Hamas attack on Israel

[makaveli1875]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cgeqr73p8wyo

That's somehow okay because a Hamas official was killed, to hell with the dozens of innocent victims because, you know, proportionality!!

And our UK government condones this behaviour from Israel!

Its not pleasant but it tends to be the way most wars go . The innocent civilians suffer the most

[The Tubs]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Its not pleasant but it tends to be the way most wars go . The innocent civilians suffer the most

I don't think the Nazis used a 230 kg bomb to take out some random allied private.

Even when the Yanks took out Bin Laden, a couple of unfortunate associates died.

The messaging and the tactics tell us that we're seeing genocide.

[Stevie Reid]

https://x.com/History__Speaks/status...21175296577632

[Ozyhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I don't think the Nazis used a 230 kg bomb to take out some random allied private.

Even when the Yanks took out Bin Laden, a couple of unfortunate associates died.

The messaging and the tactics tell us that we're seeing genocide.

To be fair, the Americans and us took out more than a few associates looking for Bin Ladin. About 180k more.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Lendo]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I don't think the Nazis used a 230 kg bomb to take out some random allied private.

Even when the Yanks took out Bin Laden, a couple of unfortunate associates died.

The messaging and the tactics tell us that we're seeing genocide.

We did firebomb Dresden and kill upwards of 25,000 people over the course of two nights….

[Hibspur]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cgeqr73p8wyo

That's somehow okay because a Hamas official was killed, to hell with the dozens of innocent victims because, you know, proportionality!!

And our UK government condones this behaviour from Israel!

Without wishing to incur your wrath again, in what way would you say Israel should have fought this war proportionally? A few rockets fired into Gaza in response to October 7th would hardly have landed well within the Israeli population.

The eye-for-an-eye version would, I guess, have been to round up around 1500 people from Gaza (mostly civilians but a few Hamas fighters too), murder the vast majority of them (with some sexual assault thrown in) and keep the rest hostage. Would we have thought that a proportionate response?

So, is what's actually happened way beyond proportionate? We've seen from what they achieved in Iran over a short space of time just what a clinical fighting force the Israelis can be. They basically left Iran reeling with the precision of their missile strikes while their pilots quickly took over the skies. Civilian casualties were relatively minimal. Such a contrast to the mass casualties in Gaza. Why is that? Sure, there are no clear, defined sites for Israel to hit in Gaza (like the nuclear plants in Iran) but a lot of the civilian deaths come down to the way Hamas operate. For example, the operative mentioned in the story you've linked to must have been aware he'd be on Israeli intelligence's acute radar yet he apparently chose to sit among citizens in a cafe, putting them all at risk. I'm not suggesting that bombing the cafe was Israel's only option, but if their mission is to eradicate Hamas how do you do so proportionally when their tunnel network runs under civilian infrastructure and their operatives base themselves within the civilian population?

While I imagine Netanyahu's long-term plans for Gaza go well beyond wiping out Hamas (is the Trump 'riviera' plan perhaps more than a pipe dream?) I'm just not convinced this war could have been fought without a very high number of civilian deaths.

[Lendo]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Without wishing to incur your wrath again, in what way would you say Israel should have fought this war proportionally? A few rockets fired into Gaza in response to October 7th would hardly have landed well within the Israeli population.

The eye-for-an-eye version would, I guess, have been to round up around 1500 people from Gaza (mostly civilians but a few Hamas fighters too), murder the vast majority of them (with some sexual assault thrown in) and keep the rest hostage. Would we have thought that a proportionate response?

So, is what's actually happened way beyond proportionate? We've seen from what they achieved in Iran over a short space of time just what a clinical fighting force the Israelis can be. They basically left Iran reeling with the precision of their missile strikes while their pilots quickly took over the skies. Civilian casualties were relatively minimal. Such a contrast to the mass casualties in Gaza. Why is that? Sure, there are no clear, defined sites for Israel to hit in Gaza (like the nuclear plants in Iran) but a lot of the civilian deaths come down to the way Hamas operate. For example, the operative mentioned in the story you've linked to must have been aware he'd be on Israeli intelligence's acute radar yet he apparently chose to sit among citizens in a cafe, putting them all at risk. I'm not suggesting that bombing the cafe was Israel's only option, but if their mission is to eradicate Hamas how do you do so proportionally when their tunnel network runs under civilian infrastructure and their operatives base themselves within the civilian population?

While I imagine Netanyahu's long-term plans for Gaza go well beyond wiping out Hamas (is the Trump 'riviera' plan perhaps more than a pipe dream?) I'm just not convinced this war could have been fought without a very high number of civilian deaths.

