Share this:
- Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
- Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
- Click to print (Opens in new window) Print
- Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
- Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
- Click to share on X (Opens in new window) X
1000 Verses - a project of Judaism Resources 
Besides the complicated history, is the current Israeli government using starvation as a weapon? Hamas is at fault, but Israel is also occupying the area and therefore legally responsible. If they’re serious about protecting civilians and finding solutions in a situation where starvation is increasingly difficult to prevent, then why did they declare a months-long humanitarian pause, earlier in the year, which preceded the beginning of actual famine in Gaza? (Especially considering how the influential far-right favours siege as a tactic.)
Especially since aid groups are struggling to deliver food without ceasefires, and civilians (including those with malnourished children, many of whom neither support Hamas nor have a way to stop them) are being expected to cross military lines to try and get aid under the new system. How does pausing aid show a commitment to solve the difficulties with malnutrition in this context? And doesn’t it just raise the prices of the food that has been stolen and hoarded from smaller aid groups?
Al Jazeera sure thinks so. The UN Palestinian Rights Committee Thinks so to, go figure. Even socialist Bernie Sanders thinks so, Ha. In fact I cannot find any leftist organizations that don’t. From what I hear Israel has let in 40,000 aid trucks. Of course Hammas is in charge of distributing the food and what I find interesting, so one talks about that. Especially Al Jazeera and the others mentioned. Isn’t the humanitarian pause proof of their commitment to help? I have not heard of pause of giving aid only a pause in fighting so aid can get through
Between March and May this year there was a pause in aid for three months. Following international pressure it was finally lifted, but it was too late as the price of flour for example rose astronomically. The humanitarian pauses to let the aid through began later when the news of starvation was becoming undeniable even to governments that have been supporting Israel’s self defence. The inexplicable decision to pause aid made the challenge so much more insurmountable, and already malnourished children can’t cope with going days between meals, even those who don’t have pre-existing conditions.
Can I have a link or story title and who wrote it?
there was a pause with condition. Do you remember the condition? Release the hostages . Israel should had allow no aid until hostages are released and Ham’Ass surrender. It’s not israel responsibility to feed them as much as it’s not Ukraine responsibility to feed Russians . That’s not starving them that’s not giving them aid until they surrender .
Furthermore with the amount of aid Israel gave Gazans they had enough for more than 3 months .
And at the beginning of August, The Commanders For Israel’s security sent a letter to Trump with 550 signatories, including fomer Mossad director Tamir Pardo, ex-Shin Bet chief Ami Ayalon, and former deputy Israeli army chief Matan Vilnai. They believe Hamas no longer poses a strategic threat, senior operatives can be found later, and the war and hostage release is being dragged on too long.
unfortunately just like the fbi was backstabbing President Trump .. Israeli x commanders and security personnel are wrong in their assessment because if Israel pulled our Hammas will regroup and will resume terror
Former Shin Bet, Mossad heads urge Trump to ‘compel Netanyahu’ to end Gaza war (The Jerusalem Post)
How Israel’s policies created famine in Gaza (BBC- noting that BBC has been giving Israeli perspectives throughout the war, as well)
I also can’t remember where I read it, but there was something early on in the war about a past Israeli official being shocked at how much higher the accepted casualties are now than before. And at this point it seems more than ever that any strategic gains are at cost not only to civilians, most of all children, and the hostages, but also to Israel’s international reputation and the safety of Jews around the world. What are they gaining in comparison to that, apart from potentially the land itself through annexation plans?
If you have no proof of what you read then this is just a rumor. I did google it and all I can find is Israel pausing fighting so aid can get through. Clearly if what you read was real, it would be written about everywhere. How is it that Israel policies are creating famine when Hammas distributes the food?
Thats like blaming the gun for a murder.
Israel is responsible for food as it is now in control of Gaza and Hamas is shattered. The halt to aid from March to May is also not just a rumour.
https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/israels-halt-food-aid-deliveries-worsens-gaza-conditions-2025-03-10/
condition was to release the hostages . That’s a very reasonable demand to resume feeding the people who Just sent terrorists to kill your family .
also please refer to steve W – clarifying that Ham’Ass is unrealistic and has refuse ceasefire agreement
Annelise
Would you speak like this on behalf of Nazi Germany during the holocaust? The tactic of Hamas is to create civilian crisis so that people like yourself can criticise Israel and they get to live another day to start the cycle over again.
I too care about Palestinian civilians. That is why I call for Egypt to open its border with Gaza – which is the normal thing that is done in time of war. Civilan refugees flee to neighboring countries. The civilians can be easily relocated if Arab countries wouldn’t keep holding them as pawns against Israel.
I also think Hamas is to blame. But has Israel had other options in this war, and is Netanyahu lying about not using hunger as a weapon, or about the ability of aid groups to properly distribute it?
well said rabbi . Thank you . No one would had been advocating for the rights of Germans right after the extermination of Jews .. Germany needed to surrender I’m not sure why some apply a whole different standard to Israel.
Annelise
My understanding is that Netanyahu is not lying. The UN – which I see as a criminal organization – are the wicked ones here. Hamas refuses to allow aid in through any organization that they cannot exploit. Hamas has funded its operations for teh last while to the tune of a half a billion dollars off stolen aid. It is they who are starving the populace in Gaza and Israel’s reluctance to send in aid is because it fuels Hamas’ terror. Israel has no interest in killing Palestinian civilians.
The only way to stop Hamas exploiting aid is to flood Gaza with aid and stop the hunger. Pausing the supply of food, water and energy doesn’t pressure Hamas, it gives them leverage and high resale prices. I can’t see any explanation for it apart from the far-right interest in sieges that long predates this war.
Hamas wanted Israel to respond brutally to October 7 so as to disrupt the normalisation of relations with Arab states. If Israel brutally removes Gazans from Gaza in the end, and claims all or most of biblical Israel, then even moderate Muslims will support Islamist causes. I don’t understand the long term strategy either for that reason.
When was that food supply paused or are you just repeating the original rumor?
no . Not allowing food in does creature pressure and will force them to demand that Ham’Ass will release the hostages and surrender. I’m not sure why Gazas who committed a horrific massacre should be rewarded with flooding of free food while Evyatar David Is starving to death and is currently 88 lbs . If more people put pressure on Ham’Ass and Gazans instead of israel we wouldn’t be in this position.
Annelise
The purpose of not sending aid into Gaza is to keep Hamas from staying alive. The only way to protect teh civilians is to let them into Egypt (or Sudan etc.). The reason Israel doesn’t go soft is because they feel that showing weakness to the Arabs encourabes more attacks. I can’t say if they are correct on this assesment but that is their logic.
