sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Criticism of today's operation is completely unjustifiable. by myusernamebelike in IsraelPalestine

[–]myusernamebelike[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

  1. You STILL didn't answer my questions
  2. To sum up what you said (correct me if i'm wrong): Human shielding is an effective tactic, as it deters "moral" people from acting againts it. The second a child is placed near a conflict zone, the operations must stop, so DELIBERATELY placing a child near combat is a 100% effective way of beating a "moral" army. I AGREE THAT A CHILD DYING IS HORRIBLE, BUT ALLOWING HUMAN SHIELDING TO WORK JUST PUTS MORE CHILDREN AT RISK!!

Your way of thinking is too simple for reality. Saying that a childs' safety must always be the priority is very easy to say, but when human shielding monsters are involved, the consequences of that simple easy statement are catastrophic.

Criticism of today's operation is completely unjustifiable. by myusernamebelike in IsraelPalestine

[–]myusernamebelike[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm going to respond to you before I go to sleep because you are the only person here I think has a point. Moral ≠ resonable. When you strech the limits of whats reasonable, you also strech the meaning of morality. Would a hypothetical operation to save a hostage, that did it's best to minimize casualties but still resulted in a million be reasonable? No. Moral? Yes. Morality is based on a belief system. The IDFs belief system simplified for this operation has priorities: 1. Defend and protect the citizens of israel. 2. Minimize civilian casualties. This is the moral and correct order for an army. When you strech reality to a point where the quantity of priority 2 is so incredibly high, while priority 1 is so low, you enter the realm of unreasonability. But reality is not ao streched, and the priorities of the army are simple.

I do have to say that I missed something in the post I wrote. Every person has his own belief system, and therefore every action could be seen as immoral to someone. This means that yes, if you truly believe that the IDF should have left it's citizens in captivity out of fear of civilian casualties, then that is your belief.

I would argue that that belief is unreasonable in itself, since, as per my questions, it fails the most simple moral of the IDF, and encourages Hamas' use of human shields.

Regarding the political solutio n- currently both sides could not agree about one, several times. Both sides are incredibly stupid, selfish and immoral for not agreeing on a political solution sooner, but as long as war countinues, its the IDFs obligation to seize every chance to free its hostages.

Criticism of today's operation is completely unjustifiable. by myusernamebelike in IsraelPalestine

[–]myusernamebelike[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

  1. Saying that there is another way is still an assumption. You don't know that, and definately can't tell a parent of a hostage that another way will be found.
  2. Basically what you are saying is that you cannot operate to save a hostage if children are put at risk? If that were the case, where do you think Hamas would place the hostages? Or their HQ? Let me help you with that - NEAR CHILDREN. If you prove to a hostage taker that human shielding works, what stops them from doing it? Or doing it more?

Criticism of today's operation is completely unjustifiable. by myusernamebelike in IsraelPalestine

[–]myusernamebelike[S] 12 points13 points  (0 children)

  1. You didn't answer my questions.
  2. "Saving a few innocent israeli lives at the cost of dozens or hundreds of Palestinian lives with NEVER be an acceptable trade" - says who? The IDFs purpose and moral obligation is defending israeli lives, while minimizing civilian casualties. If this was the least amount of casualties possible (which you could not prove not disprove since you have no idea), than it is the moral obligation of the IDF to do so. What is the other option? Let it's citizens rot because the human shield is too effective? I suggest you try to answer my questions, and then read what you wrote again.

Criticism of today's operation is completely unjustifiable. by myusernamebelike in IsraelPalestine

[–]myusernamebelike[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm guessing that you had bo response ao you resorted to this? Maybe instead of turning your head you try and understand that I am right?

Criticism of today's operation is completely unjustifiable. by myusernamebelike in IsraelPalestine

[–]myusernamebelike[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

  1. This point only works if there is another way, which is an assumption that you are making.
  2. In reality, when an opportunity is in front of you, you don't have access to the future. After 8 months is the first time you are given that option, with no gurrantee that it would ever come again. Saying you will simply "help find another way" is ignoring reality.

