• @goat
    link
    English
    -5
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    Definitely not by killing 11.000 people, destroying their homes, cutting their electricity, food, water and fuel. And mind you more than 4000 of them are kids.

    Gonna need your sources for those claims. If they are the numbers Hamas are using, then I’m not going to believe that. I mean shit, Hamas said they didn’t do the 7th of October Massacres and then 24-hours later said that they did do it–not very reliable.

    Regardless, Israel has no obligation to supply the state that just attacked them with resources.

    Oh and your math doesn’t work, Israel just updated the number of their casualties on 7th of October to 1200.

    bruh i literally said that the numbers are changing often. If you want to argue that the casualties are way higher, feel free.

    But just out of curiousity, at what number of kids we can say, enough is enough, or only Israeli kids matter?

    None, no innocents should die. On the day, Hamas should never have attacked Israel, and Israel should’ve listened to Egypt’s warnings.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      57 months ago

      On the other hand, if Israel had treated Palestinians respectfully the whole time, Hamas wouldn’t exist today. It is kind of naive to blame only one of the sides for this conflict. Plus, just looking at the numbers Israel had killed and injured historically way more Palestinians.

      They did so much wrong and I don’t see you condemning them about it. In a perfect world this would have not happened but it happened. You can check the human rights violations committed against Palestinians over time, Wikipedia, human rights reports, the UN, etc. but still Israel is playing the victim here, where they are literally the aggressor.

      • @goat
        link
        English
        -47 months ago

        Israel has offered Palestine peace treaties, even willing to make Jerusalem, the capital of their government, into a neutral zone. West Bank was for that, but Hamas responded by launching another terrorist attack. I mean, we can go back further and further in history, saying, “Uhm actually this is who started it”, and we’d be all day until we’re arguing over cavemen.

        I don’t like Israel, if that’s what you want to hear.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          47 months ago

          Ah yes, that’s why Jerusalem is now their unofficial capital. And seriously if you truly believe Israel is not to blame here you are living in a parallel reality.

          Check Wikipedia or any other respecting human rights organisation what they think about the conflict and stop repeating your country’s propaganda.

          And even if it was all Hamas fault, the military wing is 30K only and you already killed more than 11K believe it or not and destroyed a good chunk of civilian infrastructure and residential buildings, forcibly displacing people, which accounts for war crimes, which by the way are well documented.

          • @goat
            link
            English
            17 months ago

            Just so we’re on the right page, are we referring to the entire almost century-old conflict, or are we referring to the 2023 conflict?

            • TheDankHold
              link
              fedilink
              07 months ago

              It benefits propagandists to try to arbitrarily reduce the scope of a topic so they can focus on framing things in a way that validates their position.

              Conflict didn’t START in 2023. Any suggestion otherwise is either naive or manipulative. The conditions that gave rise to Hamas have existed for decades and the continuation of these conditions will keep this conflict going until one group of extremists gets their genocidal wish. Right now it looks like Likud and other extreme Zionists are the ones getting their genocide.

              • @goat
                link
                English
                -17 months ago

                rare to see a take that isn’t on a side