Ahhh, that’s fine then. Crack on lads, kill as many as you can

[Ozyhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Without wishing to incur your wrath again, in what way would you say Israel should have fought this war proportionally? A few rockets fired into Gaza in response to October 7th would hardly have landed well within the Israeli population.

The eye-for-an-eye version would, I guess, have been to round up around 1500 people from Gaza (mostly civilians but a few Hamas fighters too), murder the vast majority of them (with some sexual assault thrown in) and keep the rest hostage. Would we have thought that a proportionate response?

So, is what's actually happened way beyond proportionate? We've seen from what they achieved in Iran over a short space of time just what a clinical fighting force the Israelis can be. They basically left Iran reeling with the precision of their missile strikes while their pilots quickly took over the skies. Civilian casualties were relatively minimal. Such a contrast to the mass casualties in Gaza. Why is that? Sure, there are no clear, defined sites for Israel to hit in Gaza (like the nuclear plants in Iran) but a lot of the civilian deaths come down to the way Hamas operate. For example, the operative mentioned in the story you've linked to must have been aware he'd be on Israeli intelligence's acute radar yet he apparently chose to sit among citizens in a cafe, putting them all at risk. I'm not suggesting that bombing the cafe was Israel's only option, but if their mission is to eradicate Hamas how do you do so proportionally when their tunnel network runs under civilian infrastructure and their operatives base themselves within the civilian population?

While I imagine Netanyahu's long-term plans for Gaza go well beyond wiping out Hamas (is the Trump 'riviera' plan perhaps more than a pipe dream?) I'm just not convinced this war could have been fought without a very high number of civilian deaths.

This didn’t start with oct 7th. This is a 50 year process of ethnic cleansing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[The Tubs]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

To be fair, the Americans and us took out more than a few associates looking for Bin Ladin. About 180k more.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm talking about the collateral damage involved in the direct act of killing one target.Techniques exist if they want to be more precise. I should maybe be more specific.

[The Tubs]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

We did firebomb Dresden and kill upwards of 25,000 people over the course of two nights….

That is comparable to what Israel is doing. Punishing the general population and breaking their will.

[He's here!]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Its not pleasant but it tends to be the way most wars go . The innocent civilians suffer the most

Yes, it sounds horribly clinical but if the figures coming out of Gaza are reasonably accurate (hard to know given the combo of Israeli restrictions and Hamas-run authorities releasing the figures) then over 20,000 of the dead are Hamas fighters. That would put the ratio of combatants to civilians on a par with most wars.

[MKHIBEE]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Without wishing to incur your wrath again, in what way would you say Israel should have fought this war proportionally? A few rockets fired into Gaza in response to October 7th would hardly have landed well within the Israeli population.

The eye-for-an-eye version would, I guess, have been to round up around 1500 people from Gaza (mostly civilians but a few Hamas fighters too), murder the vast majority of them (with some sexual assault thrown in) and keep the rest hostage. Would we have thought that a proportionate response?

So, is what's actually happened way beyond proportionate? We've seen from what they achieved in Iran over a short space of time just what a clinical fighting force the Israelis can be. They basically left Iran reeling with the precision of their missile strikes while their pilots quickly took over the skies. Civilian casualties were relatively minimal. Such a contrast to the mass casualties in Gaza. Why is that? Sure, there are no clear, defined sites for Israel to hit in Gaza (like the nuclear plants in Iran) but a lot of the civilian deaths come down to the way Hamas operate. For example, the operative mentioned in the story you've linked to must have been aware he'd be on Israeli intelligence's acute radar yet he apparently chose to sit among citizens in a cafe, putting them all at risk. I'm not suggesting that bombing the cafe was Israel's only option, but if their mission is to eradicate Hamas how do you do so proportionally when their tunnel network runs under civilian infrastructure and their operatives base themselves within the civilian population?

While I imagine Netanyahu's long-term plans for Gaza go well beyond wiping out Hamas (is the Trump 'riviera' plan perhaps more than a pipe dream?) I'm just not convinced this war could have been fought without a very high number of civilian deaths.

The high number of civilian deaths is due to the ongoing genocide being carried out by the Israelis, aided and abetted by our own government. Eradicating Hamas is just a front, you cannot eradicate an ideal Netanyahu has already said all adult Palestinians should be killed. Israelis have said no Palestinians is innocent, all Palestinians should be killed etc etc etc. A truly vile and murderous regime. Supported by the UK government. A regime who have continually flouted international law and engaged in illegal occupation of an another land. Supported by the UK government. The list goes on and on.