I hope to post some videos tomorrow that counter the horribly biased slant of the world press which aids and abbets the terrorism of Hamas.
Some of that makes sense to me, but only Israel is legally responsible for providing supplies at this point, and they say they aren’t using starvation or food insecurity against civilians. That doesn’t seem honest.
The settler mindset of using hunger and pushing Palestinians off the land seems to be influencing the strategic decisions. And the proximity of that to genocide is a huge issue, even though this is also a defensive war. Why are they still pushing ahead when so many past strategists say it isn’t going to make a long-term difference, and so many allies that have supported the war to a large extent till now are losing patience? The idea that there is a philosophy driving this beyond just national defence is serious and seems to have some likelihood. It will also profoundly affect the Jewish community if the Temple Mount is taken and a politically endorsed messianic candidate put forward, and that too is within the scope of this trajectory.
Also, Hamas does have propaganda and there are times when the press is taken in by it. But when the Israeli government is dishonest about its intent to starve masses of the population, or otherwise has mixed intentions, then that is their responsibility. And if that’s the case, then they’ve legitimised Hamas’ claims in those instances, and contributed evidence to the next generation of hatred. Nor should those who support national self-defence turn a blind eye to anything that exceeds it.
Israel had delivered more food than to Gaza after October 7 than before October 7 . So let’s stop with the non sense of Jews wanting to see Gazans starved . This is Ham’Ass propaganda 101 . But let me also add that Israel has zero obligation to feed Gazans so long as they hold our hostages use the food we bring to buy weapons and pay terrorists and not surrounded. It’s weird that you are making all the demand on Israel .
Annelise
This is extremely frustrating. I don’t have the time or patience to pick apart your points. I will just point out that you are attributing sinsiter motives to a people who are fighting for survival against enemies that have avowed to eradicate them. The ones contributing to the next generation of hatred are the ones who teach their children to hate and kill, together with the ones who weave a narrative of innocent Palestinian victims and Israeli “genocidal maniacs,” together with the myth that anti-Semitism is dead and buried, togther with those who buy and sell the narrative of the genocidal Jew-haters who jump and believe every snippet of news/opinion that goes against Israel and somehow don’t hear the parts of the narrative that tell the story from the side of the victims.
I don’t believe that you, Annelise mean bad, I know you long enough and I know that you care for truth and for the values of kindness and justice. I will just ask you to step back and try to see things from a different light. I hope to post (on this comment line) some links that will help.
I’m just concerned about what looks like deliberate withholding of supplies to a whole population over this time, and the apparent mixed motivations of those with political power at the moment. It is an extremely sensitive issue of safety and security, and public criticism unfortunately distracts from the responsibility of Hamas in all this. But Israel has immense power over Palestinians who can’t change the situation. If we can’t sift between the just and the unjust, then it all gets mixed together.
I don’t really have anything to add except that the blocking of aid as a tactic doesn’t fit with the way Israel has portrayed their commitment to get it to the population in the complexities of the war. Israel’s allies have found themselves unable to justify it. And now there’s a famine situation.
Here is where you wrong. Gazans could had change the situation from day one . They could had choose peace over war . Friendship over hate and cooperation with Israel over jihad . I’m not sure how ealse to understand it but it comes across as you have a low expectation of Arabs which is a form of bigotry . They could had chosen to cooperate with the IDF bring Ham’Ass to Justice and release the hostages instead of assisting Ham’Ass kill our IDF soldiers and continue with the narrative of jihad and terror .
even in nazie Germany good Germany helped Jews – not one Gazan helped the hostages . Not one
Most Gazans can’t change the situation. Many don’t support Hamas. And even among those who want Israelis to leave, there are varying views about human rights in that.
The far-right leaders who have decided to leave empathy out of the equation and ignore the fact that there are multiple options have become the same as their enemies.
If Ukraine were to occupy Russia, they would be responsible to make sure supplies to civilians weren’t blocked. And if they talked as if meagre rations were enough to avoid a hoarding and hunger crisis, and blocked aid to ordinary people as a tactic, the world would not support that.
most Gazans can change the situation by helping israel defeat Ham’Ass . And what on earth are you talking about most Gazans not only support October 7 but they also support Ham’Ass Is majority.
empathy is to finish this war as quick as possible not drag it for this long . To finish the war quickly you have to defeat you enemies.
Actually no . Since Russia started the war it wouldn’t br reasonable to expect Ukraine to feed Russians who would use the food to buy weapons and pay terrorists to kill Ukrainians civilians and troops . The reasonable thing to do is to expect Russia to surrender and then help them .
Gazans can release the hostages and help the IDF bring Ham’Ass to Justice yet they choose the opposite. Not one Gazan has help a Jewish hostage not even one
and saying that those who seek to apply israel sovereign rights is the same as the genocidal ideology of Ham’Ass is ignorance and harmful. Again it seems you support the Islamic colonialism aspirations and you seems to give a blind eye that this ideology is to be achieved through jihad .
I agree Rabbi . It’s so sad to see people on our side treating the Israelis like the villain and the Gazans as the forever victims
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQx1Qy5Z5fA another one
Are you being honest with yourself if you believe a fat mother has severely starving children? Would it be more honest to recognize child abuse when you see it? I’m not sure anyone believes this garbage yet they keep printing it. Why? It’s not one story that’s gets the attention its the hundreds of stories, lies, that becomes convincing. How is it after Oct 7th the very next day in the USA there were protest against Israel? Hmm, someone has been planning this for awhile. I used to wonder how in the world did Germany get like it did and murder so many Jewish people. Here it is unfolding right in front of my eyes in the USA. Who is promoting this, who has the power to promote this, who has the power to convince millions of people of anything? The media. One story and everyone is an expert.
I saw a protest within the week after and felt unwell. I agree.
Regarding only the children seeming underweight, the malnourishment has been increasing for a few months. An undernourished child can lose a large percentage of their weight very quickly, and they will never recover from developmental impacts if it is prolonged and severe. Apparently the evidence of recent famine is more convincing than the evidence from before, and needs careful consideration before being dismissed based on photos with only one person unwell.
I absolutely believe there is suffering. I also absolutely believe Israel is doing all it can to help.
I think most Israelis want to limit suffering and work towards peace. There are also many, including some in power, who want Palestinians out of Gaza at any cost and their motivations are mixed. With both these things being true, I think the idea of no government being above public questions is vital.
