Fresh strike on Jabaliya refugee camp reported as Israel intensifies attacks on Gaza

[Uncle Joe]

(snip)

The Jabaliya refugee camp in the north was hit, with initial reports saying tens of people were killed and at least one residential block destroyed. Video footage showed people searching for bodies under the rubble.

About 300 people were reported to be sheltering in the vicinity of the latest strike, in a camp area that has been targeted repeatedly by Israel over the past month. It was not possible to verify exact casualty numbers.

Heavy bombing was also reported in the southern city of Khan Younis, increasingly the focus of Israeli attacks, while its military demanded further evacuation of civilians from areas of the city, telling them to head south to Rafah or to the west.

Ismael al-Thawabteh, the director general of the government media office in Gaza, told Al Jazeera that more than 700 Palestinians had been killed in a 24-hour period to noon. The health ministry in Hamas-run Gaza said later that 15,523 Palestinians had been killed since the start of the war, including 316 dead and 664 wounded “in the past hours”.

(snip)

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/dec/03/fresh-strike-on-jabaliya-refugee-camp-reported-as-israel-intensifies-attacks-on-gaza

[brush]

1. Bombing in the south too? How do you bomb where you told people to go?

[Beastly Boy]

2. That's the price for cease fire. It didn't come free of cost.

The cease fire gave Hamas time to regroup and relocate their military resources. And guess where Hamas chose to relocate? That's right, wherever they could find the most Palestinian human shields.

Who is surprised by this?

[brush]

3. Can you for once show some empathy towards innocent Palestinians?

You're a fucking broken record. We all know what Hamas has done, but we all know as well of the thousands killed by IDF bombs of civilian areas.

15,000 innocent Palestinians killed v 1200 Israelis. Is that not sufficient for your blood lust? How many more do you need?

[Beastly Boy]

7. What do you think I am doing?

Do you expect anyone to be genuinely empathetic and ignore the source of their suffering? What good is it going to do them? No amount if empathy is going to change the fact that Gaza lives inder an oppressive terrorist regime which doesn't give a shit about them, Israel or not. The cynicism with which Hamas dispenses with Palestinian lives is abominable, and it is their stated goal to get Palestinians killed in order to get sympathy. They do it deliberately! And, according to Hamas, they ould do it again and again, for as long as they exist.

So how about facing the brutal facts, quit paying lip service to all the dead Palestinians and for once ask yourself why they started dying in such numbers only after Hamas invaded Israel, and not before? Ask yourself this: if Israel is as bloodthirsty as you pretend they are, what prevented them from bombing the shit out of Gaza prior to October 7?

And be honest with yourself, if that's not too much trouble..

[brush]

10. How many do you need? The IDF/Bibi/Likud gets no scorn from you...

a long with Hamas?

How pathetic.

[Beastly Boy]

13. That's absurd.

Would Hamas not commit to terrorism if IDF weren't there? Or Bibi? Or Likud?

Would IDF or Bibi, or LIkud be bombing Gaza if it weren't for Hamas?

Cause and effect. Pay attention to the difference.

[brush]

14. You pay attention. It's over-retaliation, and conseqences will happen once it's over.

Last edited Sun Dec 3, 2023, 11:27 PM - Edit history (1)

How many Palestinian deaths are required...a 10-to-one ratio v Israeli deaths is not enough for Bibi/Likud...and you too if you can't see what's so obvious.

Seems to most others on these posts but you and the blood-thirsty few.

[Beastly Boy]

15. Well, that's refreshing!

At least you are no longer denying that Hamas is the cause and the retaliation is the effect.

Now all you have left to your argument is the relative count of casualties on each side.

I will leave it to your personal judgement to decide how empathetic or moral your bean counting approach, to the exclusion of all other factors, is in assigning responsibility for the deaths of human beings.

