What are Hamas' leaders thinking?

[Little Dragon]

when an extremist militant group with a penchant for indiscriminate violence against civilians gains power and attacks you under the banner of some form of desperate resistance movement... What did anyone expect?

Resistance actions? Not just wanton slaughter. Is that how you would conduct a resistance campaign then?

 

[Little Dragon]

Do you not see at least a little incongruity in these statements?

Violence inflicted against Israeli citizens = "no justifiable reason."
Violence inflicted against Palestinian citizens = "what did anyone expect?"

Not really. No.

 

[Revoltingest]

Again, I do not claim that Israel is innocent of wrongdoing. This argument you keep throwing in my face, is not only misrepresentation it is untrue.

I infer from your posts.
You may elaborate if I've gleaned the wrong meaning.

I do not excuse either Israeli leadership for their part in all this, nor do I excuse Hamas.

However they can't be treated with the same remedies. Israel is a democratic ally of the west and the US in particular, a tiny slice of land, surrounded by hostile undemocratic states. They deserve our support.

You advocated support for Israel,
but not for Palestinians. What
of the latter?

In this round of violence, which Hamas instigated, Hamas murdered innocents in cold blood, for no justifiable reason.
If Israel responds with aggression, then what did anyone expect?

What is your point with this question?
Aye, it's most likely that Hamas expected Israel to
kill more Palestinian civilians than Hamas killed.

It's easy to sit in judgement of another nation, like Israel, and portray it as a pariah....

It seems that you're disagreeing with my point
that Israel's conduct towards Palestinians drives
the violence against Israel. It also seems that
you're making it merely about my personal
judgement, rather than addressing the problems
I see, & the potential solutions.

...when your own government isn't exactly the most holistic and law abiding either, not exactly a champion of peace and tolerance itself.

That's whataboutism that's particularly irrelevant,
given my opposition to USA's foreign policy.

If we're going to judge Israel, and take action against her for her excesses and crimes against the Palestinian people, then petition your senator to demand that the US stops vetoing UN resolutions made against Israel!
Then, expect the US to be next in the dock...

I identify problems, & proffer solutions.
Leaders don't listen. And like most of
the population, they pick their tribe,
& demonize the other.
I take everyone's side in this conflict,
ie, that all deserve their own country
& peace with neighbors.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Not really. No.

That's all? You'd never look at the history of the Israel/Palestine conflict and say "what did anyone expect" when an extremist military group arises out of an oppressed people and commits terrorist acts under a veil of fighting against their oppressors?

You don't think seventy years of oppression and war crimes might contribute to that happening somewhat?

 

[Estro Felino]

One can't contradict what is way detached from reality, I suppose.

When someone is wrong, the interlocutor corrects them, normally.

The interlocutor never says "you're wrong" without saying the correct answer.

It would be unfair in a debate.

 

[Little Dragon]

Meanwhile, Israel responding to these attacks with war crimes is seen as somehow inevitable and expected, if not reasonably justified under the circumstances.

I would do the same thing. I would order my troops to go in and eliminate or capture the killers of my people. No doubt. No problem. If I didn't, I'd be a terrible leader and ought to be removed from office. Regardless of history.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I would do the same thing. I would order my troops to go in and eliminate or capture the killers of my people. No doubt. No problem. If I didn't, I'd be a terrible leader and ought to be removed from office. Regardless of history.

You're literally saying it's justified to commit war crimes as a response to terrorism.

Literally.

It's a good thing you're not a world leader.

I mean, seriously, by this logic Hamas are justified. You have absolutely no reason whatsoever to oppose or be upset by what Hamas did.

 

[Revoltingest]

I hope you realize how deep the implications go if you are correct in your reading.

I hope you realize the implications of what I post.

For what it is worth, I largely agree, but I also think that this is a biased view.

Everyone has biases, even you.
So accusing others of bias is meritless criticism.
Tis better to stick to the issues than resort to ad hominem.

Indeed. I am very curious indeed about the mindsets of Palestinians.

This is good.

 

[Estro Felino]

Things are probably worse now, sure. They were not great back then either. As I said.

Indeed. The Iranian Revolution took place because too many financial powers were stealing the oil from the Iranian citizens.
So...that justified the ayatollah revolution.

If those financial powers hadn't robbed the Iranian oil and had let the shah nationalize it, there would be democracy in Iran, now.

 

[Little Dragon]

That's all? You'd never look at the history of the Israel/Palestine conflict and say "what did anyone expect" when an extremist military group arises out of an oppressed people and commits terrorist acts under a veil of fighting against their oppressors?

You don't think seventy years of oppression and war crimes might contribute to that happening somewhat?