That said, we all hope that peace and truth will be strengthened quickly, and it’s true we can’t attribute dishonesty with total confidence without having all the context. All we can do is try to bring both facts and concerns to the surface with as much nuance as possible. This drags down on bias, wherever it runs.
if the Palestinians wanted to create a country they would have had one long time ago. You seems not to understand the Palestnian cause which calls for the destruction of the state of Israel and the annialtin of Jews . Once again you are showing you don’t understand the Arab mind set- appeasement is weakness to them and sometimes they don’t respect . The reasons why Gazan hate us is because we are Jews all you have to do is just listen to them begins the fancy words of European professors .. if you listen to Ham’Ass and GAZANs themselves they hate us because we are Jews and according to them we are not entitled to be free people in our sovereign ancestral language . Your ignorance on this topic is disturbing
another one
one more
Unfortunately all the falsehoods being spread have made it difficult for people not to defend against the starvation and malnutrition claims automatically, because it was being claimed to be the case at times when it wasn’t true. This quote is from the Tangle newsletter at the beginning of this month-
“After nearly two years of fighting, the situation in Gaza has, somehow, worsened. Weeks into this war, when aid groups said Israel was starving Gaza and activists in the West almost immediately described the nascent conflict as a ‘genocide,’ I expressed my concernabout overstating the horror — the risk of removing the meaning from words that should be reserved for particular, definable actions. Now, after years of crying wolf, the wolf is in Gaza. As Israeli journalist Haviv Rettig Gur put it, ‘We are very close to real, actual, desperate hunger in Gaza… It’s hard to convince Israelis of that because literally everything said to them for 22 months on this topic has been a fiction… We need to wake them up.'”
https://www.readtangle.com/malnutrition-starvation-in-gaza-israel-and-un-aid/
Annelise
I just want to point out that you are playing with human lives. If you are wrong (as I believe you are) you are contributing to the power of Israel’s enemies. Doesn’t it strike you as odd that you are on the same side as Iran, Qatar, and Hizbolla in this narrative war?
At the start of the war, I was writing to news agencies asking them to include more context from both sides rather than just the criticisms.
There are human lives on both sides, and I’m not sure that only one side has full truth in the narrative. I’m afraid that if the Jewish community defends the indefensible, no one will take seriously the more logical arguments. And although so much is unclear in the fog of war, the issue of using siege and then also denying it is concerning. The fact that so many knowledgeable Israelis think the war is only advancing personal political ends at this stage is also significant. Many of these people support Israel’s self-defence as a national responsibility.
To clarify, while I was questioning here about siege as a tactic and the link to settler ideologies, I was at the same time responding to news articles that lacked the perspective of the war as at least partially legitimate self-defence. I think there needs to be light shone on many sides and honest questioning can help much more than hinder the highlighting of relevant aspects of truth.
siege is legal until your enemy surrender and release the people they stole from you. I wish israel continued with the siege from the beginning of the war . The war would end sooner , less Israeli soldiers would had died and less Gazans would had died . And Jews are not settlers in the or own land . Again the Ignorance here is surprising . Jews had lived in Judea and Samaria from time immemorial, just as they have lived in the rest of the historic Land of Israel for the better part of four thousand years. Based on this historic connection, in 1922 the League of Nations granted the Jewish people sovereign rights toJudea and Samaria and the rest of Israel.
Article 80, preserves intact the rights of the Jewish People granted under the Mandate for Palestine, and those rights could not be altered in any way unless there had been an intervening trusteeship agreement between the parties concerned.
No such agreement was ever made during the three year period from 1945 to 1948 when it was possible to make this kind of agreement. Do you have evidence of such agreement between the parties concerned ? Israel has sovereign right to Judea samaria and Gaza. We were willing to give land for peace but instead we got our babies beheaded families set on fire and our sisters raped. So yes now it’s time to relocate Gazans for their sake and ours . For there to be a chance of peace and life free of terror
I did find a story at the Jerusalem Post about aid being stopped.
“Israel halts humanitarian aid to Gaza shortly after ceasefire expires” In the story Israel says “According to Israeli estimates, the 4,200 trucks that entered Gaza on a weekly basis in the last few weeks will be sufficient for the next few months at least.”
At the Free Press another article “Matti Friedman: Is Gaza Starving? Searching for the Truth in an Information War.” When I read those stories I ask myself do I believe what Israel says, those “who were murdered”, or do I believe what Hammas says those “who did the murdering” of over 1000 people. In all honesty I 100% trust Israel, and I 100% distrust anything Hammas and any left wing Israel haters say. My views are slanted, but so are the Israel haters. There is no such thing as a nice war but there is such thing as Justice. The murders have to pay. That includes the moms who told their sons to call them straight away if they ever kill a Jew. They and their government are responsible for 100% of the innocent who by no fault of their own are suffering. In this fog of war I know we will never know the full truth and as long as good conquers evil we will all be better off.
With the statement before the blockade that “According to Israeli estimates, the 4,200 trucks that entered Gaza on a weekly basis in the last few weeks will be sufficient for the next few months at least.” These are the only explanations I can think of as to why it instead preceded, at the least, malnutrition and pockets of famine-
-They were going off estimates that exclude panic buying and hoarding, as to the least amount of food a population can survive on. Somehow not realising or not caring that the people impacted by this will not be Hamas (it didn’t pressure or deter them), but those with no affiliation or physical strength to get what was left.
-They want to make it hell in Gaza so that people will have no will left to stay when the borders open.
-They want to reduce the population.
I think the second option is the most likely, based on comments like, “They will be totally despairing, understanding that there is no hope and nothing to look for in Gaza, and will be looking for relocation to begin a new life in other places.” (Smotrich)
Annelise
I appreciate that you are trying to keep respect for human life alive where it seems to be in danger of going lost. I also agree that no government should be above criticism. But what I can’t understand is how the following is not obvious – that is – that from the Israeli side, the argument (between the left and the right (whose position is being misrepresented but I will leave that for now) is an argument about survival. They are in a place where their neighbors are trying to kill them, their neighbors teach their children to kill them and see the death of Israel as a goal worth dying for. So the question amongst Israelis is – how do we survive in this hostile world.
From the Palestinian side the question is not about survival. If they would be interested in survival they would have done what the middle-eastern Jews did in 1948 and relocated to countries where they could live and propser. But they vowed to destroy the Jewish state and the whole argument is what steps could be taken to accomplish that goal. There are no Israelis teaching their children to kill Palestinians and that destroying Arabs is a goal worth dying for.
