Hamas strike on Israel - Threadbans in op - mod warning in OP updated 19/10/23

"Only hope for the future and the future of their children"

Their children he says.

Imagine you're at home waiting for your 12 year to come home but he doesn't, you go looking for him and eventually go to the police (israeli army) who says they have no idea where he is.

You eventually find out that he was arrested by the IDF (for some minor infraction) and taken into custody, your child has been taken to a military facility where he is held for months, he's not allowed legal representation until a day or 2 before his "trial" which is not a trial as you or I would know but a military trial.

His lawyer can't give him much of a defence because the IDF have refused to provide any evidence citing secrecy and his lawyer can't question any "witnesses" because again the IDF class all evidence as "secret".

Your 12 year old child has been beaten/tortured while in "prison" and is scared, you watch as he is charged with minor crimes and sentenced to years in a military prison with no right to appeal his sentence.

This happens on a daily basis, now again I'll ask, how much oppression like this would you stand for until you fmsay enough is enough?

763 according to the best sources.

How many were killed by the IDF?

MLK, Ghandi, Mandela were figureheads for their causes and while they called for peaceful resistance the fact is there was also armed/violent resistance alongside those causes.

"continued Palestinian armed resistance"

At least you are acknowledging that they are resisting, now explain what are they resisiting and why?

Do you support Hamas? Genuine question

If not why?

If so why?

Then you might get to the nugget of my point.

One can't have it both ways.

Verified?

One so far.

That was Doron Katz-Asher who was killed while being driven away in a tractor.

Not sure what that has to do with anything but to go down the rabbit hole of a conspiracy theory that has been debunked.

Can you elaborate, as you seem to be light on the details?

For example, what armed resistance did the civil rights leaders of the 1960s engage in in the US?

The issue is, that while you are ostensibly trying to project a neutral view, it is starting from the point that Israel are right, and therefore you mould your answer around it.

If you want to argue that the anger of Israelis justifies or excuses killing tens of thousands of Palestinian civilians, then you have to apply that to Hamas. If you want to argue that because Israel is the bigger and stronger bear which means that it is expected and acceptable for them to attack the weaker party (i.e. some form of "might is right"), then you have to apply the same logic to the situation when armed militants with AK47s are entering your kibbutz.

If Israel's big US brother suddenly pulled all support and left it at the mercy of the supposed enemies that surround it, and said hypothetical enemies attacked it and killed huge numbers of Israelis, then you'd have to say "well they poked the bear so all is fair" too.

BTW, I never said anything about Israel waiting for more victims to sate their bloodlust. My point is that if you want to have the view that Israel is justified and excused in killing tens of thousands, maiming many more, and destroying millions of people's livelihoods and homes, in retaliation for 1000+ Israelis being killed, then all I'd ask is consistency and apply the same to Hamas. But that argument will then descend to a "who started it" one because if one thinks Hamas were justified and excused for Oct 7th, then that must remove some legitimacy from Israel's response.

And to repeat again, I don't think either is justified. I just highlight the contradictory standards commonly applied by many people who've already chosen a "side"

I never said MLK engaged in violence I said he was a figurehead for the civil rights movement, the civil rights movement had MANY different factions, these included the black panthers who did engage in violence.

You can't just say MLK, Ghandi, Mandela etc as if they were the be all and end all of civil rights movements and therefore there was no violence in civil rights campaigns in their respective countries.

Remember kids

When they defend israels actions they're defending Israel's continued genocide in Gaza.

"

Unicef warns of increase in 'unbearable level of child deaths in Gaza' due to malnutrition

UN agency Unicef has warned the Gaza Strip is poised to witness an increase in what an official said was “the already unbearable level of child deaths” due to a worsening food crisis."

You miss the point completely.

Change happened in those countries, led by those people because they followed non-violent means.

Just because some fringe elements advocate more violent means does not detract from my point.

Just because the Black Panthers advocated violence, does not detract from the Civil Rights movement and its achievements. People look at the movement and celebrate its achievements, they don't celebrate the Black Panthers.

The same can be said for Gandhi and Mandela.

Also, those fringe elements never blew themselves up on a bus full of civilians, or massacred entire villages full of women and kids.

Notably, you wont answer the question on the use of violence, however.

"The same can be said for Gandhi and Mandela."

This Mandela?

Maybe the Palestinians are following the lead of Mandela, they've suffered under Apartheid the same as the people of SA did.

"Mandela embraced armed struggle to end the racist system of apartheid.

To many South Africans, particularly within the African National Congress, Mandela was a great man partly because of his willingness to use violence, not in spite of it.

Many believe apartheid would have endured much longer if he hadn’t rebelled and overturned the ANC’s long-standing nonviolence policy."

That is just like the '' croppy lie down '' policy. BUT that didn't work either. If you don't stand up for your rights then don't expect your aggressors to stand up for you.

You didn't give an example of what the Palestinians have to do to achieve their rights peacefully BECAUSE YOU CAN'T.

Even if Hamas release all the hostages , it wouldn't mean an end to the war. This is the obstacle to any permanent ceasefire, Bibi has made it clear any ceasefire will be temporary. Both Hamas and Bibi share one goal; they are seemingly intent on seeing this through to the bitter end.

America could actually solve this if they put real pressure on both Qatar and Israel. They won't do it though .