[brush]

19. I've never denied it. You haven't been paying attention. I've always made it clear...

that Hamas is a terrorist organization that has to go, but so does Netanyahu and Likud for their obvious over-retaliation in trying to make up for their horrendous failure in not detecting the Oct. 7th attack and moving to try to stop it.

Got that?

There will be consequences.

I myself, if you'll look at my journal, have taken a stance of impartiality from the jump as there are innocent deaths on both sides.

Again, refer back to my first paragraph if you have questions.

And you might want to check this out for the horror of the situation in Gaza, thanks to the bombings.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100218499945

[Beastly Boy]

24. What do you call this, then?

"The IDF/Bibi/Likud gets no scorn from you... a long with Hamas?"

You are literally lumping cause and effect in a single post and treat both as indistinguishable from one another.

Yeah, somebody is not paying attention, and it ain't me.

[brush]

28. You apparently can't comprehend English. I clearly say that Hamas as well as...

Bibi and Likud's over-retaliation are complicit in the tragedy that's going on.

There's obviously a comprehension problem. How many times do I have to say Hamas is a terrorist organization?

And look at the link again for further evidence of over-retaliation.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100218499945

[brush]

30. You're kinda late to the party. My stance on this has always been one of impartialiy.

I blame Hamas for the horrors of Oct. 7 and the Israeli deaths, and Bibi/Likud for the obvious over-retaliation to make up for their horrendous intel failure, and the many thousand of dead Palestinians from bombing civilian areas...and now for also bombing areas where they told Palestinians to go to be safe.

Not rocket science to understand. Got it?

[The Magistrate]

32. That Is Fair Enough, Sir, And I Apologize

I've learned to hit 'preview' before I post, and I really ought to read through a whole thread, too.

I have deleted a reply made in haste.

[Beastly Boy]

35. And that's what I am trying, apparently in vain, to demonstrate to you.

You are not differentiating between cause and effect. Which makes me wonder why you keep deflecting from this simple proposition, while insisting you are not.

You don't have to say a word about Hamas being a terrorist organization. What you have to say is what you consider the cause of the civilian deaths in Gaza, and what you consider the effect of this cause. And we are all in agreement about the consequences of the effect, which is over ten thousand of dead civilians. so you don't have to belabor this point yet again.

[brush]

36. Still not comprehending. Israel has a duty to retaliate, not over-retaliate.

See the difference?

Not rocket science.

[Beastly Boy]

38. I see the difference more clearly than you would ever give me credit for.

And it is not up to you to determine what the difference between retaliation and over-reraliation is. Nor is it the answer to my question, which you are still trying to avoid like fire.

For added comprehension, should I repeat my question again?

Ok, here you go:

What do you consider the cause of the civilian deaths in Gaza, and what you consider the effect of this cause?

Simple enough, no?

[brush]

39. Try your bullshit trick question on someone just off the turnip truck.

[Beastly Boy]

53. I just did.

And it turns out that my questions are neither bullshit nor tricky. It is just that the respondent couldn't come up with any halfass legible arguments against them. Not entirely unexpected, I must say.

[brush]

57. I don't have time for you anymore, and Eko handled your bullshit quite well.

[Beastly Boy]

59. A euphamism for you having no answers for me.

That's fine, I didn't expect you would. And it is between Eko and me to sort out who handled whose bullshit better, isn't it?

[brush]

60. I got bored with your inhumane lack of empathy for non-combatants being killed. Eko, however, wiped the floor with you.

[Beastly Boy]

61. That's not a very passionate statement, is it?

Do you usually get bored when you encounter inhumane treatment, whatever the hell you mean by it?

And I couldn't care less what your opinion of me having an exchange with another DUer is, one way or another, so keep ingratiating yourself at your pleasure.

[brush]

62. Heehee. He owned you.

[Eko]

42. They dont get to have an opinion here? And you do?

Do you get to decide what the difference between retaliation and over-reraliation?
What do you consider the cause of the civilian deaths in Gaza- mostly Bombs and artillery.
and what you consider the effect of this cause? Apparently a lot of civilian deaths.
How many Hamas people have been killed?

