At Least 300 Dead In GAZA HOSPITAL BOMBING

So, this turns out to have been Palestinian/Hamas propaganda. It wasn't true. A Palestinian rocket misfired and exploded in a parking lot and frankly didn't; do that much damage. And yet, this thread is still here, unedited, a stark reminder of just how dishonest and remarkably dangerous this kind of misinformation is. The unfortunate truth here is that Hamas produced wild accusations, the OP chose to push the narrative absent any real attempt at making a distinction of the veracity of the claims, and included a followup that asserted that even if this wasn't true, Israel is still a genocidal nation. All evidence to the contrary.

 

Where are you getting your evidence from?

I haven't read that anybody who was finally positive about who was responsible.

 

And I would like to add, the hospital was probably was a storage depot for Hamas's rockets. It is what they do.

 

Are you living under a rock?

 

That's not really evidence now is it?

 

I have been in PF since January and since then you and I agree on the 70%-90% of the time . I think this is one of the issues you and I disagree.

Now about media biasness. I really don’t give a s$$$. I am not one of those American sitting in some rural America watching Fox news or someone drinking Latte in Starbucks in Silicon Valley and chatted few times with Arab Muslims and now I am an expert in ME.

Over last 30 years, as a Cyber Security Engineer I have visited ME multiple times , visited South East Asia multiple time, and as my wife is Scandinavian, I visit Scandinavia at least once a year. So I know exactly the different view of rest of the world, including how Muslims in ME see the Palestinian crisis and Muslims in Pakistan see Palestinian crisis.

I remember a young lady I worked with in 2017 in Dhaka, Bangladesh. I was helping a group of Bangladeshis with a Call-Center in Dhaka. A young lady may be 22 or 24 was in the team. I stumble upon her factbook and saw a post about Jews in Israel. She expresses her view about Jews and how Jews should be treated. After reading the post, I realized compared to her view, White Supremacist in America restrain themselves when they express their hatred toward black or brown. This young lady had the best education in Bangladesh, lived in the poshest area of Dhaka and work for an international company. Now imagine Muslims in Bangladesh who has Madrasa training where Koran is the only textbook. I had similar experiences in Karachi, Bombay, Amman , Doha and many more cities in ME.

Anyway, in America, the Right; Evangelical, Conservative and the traditional republicans ( not MAGA) support Israel unconditionally. I think the root of this is more religious then political. In the Bible it says the children of Abraham from Isaac will be blessed and Ishmael will be cursed.

But liberals ( I am liberal) they support Palestine over Israel because they just need to be opposite of American Conservatives. Jews are the most persecuted people in human history. even today more then one billion Muslims in the world would like to eliminate Jews from Earth. This is not a view of past 100 years since Jews move to Palestine. This is the view of Muslims for past 1500 years. The “religion of peace” is the most intolerant religion on earth. But the liberals who champion the weak, the minority, the persecuted and promote “tolerance”, somehow when it comes to “Palestinian vs Jews” , liberals side with Palestinian.

 

No and it wasn't meant to be. That said, you dont need to look very hard to find evidence. If you haven't found it by now you dont want it.

 

I saw your post back and forth yesterday and I knew very well how it would end. As you can see Muslim will never, ever condemn atrocity done by them. This is why I never go into that conversation with them. Muslims don’t condemn their own atrocity because they never see that as crime. They always see violence as Justified. It’s embedded in their religion. Why do you think 70 virgin wait for them when they kill infidel ? Killing infidel is Islamic duty regardless those infidel are innocent or criminal. In the eyes of Islam , it doesn’t matter, just kill and get your virgin.

 

So by your definition Hamas is breaking international law daily and Israel shouldn't respond tan protect itself. Brilliant strategy if you're antisemitic.

 

I think it's important when having a discussion about this to have people put their cards on the table rather than make assumptions. Certain people have had a million opportunities to say, "I condemn lighting babies on fire and shooting them in their cribs." The fact that they flatly refuse to do so when the terrorist group Hamas does it and then try to shift the conversation is telling about their morality and world views. These are not people who can be reasoned with. There is no rational conversation that can be had when someone's heart is so black that they effectively condone this behavior as long as the victims are of a particular religion and the perpetrators are of another religion. If we can't get, "it was wrong to murder babies in a brutal fashion" there's not much else to say on the subject. Anything they have to say is tainted and should be dismissed as irrational rantings of a religious fanatic. These views are dangerous because they fuel these terrorists who use them to justify their actions.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/23/pageoneplus/editors-note-gaza-hospital-coverage.html
Even the NYT realized they were reporting terrorist propaganda.

