New War In Israel / Gaza

[lina]

30 minutes ago, Nivsch said:

@lina Without knowing the details in the cherry picked linktree I can answer in general that of course dehumanization will happen after such a trauma and the celebrations in Gaza in oct 7th and after 30 years of agreements and negotiations followed by only more terror.

Start to see the whole dynamic rather than to blame almost only one side. Every western country would probably react the same when needed to eliminate a terror organization who mix itself together with civilians in Rafah but also everywhere in Gaza.

I am not going to argue about the celebration thing because many already did but there is just one thing to point out : If an armed soldier cannot control his emotions, restrain himself to not act out of vengeance and follow the international rules of war then maybe they are not really fit or qualified to hold arms and it shouldn't be surprising when they become the terrorist they're fighting. 

Edited February 12 by lina

[Karmadhi]

41 minutes ago, Nivsch said:

Without knowing the details in the cherry picked linktree I can answer in general that of course dehumanization will happen after such a trauma and the celebrations in Gaza in oct 7th and after 30 years of agreements and negotiations followed by only more terror.

That is fair but an advanced society will understand that it does not justify to mass murder people, especially childreen. So it is not an excuse for this hatred. Especially against women and childreen.

Issue is that when you send hundreds of such links and incidents it is not longer "cherry picking", it basically becomes the norm. 

Cherry picking is when you keep using the stories of 2-3 people like Israel does all the time.

 

[Nivsch]

Nobody mass murders anyone. There are 10,000s terror targets to attack and the casualities are 15,000 civilians and ~10,000 hamas ratio of 1.5:1 that when fighting with cynical gerilla organization this is of course expected.

Edited February 12 by Nivsch

[Nivsch]

@Karmadhi They are cherry picked as long as they site almost only radical exremists like Gideon Levi and the like, and when they overlook the fair context and dynamics between the sides.

Edited February 12 by Nivsch

[Nivsch]

@lina The radical right-wing government we have for sure influences and worsen the collateral damage, but every western nation attacked like oct 7th would react very similarly.

[zazen]

4 hours ago, lina said:

@zazen @Karmadhi thousands around the world have been suffering from nonstop secondary trauma just from watching the in-ground media coming from Gaza mostly shared on X, Instagram or TitTok and witnessing new levels of barbarism on a daily basis , yet no matter how much you argue or debate it just feels like it's all in futile, I guess the dehumanization of the other is just deeply ingrained.  

One would think it wrong not to speak on whats going on and share the suffering taking place - at least to show Israeli's a side they maybe aren't being shown on their media, or to illicit a reaction to their states actions being wrong. The common response is these are bad apples and cherries being picked, but for a small country with a small population it seems to be a awful lot of bad cherries being picked continuously for many months now. There seems to exist a deep systemic dehumanization that needs to be brought to light.

For a country that is on trial for Genocide and under the watchful the eye of the world to continue their actions and also speak in genocidal ways signals something clearly wrong. The fact that the West is complicit in this should make everyone question where power lies and how the world really works.

How can these 'cherries' not know they have a follow up ICJ hearing later this week:

Only a culture that breeds entitlement and believes in its impunity can act out in such a way. The US raised a naughty child and this is the result of not being held to account for decades on end. 

 

@Nivsch The fact that you see Gideon Levy as extreme  - is actually extreme to most Westerners. This shows that Israel doesn't have a political left any more, it only has a right, far right and extreme far right. The center of gravity has moved totally right at least in terms of foreign policy and attitude towards Palestinians. Israel being more LGBT friendly doesn't make it okay to just bomb a captive population of 2 million. American culture that contains twerk dancing and drag shows for children doesn't mean what they do beyond their borders is any good either. Whether it was a Western country or a Eastern one I would equally criticize both. 

Edited February 12 by zazen

[Revolutionary Think]

8 hours ago, Nivsch said:

I heard Chris Hedges lecture in the blog and it made zero impression on me and totally biased and emotional and naively blame gaming and profoundly failing to understand Israel's roots and essence.