[Beastly Boy]

46. Neither one of us does.

And you don't get to be self-righteous about it. This is determined by applying the military concept of proportionality, by high ranking officers who then may be compelled to justify their decisions. And the meaning of retaliation itself may come into question in the context of military action.

So bombs and artillery fell on Gaza randomly, all by themselves. They weren't targeting Hamas. Hamas didn't cause the IDF to target their military infrastructure, which they hid in residential areas. And it is just a coincidence that the bombs started falling on the territory of Gaza after Hamas crossed the international border, and attacked Israeli civilians and took hostages. That wasn't the cause for the war to begin and the bombs to start falling, right?

And Israel declaring war on Hamas wasn't the effect caused by their attack on Israeli civilians and taking hostages, right?

And the civilian deaths weren't the consequence of IDF bombing Hamas targets, which was effectuated by the declaration of war on Hamas, which was in turn caused by Hamas attacking Israel, right?

It all just happened for no reason, right?

[Eko]

47. You say niether one of us does

Last edited Mon Dec 4, 2023, 04:23 AM - Edit history (1)

Then go on to explain at length what yours is. Hilarious.

[Beastly Boy]

54. "Neither of us does" refers to who gets to decide what the difference between retaliation and over-reraliation.

Then I ho on to explain at length why this is the case.

As far as expressing opinions, surely you can tell the difference between an opinion that obfuscates the causes and effects of this particular war and an opinion that draws attention to the fact that these causes and effects had been obfuscated, no?

[Eko]

48. Here is a question.

Why do you use someone so repellent as the Beast Rabban as your avatar? Someone so devoid of humanity and the consequences of second and third order consequences and incapable of seeing the other side? Someone who killed his own innocent and peaceful father? It's an interesting choice and I wonder why.
Eko.
There is a question mark there so it is a question.

[Beastly Boy]

55. Because the avatar of Einstein sticking his tongue out has already been taken, and I couldn't find

a suitable image of Mother Theresa.

Seriously and entirely beside the point, though, I am fascinated by mythological narratives that take us beyond good and evil. Thus, in the Dune cycle, for example, the son of the iconic hero and the Messiah figure Paul Muaddib, the self-proclaimed God Emperor Leto Atreidis turns out to be far more ruthless and despotic than Beast Rabban, the anti-hero. Still, he is portrayed with an unmistakably heroic pathos.

The same is true of the epic Mahabharata, where Lord Krishna himself orders his followers to commit all kinds of atrocities in order to win a fratricidal war in his name. Yet, this super villain in terms of human morality has millions of devout followers.

The figure of Beast Rabban is an amateur compared to these two mythological villains, and only because he is a bumbling amateur do you consider him to be an unmitigated villain.

But i digress.

[Eko]

72. Tell that to Gurney Halleck

and the people of Giedi Prime.

[Eko]

6. How do you know that?

How do you know that Hamas went south and joined with the civilians there?

[Beastly Boy]

8. Would they go north to Israel? Or would they remain in Gaza until they are blown out of their tunnels?

Why do you think one of their demands for cease fire and hostage exchange was the halt of aerial surveillance of Gaza by Israel?

[Eko]

9. Ah, so you are just saying what you think.

You don't actually know.

[Beastly Boy]

12. Ever read Conan Doyle?

It's called deduction. Sherlock Holmes made it famous.

And in this case, the possibilities to be deduced are quite limited. Go north, stay in place, or go south. Superior enemy in the north, superior enemy in place, human shields in the south.

No, nobody is consulting me, so I don't actually know. This does not prevent me from deducing the only direction for Hamas to take that is not suicidal.

Oh, there is one possibility I overlooked. Go up. You figure out how likely that is.

[Eko]

16. Yeah, it's a fictional book.

About a fictional character. I suggest you study game theory to get a better idea of decisions made in war and not use fictional books to come up with opinions.