I am sure it does contribute to committing atrocities, but that does not mean said atrocities are excusable.
Nor does it mean Israel has to let its people get murdered or kidnapped. It may not be innocent, but it is a democratic ally and it did not instigate mass violence. Hamas did.

 

[Little Dragon]

You're literally saying it's justified to commit war crimes as a response to terrorism.

Literally.

It's a good thing you're not a world leader.

I mean, seriously, by this logic Hamas are justified. You have absolutely no reason whatsoever to oppose or be upset by what Hamas did.

I have every reason to seek the destruction of Hamas. A terrorist organisation. Not a nation state, or even a government.
Going into an urban area, to clear out terrorists, is not a war crime. Your absurdity here is actually puzzling.

 

[Little Dragon]

It's a good thing you're not a world leader.

I agree. I am all about the vengeance.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I am sure it does contribute to committing atrocities, but that does not mean said atrocities are excusable.

I didn't say they were, and I explicitly stated that wasn't the point of my argument. The point of my argument is that you are applying nuance and consideration only to the violence committed by one side and ignoring nuance and consideration for the other. The language you use portrays violence committed by Hamas as senseless and unprovoked, but violence committed by Israel as justifiable and retaliatory. While I agree that violence against civilians is never warranted or excusable, if we are genuinely committing ourselves to ending such violence we should consider the oppression and war crimes committed that lead to those militants existing in the first place.

Nor does it mean Israel has to let its people get murdered or kidnapped.

Also never said they should. I'm just pointing out that your language here is clearly very one-sided.

It may not be innocent, but it is a democratic ally and it did not instigate mass violence.

Israel have already killed more civilians than Hamas did, and that doesn't count the thousands upon thousands killed before the current conflict. If you want to talk about who "instigated violence" you would not be excusing Israel so readily.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I have every reason to seek the destruction of Hamas.

Yes, Hamas. But Israel is committing war crimes against Palestinians. Not just Hamas.

A terrorist organisation. Not a nation state, or even a government.
Going into an urban area, to clear out terrorists, is not a war crime. Your absurdity here is actually puzzling.

Israel has sealed-off Gaza, cut off power and access to food and fuel for 2.3 million people.

That's explicitly a war crime.

 

[Little Dragon]

I didn't say they were, and I explicitly stated that wasn't the point of my argument. The point of my argument is that you are applying nuance and consideration only to the violence committed by one side and ignoring nuance and consideration for the other. The language you use portrays violence committed by Hamas as senseless and unprovoked, but violence committed by Israel as justifiable and retaliatory. While I agree that violence against civilians is never warranted or excusable, if we are genuinely committing ourselves to ending such violence we should consider the oppression and war crimes committed that lead to those militants existing in the first place.


Also never said they should. I'm just pointing out that your language here is clearly very one-sided.


Israel have already killed more civilians than Hamas did, and that doesn't count the thousands upon thousands killed before the current conflict. If you want to talk about who "instigated violence" you would not be excusing Israel so readily.

I cannot agree with any of what you posted. Especially suggesting that I excuse Israel. I think I've made myself clear here. Yet I keep repeating myself.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I agree. I am all about the vengeance.

Well, I appreciate your honesty. Although I would say you'd fit in with Hamas, then.

 

[Little Dragon]

Yes, Hamas. But Israel is committing war crimes against Palestinians. Not just Hamas.


Israel has sealed-off Gaza, cut off power and access to food and fuel for 2.3 million people.

That's explicitly a war crime.

Bad luck. Take it to the UN assembly.

(losing patience)

 

[Little Dragon]

Well, I appreciate your honesty. Although I would say you'd fit in with Hamas, then.

See you around on the boards!

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I cannot agree with any of what you posted. Especially suggesting that I excuse Israel.

Your language paints violence committed by Israel as explicitly understandable and inevitable as a consequence of Hamas, but never paints violence committed by Hamas as explicitly understandable and inevitable as a consequence of Israeli foreign policy. That's explicitly excusing Israel.

I think I've made myself clear here. Yet I keep repeating myself.

Then perhaps you should stop selectively expressing outrage at one side's "retaliatory" violence and not the other side.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Bad luck. Take it to the UN assembly.

(losing patience)

So you genuinely DO believe that killing civilians is justified?

Hamas kills thousands of civilians = "Retaliation is inevitable!"
Israel walls in and starves 2.3 million people in an objective war crime = "Too bad, take it up with the UN."

I mean, this is a serious "mask off" moment. I can't believe you've spent these last few posts pretending you care about civilian deaths when THIS is your response to war crimes intended to isolate and starve 2.3 million people. I guess you really showed your true colours, huh?