Same. He never even mentions October 7th and how Hamas's goal is world wide Jewish genocide. Isreal also doesn't deliberately target civilians but, Hamas definitely does. 

[Danioover9000]

@zazen

2 hours ago, zazen said:

One would think it wrong not to speak on whats going on and share the suffering taking place - at least to show Israeli's a side they maybe aren't being shown on their media, or to illicit a reaction to their states actions being wrong. The common response is these are bad apples and cherries being picked, but for a small country with a small population it seems to be a awful lot of bad cherries being picked continuously for many months now. There seems to exist a deep systemic dehumanization that needs to be brought to light.

For a country that is on trial for Genocide and under the watchful the eye of the world to continue their actions and also speak in genocidal ways signals something clearly wrong. The fact that the West is complicit in this should make everyone question where power lies and how the world really works.

How can these 'cherries' not know they have a follow up ICJ hearing later this week:

Only a culture that breeds entitlement and believes in its impunity can act out in such a way. The US raised a naughty child and this is the result of not being held to account for decades on end. 

 

@Nivsch The fact that you see Gideon Levy as extreme  - is actually extreme to most Westerners. This shows that Israel doesn't have a political left any more, it only has a right, far right and extreme far right. The center of gravity has moved totally right at least in terms of foreign policy and attitude towards Palestinians. Israel being more LGBT friendly doesn't make it okay to just bomb a captive population of 2 million. American culture that contains twerk dancing and drag shows for children doesn't mean what they do beyond their borders is any good either. Whether it was a Western country or a Eastern one I would equally criticize both. 

   I agree here. Definitely the political spectrum and political center of gravity in Israel has shifted to the right much more than the middle.

[Rafael Thundercat]

 

 

[Nivsch]

17 hours ago, Revolutionary Think said:

Same. He never even mentions October 7th and how Hamas's goal is world wide Jewish genocide. Isreal also doesn't deliberately target civilians but, Hamas definitely does. 

👍 Definitely

[Yimpa]

On 2/12/2024 at 4:05 AM, Nivsch said:

profoundly failing to understand Israel's roots and essence.

There’s a profound failing in understanding the root and essence of all conflicts.

[Karmadhi]

On 2/12/2024 at 7:10 PM, Revolutionary Think said:

Same. He never even mentions October 7th and how Hamas's goal is world wide Jewish genocide. Isreal also doesn't deliberately target civilians but, Hamas definitely does. 

Both sides want to wipe the other side out, but the difference is that Israel is actually doing it while Hamas is just wishful thinking.

800 civilians dead is not genocide, not even close. It is a massacre and those can happen in war. Terrible but common.

30.000 civilians dead, well that is crossing the line for 21st century standards.

A simple question you need to answer to yourself.

If Israel had killed roughly 800 civilians in Gaza, just like Hamas did. Would people be hating on Israel so much?

I dont think so. This thread would not have 400 pages either. Israel killing 30x is the issue here. It makes 7/10 seem like nothing in comparison.

Scale matters. Get this through your head.

Edited February 14 by Karmadhi

[Raze]

On 2/12/2024 at 1:10 PM, Revolutionary Think said:

Same. He never even mentions October 7th and how Hamas's goal is world wide Jewish genocide. Isreal also doesn't deliberately target civilians but, Hamas definitely does. 

1. That isn’t Hamas’s goal, their charter used to call for the end of Israel but no longer does, it never officially called for worldwide Jewish genocide 

2. Israel has killed a much higher ratio of civilians to combatants than hamas, and many times more civilians. So Hamas targets civilians but ends up killing less per combatant and Israel only targets combatants but ends up killing way more civilians?

 

Edited February 15 by Raze

[Raze]

On 2/12/2024 at 9:24 AM, Nivsch said:

Nobody mass murders anyone. There are 10,000s terror targets to attack and the casualities are 15,000 civilians and ~10,000 hamas ratio of 1.5:1 that when fighting with cynical gerilla organization this is of course expected.