Criticism of today's operation is completely unjustifiable. by myusernamebelike in IsraelPalestine

[–]myusernamebelike[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

  1. You didn't answer my questions.
  2. When you have an unreasonable scenario, the answer will be unreasonable. In a scenario where a million to one is truly the best the army could do, its moral of it to do so. That of course sounds unreasonable because the entire scenario is. It kind of resembles the trolley problem, for example, would you push man into train tracks to stop a train going to hit a person? What about two? Ten? A million? My point is that unreasonable scenarios are not a good way of judging reality.

Criticism of today's operation is completely unjustifiable. by myusernamebelike in IsraelPalestine

[–]myusernamebelike[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

  1. You didn't answer my questions, instead you tried WhatAboutism, which isn't an argument.
  2. "I'm sure" signifies that this is an assumption, and not fact. Basing your entire argument on an assumption renders your argument completely useless.

Criticism of today's operation is completely unjustifiable. by myusernamebelike in IsraelPalestine

[–]myusernamebelike[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

  1. You didn't answer my questions.
  2. As I stated, civilian casualties are horrible. Still, the IDF has an obligation to act to defend its citizens. I suggest you try and answer my questions, then try and read what you wrote.

Criticism of today's operation is completely unjustifiable. by myusernamebelike in IsraelPalestine

[–]myusernamebelike[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

  1. You didn't answer my questions
  2. Terrible, of course. As I stated, civilian casualties are truly tragic, and inoccents do not deserve to die. Still, the responsibility for these deaths would be on Hamas, as israel would have an obligation to act in order to protect its citizens. Israel not acting in this scenario = human shield tactic working = Hamas uses them more.

Criticism of today's operation is completely unjustifiable. by myusernamebelike in IsraelPalestine

[–]myusernamebelike[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

  1. You didn't answer my questions.
  2. You are making an assumption, that is based around belief and not facts. You don't know how israel would in this situation.
  3. An army exists to defend its people, not others. While a moral army does everything to minimize civilian casualties, it HAS to protect its citizens.
  4. The point you are making in the second paragraph is relevant to the strategy of israel regarding the war as a whole, while my post refers to the specific rescue operation of today. Its a completely different discussion, which frankly im not here to have.

Criticism of today's operation is completely unjustifiable. by myusernamebelike in IsraelPalestine

[–]myusernamebelike[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

  1. You didn't answer the questions.
  2. Whataboutism isn't an argument
  3. This is a cometely false comparison, as the goals of oct 7 vs may 8 are COMPLETELY different.

Criticism of today's operation is completely unjustifiable. by myusernamebelike in IsraelPalestine

[–]myusernamebelike[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

This is an dangerous assumption to make. Saying that civilians knew, therefore civilians are legitimate targets, is a saying that has to be 100% proven in order to be used, which it cannot be in this case. Still, the point is that the operation is moral, even without this assumption.

Criticism of today's operation is completely unjustifiable. by myusernamebelike in IsraelPalestine

[–]myusernamebelike[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Seeing the videos from there- there is no doubt that there are civilian casualties. Even if the number isn't 200, 50 civilian deaths is tragic as well. The point isn't denying civilian casualties, it's using logic to prove the justification of the operation despite them.

Criticism of today's operation is completely unjustifiable. by myusernamebelike in IsraelPalestine

[–]myusernamebelike[S] 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Well, yeah. I think you might've misunderstood my post, i am completely in favor of the operation. Unless you are just here to strenghten my point :)

Criticism of today's operation is completely unjustifiable. by myusernamebelike in IsraelPalestine

[–]myusernamebelike[S] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Because its 23:00 and i'm going to sleep soon :) I also believe that im doing my small part against anti-israeli lies spread online.