• dlatch@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Reposting this what I posted a few times here already:

    Let me ask you two questions.

    If Hamas is using the Palestinian people as shields and is forcefully preventing civilians from moving away from them, that makes the Palestinian people effectively hostages of Hamas. So if the Palestinian hostages happen to be near Hamas terrorists, are they acceptable collateral damage if Israel bombs them?

    Eventually, Israel will find out where the Israeli hostages are being kept. Obviously, there will be Hamas terrorists near them. Are the Israeli hostages acceptable collateral damage if Israel bombs them?

    If you answered yes to one question, and no to the other, you should ask yourself why you put different value on the lives of innocent human beings. Is it what side of a fence they are born on? What nationality they happen to have? What religion they believe in? The color of their skin?

    • DarkGamer@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      if the Palestinian hostages happen to be near Hamas terrorists, are they acceptable collateral damage if Israel bombs them?
      Are the Israeli hostages acceptable collateral damage if Israel bombs them?

      I suspect both would absolutely be considered acceptable collateral damage, that is consistent with Israel’s previous Hannibal Directive, and IDF forces mortared their own Kibbutzes and bases to hit Hamas targets during the Oct 7 attack.

      Interesting you presume Israel and its supporters are motivated by racism, it seems obvious to me Israel’s motivation is regarding safety. Meanwhile, the other side of this conflict is explicitly genocidal.

      • dlatch@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m not asking what Israel considers acceptable collateral damage, I’m asking what individuals consider acceptable collateral damage. Note that also no where in my post I presumed Israel and it’s supporters, my questions were balanced both sides and I let open which one you would find acceptable. For me personally, collateral damage on either side is not acceptable.

        If you consider both sides acceptable collateral damage, congratulations you are not a racist. However, you could question your value for human life in general.

        • DarkGamer@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’m not asking what Israel considers acceptable collateral damage, I’m asking what individuals consider acceptable collateral damage. Note that also no where in my post I presumed Israel and it’s supporters,

          Because your question format was, “is it acceptable … if Israel bombs them?” I thought it was posed to be from the perspective of the actor making that call, apologies if I was presumptive.

          For me personally, collateral damage on either side is not acceptable. … you could question your value for human life in general.

          War in general devalues human life, throws lives into the furnace for political ends. Given the tactics employed in this war, not letting human shields and hostages be viable and diminishing their value seems like the least terrible option, and it is quite terrible. It’s the same principle as not negotiating with hostage-takers.