CV's Copy - ISRAEL-HAMAS

[CountValentine]

We can get a vague idea but we shouldn't think that Israel's number are the word of G-d.

I don't. Everyone can adjust them as they see fit. Right now we are completely in the dark.

It seems everyone accepts the fact they are doing everything they can to limit civilian deaths without even knowing how many have been killed.

[yfr bachur]

I don't. Everyone can adjust them as they see fit. Right now we are completely in the dark.

It seems everyone accepts the fact they are doing everything they can to limit civilian deaths without even knowing how many have been killed.

Why is the point "everything"?
It is widely known, reported on, and proven that they almost always do more than any other army in history.
So they could have done one or two (rediculous from a military point of view) things more? That to me is a anti semetic demand.

To clarify: expecting israel to do things not expected from other western democracies, and condeming it if it doesnt, is anti semitism.

[aygart]

Who said otherwise? We have ballpark numbers.

Hamas has produced 24K names. Israel says over 13K are terrorists.

Are those numbers rounded? Would some of those people have died of natural causes anyway? Of course.

But either way, they are historically low civilian death ratios for wartime.

לא לחלוק בא אלא להוסיף

[CountValentine]

Why is the point "everything"?

That is their claim. They also claim they are doing everything they can to get the hostages released. Should we accept that as fact or question it?

To clarify: expecting israel to do things not expected from other western democracies, and condeming it if it doesnt, is anti semitism.

Thank you for the clarification.

[yfr bachur]

That is their claim. They also claim they are doing everything they can to get the hostages released. Should we accept that as fact or question it?

"everything" means within reason. Not everything that every armchair analysit in the world can dream of.

They won't offer two Israeli cities in return for the hostages bec that isnt a normal reasonable thing to do.

[CountValentine]

"everything" means within reason. Not everything that every armchair analysit in the world can dream of.

I agree with you.
Would you say the same when someone says "don't". 

[Yehuda57]

I don't. Everyone can adjust them as they see fit. Right now we are completely in the dark.

It seems everyone accepts the fact they are doing everything they can to limit civilian deaths without even knowing how many have been killed.

1) We're not completely in the dark, you have the Israeli and Hamas numbers to go off, and their historical accuracy. You also can see how they have waged the war and compare it to how others have waged wars. 

Coleman Hughes said it quite succinctly on the Joe Rogan show - *even if* you go with Hamas numbers, it still is a better ratio than any other urban war. And this is arguably the most "civilian enmeshed" enemy ever fought by a "western army".

2) The number of casualties doesn't necessarily reflect on whether they are "doing everything". The way Hamas is enmeshed in the civilian population, even if Israel does do "everything" there are still going to be a lot of civilian deaths. The question then becomes how many is too much? And again, Coleman put it very succinctly. If you say it is too much, you are providing the foolproof way for any terrorist group to destroy any civilization.

IOW: If the argument is Israel is not doing everything or not doing enough, then the accusers must provide concrete, realistic strategies and tactics that Israel can use. But tellingly, that never happens.

[CountValentine]

IOW: If the argument is Israel is not doing everything or not doing enough, then the accusers must provide concrete, realistic strategies and tactics that Israel can use. But tellingly, that never happens.

Don't you have it backwards? They made the claim so shouldn't they back it up?

[aygart]

Don't you have it backwards? They made the claim so shouldn't they back it up?

I think it was only in response to accusations

[Yehuda57]

Don't you have it backwards? They made the claim so shouldn't they back it up?

No, Israel went to war and people said/say their warfare is unjust/disproportionate/criminal/indiscriminate, etc. In response, Israel says "we have done everything...".

But even if it is backwards, Israel has made claims of what they do. Others are saying it isn't enough. So what more do they want Israel to do? They need to be specific.

This is almost always the sticking point in honest debates. The pro Palestinian side, when they are being honest, doesn't have an answer for what Israel should do differently beyond a complete ceasefire - i.e. capitulation.

[CountValentine]

This is almost always the sticking point in honest debates. The pro Palestinian side, when they are being honest, doesn't have an answer for what Israel should do differently beyond a complete ceasefire - i.e. capitulation.

Actually some military experts have gave ideas on things that could have been done different to limit civilian casualties. House to house combat instead of leveling blocks at a time. The problem is that it results in more soldiers being killed.

Knock on roof would also save more civilian lives. The problem there is it will also save terrorist lives.   

[Yehuda57]

Actually some military experts have gave ideas on things that could have been done different to limit civilian casualties. House to house combat instead of leveling blocks at a time. The problem is that it results in more soldiers being killed.

This is answered in your post. The rules of war do not require an army to be suicidal. Which soldier would agree to fight in a war their commanders are valuing the lives of the people shielding their enemy than their own?

Knock on roof would also save more civilian lives. The problem there is it will also save terrorist lives.

Are you kidding? Israel pioneered knock on roof and has used it this war too. No army has ever gone to the lengths of warning civilians about strikes ahead of time Israel has done. There are long stories on the BBC about this, and the BBC is massively slanted against Israel. (they frame it as a terrible thing, Israel torturing Palestinian civilians, making them evacuate their neighbors).

[CountValentine]

This is answered in your post. The rules of war do not require an army to be suicidal. Which soldier would agree to fight in a war their commanders are valuing the lives of the people shielding their enemy than their own?

We are talking about civilians. Yes, soldiers have died to limit civilian casualties.

Are you kidding? Israel pioneered knock on roof and has used it this war too.

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.   

[zh cohen]

Israel can be inflating the eliminated terrorist number or can be very liberal in who they are including.

US intelligence estimates of the percentage of Hamas forces that have been killed line up with Israeli numbers. (Was posted up thread)

[avromie7]

Who said otherwise? We have ballpark numbers.

Hamas has produced 24K names. Israel says over 13K are terrorists.

Are those numbers rounded? Would some of those people have died of natural causes anyway? Of course.

But either way, they are historically low civilian death ratios for wartime.

Of the civilian deaths, how many were killed by Hamas? Between errant rocket fire, their own collateral damage, and anyone they intentionally killed.

[Just A Jew]

You can't then claim you are doing everything you can.

Is it reasonable to assume that when they say "everything" they mean "everything within reason," or do we have to take the words literally?

If you say take them at their word, of course they are lying, as "everything" would mean doing absolutely nothing other than precise targeted killings of documented fighters.

If you say that they obviously do not mean it literally, since they are engaging in warfare in civilian areas, then it's open to interpretation.

That then begs the following question: what does "within reason" mean? It's a judgement which is subjective to the rationale of the decision makers. As in most other facets of war, there are no clear cut answers.

[Just A Jew]

Of the civilian deaths, how many were killed by Hamas? Between errant rocket fire, their own collateral damage, and anyone they intentionally killed.

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).

[CountValentine]

Is it reasonable to assume that when they say "everything" they mean "everything within reason," or do we have to take the words literally?

Something they have done many times before would be reasonable to do again.

[aygart]

Something they have done many times before would be reasonable to do again.

Were they with the same objectives?

[Just A Jew]

Something they have done many times before would be reasonable to do again.

2 points to that: 1) was what they did "many times before" effective? If it wasnt, is it reasonable to expect them to take a different approach? 2) if the circumstances aren't the same as previous times, is it reasonable to expect the same response (including tactics) as the previous times?