[Beastly Boy]

20. A method of deduction is being used in most studies that are based on presumption of rationality.

This includes game theory, along with a multitude of other channels of inquiry, as well as the scientific method itself. Conan Doyle merely popularized it.

In your undoubtedly extensive studies of game theory, did you never come across deductive reasoning? Not even once?

Evidently, I should not take presumption of rationality for granted in this exchange.

[Eko]

26. I have to ask you

Do you think Hamas is rational? Do they have a history of choosing the rational thing? This is where deduction can be wrong. Deduction is based on previous knowledge, Deductive reasoning, or deduction, is making an inference based on widely accepted facts or premises. Previous knowledge and the history of fact that Hamas could not coordinate well enough led the Israeli intelligence to conclude that Hamas couldn't invade like they did. That was using deduction. I think I have no problem expressing rationality with you in this regard. Added, you are the one arguing something is true when you don't know it is.
Thanks,
Eko.

[Beastly Boy]

33. My doubts were about your use of rational thinking, not hamas.

Deduction is mainly based on observations, not necessarily on previous knowledge. This is why a deduction often goes against previous knowledge and assumptions. You can find the folly of basing conclusions on previous knowledge addressed at length in various aspects of critical theory. You yourself present the case of previous knowledge being inadequate in reaching adequate conclusions, which, BTW, is an observation, and not a deduction as you claim. You have yet to demonstrate your mastery of deductive reasoning, and I am looking forward to it with great anticipation.

Now, apply your own reasoning to examine the options available to hamas. Given all the the available options, I was wondering how you would deduce anything other than what I deduced.. And if your deduction is different from from mine, I would love to hear the reasoning that went into it.

[Eko]

37. Are you claiming that observations are not previous knowledge?

Seems odd.

[Beastly Boy]

41. Yes I am.

I am claiming that observations are acquisition of new knowledge, which may or may not confirm the accuracy of previous knowledge.

What is so odd about that?

On the other hand, claiming that an observation, which by definition takes place in real time, is previous knowledge... now that's odd!

[Eko]

43. Observation is the present form of it.

Observations would include the present and past. All that have been made. There is that pesky S there that you left out.
claiming that an observation, which by definition takes place in real time, is previous knowledge... now that's odd! Why are you doing that? Is it still because you are trying to say something is true when it is only what you believe?
Eko.

[Beastly Boy]

52. Good catch.

In the context of deductive reasoning as a process, I should have used "observation" as a process, and not "observations" as records of observing, more consistently.

[Eko]

17. And just to point it out

You did miss one direction. Go down. Of course they haven't ever done that have they?

[Beastly Boy]

21. Sure, add that to the list.

Now, apply your deductive reasoning to figure out whether this direction makes any more sense than going north, staying in place or going up.

[Eko]

23. You should never go to where your enemy expects you to.

Easy enough to figure that out. Either way you are still just arguing your opinion.
Thanks,
Eko.

[Beastly Boy]

25. This is not deductive reasoning. it's just the opposite

You might call this assumptive reasoning: something being based on a preconceived notion.

Of course, it goes without saying, that your conclusion did not take the available options into consideration at all.

[Eko]

27. I never called it deductive reasoning.

[Beastly Boy]

34. I had an impression, apparently a false one, that you responded to my post in which I challenged you to use

deductive reasoning.

I should have known better.

[Eko]

40. You didnt challenge me at all.

You made a statement. Now, apply your deductive reasoning to figure out whether this direction makes any more sense than going north, staying in place or going up.
I don't use deductive reasoning because it can be faulty.
Deductive reasoning is valid if the premises are true and the conclusion follows logically from them. Deductive reasoning is also sound if the premises are true and the conclusion is true. However, deductive reasoning can be invalid or unsound if the premises are false or the conclusion does not follow from them.
I use deductive and inductive and you have to remember that it is only reasoning. It's not quite fact. I use facts way more than reasoning since they are way more true. Sure, Hamas might have moved south or done something totally different of which they have a track record of doing. Using deductive or inductive reasoning I might come to the same conclusion or different ones. Either way neither are true at this moment and for you to claim one is would be absconding from reality as we know it at this time.