One of the primary tools at the disposal of the Palestinians is the tool of public opinion. The public opinion is made up of individuals. If the individuals will shift the rhetoric and focus on the root of the problem – the Arab hatred of Jews and Israel – as documented in their textbooks, in the way they name their streets, in the way they celebrate the death of civilians etc. – then the tool of public opinion will be taken from them and their goal of destruction will be further from them.
If you felt convinced that there were other ways to work towards security and safety, and that some large portion of the civilian (non-Hamas) impact in this war were because of pressure from groups wanting to settle all of historical Israel, I don’t think you would defend that. It’s the uncertainty that numbs us.
I read this list of other possible approaches the government could have taken. And then reading quotes from people like Smotrich about totally destroying Gaza and annexing the West Bank, besieging everyone who is too unwell to leave and their carers without caring how long the IDF says they need to evacuate them. What if the coalition is the reason why this is the course of action, instead of any of these other possibilities? Is that unlikely?
Here are a few options for what Israel could have chosen. This isn’t to endorse one or the other, or to rank them in any way, but is just to illustrate why the suggestion that Israel had no better options than its current course is absurd.
These are just a few options. Many of them I think are worthwhile, and I find others risky or flawed. Most, to me, would have been better than the path Israel chose, given the results that path has yielded. (Quoted from Tangle)
Early in the war, I was aggressively made to leave an online group where I was asking questions in a way I thought was fair and respectful, because they said I was spreading Israeli propaganda and believed that even asking questions is both-sidesism. I don’t think we can be like that.
I understand the fear of airing concerns publicly in case it may wrongly put blame on Jews in general. But to me the risk is more in the opposite direction; if people think there’s no debate in Jewish circles and that the coalition government has been given a blank cheque by Israelis (which isn’t the case), then that will increase antisemitism far more among people who are otherwise moderates and anti-racists. And the Arab world is very unlikely to forgive the idea that Israelis had concerns but didn’t voice them. Hiding the questions also hides the intention to make sure the war never oversteps its security purpose and blends into a form of militant Zionism.
At the moment, Gazans can’t leave and many of those who don’t support Hamas (and have no strength against them) also have survival in the balance. So do the hostages. So do Jews around the world who are impacted by the constant cycle of wars caused by Islamic pushback and Israeli intentions to keep a Jewish majority in government perpetually. So examining the intentions of the leaders in this coalition making the decisions around the ‘Gaza problem’ really seems to be important.
If this government is allowing settler ideology to continue to prolong the war unnecessarily, and disrupt international relations with both Arab and Western nations irreparably, then the choice isn’t just between Netanyahu and Hamas. It’s between accepting those who want to push Gazans to the brink so they leave (and have wanted to do that for many years), or pushing Netanyahu to listen more to other advisors.
what settlers ? Judea and Samaria is part of Israel sovereign land .
Annelise
Again, this is frustrating to no end. You are accepting so many assumptions that it is difficult to unravel all of them.
I will tackle one assumption. You assume that “settler ideology” is prolonging the war. This is demostrably false. Israel abandonded Gaza in 2005, they fought with Hamas several times since then, each time it was a brief and quick “in and out” operation. It is these non-settler policies and strategies that are prolonging the war.
If the international community would set aside their antisemitism and get up and say the obvious – that a society that teaches its kids to hate and kill and that glorifies terrorism – does NOT have a right to self-determination. A society like that needs to be put in a place where they cannot harm their intended victims and/or denazified. The perpetuation of the myth that the Palestinian society as it stands now (with its murderous hatred entrenched as moral virtue) should be treated exactly like a society that seeks only peace and prosperity is what is prolonging the war.
And it is not just Palestinian society that teaches to hate and kill – this is a problem in many places throughout the Moslem world including of-course places like Iran and Iraq, but also more “moderate” places like Egypt and Jordan.
The international society is one of the primary causes of this war. It is their money and their blind eye to the hatred of the Arabs that allowed Iran/Hamas to build its infrastructure of terror. The international community has no moral standng to lecture to the victims of its own crimes about morality. Until they take moves to rectify their own crimes their voices will be identified as the voices of those who want us dead.
I cannot imagine why this is not obvious.
I agree that Israel shouldn’t be the only ones held to account by the international community. That said, many Western governments do oppose Hamas and are criticising aspects of the war (more so recently) while saying Israel has the right and responsibility for self defence according to nationhood.
One fear is that the international law and humans rights put in place in the 20th century are starting to be considered irrelevant by democratic powers in the 21st, and in this case, the responsibility of occupying powers.
It seems the IDF chief Eyal Zamir has also been clashing with Smotrich a number of times lately. The questions are being raised from within Israel, not just outside. And even many Zionists don’t feel he represents them, but he has had incredible influence in the course of the war and has been saying extremely discompassionate things from the start, far beyond even the usual deterrence approach.
And if normalised international relations can’t be achieved, the result is an endless war between Israel and Islam. That’s not safe and it’s not a simple end to the way things were.
the rest of the historic Land of Israel for the better part of four thousand years. Based on this historic connection, in 1922 the League of Nations granted the Jewish people sovereign rights toJudea and Samaria and the rest of Israel.
Article 80, preserves intact the rights of the Jewish People granted under the Mandate for Palestine, and those rights could not be altered in any way unless there had been an intervening trusteeship agreement between the parties concerned.
No such agreement was ever made during the three year period from 1945 to 1948 when it was possible to make this kind of agreement. Do you have evidence of such agreement between the parties concerned ? If so please show us.
Israel’s legal claim to sovereignty over Judea and Samaria is grounded in international law, through treaties and legal precedents, and is far stronger than the Palestinian claim to sovereignty over these areas. Yet this right has been systematically ignored, denied, and drowned in an ocean of lies and distortions about the nature of international law itself and about Israel’s basic rights as a sovereign state.
This distortion and denial are not accidental developments. Israel has been the target of a long- standing international campaign to delegitimize its right to exist. Denying Israel sovereignty in Judea and Samaria paves the way to denying Israel sovereignty to tell aviv , Haifa and Beer Sheva.
Article 80 preserves intact the rights of the Jewish People granted under the Mandate for Palestine , and those rights could not be altered in any way unless there had been an intervening trusteeship agreement between the parties concerned.
Therefore all Jewish rights under the Mandate remain in full force today, including in particular the right to establish new Jewish settlements in any part of former Mandated Palestine under effective Israeli control.
