Correction: Some individual actions taken on October 7th (with no evidence they were Hamas policy) were wrong. October 7th as a whole was resistance against a foreign occupier, which is allowed under international law.
Wow this is a very delusional take. Hamas didn’t rampage into the “Settlements” of land that has been taken, they went deep into Israel. And I don’t think international law allows you to kill or capture civilians or children and hold them for ransom.
They didn’t hold them for ransom. They demanded the release of Palestinian prisoners in Israel, which Israel is detaining in a way that conflicts with international law (unlawful detainment, torture, withllding food, already several prioners have died in Israeli prisons since October 7th, but the correct word is that they were murdered/assassinated by Israel.
International law generally makes exceptions for actions that have military purpose. Israel created a status quo where one of the few things Hamas can do that actually make the lives of Palestinians better is take hostages, so from my understanding it’d be allowed by international law.
Israel was not occupying Gaza, in fact it withdrew its settlements and all army forces in 2005. On October 7th, not a single Israeli soldier was in Gaza.
What’s the standard for this in the U.S.? It reaches only as far up the ladder as anyone can definitively prove. Abu Gharib saw like, what, a lieutenant fired or something. But when it’s “the enemy”, all of a sudden we assume by default the decision came from the highest levels, and it’s carte blanche to wipe out 2.5 million people living in a giant concentration camp, in a supposed attempt to do regime change.
What I’m saying is that Bibi and his cabinet made lots of genocidal claims to fully support intent of genocide, and tery are the ones pushing their army to do this.
It’s because they said that we have to assume it comes from above… Well with Bibi we don’t have to assume, he already told us he’s Hitler.
No no. They’re talking about Hamas in the “comes from above” thing. When it’s the US crimes go only as high up the ladder as provable, but when it’s “the enemy” (aka Hamas) individual crimes are used as excuses to wipe out 2.5 million people, is what dx1 is saying. They’re pointing out the hypocrisy.
Yeah buddy I get it, I have eyes, I read their comment. My response to them meant “lol well isn’t that funny since Bibi is the genocidal one here, saying the quiet part out loud on television”.
When the atrocity in question was ordered or encouraged by the leadership. The point the blame passes from the individual to the institution is when the institution gets involved in the atrocity. So if Hamas had said “kill civilians” or “rape women” we’d have to blame Hamas for that, but as long as it’s a decision an individual made on their own only the individual bears responsibility.
so, if, for example, the head of government goes and awards medals to people shooting children you would assume that the government supports that, right?
Correction: Some individual actions taken on October 7th (with no evidence they were Hamas policy) were wrong. October 7th as a whole was resistance against a foreign occupier, which is allowed under international law.
Wow this is a very delusional take. Hamas didn’t rampage into the “Settlements” of land that has been taken, they went deep into Israel. And I don’t think international law allows you to kill or capture civilians or children and hold them for ransom.
They didn’t hold them for ransom. They demanded the release of Palestinian prisoners in Israel, which Israel is detaining in a way that conflicts with international law (unlawful detainment, torture, withllding food, already several prioners have died in Israeli prisons since October 7th, but the correct word is that they were murdered/assassinated by Israel.
International law generally makes exceptions for actions that have military purpose. Israel created a status quo where one of the few things Hamas can do that actually make the lives of Palestinians better is take hostages, so from my understanding it’d be allowed by international law.
Your understanding of international law is absolutely frightening. Go ask ChatGPT that question before you say it out loud again.
Israel was not occupying Gaza, in fact it withdrew its settlements and all army forces in 2005. On October 7th, not a single Israeli soldier was in Gaza.
Thanks. That’s a good explanation of it.
But where does one draw the line between “Individual action” and “battalion action”?
What’s the standard for this in the U.S.? It reaches only as far up the ladder as anyone can definitively prove. Abu Gharib saw like, what, a lieutenant fired or something. But when it’s “the enemy”, all of a sudden we assume by default the decision came from the highest levels, and it’s carte blanche to wipe out 2.5 million people living in a giant concentration camp, in a supposed attempt to do regime change.
I mean, let’s be honest, this looks like a serious genocide attempt, and Bibi has been saying genocidal things every few days.
The “enemy” in their comment is Hamas. You’re agreeing with them.
Hmmm. Are you replying to the right comment?
What I’m saying is that Bibi and his cabinet made lots of genocidal claims to fully support intent of genocide, and tery are the ones pushing their army to do this.
It’s because they said that we have to assume it comes from above… Well with Bibi we don’t have to assume, he already told us he’s Hitler.
No no. They’re talking about Hamas in the “comes from above” thing. When it’s the US crimes go only as high up the ladder as provable, but when it’s “the enemy” (aka Hamas) individual crimes are used as excuses to wipe out 2.5 million people, is what dx1 is saying. They’re pointing out the hypocrisy.
Yeah buddy I get it, I have eyes, I read their comment. My response to them meant “lol well isn’t that funny since Bibi is the genocidal one here, saying the quiet part out loud on television”.
Oh I see. Their comment could be taken both ways, so I assumed that was what’s going on. Nevermind.
When the atrocity in question was ordered or encouraged by the leadership. The point the blame passes from the individual to the institution is when the institution gets involved in the atrocity. So if Hamas had said “kill civilians” or “rape women” we’d have to blame Hamas for that, but as long as it’s a decision an individual made on their own only the individual bears responsibility.
so, if, for example, the head of government goes and awards medals to people shooting children you would assume that the government supports that, right?
Uh… Yes? Is that going on in Hamas?
It’s funny because literally the IDF gets pizza coupons for killing Palestinians. That’s how trivial Palestinian life is to the IDF.