jesus, I've only pointed that out like 50 times here, which is why the change in the Hamas charter in 2017 is such an important change.

The best part of US politics is where politicians reach for legal means to remove an opponent instead, I don't know, have actual policies that improve the material conditions of your citizenry.

Seems fine to me. One's a prosecution, the other a common law claim, right? Liability can kick in because of contractual risk distributions that have nothing to do with intent or gross negligence.

Oh wait, I must looked it up and it's a criminal proceeding as well. This can be a difference in law systems. I'm pretty sure in the netherlands it's about the constellation of facts that you cannot be prosecuted twice for. In the past, prosecution wasn't even allowed to change the writ before the court session. So if you made a mistake you were screwed. This has been somewhat relaxed, in that you can change the charge as long as it is part of the same chapter (eg. related type of crime). This is why when you study, you're taught to charge suspects with all the crimes that you think applies. In practice, most prosecutors charge what they think will most likely result in a conviction. I never understood that since it's not a lot of work to add additional charges (a paragraph per charge suffices generally speaking).

@Tobias anything to add?

This seems to relate to the ne bis in idem principle, which means you cannot be prosecuted twice for the same fact. Is an impeachment a prosecution? I don't think so, so I don't see how it would result in immunity.

I'd like to see you set out a consistent and closed system of private ownership based on moral rules only.

The problem is that "contracts" aren't aimed at reaching morally just outcomes; they are generally not included at all. So the idea people have an extra-legal moral right to pre-tax income is fundamentally flawed.

It won't open for me.

There are no just transfers, only legal ones.

Roman law and Greek philosophy.

I've pointed out before in this thread this is just a heuristic with little value as an actual argument in specific cases.

Watching it now but without watching it I already now pharma is not to be trusted.

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/573763

None of the vaccine makers have made any claims with respect to transmission, only the reduction in severity as I already pointed out 2 years ago when this first became a thing. Many people assumed it would because most vaccines also reduce transmission (and it did).

Or, we can't trust what Hamas says so their charter is irrelevant. Here is a Hamas leader saying they want to destroy Israel and we must trust what he says.

[ When Israel has an HRW report it's not relevant because the other side are animals because there are HRW reports saying so.

Yes, dumb Trump voters and the orangutan turn out to be a degenerative sub-species of homo erectus.

I think the problem is to think here that retaliation and retaliatory strikes is the answer. Going after the perpetrators to prevent further attacks isn't retaliation. But it is hard not to see the retaliatory nature of the mission with the talk of human animals, the evil city, Biblical references and other dehumanization of the Palestinians. And then, even with the ground troops inside the city, using still a lot of air power. Using bombing to level the city is so different from how for example the US fought against insurgents in Iraq. It comes to mind that the unannounced objective could to make Gaza unlivable and then try to push the 2,2 million or so to Sinai. Perhaps for a 'temporary time', so it wouldn't be an act of genocide / ethnic cleansing.

Comparing how the US dealt with insurgents in Iraqi cities is here valid. The US went to great lengths to avoid using air power and the ground troops understood it well. The ironic thing is that the US armed forces actually won the Sunni insurgency only to then withdraw, have the Shia lead government take over and mess up all the work the Americans had done and the end result was ISIS taking over.

Showing restraint isn't a sign of weakness, it's usually a sign of intelligence. But if one wants just to retaliate and thus give those who call for retaliation what they want, that's something else. — ssu

"Retaliation" implies "revenge", so already an interesting choice of words but not my words.

I reject analogies that liken countries to individuals. Countries are not individual moral agents that bear individual moral responsibility. One does not "get back" at this "person" by killing its civilians. — BitconnectCarlos

Sure. Then Israel also has no right to self-defence. We "liken" countries to individuals all the time as we conceptualise that they have rights. And this makes perfect sense. If a person has a right then obviously a party who represents that person also has such right. So the State has rights because it is an agent of its citizens (ideally). And if actual people oppress another people, and the State as an agent supports such oppressions, its rights and duties are derived from the rights and duties of the individuals it represents. And since those illegal settlers and IDF soldiers are perpetrating a continuous war crime, they do not get to enjoy any protection.

A Jewish baby born in Jerusalem or Tel Aviv is an "illegal settler" according to Hamas (and unfortunately a significant portion of the Palestinian population). I recommend the Ami Horowitz interview where he interviews a Hamas leader and asks this question directly. — BitconnectCarlos

Except I never said that, I said in "occupied territories" which is well established under international law and since I'm not a Hamas spokesperson or affiliated with them, I don't see how whatever they say has anything to do with what I'm saying.