[The Tubs]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Yes, it sounds horribly clinical but if the figures coming out of Gaza are reasonably accurate (hard to know given the combo of Israeli restrictions and Hamas-run authorities releasing the figures) then over 20,000 of the dead are Hamas fighters. That would put the ratio of combatants to civilians on a par with most wars.

Would that not mean all adult males are in Hamas? It certainly seems like the logic Israel is applying.

[He's here!]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

This didn’t start with oct 7th. This is a 50 year process of ethnic cleansing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't think this conflict compares to what's come before during that time, certainly since Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2006.

[MKHIBEE]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Yes, it sounds horribly clinical but if the figures coming out of Gaza are reasonably accurate (hard to know given the combo of Israeli restrictions and Hamas-run authorities releasing the figures) then over 20,000 of the dead are Hamas fighters. That would put the ratio of combatants to civilians on a par with most wars.

I have no idea if those figures are accurate but I read that the amount of armed Hamas combatants was only 10000. Something isn’t adding up

[He's here!]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Would that not mean all adult males are in Hamas? It certainly seems like the logic Israel is applying.

I thought the population of Gaza is/was 2 million odd? That must include a lot more than 20k adult males.

[MKHIBEE]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I have no idea if those figures are accurate but I read that the amount of armed Hamas combatants was only 10000. Something isn’t adding up

I have just checked. It’s given as between 20000 to 30000 Hamas with Israeli sources saying 16000- 18000 left. So you could, on these figures, have 20000 Hamas in a total of 50000 plus. Unlikely I know.

[Keith_M]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Yes, it sounds horribly clinical but if the figures coming out of Gaza are reasonably accurate (hard to know given the combo of Israeli restrictions and Hamas-run authorities releasing the figures) then over 20,000 of the dead are Hamas fighters. That would put the ratio of combatants to civilians on a par with most wars.

Do you have a source for the estimated 20k Hamas fighters?

[Kato]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I don't think this conflict compares to what's come before during that time, certainly since Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2006.

That's like saying Iwo Jima wasn't part of WW2 because Dunkirk wasn't as bad.

This has been going on for as long as I've been alive in one way or another.

There have been periods when Arabs and Israelites have lived in peace together but that aspect seems beyond the outlook of all parties just now.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

Imagine leaving uni and getting a good job in a consultancy firm, doing pretty well for yourself and before you know it you’re discussing the most effective method of ethnic cleansing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[He's here!]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Without wishing to incur your wrath again, in what way would you say Israel should have fought this war proportionally? A few rockets fired into Gaza in response to October 7th would hardly have landed well within the Israeli population.

The eye-for-an-eye version would, I guess, have been to round up around 1500 people from Gaza (mostly civilians but a few Hamas fighters too), murder the vast majority of them (with some sexual assault thrown in) and keep the rest hostage. Would we have thought that a proportionate response?

So, is what's actually happened way beyond proportionate? We've seen from what they achieved in Iran over a short space of time just what a clinical fighting force the Israelis can be. They basically left Iran reeling with the precision of their missile strikes while their pilots quickly took over the skies. Civilian casualties were relatively minimal. Such a contrast to the mass casualties in Gaza. Why is that? Sure, there are no clear, defined sites for Israel to hit in Gaza (like the nuclear plants in Iran) but a lot of the civilian deaths come down to the way Hamas operate. For example, the operative mentioned in the story you've linked to must have been aware he'd be on Israeli intelligence's acute radar yet he apparently chose to sit among citizens in a cafe, putting them all at risk. I'm not suggesting that bombing the cafe was Israel's only option, but if their mission is to eradicate Hamas how do you do so proportionally when their tunnel network runs under civilian infrastructure and their operatives base themselves within the civilian population?

While I imagine Netanyahu's long-term plans for Gaza go well beyond wiping out Hamas (is the Trump 'riviera' plan perhaps more than a pipe dream?) I'm just not convinced this war could have been fought without a very high number of civilian deaths.

What surprised me in that BBC story was that a 'bustling seaside cafe' can still be a thing in Gaza.

I suppose a strictly proportional conflict would mean Israel fighting it using only resources available to Hamas but they were hardly going to do that.

[He's here!]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I have just checked. It’s given as between 20000 to 30000 Hamas with Israeli sources saying 16000- 18000 left. So you could, on these figures, have 20000 Hamas in a total of 50000 plus. Unlikely I know.

