- cross-posted to:
- world@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- world@lemmy.world
Three sons and three grandchildren of Hamas ’ top political leader were killed Wednesday by an Israeli airstrike in the Gaza Strip, and the leader accused Israel of acting in “the spirit of revenge and murder.”
In his interview with Al Jazeera, Haniyeh said the killings would not pressure Hamas into softening its positions.
“The enemy believes that by targeting the families of the leaders, it will push them to give up the demands of our people,” he said. “Anyone who believes that targeting my sons will push Hamas to change its position is delusional.”
“The criminal enemy is driven by the spirit of revenge and murder and does not value any standards or laws,” he said in the phone interview.
The strike came as Palestinians in Gaza marked a muted Eid al-Fitr holiday, which ends the holy fasting month of Ramadan, by visiting the graves of loved ones killed in the war.
Small update,
IDF seems to be claiming that the children (not grandchildren, the ones aged 10, 8 and 4) would have been Hamas military operatives. That would make sense, given their father.
In my opinion, that would make these collateral deaths, not “butchering”.
If your society is content with murdering children based on your belief of what they will grow up to be, it’s not a society I’d be comfortable being part of, associating with, or existing alongside.
May you be judged accordingly.
Perhaps you misread me or the article. The sons were not underage. I mean… they had children of their own. Did IDF know the underaged grandchildren were travelling with them? I have no idea.
Based on what we know about Israel’s Lavender system, they don’t care if the grankids were there, they already factored in the risk and deemed it acceptable.
Idf says: the would be operatives. Therefore they are not. Either idf claims to predict the future or they killed innocent people either way.
The IDF claims that the children would have been Hamas operatives, on account of who their parents were. It’s not hard to extend that reasoning to the grandchildren. After all, their parents were likely to be Hamas operatives as well.
No judge, no jury, just an executioner, based solely upon the IDFs word that they’re likely to become future terrorists. One might apply that same logic to the whole of Palestine.
No, I think I read you perfectly.
The phrase “collateral death” is inhumane and depraved on its own. No American would accept “collateral deaths” of their own service members’ families with a shrug.
Murdering people vs doing something causes people to die are very different things.
They are as different as 1st degree murder and 3rd degree murder.
Yep. Very different. End result is of course the same, but so is the end result of a fatal aneurysm.
What the fuck is your actual point here? That the 3rd degree killing of children is somehow acceptable? Would it be acceptable for example for Hamas to collaterally kill the families of IDF soldiers?
EDIT: Iran is supposedly soon going to be retaliating against Israel for the bombing of its consulate. Let’s say the target high ranking Israeli military officers (like Israel has been targeting theirs). How many Israeli kids is it acceptable for you to be collaterally killed in such an attack?
My position is no, none, collateral murder of kids is fucking wrong no matter who does it. What the fuck is your position?
Obviously. What is the point of stating this banality, this easiest positions of them all?
Check out the OP buddy. If it were a banality we wouldn’t have this very discussion. But it apparently isn’t, so here we are.
Wow that would “make sense” huh. Do you have any evidence for that “sense” or can someone blow up your entire family if your father does something bad?
I mean if my father was the head of a rebel resistance movement, I think it would increase the odds of me being part of the same movement.
Okay very cool so you endorse wiping out entire families because of one person?
Where is the evidence these people were Hamas
Do I?
We know that our species has the ability to deteriorate circumstances so badly that violence ensues. In many cases, there’s no obvious objective single perpetrator – things just deteriorate slowly to a place where nothing sane can be done to fix it. Israel vs Palestine is an obvious example of this happening.
Realizing this fact doesn’t mean that one supports it or any of the steps that were taken to end up in that situation. I may have the opinion that I would rather see Israel win this thing, but it’s not like I think that that would be an absolutely great thing. Just a less shitty thing than any other realistic option that I can see.
I understand that this means that I indirectly support deaths of people who deserve to die, but also of people who don’t deserve to die. But now that we’re here, there’s no path in which that doesn’t happen.
Rooting for the Nazis is not a great look. Not sure how any person still supports israel.
Of course I have no evidence. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe you also have no evidence that they were not?
I do have evidence they were not. I will debunk all the “presented evidence” in this comment:
Oh wait there is no evidence. That’s right.
Just calling it “collateral” doesn’t excuse or justify murder.
No, but it does make it not-murder.
Sophistry.