Israel aims to cut Gaza ties after Hamas defeat
Israel aims to cut Gaza ties after Hamas defeat
The long-term goal of the campaign against Hamas is to sever all links with Gaza, Israel's defence minister says.
By Henri Astier BBC News
Israel has suggested that the long-term aim of its military campaign in Gaza is to sever all links with the territory.
Israeli Defence Minister Yoav Gallant said that once Hamas had been defeated, Israel would end its "responsibility for life in the Gaza Strip".
Before the conflict, Israel supplied Gaza with most of its energy needs and monitored imports into the territory.
...
You're viewing part of a thread.
I know right. Imagine they used air burst munitions or. Cheaper mass artillery barrages rather than the primary kinetic and precision strikes they use now. It would look like Eastern Ukraine in Gaza.
Ah yes, because the current bombing campaign against civilians and civilian infrastructure has been very humanitarian. So glad Israel has been showing "restraint". Never mind the white phosphorous too, very legal and very restrained.
Do you know how and why wp rounds get used? You mark a target with wp rounds and now it has an IR signature. So your artillery round can be a single "smart" round that hits your target.
Without wp you'd need to send dozens of rounds in to only probabilistically hit your target and if there was unexpected wind or pressure you might need to try multiple times. That would level whole neighborhoods and sometimes would level them as a "miss".
People talk about wp rounds like they're mustard gas or something. It's a wp round per target or it's 10-40 artillery rounds per target.
How about, no rounds per target?
I love how you're debate-lording me on the specifics of how civilians, children and their infrastructure get blown to bits. Even if you could justify it in that way, that shit is still a war crime for a reason.
It's not a war crime though. That's the point. They're not specifically targeting civillians. They're targeting dual use infrastructure.
That's not making the point you intended.
My bad. Imagine civilians killed in the original slave raid weren't Jewish.
They weren't, the first civilian bombing in the conflict is objectively the bombing of a hotel that housed the Palestinian embassy of sorts, killed like 91.
Pointing fingers in this conflict is a bit idiotic, the protagonists are all ultra religious shitheads fucking over huge populations because of story time interpretations.
Details on the hotel bombing?
That was in 1946. How many peace treaties and ceasefires have there been between them and the current conflict?
The start of a trend does tend to be earlier than everything that follows.... I'm not sure how or why you think that's a valid point.
Because if any conflict between people, even ones that have been resolved, can be used to justify current violence; there's no concievable violence that can ever be unjustified.