CV's Copy - ISRAEL-HAMAS

[CountValentine]

Knock of roof didn't save civilian lives?

[avromie7]

For the purposes of this conversation, is it relevant? Civilian deaths by "friendly" fire (ie. not by opposition forces) is a reality in every war, and I don't know that it's ever broken out as a standalone statistic.

ETA: and to the argument of Hamas being more brutal toward "their own" people or less accurate with their missiles than anyone else, I would say that ISIS and the Taliban would fall in to the same category, and the Germans and Russians weren't much better (plus they had worse technology for accuracy).

You can't expect Israel to "do more" to prevent Hamas from killing their own people.

[Just A Jew]

Knock of roof didn't save civilian lives?

At what cost?

[Just A Jew]

You can't expect Israel to "do more" to prevent Hamas from killing their own people.

100%. But let's not pretend there isn't more that could be done to prevent deaths caused by the IDF. It may not be a reasonable ask, but the number of deaths caused by Hamas isn't really relevant to that conversation.

[CountValentine]

At what cost?

Exactly the point I am making.

[Yehuda57]

We are talking about civilians. Yes, soldiers have died to limit civilian casualties. Israel used it because it saved civilian lives. They stopped using it (or rarely) in this war.
Why would they stop using it when it saves civilian lives. The answer is simple. It also saves terrorist lives. They made the calculation that it was more important to kill the terrorist. They have every right to make that calculation as every civilized country does. You can't then claim you are doing everything you can.   

Lots of Israeli soldiers have died to protect Palestinian civilians.

This conversation isn't going to go anywhere. No one saying "everything" means literally everything. Sure, Israel *could* send their conscripted army into Hamas tunnels on suicide missions, and go door to door without prior air attacks and sacrifice thousands of their most productive citizens.

Obviously "everything" is within a certain amount of reason.

Israel has telegraphed every area they were going to attack giving terrorists loads of time to flee. They're doing it again with Raffah. Israel has used roof knocking this war, and if they're doing it less it makes sense as the civilians have been warned to move to other areas.

[Yo ssi]

Knock of roof didn't save civilian lives?

Short term or long term?

[Just A Jew]

Exactly the point I am making.

You're asking an unanswerable question. Who makes that calculation? Certainly not me or you. I don't know a country on Earth who would be ok with other countries answering that question on their behalf, either. So why is it even being asked of Israel, as if everyone else gets to decide what their risk calculations should be?

[CountValentine]

So why is it even being asked of Israel, as if everyone else gets to decide what their risk calculations should be?

This goes on in every war. Lets not be in the EC that it only happens to Israel.

[aygart]

Exactly the point I am making.

If the objective is to degrade capabilities then knock on roof may not deter its accomplishment, but if the objective is to eliminate the terrorists then it will prevent its accomplishment.

[CountValentine]

If the objective is to degrade capabilities then knock on roof may not deter its accomplishment, but if the objective is to eliminate the terrorists then it will prevent its accomplishment.

I thought the reason was to avoid killing as many civilians as possible, no?

[aygart]

I thought the reason was to avoid killing as many civilians as possible, no?

the reason for the strike? I guess it is to avoid the killing of Israeli civilians.

[CountValentine]

Short term or long term?

Short term for sure. Not following the long term.

[CountValentine]

the reason for the strike?

No, the warning before the strike.
The strike itself is to take out Hamas and its capabilities. I think we all agree on that.

[Just A Jew]

This goes on in every war. Lets not be in the EC that it only happens to Israel.

To the extent that it happens to Israel? And during the war vs after the war? I challenge you to show me 3 wars within the last 50 years where this question was asked half as much as its being asked now within the first 6 months of the start of the war. Russia and Ukraine haven't been asked this many times during the course of their war, and it's been going on for more than 4 times the amount of time.

[Just A Jew]

No, the warning before the strike.
The strike itself is to take out Hamas and its capabilities. I think we all agree on that.

IINM, the roof knocking was procedure mainly for structural targets, not when targeting terrorist personnel.

[aygart]

No, the warning before the strike.
The strike itself is to take out Hamas and its capabilities. I think we all agree on that.

It can be to take out Hamas operatives or it can be to take out its capabilities. Those two are very different in their requirements. If it is to take out the operatives then to warn people undermines the entire strike since those operatives will also escape. If it is to take out capabilities then the building itself can be the target and this can be accomplished even if every single person evacuates the building.

[CountValentine]

To the extent that it happens to Israel?

Doing all you can to protect civilians.

I challenge you to show me 3 wars within the last 50 years where this question was asked half as much as its being asked now within the first 6 months of the start of the war. Russia and Ukraine haven't been asked this many times during the course of their war, and it's been going on for more than 4 times the amount of time.

Vietnam war.

How can you even bring Ukraine into this. Have they even killed any civilians?

Every day for the first 100 days all you heard about was Russia killing civilians. 100 times more than now.

[CountValentine]

Plane is calling.
GS!

[Just A Jew]

This goes on in every war. Lets not be in the EC that it only happens to Israel.

To the extent that it happens to Israel?

Doing all you can to protect civilians.

Not sure I follow.

Vietnam war.

I'm not going to claim to be nearly as familiar as you on that era, but I don't believe this to be true. The war started in the late 40's or early 50's, and protests didn't become common until the mid-to-late 60's. IINM, the biggest problem brought up by the protesters was regarding US involvement and casualties rather than the civilian death toll.

How can you even bring Ukraine into this. Have they even killed any civilians?

Every day for the first 100 days all you heard about was Russia killing civilians. 100 times more than now.

I was referring to the Russia-Ukraine War in general, not calling out Ukraine in particular. Although, there have been cross border attacks in which Russian civilians were killed.

All you heard for the first 100 days was about the civilians. From who? Where? With what language? With what repercussions? Offline, outside of the EC, make yourself a list, side by side, of the answers to those questions for both wars. If they don't match up, ask why. Is it really about the civilians? Are they even really a factor?