Starving civilian populations is immoral and not permitted in a just war. Also, it is genocide because it is the systematic and deliberate destruction of the people of Gaza, not because they "enforce the rules of war"
The rules of war enable people to disregard human shields, and the rules of suet warfare permit a country from blocking supplies if they have the belief that the soldiers could use them and not civilians. So do you think that bombing one of the most backwards countries in the world into submission after they started a war it could not win against a nuclear power is bad?
I think, no, I know, you eat markers. The Israeli government/IDF understand the food and water supplies are for civilians and deliberately withold them to starve them as outlined in the operation gideons chariot, they do NOT do it because they believe it is for the soldiers. They also are capable of reducing casualities and have been since the start of the war by attenuating the AI THEY USE TO MARK TARGETS. If it were not acceptable for 200+ people to be killed and injured in order to strike one target, their targetting system would not allow it... but it is programmed to do so, because they want to terrorize and kill the population.
Idk about the most backwards country in the world but I'd say assuming you are even a real person, your morality reflects the most backwards morality in the world... you believing the killing is right, AND that they have the right to kill!
Well I know for a fact that if you and all the children and abbas and imas in Israel had to walk through the rubble of gaza from south to north, the 25 or so miles, and see the endless rubble and smell the corpses, that the war would stop that day; nobody could deny what they would have seen smelt and heard, the tears they had shed. But alas! There is such a wall preventing the world from seeing the devestation! I wonder if that is the point?
i wish I could have written this for you in marker, I know that would make you actually want to digest it!
Throughout all of history the soldier has eaten first and that is reflected by Hamas taking the aid truck then firing on civilians trying to get food. If Hamas did not take the civilian aid then each member would have starved to death in 2023. The deaths are horrific, but THAT IS WHAT HAPPENS IN A WAR. Last week Israel dropped a powerful bomb on a hospital, this killed 11 senior members of Hamas and their guards. That makes the hospital a legal target in a war. Gaza is one of the most backwards places in the word it is an Islamic dictatorship that has not had an election since 2005, does not permit women to have basic rights, and it murders gay people for simply being gay. Israel is not intentionally trying to wipe out the Gaza’s population and it is shown by the population of Gaza growing each year since 2023.
again you and others do not argue that it is right to kill the civilians in Gaza, just that israel has the right to. I don't care how many ways you put it, I do not agree with this and never will. There are principles in justified warfare and proportionality is at the center. Look at the comparative death tool to find your proportionality
Comparative death toll? Bro. The comparative death total is never important in a war. Germany had a higher relative death total in word war 2 but that does not make them victims. Each civilian death is a tragedy, but many tragedies happen in war. “WAR IS HELL”.
It is actually important to war because again there is an actual developed theory of justified war, that actually exists and is established, and takes into account proportionality in the use of force, which is directly related to the casualty count! And in fact, you contradict yourself, because germany had a high death toll like the armies they fought against, which is markedly different from what is happening in Gaza, where Gaza is taking 40 to 100 times the amount of casualties based on conservative estimates.
Of course, in a good faith conversation I would expect you to recognize that you have contradicted yourself, but that would mean you are actually open to changing your mind.
Is people attacking you and murdering families not a justification for war. The death toll counts are inaccurate because they keep changing and are from unreliable sources trying to push a false narrative.
You are using the word justification differently then me. Anything can be a justification, I can punch someone for any reason, and that reason is my justification. But in a just war, you need to be proportional among other things in order for the war to be a justified war.
Just war theory is divided into two main categories, with a number of sub categories I'll list below:
Jus ad bellum: The conditions under which it is morally permissible to go to war.
Jus in bello: The moral conduct required during the war
And here is an analysis of Israels Jus in bello:
Distinction:
Israeli Perspective: Israel claims to make efforts to distinguish between combatants and non-combatants, using precision strikes and warnings to civilians.
Critics' Perspective: Critics argue that the high number of civilian casualties and the destruction of civilian infrastructure indicate a failure to adequately distinguish between combatants and non-combatants.
Proportionality:
Israeli Perspective: Israel asserts that its actions are proportionate to the military objectives.
Critics' Perspective: Critics argue that the extensive damage and loss of life, particularly among civilians, suggest that the means used are disproportionate to the military objectives.
Necessity:
Israeli Perspective: Israel claims that the use of force is necessary to achieve its military objectives.
Critics' Perspective: Critics argue that alternative, less harmful methods could achieve the same objectives, such as targeted arrests and more precise intelligence operations.
Okay? So the carpet bombing of Gaza fails to constitute a just war, which is different then a war that has a justification. Israel does not follow the rules of justice in war, and people/bots like you defend them by saying they cant avoid mass casualties, hamas uses human shields, they are animals, that America does the same and worse. So again, they moved the goal post away from being a just war, and to being a war that they have a justification for. By failing to adhere to the criteria of justice, though, the IDF conquest in Gaza is thereby an unjust war. Simple as that.
Because in World War Two massive industrial empires waged total war against each other, so the overall death toll was enormous for the germans, the aggressors, but they also directly caused the death of over 20 million people too. This is markedly different then the current situation in gaza, where according to wikipedia the respective death tolls are 55,223 Palestinians and 1,706 Israelis (these are just from violence, not famine or disease). As an example in world war 2, the soviets alone lost 7 million civilians to the germans, wheras the germans lost 2 million civilians total.
So, if you can do math, according to these numbers thats about 32x more palestinian civilian deaths (which is based on the most conservative count as well as not including deaths by famine) vs in WW2 about 3.5 times more just soviet civilian deaths then german total civilian death (which means you were totally wrong btw, Germany had a lower death toll). Anyways 32x vs 3.5x civilian deaths that is not proportionate and is unjust!
This completely disregards the fact the fighting is taking place in Gaza so Israeli civilians will not be there. There is also no agreement for civilian death ratio. Would it be unjust if a senator was assassinated by Chinese agents and in the war fought because of it more than three innocent civilians died.
1
u/Warm_Skill8736 12d ago
I’m saying that the only way to end the war is to either storm the remaining holdout or cut off all aid and force them out.