If you're suggesting Palestinians aren't allowed to kill illegal settlers in the occupied territories of the West Bank or to kill IDF soldiers who protect those illegal settlers, then really what you have is human shields to pursue immoral State sanctioned policies. In which case I think indiscrimate bombing of illegal settler villages and IDF posts, killing as much as possible and levelling it to the ground by the international community makes perfect sense, just to get to the adults. Because that's the calculus the Israeli government is making. We'll even be nice about it and warn them beforehand!

Or, maybe a weird idea, Israel stops pursuing the war crime of annexing land and reverses the crimes it has already commited (and we all know that in a negotiated peace they still get to retain what they have no right to) and then when an attack does happen, they can at least claim a moral right to do something against it and I'd be the first to support discriminate police action and, depending on circumstances, escalate to military action.

Does someone who commits assault have a right to retaliate when the victim strikes him, even when it's in his balls or a knife in his neck? It's the Palestinians retaliating not the other way around. Israel is not a victim but an aggressor.

I recognise an individual right for Israeli citizens to defend themselves against terrorist attacks, since I don't believe in guilt by association, but as far as I'm concerned every illegal settler, every idf soldier in the occupied territories is explicitly involved in the oppression and is therefore fair game. Shoot them all until the oppression stops. The state of Israel doesn't have a right to do anything until it stops committing crimes itself. Only once it has done that and if they are still confronted with an attack, then do they have any rights.

Edit: actually no rights is an exaggeration but you get the drift.

You're starting to improve your thinking on this issue when at least you're comparing Assad and Israel and your only complaint is that not everybody complains about Assad. :clap:

Goddammit man, use a smiley or something so we understand when you're getting cynical.

Ok, so what you're saying is "a very successful start if you ask Bibi"?

I think he's just overcompensating for the fact his name sounds like baby.

Edit: probably too soon but shitty jokes is how I cope.

So a very successful operation if you ask Bibi.

Here's some other views on the conflict instead of the myopic western bullshit being peddled in this thread.

South Africa

https://www.dirco.gov.za/south-africa-has-maintained-a-consistent-position-on-the-israel-palestine-question/

"unfinished decolonisation struggle"

India

https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/palestine-israel-conflict-india-unsc-jerusalem-clashes-aqsa-7320652/

"Hours after Hamas' first attacks on Gaza on October 7, Prime Minister Narendra Modi, on a post on X, expressed shock at the Palestinian offensive, and conveyed “solidarity with Israel”. He wrote, "“Deeply shocked by the news of terrorist attacks in Israel. Our thoughts and prayers are with the innocent victims and their families. We stand in solidarity with Israel at this difficult hour." However, five days later, in its first official statement on the Israel-Hamas war, New Delhi has sought to nuance this. Ministry of External Affairs’ official spokesperson Arindam Bagchi, in response to questions at the weekly briefing, said that there is a “universal obligation to observe international humanitarian law,” and there is also a global responsibility to fight the menace of terrorism in all its forms and manifestations. In addition, Bagchi further cleared that India advocates for "the resumption of direct negotations towards establishing the sovereign, independent and viable state of Palestine living within secure and recognised border side by side with Israel."

China

https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202311/1302191.shtml

China urged an immediate cease-fire in the Gaza Strip, expressed opposition to any forced displacement and relocation of Palestinian civilians and emphasized that any arrangement concerning the future and destiny of the Palestinian people must have their consent, Chinese top diplomat Wang Yi told visiting Arab and Islamic foreign ministers on Monday.

Brasil

https://www.newindianexpress.com/world/2023/nov/14/brazils-lula-says-israel-committing-equivalent-of-terrorism-in-gaza-2632858.html

Lula: Israel is committing the "equivalent of terrorism" in Gaza by killing innocent women and children in its war on Hamas

& other south american countries

Have cancelled arms deals with US and other Israeli supporters for their unrepenting support of Israel.

None of these "non-Western" countries (except for Paraguay) designate Hamas as a terrorist organisation other than via the OAS, which is of course dominated by the northern American countries. That aside, no Asian country but Japan and no African country. In other words, the favoured position here is a minority position in the world. Posters would do well to acquaint themselves with other narratives instead of the implicitly racist assumptions in the Western narrative where the more people look like us the more support they get (Ukrainian refugees vs others, Israel vs Palestine etc.) or because of historic guilt trips for crimes committed by our grandfathers. My country doesn't owe Israel allegiance or support just because a bunch of Jews live there.