Yes, it was on the Nicky Campbell show I heard the 20k figure but they were at pains to stress that all casualty figures coming out of Gaza are unverified.

As you say, that seems to be the number cited by Google.

[Kato]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Imagine leaving uni and getting a good job in a consultancy firm, doing pretty well for yourself and before you know it you’re discussing the most effective method of ethnic cleansing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Biblical shi'. But that's where we are. The evangelical, former "spiritual advisor" to Donald Trump, Rev Dr Johnny Moore has been given made Chairman of the Gaza Aid Group.


He believes that God, his pal in the sky, has a plan for Gaza and those that "bless Israel will be blessed."

"Mr. Moore, like many evangelicals, including Mike Huckabee, the U.S. ambassador to Israel, is committed to a Jewish state based on his interpretation of the Bible.

Some evangelicals view their support for Israel as an important element of their belief in biblical prophecy. Speaking to The Washington Post in 2018, Mr. Moore said he had advised White House officials that “those that bless Israel will be blessed..”


https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/05/w...oundation.html


Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[Kato]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

What surprised me in that BBC story was that a 'bustling seaside cafe' can still be a thing in Gaza.

I suppose a strictly proportional conflict would mean Israel fighting it using only resources available to Hamas but they were hardly going to do that.

Wow. Don't join the army.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[Moulin Yarns]

A lot of responses to Hibspur, but my tuppence worth. There was no need to bomb a cafe full civilians when there are thousands Israeli defence (sic) forces on the ground. Must have been easy to identify the individual in close proximity. But maybe, just maybe, that doesn't suit the Israeli killing machine.

[Moulin Yarns]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Without wishing to incur your wrath again, in what way would you say Israel should have fought this war proportionally? A few rockets fired into Gaza in response to October 7th would hardly have landed well within the Israeli population.

The eye-for-an-eye version would, I guess, have been to round up around 1500 people from Gaza (mostly civilians but a few Hamas fighters too), murder the vast majority of them (with some sexual assault thrown in) and keep the rest hostage. Would we have thought that a proportionate response?

So, is what's actually happened way beyond proportionate? We've seen from what they achieved in Iran over a short space of time just what a clinical fighting force the Israelis can be. They basically left Iran reeling with the precision of their missile strikes while their pilots quickly took over the skies. Civilian casualties were relatively minimal. Such a contrast to the mass casualties in Gaza. Why is that? Sure, there are no clear, defined sites for Israel to hit in Gaza (like the nuclear plants in Iran) but a lot of the civilian deaths come down to the way Hamas operate. For example, the operative mentioned in the story you've linked to must have been aware he'd be on Israeli intelligence's acute radar yet he apparently chose to sit among citizens in a cafe, putting them all at risk. I'm not suggesting that bombing the cafe was Israel's only option, but if their mission is to eradicate Hamas how do you do so proportionally when their tunnel network runs under civilian infrastructure and their operatives base themselves within the civilian population?

While I imagine Netanyahu's long-term plans for Gaza go well beyond wiping out Hamas (is the Trump 'riviera' plan perhaps more than a pipe dream?) I'm just not convinced this war could have been fought without a very high number of civilian deaths.

Let's talk about proportionality!

How many Israeli were killed and captured on October 7th?

How many Palestinians have been killed or captured since?


You want to talk about proportional??

Now justify what your precious Israel has done to Palestine!

By way, loving your Guerilla tactics of dropping a comment then disappearing into the ether. Very Hamas of you.

[Bristolhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Without wishing to incur your wrath again, in what way would you say Israel should have fought this war proportionally? A few rockets fired into Gaza in response to October 7th would hardly have landed well within the Israeli population.

The eye-for-an-eye version would, I guess, have been to round up around 1500 people from Gaza (mostly civilians but a few Hamas fighters too), murder the vast majority of them (with some sexual assault thrown in) and keep the rest hostage. Would we have thought that a proportionate response?

So, is what's actually happened way beyond proportionate? We've seen from what they achieved in Iran over a short space of time just what a clinical fighting force the Israelis can be. They basically left Iran reeling with the precision of their missile strikes while their pilots quickly took over the skies. Civilian casualties were relatively minimal. Such a contrast to the mass casualties in Gaza. Why is that? Sure, there are no clear, defined sites for Israel to hit in Gaza (like the nuclear plants in Iran) but a lot of the civilian deaths come down to the way Hamas operate. For example, the operative mentioned in the story you've linked to must have been aware he'd be on Israeli intelligence's acute radar yet he apparently chose to sit among citizens in a cafe, putting them all at risk. I'm not suggesting that bombing the cafe was Israel's only option, but if their mission is to eradicate Hamas how do you do so proportionally when their tunnel network runs under civilian infrastructure and their operatives base themselves within the civilian population?

