide bombing or by indiscriminate rockets [which are both tactics Hamas has used significantly in the past]". Using methods that are considered illegal under international law as their main way of resistance against Israeli occupation is why Hamas's legitimacy is in doubt in the first place.

I'm glad we agree on this.

I think we agreed originally, it can be really difficult to cut through the sheer amount of material we have available to us in the age of instant information.

 

[lilyhollow]

Alright, I'm not saying anything you said is wrong, and Im not saying anything you said is right. Im just saying that you making a post in response to someone venting their loss consisting only of corrections is very insensitive.

I will not accept the denigration of Palestinian armed resistance groups as 'irrational genocidal terrorists' any longer, full stop. If we're going to be 'emotionally sensitive,' then let's treat all humans as equal instead of treating Palestinians as lesser beings. Many Hamas members are literally orphans whose whole families, whole lives were stolen away from them by a genocidal state, and yet it is somehow acceptable to smear them as irrational genocidal terrorists. As if they have no dreams, no goals. Their goal is to rescue their people from mass rape prisons and to liberate their nation, which has been suffering for decade after decade after decade. And yet we can dismiss all of that and just smear them with no pushback. Somehow nobody feels that that is insensitive, even as that force is essentially the only thing standing between Palestinians and total extermination.

I'd like to leave you with one question: why would Hamas attack the Re'im music festival, the city of Sderot, the villages of Nir Oz and Netiv HaAsara, and the civilian populace of Sufa, if they are diametrically opposed to attacking civilians and were specifically focused on killing IDF military forces? Perhaps Hamas states that its goal is not to kill civilians, but its actions on October 7th in at least these places go against that stated goal. I'd love to hear your explanation.

I'm not here saying that Hamas ran away from all civilian populated areas and checked everyone's ID to see if they were a civilian before engaging them, this would be absurd. They breached the border fence their people were trapped to starve in by an apartheid government, with the goal of using the surprise attack to overrun security forces and capture as many prisoners as possible, ideally high-value military prisoners, using the very limited resources that they had.

Any normal rational resistance organization would of course attack targets on the border if their strategy involved breaching the border against one of the most militarized societies on earth in these conditions. What Hamas did not count on is that Israel was either incompetent or arrogant enough to suffer a security collapse so complete that there is an ongoing theory that Israel let the attack happen on purpose (which I do not personally believe). They almost certainly expected far more of a fight, involving actual IDF forces trying to save their people.

Ignoring security force deaths and hostages (most if which are dead) to promote Hamas as "not so bad"

Do not attempt to soften or misdirect my position into some wishywashy notion of 'good' or 'bad.' My position is not that Hamas is "not so bad," my position is that Hamas is a legitimate Palestinian resistance organization and one of the only forces in the entire world which is directly combatting the genocidal rapist freaks who are currently exterminating the Palestinian people. The days of people smearing them as 'fascist Islamic terrorists who aim to exterminate Jews just for being Jewish' with zero pushback are over.

by making the death total in a civilian massacre look smaller is absolutely disgusting.

No it isn't. Correcting people is an extremely good and important thing to do. For months now, people have repeated the lie, over and over and over again with zero pushback, that Hamas slaughtered 1400, 1200, or "over 1000" civilians. Why did they do this? Specifically because this is the only way to convince people that Hamas is an irrational terrorist group, instead of the legitimate resistance organization that they are.

Imagine if the truth had been reported from the very beginning. Imagine if the initial reports said things like, "Hamas breached the border fence which traps their people in starvation in a surprise attack against military installations and settlements on the border. We have 100% confirmed that the IDF then came in and shelled their own people with tanks and gunned them down with helicopters in order to prevent Hamas from taking prisoners, which it is doing in order to secure the release of thousands of its own captives who are being maimed, tortured, and raped in Israeli prisons. There are 1200 dead Israelis, 800 of whom are civilians, with it being unknown how many of the deaths were caused by Hamas and how many were caused by Israeli forces themselves. Hamas successfully captured about 200 prisoners, which it plans to exchange in negotiations as soon as possible."

If that were reported--you know, the truth, and honestly I'm leaving things out, like the fact that peaceful protest was already tried by the Palestinians and met with lethal repression--like barely anyone would think to label Hamas as terrorists. The 'terrorist' narrative is one that was completely imposed from the top-down.