[Beastly Boy]

44. That's not a challenge?

What is it, then? A humble request left ignored?

But I see you addressed my challenge... I mean humble request: "I don't use deductive reasoning because it can be faulty."

Ok, so you wasted so much time deliberating the virtues of deductive reasoning, only to tell me you don't use it? Never mind the remarkable admission that you don't use it, but why not warn me before I wasted my time?

Fool me once...

[Eko]

45. No it was a statement, everyone knows a question is followed by this ?

Im not the one that pushed deductive reasoning like it was gold. That would be you. You wasted your own time using one form of reasoning that can be false and saying it was fact.
Eko.

[Eko]

73. Apparently they are still very much up in the north.

Hamas commanders killed by IDF hiding in tunnels
The Northern Gaza Strip Brigade is the second largest in the Hamas terrorist organization. In the attack on the tunnel where the terrorist organization's commanders were hiding, under civilian homes and near the Indonesian Hospital, IDF forces, guided by the Shin Bet and Military intelligence, eliminated the brigade commander, Ahmed Ehandor, the deputy brigade commander, Al Rajab, and other senior members including the commander of the support battalion, the head of the electronic warfare unit, and the surveillance officer in the Northern Gaza Strip.
The Indonesian Hospital is in the north.
Are they down south? I dont know and neither do you. Are they still up north? Looks like they are.
Eko.

[Beastly Boy]

74. This article refers to an undated report. In the excerpt you posted,

the words " Hamas terrorist organization. In the attack on the tunnel where the terrorist organization's commanders were hiding, under civilian homes " is actually a link to another JPost article which is titled Israel kills senior Hamas commanders in underground targeting, Hamas confirms

https://www.jpost.com/breaking-news/article-775182

It is dated November 26, before the cease fire took effect. The terrorist organization commanders were killed on or before this date.

A careless but honest mistake.

[Eko]

75. The ceasefire started Nov 24th.

[Beastly Boy]

76. Ok, so they took their time

Probably needed to pack their RPGs for the trip and decide which suicide belt goes better with their bow ties.

But let me give you some credit where credit is due: I vaguely recall that, in addition to their traveling options that I proposed, you mentioned one direction the militants could go was down.

You were right.

On edit: their deaths were REPORTED on Nov 26. The actual operation could not have taken place later than this date, but it could have easily occurred a week or so earlier.

[Eko]

77. Or they decided not to go where the enemy expected them to.

Who's right? I don't know. This doesn't prove that most of Hamas did not go south as you presume but the fact that it was a lot of high ranking people lends a lot of credence that they didn't. Usually the highest ranking are the first to go. If I was Hamas, purely from a strategic view, I would split my forces pretty much evenly between the north and south.
I cant take credit for that, my down was a direction but that way works even better.

[Beastly Boy]

78. More like they decided not to run where enemy expected them to go.

And the enemy certainly expected them to die.

[Eko]

79. To "Run" is a form of "Go".

[Beastly Boy]

80. There you go again, splitting hairs.

Somehow, every conversation with you turns into a protracted pissing contest. And I am all out of piss.

Enjoy your day. Don't run, go.

[Eko]

81. Huh, I looked at it as more a conversation

And one that I enjoyed. Sorry that you feel that way but, I will stay.

[Uncle Joe]

4. You start by mentally or emotionally disconnecting your humanity by

devaluing people's status as human beings to that of disposable "shields."

I believe that when the people become shields, it becomes easier to slaughter them especially if you're bombing from up high or far away.

After all it's just "Hamas' fault;" they use humans as shields, with all the sheer misery and just pure hell going on there, I can't see how anyone living in Gaza could believe that.

[brush]

5. Good points. Hamas and Bibi/Likud/IDF, all complicit/at fault...however you want fo phrase it.

And all apparently against negotiations towards a two-state solution.

