by invalidname | 2025-06-22 18:35:06+00:00
> Ansar Allah suppresses the port of Eilat while Iran suppresses the port of Haifa ( https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/shipping-company-m... ). I don't think Israel can be adequately supplied by the throughput of Ashdod alone.

Well... It isn't. It's a big port. We're doing perfectly fine and the shops are full.

> Does Israel have an undeclared nuclear arsenal? YES.

Probably. But assuming it does, did it ever threaten anyone with it even when it was under attack? Nope.

> Does Israel occupy territory in multiple neighboring countries? YES (in both Syria and Lebanon

Lebanon shot rockets into Israel for a year at an average of 10 rockets per day targeting civilian population killing children etc. They dug huge tunnels in an attempt to do a full out invasion/massacre on the north border. Israel responded "gently" at first. Gave them a year to back down.

Now there's a price to pay after that.

In Syria Israel is being cautious. Just like Turkey is being cautious. It's an unstable region. Furthermore, the Druzi population in Syria is under threat: https://www.thenationalnews.com/news/mena/2025/05/03/syria-c...

Israel is there to protect the family members of Israeli Druzi minorities and make sure they aren't murdered by the new regime.

> Well if we want to get technical, Israel is conducting a genocide, as ethnic cleansing is not precisely defined.

> 1. Killing members of the group; - Israel doesn't satisfy that criteria. There is a war which Israel didn't start. It's targeting Hamas which is in a specific region still holding hostages. People don't die because they are Palestinians.

Yes, civilian casualties happen a lot and it's tragic. But that isn't genocide by even the most lax definition of that.

> 3. Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

Again, war isn't that.

But let me help you with the arguments. First there's the ethnic cleansing which essentially means displacement. Initially when Palestinians were cleared from the north there were fears that they won't be able to return home. Some right-wing extremists even advocated for that. However, they have since returned.

The second claim is about starvation which I agree is terrible. Unfortunately, it's not as clear cut. Israel did plenty of stupid/evil stuff in that regard (cutting water, electricity and holding aid trucks). These were indeed bad. But they got restored.

The logic they had was that this is stolen by Hamas and then resold on the black market to fund their operation. This is also 100% true. That's why Israel is trying a different way around Hamas to bring down the organization for good.

That's horrible, but so are the other guys.

> > There are many civilian casualties and that is indeed horrible and tragic, but blaming Israel for it is contributing to the death toll. > > Why are you using passive language?

Because I never killed anyone and always voted for peace. I didn't do this, Hamas did it. I feel terrible for Palestinians. I can (and do) demonstrate against my government, I hope they will get a deal to release the hostages and end this.

A Palestinian who tries to do the same thing in Gaza will find himself in a shallow grave and the people who will put him there are his own countrymen.

Ideally, if Israel had a decent government this war should have been about freeing Palestinians from the clutches of Hamas. But with the current government it's unfortunately just terrible.

> Why are there civilian casualties?

There always are in war.

But mostly because of you. Hamas believe that without western support Israel will collapse. So they are making the war as brutal as possible for their own populace in the hope of de-legitimizing Israel. The Israeli extreme right-wing is actually for it, they think that if western support is no longer an option then no one will hold them back from forcing Palestinians out of Gaza entirely.

> They don't just magically appear on their own.

In a war zone people don't carry flashy signs indicating their civilian status.

> There would be no civilian casualties if Israel wasn't dropping bombs on peoples' homes.

Maybe. But there would be a lot more if Israel wouldn't just call them up and tell them to leave https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-67327079

> There would be no civilian casualties if the IDF wasn't ambushing convoys of first responders.

There were several cases of Hamas using Ambulances to drive around and move troops. There were cases of mistaken identity by the IDF. It's horrible and that's exactly what Hamas wants.

> I will not allow you to deflect from the core issue at hand by pivoting the conversation to Hamas.

Why is that deflection?

You're pretending that Israel is there shooting civilians while ignoring the reason it's there to begin with.

> The point is to compare and assess the two principle STATE ACTORS, one of which sits on a nuclear arsenal while massacring civilians,

Again. Not murdering civilians, you have no concept of what war is.

> and one of which is on the receiving end of "preemptive strikes" while not possessing equivalent weapons.

They didn't receive a "preemptive strikes". They were the people behind the rise of Hezbolla in Lebanon who attacked Israel repeatedly. They funded the Huttis who attacked the Saudis and shipping. They blew up embassies and were behind countless terrorist action. They are the trigger, training and a major driver for the October 7th attacks.

Once they gain nuclear weapons it would be too late and WWIII will start. This strike was essential to prevent that.

> > Hamas sees Israel as a western nation. It believes that without western support Israel will collapse. > > Hamas isn't wrong, which is probably why Israel spends such a massive amount of treasure and effort on propaganda directed at western audiences.

Israel is one of the worlds largest manufacturers of weapons. Why?

Because we were under embargo before and it helped us build up our economy and technology. When we first got American aircrafts we had to strip that junk down and rebuild it. Thanks to us Americas aircrafts are now far better. Missile defense systems actually work.

An embargo will hurt Israel a lot. But would probably be far worse to the Palestinians.

> The Israeli air force would have been grounded months ago if not for a blank check to get fuel and ordnance from the US. Israel's jets drink more aviation fuel than Israel can ever refine itself.

If Israel can fly fewer missions it would just have to make every bombing count.

> Hamas aren't the ones intercepting aid shipments in international waters. Israel is.

The amount of aid in these flotillas is minuscule. They are for show only. Aid comes through trucks. Gaza has no port large enough for a ship, Biden tried to build one and failed.

These flotillas try to present the Israeli blockade as illegal. It isn't. Hamas is a threat and blockades are legal. Starvation tactics are illegal, but whether Israel is at fault here is debatable.

The problem I have with people like yourself is that you have a lot of criticism but no actual solutions. It's really easy to blame Israel, but what would you have Israel do exactly?

Go nicely and ask Hamas kindly to return the hostages? Stop firing rockets?

You say don't kill civilians, which school of urban warfare did you study in?

Give Palestinians a state: Israel tried it twice, arguably three times (leaving Gaza).

Leave Gaza: tried that before. That's how we got here.