People like to act like these lies don't matter, or are just irrelevant details. It is actually completely necessary for the west to lie. Poison the well by inflating the numbers as much as you can get away with. Push the narrative that Hamas went with the ridiculous, irrational goal of murdering as many Israelis as possible out of pure hatred (a depraved reversal of reality). Push the lie hard enough, and it doesn't even matter if it's corrected later: now we're at the point where people are so brainwashed into believing that Hamas is a hateful, illegitimate terrorist force that they won't change their position even when new information is presented to them. Sadly, that only makes it more important, not less, for someone to post those corrections and allow people the chance to adjust their understanding.


Dead by Daylight , I think one of the key problems with this discussion is that the word 'terrorist' is incredibly nebulous and has been used by different people to mean different things. I think we are getting bogged down by this imprecision.

It sounds like from your most recent post that you believe Hamas is a legitimate resistance organization. You just also think that they have committed some war crimes, and that is enough for you to apply the word 'terrorist' to them under your personal definition. If that is the case, then to me that sounds like, definitions aside, you agree far more with me than with you do with members on the 'other side' of this argument.

Other members in this thread have used the term terrorist to claim that Hamas is fascist, genocidal, and anything but legitimate. When the media, or when online liberals invoke the term 'terrorist,' they aim to prey on the westerner's mental image of the 'deranged Islamic extremist who kills purely out of hatred and indiscriminately targets civilians in order to inspire fear.' And they do this precisely with the goal of delegitimizing the movement. They use this image to make it sound absurd to the average westerner that we would even bother negotiating with such 'irrational,' unhinged criminals. They use it to draw a false equivalency between Hamas and the IDF. They use it to poison the well and make people squeamish about supporting the Palestinian right to resist their genocidal oppressors.

So in my mind, if I'm not misreading you and you do believe that Hamas is a legitimate resistance organization, referring to them as a terrorist organization creates confusion and should not be done. But honestly even if you insist on using the term 'terrorist' for some reason, but at least acknowledge them as a legitimate armed resistance group, I can live with that, to be honest that is more than I thought I would be able to get.

 

[Cancel cult]

I will not accept the denigration of Palestinian armed resistance groups as 'irrational genocidal terrorists' any longer, full stop. If we're going to be 'emotionally sensitive,' then let's treat all humans as equal instead of treating Palestinians as lesser beings.

What are you talking about?
When did I ever say "I personally support the extermination of all Palestinians"
When did anyone here say that.
I won't act like I know what is going on, but saying an organization is terroristic, true or not, is not the same as hating Palestinians and supporting the genocide. All I asked was for you to consider the other person, and you took it as me saying that I support the actions of Israel. The way you vilify anyone who disagrees with you makes me think that you are stubborn and shortsighted. I don't think you care about the truth, I think you care about what you believe to be true, and regardless of whether or not you are right, your aggression is not making people want to stop engaging with you. If you truly wanted to convince people here of your opinion, then you have a funny way of showing it. I for one am not particularly inclined to agree with someone who isn't willing to accept that they are wrong, and who skims over the venting of someone who has lost people they care about to tell them they are wrong. This post is not about politics, or who is right or wrong. This post is about showing the most basic amount of compassion to someone who you disagree with.

 

[lilyhollow]

Did I say that you personally support the extermination of all Palestinians? Why did you make a fake quote...? I think you should rewrite your post to respond to what I actually said, not what you want to believe I said.

For several posts now, members have attempted to browbeat me because I didn't comment on the personal misfortune of some Israelis. Please explain to me how it is reasonable to be doing this. Imagine if I said "I have a Palestinian friend who died" in the middle of a debate, and then if someone didn't respond to that specific comment with a flowery letter of sympathy, I ignored all of their points and said "how dare you not reply to that!" Do you see how that is not reasonable?

Except ignoring and condemning the struggles of the Palestinians is the actual reality that is happening right now this very moment in this thread. Post after post of SAC and I detailing the unconscionable barbarity Palestinians have been subjected to. And yet what is the matter of the debate? What is it that everyone is so interested in, and so outraged about? Is it the fact that children are being shredded up and buried alive as we speak, paid for by the US and German populations? No. All anyone wants to talk about is how Hamas, who I repeat, is the number one force standing between Palestinians and mass rape, displacement, and utter extermination, is somehow an illegitimate, genocidal, terrorist force that should be condemned. In no universe will I do anything other than reject this. You might as well be speaking to a brick wall if you think you will get me to stop pointing out that no, in fact, Hamas is a legitimate resistance organization and it is unacceptable to condemn them as illegitimate.