All UN bodies and agencies are obliged or bound by Article 80 and therefore the UN cannot legally prevent the Jews of Israel from exercising their rights or interfering with them that were recognized under the Mandate, or transfer those rights to a non-Jewish entity such as the “Palestinian” Authority.
was never part of Jordan, which seized it in 1949 and ethnically cleansed its entire Jewish population. Nor was it ever the site of an Arab Palestinian state.
Moreover, a country cannot occupy territory to which it has sovereign title, and Israel has the strongest claim to the land. International law holds that a new country inherits the borders of the prior geopolitical unit in that territory. Israel was preceded by the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine, whose borders included the West Bank. Hansell’s memo fails to discuss this principle for determining borders, which has been applied everywhere from Syria and Lebanon to post-Soviet Russia and Ukraine.
occupation is part of the law of war, Hansell wrote, the state of occupation would end if Israel entered into a peace treaty with Jordan. In 1994 Jerusalem and Amman signed a full and unconditional peace treaty, but the State Department neglected to update the memo.
I don’t think it’s reasonable to blame the victims of Islam for the wars Islam waged on them . Very irrational
Is there any accountability for Western powers (such as EU) in their complicity for what is happening?
I think you’re talking about the larger picture and things that have been debated for decades about which side has done what. And also about who needs to release the pressure on Gazans.
I’m just talking specifically about how the IDF is being commanded from above to do things that cause desperation for the sake of getting Gazans to leave when they get the chance (in Smotrich’s explanation). And then the supporters of Israel are being flooded with news that implies the opposite. That’s the limit of what I’m trying to discuss.
The issue is this debate about the current moment-
“there is no need to bring in aid [to Gaza], they have enough. Hamas’s food stores should be bombed.” (Ben-Gvir, when voting against resuming aid transfer in May)
“You don’t understand what you are saying. You are endangering us all. There is international law and we are committed to it. We cannot starve the Strip, your statements are dangerous.” (IDF Chief Zamir, in response to Ben-Gvir’s comments)
“We are bringing in aid because there is no choice… Nobody will let us cause 2 million civilians to die of hunger even though it might be justified and moral until our hostages are returned.” (Smotrich)
Zamir’s assessment is also that there is no answer for humanitarian concerns for 1 million people being rapidly evacuated (many who are already in the same areas as the food shortages), and there is a clash with hostage safety, as well as the issue of troop fatigue, if the government doesn’t accept the phased hostage deal that is on the table and instead goes for the land.
The point isn’t to leverage this issue of humanitarian concerns against Israel. It’s to say how urgent it is for the issue to be examined that powerful sections of the government are doing all they can to include scarcity in the tactics, and that people not affiliated with Hamas are the ones suffering directly because of it.
And that annexation appears to be the sole directional motivation for these influential members of the coalition, with the danger to Palestinians and to Israelis considered less consequential to them.
Annelise
I don’t see it the way you do. Smortrich and Ben Gvir are saying what they are saying because they believe that this is the only way to deal with a people who are committed to killing you. Their main concern is safety of Israel.
Again, to speak about this conflict while ignoring the open intent for murder on the part of the Palestinians, an intent and motivation that floods their culture, media, entertainment, education and their spiritual goals – is immoral.
The fact that the world turns a blind eye to this open declaration for murder should tell you where the world stands on this. The international community cannot be trusted with the safety of Israel because they are complicit in the crimes of the terrorists. Their promises are meaningless and there is every reason to believe that the intent behind their moral lecturing has nothing to do with morality and everything to do with antisemitism.
Just understand. If the Palestinians get what they want which is a stop to this war, Hamas gets to live another day and start the cycle of killing again. And this cycle kills both Israelis and Palestinians.
Just now the left-leaning Australian government has cut diplomatic ties with Iran because of the belief that its government was behind the recent antisemitic attacks. Australia’s foreign minister and prime minister have also been defending Israel’s right to self-defence all this time. But recently they’ve made some comments about the truth of the claims of the starvation in parts of Gaza and the amount of bombing with intent to clear the land of Palestinians.
Iran and Hamas are clearly using terrorism. Other nations, both in the Middle East and in Europe, aren’t condemning them enough. At the same time and without making a comparison, I don’t think the situation would be what it is if the settlements and incidents of settler violence had not been encouraged. I also believe that without a two state solution, which does have its own risks, this will be a much more intense ‘forever war’ between Islamists and Israelis, one which I wouldn’t want fought on my behalf regardless of which side I were on. And one which alienates Israel from its allies much more than would have been the case. Saying that, the residents of all parts of the land need protection.
But none of that is my point in this thread. I just think it’s very pertinent that Israel is going along with a philosophy of siege (or close to it) and ethnic cleansing, and then sending out a wave of news to its supporters that claims the exact opposite. Regardless of which assessment is right about what is fair and necessary, that’s dishonest, and the Israeli government is using Hamas’ unwillingness to distribute the food as a weapon against all Palestinians to make them flee, while saying they have nothing to do with it. It makes it very hard for Western nations to offer unconditional support, even while trying to defend the real threat of terrorism. I think it endangers Israelis and Jews everywhere to a level that is much broader than remnant antisemitism.
I’ve also heard the idea that Palestinians who are powerless against Hamas should be starved into overthrowing them.
And keep in mind that Islam isn’t monolithic, and many Muslims don’t believe in fighting for previously Muslim controlled lands apart from in extreme circumstances. They see context in the modern international situation. Islamic law varies on this but a lot has to do with how Muslims are being treated.
Also, it may be possible to defeat Hamas without the clearing of everyone from Gaza, and the humanitarian, hostage reclamation, and long term political goals may align in that direction. I suspect there’s more to the far right agenda than just security, and/or they have a black and white way of looking at international relations and war. They talk as if they also have no empathy in the mix of their considerations.
I do support wars of national defence, but I don’t support forever wars based on one group or another having permanent ethnic or religious governance. If a totally just peace is impossible, then at some point it has to stop at the defence of civilians and not at permanent ethno-nationalist government.
That’s not the point I’m trying to make though, I just feel like the IDF’s caution and humanitarian foundation is being heavily advertised at the same time as the opposite approach is being taken by those making the decisions. I think we agree that’s true and that it’s because of international optics. But I also think the decision making is logically biased by the far-right belief that Jews should fight to reclaim the whole land for reasons beyond security. That’s not inherent to Judaism.
Zamir also was not pushing back so much on clearing Gaza City as much as on the speed of doing so, with disregard to Gazan humanitarian needs, the hostages, the IDF, and national/international law.
