The bodies of 109 Palestinians including 23 children and 11 women were taken to Al-Aqsa Martyrs Hospital, and spokesperson Khalil Degran told the Associated Press that more than 100 wounded also arrived to the hospital. In addition, he said the rest of the 210 Palestinians killed were taken to Al-Awda Hospital after the spokesman said he spoke to the director there. But the numbers at that hospital could not be confirmed by the AP.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu vowed to continue the war until all hostages are freed, but Bassem Naim, a senior Hamas official now based in Lebanon, struck a drastically different tone.
“The horrific massacre committed today by Netanyahu and his fascist government against the Palestinian people in Gaza, which led to slaughter of 210 and more than 400 wounded so far — under the pretext of liberating those detained by the resistance — confirms what the resistance has said repeatedly: that Netanyahu doesn’t plan to reach an agreement to stop the war and free the captured Israelis peacefully,” Naim said, according to the Associated Press.
Well all those people definitely weren’t just civilians. Why would civilians be holding hostages? That means those people were combats. That’s a good thing then.
While not all of them were combatants, it only makes sense that Hamas would hold civilians in direct danger because they can’t win otherwise. IDF would wipe the floor with Hamas in direct conflict as Israel’s military power is far greater than Hamas, so Hamas is resorting to using civilians to prevent military action around their territory. Hamas then can use this against Israel in a lawfare sense when netanyahu attacks.
The issue ultimately is the intentional presence of civilians in these active military areas. Normally you wouldn’t bomb schools, but when Hamas sets up shop in these typically protected areas and starts launching missiles from them they start losing that protection. This is a win-win for Hamas, they can call Israel out for being reckless if they’re attacked and use down time to recuperate when Israel is restrained. Though, if you can’t win without subjecting your own people to your own deliberate war crimes, I think you have an obligation to surrender, you clearly don’t have your own people’s interest at heart.
So, sure one could say “what else is Hamas supposed to do? They’re outgunned, how else are they supposed to fight?” Answer is you don’t. Hamas shouldn’t have attacked in October and made the choice to subsequently hide behind civilians, they should surrender for the better of Palestinians.
There’s nowhere else for Hamas to set up. There’s civilians in all of Gaza. It’s an extremely densely populated region, even more so now that it’s being cleared and destroyed. Second, Hamas was created in response to Israeli aggression that already existed. Surrendering would just bring them to the status quo that inspired the First Intifada, when Palestinians were still being attacked, killed, restricted, oppressed, and their land steadily taken for more than 20 years already. People don’t respond well to that and to expect them to sit there and being slowly ethnically cleansed again is unrealistic. The correct take is to oppose Israel and it’s settler colonialism.
If you actually think this is a settler vs native thing you are cherry picking your history lessons.
It sounds like the opposite. Do you even know what Zionism is? It’s calling for a place Jews from all over the world can go via. They bring in people from all over the world, lots of them have dual citizenships. Because Jewish people can trace genealogic origins there from thousands of years ago doesn’t make some lady from Europe or New York the same as some local Palestinian kid at all. They then kick out the natives and give their homes to these settlers. They’ve been doing it since the 40’s. People can look over the wall and see where they, their parents, or their grandparents used to live.
I recommend looking up the history of Zionism, including the European Jews that forwarded it, like Theodore Herzl, and the different places they considered for it (Uganda,Argentina, Cyprus, etc) before settling on Palestine.
Don’t cherry pick now. Go farther back.
The original homeland of the Jewish people is the region historically known as the Land of Israel, also referred to as Canaan, and later as Palestine. This area is located in the modern-day state of Israel, as well as parts of the Palestinian territories (the West Bank and Gaza Strip), and parts of neighboring countries such as Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria. Historically significant cities in this region include Jerusalem, Hebron, and Bethlehem.
But with that logic, my friends have the right to go to Italy and Ireland, kick out native Italians and Irish and take their houses, because they’re Italian-American or Irish-American. That’s not how it works or how it should work. Its the same reason I wouldn’t have supported the Liberia project of having African-Americans go back to Africa and kick out and oppress the natives just because they were mistreated in the US, if I was alive at the time. It led to centuries of indigenous oppression and civil wars, like Israel and Palestine nowadays. We shouldn’t be looking to imitate that level of colonial superiority anywhere else.
You’re right looking at this situation like it about settlers and natives is totally silly.