You mistake my refusal to compromise for aggression. I feel no ill will towards you, I am used to debate and I understand that this is a controversial topic that may upset some people. But if the truth of my words is uncomfortable for you, it's the truth that you have a problem with, not me. Certainly I am not effective at dressing things up in a more sugarcoated, polite way, but that is no excuse for choosing to remain ignorant.

 

[Dead by Daylight]

I'm not here saying that Hamas ran away from all civilian populated areas and checked everyone's ID to see if they were a civilian before engaging them, this would be absurd. They breached the border fence their people were trapped to starve in by an apartheid government, with the goal of using the surprise attack to overrun security forces and capture as many prisoners as possible, ideally high-value military prisoners, using the very limited resources that they had.

Any normal rational resistance organization would of course attack targets on the border if their strategy involved breaching the border against one of the most militarized societies on earth in these conditions. What Hamas did not count on is that Israel was either incompetent or arrogant enough to suffer a security collapse so complete that there is an ongoing theory that Israel let the attack happen on purpose (which I do not personally believe). They almost certainly expected far more of a fight, involving actual IDF forces trying to save their people.

I am not insinuating that your stance is that Hamas "ran away from all civilian-populated areas", rather that "Hamas tried to attack military settlements but killed civilians in the crossfire". Please don't try to misconstrue what I'm saying.

So wait. You're telling me that the Re'im Music Festival was secretly housing "high-value military prisoners" that were attempted to be kept captive? You're telling me that the bus with 15 senior citizens that was held up by a flat tire in Sderot were really "high-value military prisoners" that just had to be murdered? You're telling me that Israel is at fault for the deaths of most, if not all, of these civilians because they were not expecting a surprise attack from Hamas due to intelligence failures?

This point makes no sense.

Dead by Daylight, I think one of the key problems with this discussion is that the word 'terrorist' is incredibly nebulous and has been used by different people to mean different things. I think we are getting bogged down by this imprecision.

It sounds like from your most recent post that you believe Hamas is a legitimate resistance organization. You just also think that they have committed some war crimes, and that is enough for you to apply the word 'terrorist' to them under your personal definition. If that is the case, then to me that sounds like, definitions aside, you agree far more with me than with you do with members on the 'other side' of this argument.

Other members in this thread have used the term terrorist to claim that Hamas is fascist, genocidal, and anything but legitimate. When the media, or when online liberals invoke the term 'terrorist,' they aim to prey on the westerner's mental image of the 'deranged Islamic extremist who kills purely out of hatred and indiscriminately targets civilians in order to inspire fear.' And they do this precisely with the goal of delegitimizing the movement. They use this image to make it sound absurd to the average westerner that we would even bother negotiating with such 'irrational,' unhinged criminals. They use it to draw a false equivalency between Hamas and the IDF. They use it to poison the well and make people squeamish about supporting the Palestinian right to resist their genocidal oppressors.

So in my mind, if I'm not misreading you and you do believe that Hamas is a legitimate resistance organization, referring to them as a terrorist organization creates confusion and should not be done. But honestly even if you insist on using the term 'terrorist' for some reason, but at least acknowledge them as a legitimate armed resistance group, I can live with that, to be honest that is more than I thought I would be able to get.

I'll clarify my stance on Hamas.

The cause behind Hamas is completely legitimate.

The actions of Hamas are illegal under international law (using suicide bombers, indiscriminate rocket fire, and ground warfare to injure or kill civilians or take and hold them hostage) - thus, I currently do not consider them a "legitimate" resistance organization due to the nature of their resistance. I certainly do consider them a resistance organization because that is what they are, but they are not legitimate in my eyes.

 

[Cancel cult]

Did I say that you personally support the extermination of all Palestinians? Why did you make a fake quote...? I think you should rewrite your post to respond to what I actually said, not what you want to believe I said.

What is "If we're going to be 'emotionally sensitive,' then let's treat all humans as equal instead of treating Palestinians as lesser beings." supposed to imply, then? To me, that implies that you thought I didn't already do that, and you were calling me out on hippocracy.