And also I do feel the strong tension between the fact that the partition was never intended to be all for one group, as both groups had reasons to aspire to nationalism there, and then the fact that so much hatred has been stirred up among a significant portion of Gazan culture. I don’t see any really great options, but whatever the way forward is, it isn’t simple.
the partition was as followed
77% to Arabs 23 % for Jews . Jews have lived in Judea and Samaria from time immemorial, just as they have lived in the rest of the historic Land of Israel for the better part of four thousand years.Based on this historic connection, in 1922 the League of Nations granted the Jewish people sovereign rights to Judea and Samaria and the rest of Israel.
Fact 1) Judea and Samaria are part of Israel sovereignty under international law. So how did the Arabs get the land?
On May 15, 1948, the day the Jewish state declared independence, Jordan joined Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq in invading Israel with the intent of annihilating it. Jordan ended the war in possession of norther n, southern and eastern Jerusalem as well as Judea and Samaria. Under international law, this war was an illegal war of aggression.
Fact 2) Jordan invade Israel ,occupied its land ,ethnically cleans every single Jew and illegally annex the cities.
So, explain to me under what international law – invaders, occupiers war criminals are to be granted the land they stole?
Annelise
This is super frustrating
Yes, it is not all Arabs, but many of them are actively calling for ethnic cleansing, genocide, death to Jews. They are educating their children like this and this murder permeates their psyche. It is intentional it is real and it is deadly. This preceded any “settler violence” etc.
Ethnic cleansing is when no Jews are allowed to live in Gaza, or any Palestinian controled territories – or pretty much in most places in the middle east. That is ethnic cleansing.
The whole zionist movement from right to left is a reaction the real killing of Jews in European and Moslem lands.
Do I think the far right is morally correct in their stance – no I don’t. But I recognize that it is an opinion of people trying to stay alive when threatened with death. I will not lecture to them. I will call on the people who are trying to kill them and their supporters to stand down.
The Australian “recognition” for Israel’s right to self defence (how generous) is garbage. If they were not immune to the killing of Jews they would have long stood by Israel when Israel was trying to deal with people who call for their death. The whole “two state solution” was imposed on Israel by the international community with zero consideration for the fact that the Palestinian leadership is calling for the death of Jews.
Again, what is prolonging this conflict is not “settler violence” or idiotic statements by Smotrich and Ben Gvir. What has brought this conflict on to begin with and perpetuates it is the Arab (again not all) open desire to murder Jews coupled together the fact that the international community is completely fine with that.
The focus on Smotrich and Ben Gvir as if this is the eye of the storm while ignoring the hatred of the Arabs and the toleration of that hatred by the international community is immoral.
Just realize that if the far right would have gotten their way in 2005 then this particular conflict would not have happened. So many more Palestinians would be alive. The blood of all those Palestinians (and Israelis) is on the hands of the international community that demonized the Israeli far right, that pressured Israel into giving land to a people committed to killing them, all of the supporters of this immoral position together with the Israeli government of that time for caving in to the international pressure.
Just ask yourself – who has this blood on their hands? Should these people be lecturing to the victims of their own crimes?
I think the focus on those men is because this is a crossroads in time, they have all the power in the decisions made now, and with so many Gazans going through hell after hell and the possibility of Israel losing allies and facing retribution in the future, this is a time that can’t be taken back. Those men are highly accountable because of their command position.
I think ethnic cleansing is the world’s problem wherever it happens. And the targeting of non-combatants. Australia’s government has mentioned Hamas and the hostages whenever I’ve heard them talk about this. Though I agree that wherever and to whomever this is happening, there should be outrage and there isn’t always.
I don’t really have anything else to add. Except to recognise that Jews have gone from the ancient empires to exile and more antisemitism, to the Holocaust and then to anti-Zionism with no respite, and even while I think actions done in the name of Zionism do need scrutiny, there is libel involved too. I do recognise that and wish the right emphasis could be given to every aspect of responsibility for it all.
by far most Arabs Palestinians are seeking the destruction of Israel. Also relocating Gazans is not ethnic cleansing as they use the land they stole from the Jews in 1948 to terrorize and kill as many Jews as possible with the goal of destroying Israel
The question is whether this decision would be made for security reasons if there were no motivation to reclaim the entirety of historical Israel. And also, whether it is likely to increase security or bring much greater problems.
When have you ever seen israel claim parts of Jordan ? Furthermore why shouldn’t Israel assert sovereignty in its land of Judea samaria and Gaza since the Arabs want to use land not to build a state but further colonialze Israel ? Do you support Islamic colonialism?
you clearly don’t understand the middle eastern mindset . Our enemies respect strength and see compromises as weakness.
When Germany was defeated it brought greater security. For the world.
When Japan was defeated it brought greater security. For the world.
If they rise again, and they might,
Repeat, bomb, defeat. Security.
I don’t think that defeating Hamas You r clearing Gaza will have that kind of finality for this conflict. But I don’t disagree that there should be a serious response to Hamas. Only saying that the current Israeli coalition has given disproportionate decision making in this war to men whom many in the government and other strategic/leadership positions think are terribly wrong.
Part of the equation is that when Islamic communities first populated the land, it had already been colonised by the Romans and succeeding powers, and it because Islamic well over 1000 years ago. That doesn’t give them the right to claim simple indigeneity in all the land, but it means that for many families it contains their longtime home towns, just like the basis for many nations elsewhere. It complicates the accusation of colonisation in both directions.
Autocorrect typo “You r” was meant to be “or”
(Unfortunate the typo looks personally confrontational, I don’t intend to come across like that, although these discussions are difficult in this format.)
the only way to stop the conflict is when Arab accepts are right to be free people in our land with rights just like any other people. For that their ideology and their Islamic teaching has to be reformed just as Christianty was .
The only way to contain the terror at this point is for israel to take back its land and relocate Gazans .this mass relocation is not unprecedented in history. Relocating populations can be justified in the interest of peace and their own security. For instance, at the end of World War II, the United States and the United Kingdom relocated approximately 3 million ethnic Germans from the Sudetenland region of Czechoslovakia back to Germany. Similarly, the partition of India and Pakistan in 1947 resulted in the movement of millions of people, ultimately leading to a level of peace between the two nations. These historical precedents illustrate that while mass relocations can be complex and challenging initially, they have sometimes been deemed necessary to foster future peace and security for affected populations.
Furthermore, it is essential to recognize that supporting this relocation is an act of compassion, a recognition of our shared humanity. By choosing to intervene and offer these individuals a second chance, we are not just investing in their futures, but also in the future of the communities they will join. It is a proactive step towards dismantling the ideologies that perpetuate violence and hatred.