[Beastly Boy]

11. Who do you think is doing the devaluing, those who use civilians as human shields, or

those who call human shields by their proper name?

"Human shield" quite literally denotes the humanity of the victims who are used, against their will, to take bombs and bullets intended for their captors who utterly devalue their humanity by turning them into inanimate shields.

And it is beyond any room for debate that the fault lies with those for whom the bombs and bullets are intended, not those firing the bullets. At least that's what international laws make absolutely clear, all attempted claims to the contrary notwithstanding.

[Uncle Joe]

18. No, "human shield" doesn't denote any humanity of the victims,

or the people hiding behind them.

There is no compunction in destroying an enemies armor or shield, these are items owned by the enemy.

Humans are not property.

Civilian population works quite well in describing what Hamas has been hiding behind or in, because that's what they have been doing just as virtually every other fighter in guerilla war history.

[Beastly Boy]

22. What term would you prefer that would more accurately denote the humanity of the victims?

Subhuman shields? Superhuman shields?

Take your pick, and then argue in favor of whatever you come up with. Don't just say this is unacceptable out of the blue, when this term is universally accepted and widely used, with its meaning devoid of any ambiguity.

[Uncle Joe]

49. How about civilians? That's seems to work well in International Law n/t

[Beastly Boy]

50. This doesn't begin to describe the condition of civilians who are

forcibly placed between a combatant and a legitimate military target.

And referring to "the presence of a civilian or other protected person to render certain points, areas or military forces immune from military operations" outside of the context of international law is a bit awkward, in my opinion.

[Uncle Joe]

56. That's precisely the case of every civilian trapped by the insanity of war.

The civilians trapped in Gaza don't lose their status as human beings to becoming inanimate objects just because there is no "good side" in this war that is slaughtering them.

[Beastly Boy]

58. Interesting perspective

Still, both international law and established convention address human shields as a separate and unique segment, possessing certain attributes under the law in addition and not in place of the universal protections afforded to civilians. Actually , the status of protected people covers both civilians and certain combatants (POWs, wounded, foreigners, etc), as well as other segments of population under occupation. So using the term "civilians" would imply exclusion of some of them from being considered human shields under international law. Not a good idea, especially in the case of so many protected people of different types potentially falling into this category.

[Uncle Joe]

63. Civilians are human, shields are not,

no matter if someone had the idea to put the word human in front of it.

I'm speaking from a psychological /sociological perspective.

Currently Netanyahu's government has informed 2.3 million humans to move with no where to go while bombing and shooting them even when carrying white flags.

Netanyahu's government turned off all water, food and medicine in Gaza as punitive mass punishment against 2.3 million civilians, humans, or people; living under occupation also having lived in the world's largest open air prison for the past 15 years.

Of the 2.3 million Palestinian humans, 40--50 % are estimated to be children

Of the 2.3 million Palestinians living in Gaza less than 1.08% are members of Hamas at an estimated 20-25 thousand.

So far well over 15,000 Palestinian humans in Gaza have been killed with at least 6000 being children.

No shields have been killed yet, as none were ever alive.

Short of not dropping a nuclear weapon, I can't tell that Netanyahu's government is doing anything regarding "special protections" of any category of human living in Gaza.

[Beastly Boy]

64. OK then, civilians.

If this is your way to deflect from the fact that both sides kill humans and only one side uses humans to shield themselves, so be it. I cannot stop you from doing this.

I still don't see how this benefits humans in Gaza in any way.