16,000 of the dead are women and children.

If these numbers of Hamas are real, that would mean every single man killed and some of the women or children were all hamas.

[Nivsch]

2 minutes ago, Raze said:

16,000 of the dead are women and children.

If these numbers of Hamas are real, that would mean every single man killed and some of the women or children were all hamas.

I didn't understand your sentence here.

[Raze]

Just now, Nivsch said:

I didn't understand your sentence here.

If I am understanding right you’re saying 15,000 killed are civilians and 10,000 killed are Hamas, with the overall dead being around 25,000.

But we also know 16,000 of the dead are women and children. Assuming they aren’t Hamas, that would mean every man killed was Hamas. Seems pretty unlikely.

[zurew]

You guys using and obsessively holding onto the civilian to combatant ratio and not the per capita version of it to prove genocidal intent, is still incredibly sad that you think thats a reliable way to assess anything.

[Nivsch]

12 minutes ago, zurew said:

You guys using and obsessively holding onto the civilian to combatant ratio and not the per capita version of it to prove genocidal intent, is still incredibly sad that you think thats a reliable way to assess anything.

Can you explain more?

Edited February 16 by Nivsch

[zurew]

44 minutes ago, Nivsch said:

Can you explain more?

I already shared the video in this thread a while back, but I will share it again. He uses examples to demonstrate whats the problem if you don't use the per capita version of it. 

So here is the video time stamped:

Quote

 

Imagine the three following scenarios scenarios:

 Let's just say you have a strategy of being as indiscriminate as possible. So you're just going to throw bombs on cities randomly so we can all agree that's thats maximally indiscriminate.

 

Example 1) So let's say that this city has a militant to civilian population of 50 to 50 , you kill everyone you randomly bomb the city you, kill everyone what's your civilian casualty ratio? it's 1 to 1 , so you killed everyone.

Example 2) Okay now let's say the city has a  civilian to militant population of  90% to 10% what's your civilian casualty ratio now? 9 to 1

Example 3) Now let's say you have a city with 10% civilians and 90% militants. what's your civilian casualty ratio now? 0.1 (even though you killed everyone and you didn't discriminate between who you wanted to kill) 

So in one case you look great (example 3) in another case you look terrible (example 2 ,where you ended up killing 9x more civilians than militants) in another case, you look so-so (example 1) , but what was your strategy the entire time? - to be as maximally indiscriminate as possible. So the problem is that civilian casualty ratio isn't actually tracking with what we mean by discernment or intent (or in other words, what we mean by discriminating between civilian and militant killings). 

So the issue with not  using the per capita version of the civilian to combat ratio, is that if you intent to be as maximally indiscriminate as possible and literally just kill everyone, you can look really good , depending on the relative proportions of how many militants and how many civilians you have in a population, so that's why it doesn't work.

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------

 

So what does work?

What does work way better, is a very simple tweak, it's just doing the per capita version of it.  So instead of Civilian casualty ratio it's [(militants killed divided by militant population) divided by (civilians killed divided by civilian population)]. So in other words, the percentage of militants killed divided by the percentage of civilians killed.

 

So let's go back to those three cases again using relative risk:

Example 1) if you kill everyone, (being maximally indiscriminate) 50/50 population what's your relative risk? well it's one, because civilians killed divided by civilian population is just going to come out as  one if you divded that by ( militants killed divided by militant population).

Example 2) In the second case (the 90% civilian vs 10) militant population) using the same calculation will have the same result of 1 .

Example 3)  (10% civilians vs 90% militant) using the same calculation will have the result of 1.

So calculating relative risk tracks the intention of genocide way better (cause in all 3 scenarios the attacker was completely indiscriminate and all of them ends up with the same number) compared to using the civilian to combat ratio, where you end up with different intention results, even though the attacker was completely indiscriminate.

 

Edited February 16 by zurew

[Leo Gura]

The civilian to combatant ratio on Oct 7th was something like 2:1.