The Jews existed in Syria first thousands of years but no one will say that Syria is Jewish land , or that Jews have a political right to establish a Jewish sovereign state within Syria . Jews and Samaritan are the only indigenous people of the land of Israel. That doesn’t mean that non indigenous residents have no civil rights but they have no political right to slice and divide sovereign Israel in the making of another Arab state. It should also be noted that most of your Arab Palestinians were new comers to the land under the Turkish colonization. In historical fact, the Jews continued to form the majority of the Palestinian population for many centuries after The Roman occupation date. The Arabs, on the other hand, are romanticized as age-old inhabitants of the region, direct descendants of the aboriginal inhabitants.In fact the Arabs arrived there as imperialist conquerors at the time of the Arab Conquest, in the seventh century AD, at a time when the Jews had already inhabited Palestine for 2000 years. To see the Jews as powerful imperialists is a curious reversal from the time, not so long ago, when the Jews were regarded as natural serfs and slaves, and the idea of Jews as rulers and fighters was regarded as laughable, or even as a blasphemous reversal of the destined role of the Jews as meek sufferers.
disproportionate Overwhelming force wins wars. Making excuses will get you killed just like Charlie Kirk was assinated today. Don’t demonize the wrong people.
There’s no peace on either extreme, and there can be nuance that considers multiple needs according to the possibilities at hand.
What you call extreme I call fighting a war.
That’s demonizing the wrong people.
The far right is pushing to stop the distribution of aid, not just to take power from Hamas but to ensure that survivors are too traumatised to return to their homes after the war. If that’s not necessary for national defence, then is it not an extremely serious choice? And as it’s the minority view, despite their current influence, shouldn’t it be scrutinised heavily because of its potentially horrific impacts? This is not about blaming people, it’s about the choice in front of this moment, and why people think it should be this one.
The far right does not run this war like the far left wants us to believe. That kind of demonizing got Charlie Kirk murdered today.
I trust the IDF.
The IDF leadership doesn’t want to starve people or rapidly clear areas without looking after innocent people. But they are following orders.
Btw I feel the same way about the US decision to cut off USAID so rapidly. Winding down with proper warning is one thing if truly necessary, but shutting staff out of their computers without warning and taking funding from organisations that didn’t expect it even though lives depend on them, this is a mindset in which empathy is dismissed as weakness rather than being balanced within ethics.
This kind of discussion is important, and doesn’t imply that anyone should be physically attacked for their politics. Extremists aren’t motivated by balanced concerns.
“
“Extremists aren’t motivated by balanced concerns.” you and I can agree on one thing, although there are many wolves in sheep clothing. Matthew Dowd, as example, got fired for his choice of words.
I think most people agree on most things. Hopefully it all gets clearer.
I didn’t know who Charlie Kirk was, but I just read this article and it resonated with me. Both the situation of his death, and his own words against polarisation and in favour of human-focused discussion, say a lot about how much we all need to prioritise listening and turning down the heat in politics while still taking it seriously and continuing to talk. This article asks where we can go from here and it’s really awful that political violence is increasing in the US, as well as so sad for people who knew him.
https://www.readtangle.com/the-assassination-of-charlie-kirk/?ref=tangle-newsletter
“We witnessed Hamas’ chilling credo last month when the terrorist group created and released a video aimed at the public with one message: “We love death more than you love life.”
USA, Dec8, 2012–Palestinian must choose life over death
The unaffiliated/vulnerable ones who can’t even get food from Hamas can’t do much, and can’t be expected to.
The Arab Palestinians are a people who can defeat Ham’Ass and stand with Israel against terrorism if they wanted to . Israel has zero obligation to feed their enemies so long as they continue to murder Israelis , murder IDF soldiers , hold our hostages and not surrender. Furthermore- using the aid to enrich Ham’Ass which use the money to pay terrorists to murder Jews is defeating the objective of victory and ending the war Wars are ugly and innocent get hurt , I wish the Arab Palestinians didn’t wage wars against my people and instead chose peace .
But blocking aid and saying there is no starvation when there is. It’s not about feeding Gazans but about doing everything possible to enable it to get to people.
Evacuating Gaza City so quickly means anyone who is too unwell to travel or can’t afford transport is stuck there. Is there no other possible option?
Jews should be safe when in Israel, and at the same time, we don’t have to think that every decision of an Israeli PM is in line with the IDF’s stated values, or that every concern is antagonistic.
why do you keep on ignoring that the temporary stop in aid came with a condition? I’m just curious does your self righteous comes before our hostages who are tortured and starved ?
Ben Gvir didn’t want it to be temporary, he has voted against resuming aid even as food was becoming unaffordable for many, and spoken against humanitarian pauses to allow people to receive aid. Smotrich has defended him on this. The rhetoric is very similar to that being used in settler communitities for years before the war, and to the rhetoric used when declaring the war.
“I say to the prime minister, ‘Dear prime minister, we must not give them humanitarian aid. We must not give them fuel…’ Our enemies deserve only a bullet to the head!”
According to Smotrich, this is not just to pressure Hamas but to make conditions so despairing that ordinary Gazans will never want to return.
I have no interest in disparaging Israel and I don’t enjoy the conversation. I just have concerns about this issue after seeing starvation set in, and be denied, after this pause, and then the same people now being subjected to an evacuation that isn’t logistically possible in this timeframe.
Two men want Gaza to starve if the hostages aren’t returned, and they have special influence over Netanyahu even if he is only tolerating them. But how does the starvation of millions of people fit in with a religious war that isn’t going to end here unless one side decides to drop the goal of ethnic nationalism? And will it really help security to have the most vulnerable and unaffiliated people suffering while Hamas has food and is making money from the incredible price hikes? Also, why exactly do Ben Gvir and Smotrich hold the view that the only way is this one?
Many Israelis and leaders are afraid that the goal of destroying Hamas with no deals has made the hostages a lower priority, and that as well as endangering Gaza, it will also make the world incorrectly frame what Israel has done in the past in light of this blunt hammer, civilian punishing approach.
I understand the urgency of defeating Hamas but there must be at least multiple pathways to give some level of thought to instead of just sticking to the one idea of starving everyone and getting them all out if they survive in a rapid operation.
“why exactly do Ben Gvir and Smotrich hold the view that the only way is this one?”
..Frustration. Israel being held to a higher standard than any other country that was attacked.
Do you have any questions for Hamas you would like to share here?