 

The UK said on Monday its assessment, based on intelligence and analysis by weapons experts, was that it was likely a missile fired from within Gaza towards Israel was responsible. French military intelligence also came to this conclusion.

Hamas told the New York Times that the missile had disintegrated beyond recognition. "The missile has dissolved like salt in the water. It's vaporised. Nothing is left," said Ghazi Hamad, a senior Hamas official.

Experts have said it is extremely unusual for a blast site such as this not to yield debris of this kind.

Former UN war crimes investigator Marc Garlasco tweeted: "In 20 years of investigating war crimes this is the first time I haven't seen any weapon remnants. And I've worked three wars in Gaza."

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-67216929

 

--_----------_------------------------


Your link also says this:

In further support to my previous theory, i can see that using the videos there is approx 6.5 seconds between the flash in the sky and the explosion in the hospital. Tamir rockets travel at around Mach 2. In 6.5 seconds that speed translates to a distance of around 3.5km. Other people's analysis has determined that the light flash in the sky was around 3.5 km away from the hospital. My theory that the hospital explosion was caused by a remnant of dome missile + excess fuel is supported by this calculation

 

Forensic Architecture? WTF is that?

 

Thank you for explaining your viewpoint.
I find this assumption of yours, however, to be erroneous, on its face.

An anecdotal account, I'm sure you would have no trouble recognizing, were this a different issue, is no basis for a characterization of one-quarter of the world's population. You falsely assume that I am unaware of Jihadist philosophy, programmed into the youth, in schools which are intended to foster terrorism. But are there no religious extremists, in Israel? Even if it may take different forms, did you see the picture from the 2006 Gaza conflict, of young Israeli children, signing bombs for the Palestinians, "with love from Israel?" Obviously, they could not have been doing this, on their own. First, their parents must be encouraging this dehumanized view of Palestinians, in general (not just of Hamas terrorists). Secondly, though, even the Israeli State must favor the fostering of this bigotry, unless they typically leave rows upon rows of missiles, standing unwatched, in random fields.

Hatred is ubiquitous, in this world. It is a deluded idea, that it only exists on one side of this issue. Look at all the American posters, here, who equate Hamas with all Gaza Palestinians, and who advocate for a complete disregard, by Israel, for their welfare-- if not, in some cases, even advocate for the wiping out of all of them, which would mean millions of people.



My noticing this reply from you, to a different member, confirmed my suspicion that you, likewise, have a predetermined prejudice, in this matter, which is not based on strictly hard, statistical evidence (even if you may like to think, that it is):

Wow.
Are you unaware, despite your world travel, that many Muslims have condemned Muslim terrorism, on the whole, and in this most recent, Hamas attack, in particular? I will note that the Palestinian-Israeli born commentator, Ms. Gebreal, from the video I'd offered you, which I don't know if you'd bothered to watch, condemns terrorism, and fully supports Israel's right to defend itself. But I guess, she's the only one, who does?

Would I be correct, in guessing that you have some personal ties to either Judaism, or to Israel (such as a Jewish heritage, relatives, friends, etc.)?

 

Not to mention, that it "didn't do that much damage."

 

Let’s start here – I don’t have any relation to Judaism, or to Israel (as a Jewish heritage, relatives, friends, etc.)?

The story I gave about Dhaka , Bangladesh, that is not anecdotal, it is 30 years’ experience visiting, working, spending hundreds of hours working, socializing, side by side with Muslims in US, in ME and south East Asia. And I stand by my opinion.

As I have said in my last post – in most issues we debate in this forum, you and I agree on majority if not 90% of the time. So , let’s end the debate with “ I respectfully disagree with you on this”.

Have a wonderful weekend.

 

Obviously well known enough for the BBC to quote them unlike the info in the headline where it just says "The UK said.. "! Who is this "UK"?

 

While I find it a little bit unusual, that you would imply that you don't feel you could debate, or discuss this question, from different perspectives (on a debate forum), and do so "respectfully"-- which I certainly could-- nevertheless, it is of course, your decision, and I respect that. Have a good weekend...