While I imagine Netanyahu's long-term plans for Gaza go well beyond wiping out Hamas (is the Trump 'riviera' plan perhaps more than a pipe dream?) I'm just not convinced this war could have been fought without a very high number of civilian deaths.

Are you for real? For a start a proportional response, or even a bit over the top wouldn’t be Genocide, Ethnic Cleansing and War Crimes.

Their mission is to wipe out the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip. October the 11th was just an excuse.

J

[Jones28]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Without wishing to incur your wrath again, in what way would you say Israel should have fought this war proportionally? A few rockets fired into Gaza in response to October 7th would hardly have landed well within the Israeli population.

The eye-for-an-eye version would, I guess, have been to round up around 1500 people from Gaza (mostly civilians but a few Hamas fighters too), murder the vast majority of them (with some sexual assault thrown in) and keep the rest hostage. Would we have thought that a proportionate response?

So, is what's actually happened way beyond proportionate? We've seen from what they achieved in Iran over a short space of time just what a clinical fighting force the Israelis can be. They basically left Iran reeling with the precision of their missile strikes while their pilots quickly took over the skies. Civilian casualties were relatively minimal. Such a contrast to the mass casualties in Gaza. Why is that? Sure, there are no clear, defined sites for Israel to hit in Gaza (like the nuclear plants in Iran) but a lot of the civilian deaths come down to the way Hamas operate. For example, the operative mentioned in the story you've linked to must have been aware he'd be on Israeli intelligence's acute radar yet he apparently chose to sit among citizens in a cafe, putting them all at risk. I'm not suggesting that bombing the cafe was Israel's only option, but if their mission is to eradicate Hamas how do you do so proportionally when their tunnel network runs under civilian infrastructure and their operatives base themselves within the civilian population?

While I imagine Netanyahu's long-term plans for Gaza go well beyond wiping out Hamas (is the Trump 'riviera' plan perhaps more than a pipe dream?) I'm just not convinced this war could have been fought without a very high number of civilian deaths.

Your defence of genocide is really quite something.

You think the Israeli intelligence services couldn’t have known where this guys was at any given time of day?

How instead of bombing a cafe, where we know for a fact we will kill most of the other occupants, we follow him and shoot him in the back of the head.

If Israel wanted to it could have done something different and been clinical. Instead, like with everything else they’re doing, they’re using a sledge hammer to hang a picture hook.

[MKHIBEE]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Let's talk about proportionality!

How many Israeli were killed and captured on October 7th?

How many Palestinians have been killed or captured since?


You want to talk about proportional??

Now justify what your precious Israel has done to Palestine!

By way, loving your Guerilla tactics of dropping a comment then disappearing into the ether. Very Hamas of you.

The Rupert Lowe of .net

[Betty Boop]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Without wishing to incur your wrath again, in what way would you say Israel should have fought this war proportionally? A few rockets fired into Gaza in response to October 7th would hardly have landed well within the Israeli population.

The eye-for-an-eye version would, I guess, have been to round up around 1500 people from Gaza (mostly civilians but a few Hamas fighters too), murder the vast majority of them (with some sexual assault thrown in) and keep the rest hostage. Would we have thought that a proportionate response?

So, is what's actually happened way beyond proportionate? We've seen from what they achieved in Iran over a short space of time just what a clinical fighting force the Israelis can be. They basically left Iran reeling with the precision of their missile strikes while their pilots quickly took over the skies. Civilian casualties were relatively minimal. Such a contrast to the mass casualties in Gaza. Why is that? Sure, there are no clear, defined sites for Israel to hit in Gaza (like the nuclear plants in Iran) but a lot of the civilian deaths come down to the way Hamas operate. For example, the operative mentioned in the story you've linked to must have been aware he'd be on Israeli intelligence's acute radar yet he apparently chose to sit among citizens in a cafe, putting them all at risk. I'm not suggesting that bombing the cafe was Israel's only option, but if their mission is to eradicate Hamas how do you do so proportionally when their tunnel network runs under civilian infrastructure and their operatives base themselves within the civilian population?

While I imagine Netanyahu's long-term plans for Gaza go well beyond wiping out Hamas (is the Trump 'riviera' plan perhaps more than a pipe dream?) I'm just not convinced this war could have been fought without a very high number of civilian deaths.

Hasbara