There are reasons why this discussion can’t be deflected to other debates. Yes there’s desperation and frustration and we live in an incredibly volatile time, as well as the injustices and lack of comparison between Israel and Hamas. But to dismiss empathy and assume a simple solution is the only one is dangerous for everyone. We may be talking in circles about this, but when tempering empathy with necessity it should not be trodden underfoot.
This kind of conversation is so often filled with blame, accusation and apologetics and that’s not what I’m trying to express. It’s about how a situation like this needs to be able to be talked about if it isn’t right or is raising flags, even amidst all the more simplistic and hateful opinions that get put out. We can’t let polarisation become us vs them to an extreme of just the end justifies the means or the trauma justifies the revenge.
Hamass is fair game in this discussion or Israel can be the only ones who make mistakes in this problem. Yes the frustration is great because Israel gets so much bad press when clearly it is hamass who wants their citizens to die of starvation so they can blame Israel for their deaths. Personally I have no advise for those in charge, only my prayers they can make it through another day. Gods bless Israel.
We all agree that Hamas is a terrorist organisation and I heard even the highest Islamic teacher in Gaza denounced what they did. And we also agree that context matters and can’t be left out from the wider conversation. I also don’t blame people for feeling angry and voicing things in anger. Just when it is driving policy and an army is following that, the conversation matters.
I think it is helpful to hear each other’s emphases, keep talking and hopefully get closer to the true centre, and protect not only freedom, but also its foundations in critical thinking and a safe space for disagreement. So we don’t end up in simple tribal loyalties but rather greater learning of what matters from the perspectives we all hold.
You really believe the whole military policies is drive out of anger. I’m going out on a limb here and would guess the closest you have come to military is being a comment box warrior. Don’t take that to negatively but there is a difference. I see that this conversation only drives more negative comments about Israel. First you mention some un named High level Islamic teacher who said something negative about Hamass, what a good guy,
Then you say Israel policies on fighting this war is driven by anger. Bad guy. So I will back out of this conversation lest you keep this negative drive about Israel going.
Most people do not agree on most things.
That’s not what I said at all. I don’t think all the IDF or government decisions are based on revenge, but I’m concerned when that sort of thing is tolerated or given power at the highest level. Also I don’t think one side is 100% good and the other is 100% bad and I wasn’t comparing anyone to anyone else.
This conversation seems to have become about whether it can stay on topic so I agree that we should step it back. But about agreeing on most things, I mean most people want peace and justice and the question is just how to get there.
Maybe more accurate to say this conversation is about whether the concern should be raised in public. These men are responsible for the words and policies they are pushing which, if wrong, are unnecessarily endangering everyone. They either need defending or opposing, but not silence. And if there is silence from the Jewish community, the world interprets that as agreement.
Ben Gvir didn’t want it to be temporary, he has voted against resuming aid even as food was becoming unaffordable for many, and spoken against humanitarian pauses to allow people to receive aid. Smotrich has defended him on this. The rhetoric is very similar to that being used in settler communitities for years before the war, and to the rhetoric used when declaring the war.
What kind of logic is this? The policy of Israel was that it will be temporary so long as the conditions to end the wars are not met .
1- release the Hostages
2- Ham’Ass surrender
you are ignoring that this is Israel policy and trying to offset that by saying a monster or two said so when they are not the only party here nor do the override the Pm .
“I say to the prime minister, ‘Dear prime minister, we must not give them humanitarian aid. We must not give them fuel…’ Our enemies deserve only a bullet to the head!”
our enemies don’t deserve us feeding them and they do deserve a bullet to the head . He was speaking about Ham’Ass which STEALS the aid and sell it to maintain power . As I said before if we stuck to the siege less young israeli soldiers would had died as well as less Gazans
According to Smotrich, this is not just to pressure Hamas but to make conditions so despairing that ordinary Gazans will never want to return.
I have no problem with Gazans leaving and not returning . We gave them everything and they proven again and again that they don’t want to build a state they want to destroy ours. Please explain why we should continue to offer our own land to people who want us dead
I have no interest in disparaging Israel and I don’t enjoy the conversation. I just have concerns about this issue after seeing starvation set in, and be denied, after this pause, and then the same people now being subjected to an evacuation that isn’t logistically possible in this timeframe.
there is no starvation . If you want to see starvation look at Evyatar David who is 88 lbs . Can you show me anyone in Gaza who has lost 50% of their weight since October 8?
please stop forwarding Ham’Ass Propaganda. Especially considering that of Gazans were hurting so badly THEY can surrender and help the IDF return the hostages.
Two men want Gaza to starve if the hostages aren’t returned, and they have special influence over Netanyahu even if he is only tolerating them. But how does the starvation of millions of people fit in with a religious war that isn’t going to end here unless one side decides to drop the goal of ethnic nationalism? And will it really help security to have the most vulnerable and unaffiliated people suffering while Hamas has food and is making money from the incredible price hikes? Also, why exactly do Ben Gvir and Smotrich hold the view that the only way is this one?
These two men don’t want Gazans to starve they want the hostages to be returned . Please stop dehumanizing our people .
The goal here is to return our poor hostages who are suffering every second since October 7 .
How does siege helps win a war? It forces them to choose whether they want to continue to fight us or whether they will finally chose life over sacrificing their life for the barbaric jihad .
There is nothing unethical about a siege so long as we accept surrender and will grant aid with surrender a point you keep on missing .
The men who are speaking like this have a lot of power over the PM because he relies on them to keep the coalition together.
It isn’t dehumanising to question people in leadership.
The point is they don’t believe there are any innocent civilians, when in fact there are many who have no power to change anything and don’t support Hamas. Directly attacking them would be, and is, wrong. There are significant pockets of starvation and malnutrition now and this is what some of those with decision making power are pushing to cause. Yes there should be intense pressure on Hamas, but this is not that.
Also a siege on a room or building of hostage-takers would make sense, but is very different from a siege on millions of people who mostly have no part in negotiations.
Especially considering the quote showing that the release of the hostages is not the only reason for causing as much despair as possible for Gazans. And the way people were calling for siege as the only solution long before the hostages were taken.
I’m not sure I have anything else to say that hasn’t already been said.
“M”
Did you see this?
“Gaza Lies Collapse: The Myth of Genocide Exposed (w/Prof. Danny Orbach)”
Guaranteed not from some left wing Palestinian propagandist rag magazine
A major problem is that starvation in Gaza has been falsely claimed so many times with crying wolf, that Israelis and those who receive similar news don’t believe it when the wolf actually is there. Things like the price of food and the inability of doctors to refeed malnourished children who don’t have prior conditions need to be considered as actual evidence.