Despite the fact-- if you don't mind my using this reply to make the announcement, to the thread--
BREAKING NEWS:
Israeli troops move into Gaza, to take over a hospital, underneath which they say they've discovered an extensive Hamas tunnel network.

There is currently a blackout of phones and internet, in Gaza (which is operationally understandable; I'm not sure what negative ramifications, if any, this might have upon civilians).

 

They've known for a while that they had their Hamas HQ under that hospital. There have been a lot of stories about it. It wasn't a secret. I find it interesting that some news articles are reporting this today as if it's new information.

 

Incorrect, it is YOU who offered a very specific and wild accusation that if even one person was suspected of being there they would destroy the whole building and anyone in it. Nothing you have posted there supports your claim that even ONE person lol.

Again, you made a very specific claim and it was wild and irrational.

 

Nothing of the sort. I just produced for you an interpretation, from a legal perspective, of the way that Israel is on the record, as interpreting the Geneva guidelines, regarding calculating military advantage, weighed against potential "collateral" civilian property destruction, injury, and death. If there is any "military facility," in a building, this makes the entire building, in Israel's view, a "military objective," in which legal interpretation, Israel is almost completely unique.

So the only part of my claim, against which you are arguing, is my ad libbing the addition, "even just one Hamas fighter"-- not against the general principle, itself, that Israel does not, like every other nation, calculate civilian loss as collateral damage, even in a residential building, if there is even one "military facility," in that building. Arguing with me, whether that would involve a group of four or five Hamas fighters, or just one, does not change, that this is creating, by international standards, an unjustifiable amount of civilian collateral damage; potentially enough to qualify as a war crime.

But, to address the incidental discrepancy, in our interpretations: would not an Hamas "safe house," used as an Hamas shelter, qualify as a "military facility?" Of course it would-- what else could it be called? "Facility" is an inclusive term: it encompasses all enemy installations, regardless of size or purpose. A safe house, though, is not always in use-- yet it is remains a safe house. So if Israel knew there was such a hideout in a building-- regardless of the number of occupants, at the time of their attack, which it is something too specific, and changeable, to expect Israel to know-- then by its own contention, it can consider that entire building as a military objective, and hence not consider any civilian death or destruction, as "collateral damage" (even if there had only been one or two guards at that safe house, at the time in question). And if the one member of Hamas, in a civilian building, was someone high in Hamas' military command, who Israel was after, Israel would absolutely bring down the whole building, if necessary, to get him (maybe even, if not "necessary").

The quote, once more, which I'd requoted near the bottom of page 35 (post #872) for you, from the thread's early pages:

<Snip>
Israel apparently adopts a highly unusual view of LOAC <Laws Of Armed Combat> that would allow greater license to destroy an entire residential apartment building in which an enemy military facility is found — and to do so without the standard proportionality analysis. The generally accepted view is that an attack on a civilian apartment building in such cases must consider whether the civilian infrastructure that is expected to be destroyed is excessive in relation to the expected military advantage (ICRC, United States, International Law Association; ICRC report surveying States’ views and leading scholarship). The outlier position adopted by Israel is that “as a matter of law, the building is a single military objective, and therefore damage to other parts of the building need not be considered as collateral damage” (Merriam & Schmitt 2015; Eli Bar-On 2021).
<End Snip>

 

You want to debate, let us debate.

Even yesterday HAMAS fired hundreds of rocket toward Israel. What do you think Israel should do ?

 

Do you think Geneva guideline was written for warfare where one side hide behind innocent civilian and break every single of the “Geneva Guideline” and the other side has to follow the guideline?

 

Yes, the guidelines were not developed as rules in a game, to make combat "fair." They were a statement of what the world considers acceptable, civilized behavior. It almost goes without saying, that a terrorist organization, is not going to respect those rules.

I will note, in case you are confused, that the Geneva guidelines, do not preclude causing civilian casualties. They only compel the weighing of those collateral deaths, & that collateral civilian destruction of property, so that it is not disproportionately great, relative to the military advantage gained, through the operation, which causes that collateral damage. The argument that the other side had broken the rules, therefore Israel should be relieved of trying to minimize the deaths of non combatants, is not a reasonable position. There is no allowance in international law, to fight terrorism, perpetrated on civilian targets, with more terrorism, against other civilians. Can you really not understand the basis of this principle, that it's never "OK," to ignore civilian casualties?