[Uncle Joe]

65. Why do you believe only one side uses humans to shield themselves?

(snip)

In December 1947, immediately following the UN partition vote, the 1947–1948 Civil War in Mandatory Palestine broke out between the Yishuv and Palestinian Arabs. The Irgun fought together with the Haganah and Lehi during that period. Notable operations in which they took part were the battle of Jaffa and the Jordanian siege on the Jewish Quarter in the Old City of Jerusalem. The Irgun's most controversial operation during this period, carried out alongside Lehi, was an assault on the Arab village of Deir Yassin in which more than a hundred villagers and four of the attackers were killed. The event later became known as the Deir Yassin massacre, though Irgun and Lehi sources would deny a massacre took place there. Begin also repeatedly threatened to declare independence if the Jewish Agency did not do so.[20]

Throughout the period of the rebellion against the British and the civil war against the Arabs, Begin lived openly under a series of assumed names, often while sporting a beard. Begin would not come out of hiding until April 1948, when the British, who still maintained nominal authority over Palestine, were almost totally gone. During the period of revolt, Begin was the most wanted man in Palestine, and MI5 placed a 'dead-or-alive' bounty of £10,000 on his head. Begin had been forced into hiding immediately prior to the declaration of revolt, when Aliza noticed that their house was being watched. He initially lived in a room in the Savoy Hotel, a small hotel in Tel Aviv whose owner was sympathetic to the Irgun's cause, and his wife and son were smuggled in to join him after two months. He decided to grow a beard and live openly under an assumed name rather than go completely into hiding. He was aided by the fact that the British authorities possessed only two photographs of his likeness, of which one, which they believed to be his military identity card, bore only a slight resemblance to him, according to Begin, and were fed misinformation by Yaakov Meridor that he had had plastic surgery, and were thus confused over his appearance. Due to the British police conducting searches in the hotel's vicinity, he relocated to a Yemenite neighborhood in Petah Tikva, and after a month, moved to the Hasidof neighborhood near Kfar Sirkin, where he pretended to be a lawyer named Yisrael Halperin. After the British searched the area but missed the street where his house was located, Begin and his family moved to a new home on a Tel Aviv side street, where he assumed the name Yisrael Sassover and masqueraded as a rabbi. Following the King David Hotel bombing, when the British searched the entire city of Tel Aviv, Begin evaded capture by hiding in a secret compartment in his home.[20] In 1947, he moved to the heart of Tel Aviv and took the identity of Dr. Yonah Koenigshoffer, the name he found on an abandoned passport in a library.

(snip)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Menachem_Begin#:~:text=As%20head%20of%20the%20Irgun,of%20the%20notorious%20terrorist%20organisation%22.



This is the MO of guerrilla war.

They hide among civilians because they don't have a standard military force to compete against an occupying power.

[Beastly Boy]

66. Who besides Hamas is using human shields... sorry, using humans as shields?

And they are bragging about it.

You are still talking about Gaza, aren't you?

And how is guerilla warriors using humans as shields different from terrorists using humans as shields?

[Uncle Joe]

67. Currently Hamas in Gaza, and Israel at its' founding.

With the history of the past 75 or so years, they're inseparable.

[Beastly Boy]

68. So we are not talking about Gaza anymore.

We are talking of a seventy-five year old event because there is no precedent for Israel using humans as shields, only a rogue Jewish terrorist group doing it before Israel was even a state.

And that is not a deflection from Hamas using Gazan civilians as human shields today... how?

[Uncle Joe]

69. Sure there is, what do you think the IDF is doing in aiding and abetting illegal settlements in the West Bank?

They know the settlements are illegal, they know it will create animosity and hardship for the dispossessed.

They know it will foster violence.

They know as a result some Israeli settlers will probably die but a lot more Palestinians will as well because the IDF is backing up the settlers.

The settlers in the West Bank are the government of Israel's version of using humans as shield (s).

One primary difference, the illegal settlers in the West Bank could be more classified as volunteering to be a "human shield" for the state of Israel vs. the 2+ million Palestinians in Gaza without a choice.

[Beastly Boy]

70. AAAAnd, now we are deflecting to the West Bank!

Ok, Uncle, let's end it now and get our thoughts together before we continue this nonsense.

[Uncle Joe]

71. It's all part of the same package.

That sounds like a good idea Beastly.