The difference is between night and day. — ssu

And between right and wrong.

To be honest, we are sidewalk superintendents, by-standers, kibitzers at a long distance from the war. For us, our caring and concern is low-cost. — BC

I disagree. Public awareness and opinion do shape policy in the countries we live in and this is far more important than we think. The Israeli governments, when run by Likud or other right wing nutjobs, will not improve the fate of Palestinians unless the international community forces them. As they did with South Africa. Today, the Palestinian cause is getting much more attention than before despite the one-sided media coverage of traditional media and politicians.

We can only hope that the "Western" narrative is quickly abandoned by a more pluralistic and therefore balanced view as expressed by many other countries. The cry of "anti-semitism" each time Israeli policy is critizised, is losing its potency, both for being false and due to the inexoriable shift of (economic) power to Asia and hopefully sooner than later: Africa.

The same reason Russian sanctions are only upheld by EU, US and direct allies like Canada, Australia, Japan are at play here as well. Not even Mexico, with an important dependence on the US, sanctioned Russia. Because these countries understand all too well the role international policy from those countries have contributed to creating the circumstances for war. The "Western" narrative with respect to Israel-Palestine is obviously not shared by former colonies, who see this conflict much clearer with their own history of being oppressed by the same powers that now unconditionally support Israel. Quite frankly, it's as if we're reliving the 1800s with how backward the EU and US positions are. Especially when we get the cultural superiority arguments from the closet white supremacists ("where would you rather live?" "How come these countries do not independently develop into liberal democracies?").

Except of course I actually know what I'm talking about: https://imeu.org/article/self-defense-or-provocation-israels-history-of-breaking-ceasefires

In the period 2013-2014 Israel violated the ceasefire 190+ times and Hamas about 75 times. So I'm significantly more likely to agree to something with Hamas than Likud/IDF.



But please continue

Stop wasting your time.

Crystal ball bullshit. Historically, IDF has broken more cease fires than Hamas. So if it's a matter of trust, I'd sooner deal with Hamas than Likud or the IDF. In that respect it's always fun to see the spectacle of media parrotting IDF narratives without confirmation of the facts through alternative sources.

Even so, what Israel should do is independent of what Hamas would do. Nobody is calling for it to be pacifist, but for it to stop taking land from Palestinians and undermining peaceful solutions. And yes, I think people who were expelled from the land that they lived and the houses they lived in, should have a right to return there. So weird!

people both committed to your death and destruction, ready, willing, and able to act on it, — tim wood

A fantastical depiction of Palestinian and Jews in one sentence. Well done.

My own view is that the Israelis restyle their state into a joint Israeli-Palestinian state, citizens having a choice of one of three passports, Palestinian, Israeli, or joint Israeli-Palestinian, full rights as citizens for all, and all Palestinians citizens. Obviously a lot of details to work out. — tim wood

Maybe start with the detail that what you just wrote is inherently contradictory.

What question? The one where you display you're so emotionally stunted you cannot comprehend why other people care what happens to innocent people?

The fact you feel my post addressed you, says it all. I already pointed out your idiocy in an earlier post; which was hubris. You also get half of history wrong because it's like you read exactly one book in high school or something.

The presumed supremacy of Western civilisation and the logical next step it should be defended by any means necessary. But you're right. Forget it. Don't waste your time on it.

@180 Proof what do you make of the white supremacist movement rearing it's head through these unwitting jokers?

Oh, I definitely could. Maybe read up on the local history and understand how these monsters got into power instead of positing as if they are isolated facts of reality with no causes and you will find those liberal democracies you venerate at its core.

Yes don’t trust any party that isn’t western, liberal democratic, and who are not generally trying to get along peacefully. — schopenhauer1

Haha. :rofl: you really have no sense of history at all, do you?

:vomit:

certainly lowers the risk of contracting that form of insanity from the basket of deplorables that do attend these things.

the 2 state solution as has been outlined numerous times. — Punshhh

Any idea how many right wing settlers will have to move to make that a realistic option? Because currently it's simply not physically viable.

I think that part refers to the memo of the Defense Attache and not the Israeli memo - so it would be a peace keeping force.

Reported yesterday in the Dutch newspapers (Google translate) :

Israel uses “disproportionate force” in Gaza and deliberately attacks “civilian infrastructure” such as bridges, roads and residential complexes. This approach explains the “high number of deaths in Gaza” and, according to critics, “constitutes a violation of international treaties and the laws of war.”

This is stated in a confidential memo from the Dutch embassy in Tel Aviv, which has been seen by NRC .

The memo was drawn up by the Defense Attaché at the embassy, ​​who is intensively monitoring the situation around Gaza with a military team. According to the report, the Israeli political and military leadership has no clear strategy and the Israeli desire to finally deal with Hamas is "a military goal that is virtually impossible to achieve."

The findings in the confidential report are in stark contrast to public statements by the Israeli army in recent weeks, which claims to be doing as much as possible to prevent Palestinian civilian deaths. More than 11,000 people have been killed in Gaza since the war began, according to the Hamas-controlled Palestinian Health Ministry. Just this weekend, Israel came under intense international criticism for air and ground strikes around Al-Shifa Hospital.

Outgoing Prime Minister Mark Rutte (VVD) said last Wednesday after a conversation with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu that Israel "must show that what they do is also proportionate" and must act within the limits of international law. Rutte, unlike French President Macron , for example , does not want to call for a ceasefire.

The memo shows that the Netherlands knows that Israel consciously opts for a ruthless military approach that leads to large numbers of civilian casualties. Yet the Israeli actions are not publicly condemned by Rutte and outgoing Foreign Minister Hanke Bruins Slot (CDA).

D66 party leader and outgoing Minister for Climate and Energy Rob Jetten said on Sunday in Buitenhof that he believes that Rutte should now call for a ceasefire, but D66 appears to be alone in this within the outgoing cabinet.

According to the official memo, the decisions of the Israeli war cabinet and army leadership are motivated by feelings of revenge. “The emotion and anger are echoed in IDF [Israeli army] briefings,” the message said. These emotions would play a role in expanding the instructions for use of force for the Israeli military and in the Israeli interpretation of the laws of war.

Dahiya-doctrine
The IDF, the embassy writes, tries to limit losses on its own side as much as possible during the ground offensive (" zero risk ") and therefore uses lethal force more quickly (" shoot to kill "). Moreover, the embassy sees that the IDF applies "elements" of the so-called Dahiya doctrine. This strategy, which was first used in the 2006 war in Lebanon, "intends to deliberately cause massive destruction to infrastructure and civilian centers" while taking large numbers of civilian casualties for granted. The deliberate destruction of civilian targets is contrary to the laws of war, the memo states.

The use of brute force should restore the deterrence of Israel, which appeared militarily vulnerable to the Hamas attack. According to the memo, Israel wants to "display credible military force with its offensive in Gaza to show Iran and its proxies [such as Hezbollah] that they will stop at nothing." This attitude increases rather than decreases the chance of regional escalation, the Defense Attaché fears.

Embassy does take reports about Israeli plans to move Palestinians to the Sinai desert seriously.
Because the Israelis feel little explicit support from allies other than the United States, this could lead "to more extreme actions and the possible targeting of the northern front [a preventive Israeli war against Hezbollah]. then to hoped-for peace negotiations.”

At the end of October, Rutte said in a parliamentary debate that Israel has the right to eliminate the terrorist threat: “Hamas' ability to carry out attacks must disappear.” However, according to the embassy, ​​"a clear military victory over Hamas" cannot be achieved. Moreover, there is no agreement on the Israeli side about the end goal of Operation Swords of Iron. “The current action is first and foremost motivated by the need to deliver a final blow to Hamas,” the memo states: “The prevailing feeling is that we will look further afterward.”

Even if Hamas is almost completely eliminated, the fundamentalist movement's ideology will live on, the memo said. “There is no military answer to this, this is a political issue.”

Saudi Arabia and Qatar
The Dutch Defense Attaché is also concerned about leaked Israeli plans to forcibly relocate the more than two million Palestinians in Gaza, temporarily or otherwise, to Egypt's Sinai desert. Israeli media recently wrote about a policy document mentioning this option, sparking fears among Palestinians of ethnic cleansing. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called the plan "hypothetical", but the Dutch embassy is taking it seriously. Under the heading ' Thinking the unthinkable ' it says that in Israel "several people – including parliamentarians, advisors and soldiers – do not dismiss this option as extreme, but as real."

The memo states that one of the scenarios for a Gaza without Hamas is that an international force will control the coastal strip. It could consist mainly of Arab countries, including Saudi Arabia and Qatar. The memo states: “The question is what is left of Gaza after the military offensive and what this force will oversee.”

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs does not want to respond substantively to the memo, but emphasizes that it is only one of a "multiple of sources" that are used in drawing up policy advice to the minister. “The Netherlands is very concerned about the severity and scale of the conflict,” the ministry said: “Further civilian casualties on both sides must be prevented as much as possible.”