And in any case, Isreal should be actually able to implement this. I trust it! It's a local superpower! So let's support a realistic solution and the side that can actually implement it, and end this loong conflict, because Hamas is clearly not the side that can practically do it. It will finally be the final solution so to say. (Because then there will be no conflict. So it's final, you know.) Palestinians will forget about it all, and there will be peace from then on, and ever after. There will be no national shame for them like in 1948, because this time, we're also doing it for them, because Hamas is also bad for them. They'll have to leave Gaza for a while, but that's ok. They'll be fine in the desert for a while. I've heard the good people from UN do take care of people in such unfortunate situations. It's not really our problem.

There has to be no nuance this time!

https://www.newstatesman.com/world/2014/07/jeremy-bowens-gaz...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_shield#2008%E2%80%932009...

https://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?a... (This article is honestly, one of the most shiver-inducing ones)

Honestly, for how ubiquitous this claim is, I've never been able to find more than a handful of clips of urban warfare (?)

I don't think it's that much of a surprise that in the world's most densest urban area, militants will be in a city?

Either way, "human shields" isn't a valid defense. Especially if you don't provide evidence for __every single instance__ you're causing civilian damage.

Edit:

I decided to end up doing more research on this.

https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/mde15/015/2009/en/

Apparently makes a claim that there was no evidence of human shields in the major war then.

Honestly - I feel like this is one of those situations where an entity has lied so much about a specific thing, that takes a life on its own.

It's how journalists don't fact check cops and just report their reports as fact. I'm guessing a similar thing has happened here.

I mean, we've seen how dangerous not supporting Israel has been in terms of reputational damage.

--

Edit 2:

Even more research. I did find https://stratcomcoe.org/publications/hybrid-threats-hamas-us...

Seeing this is apparently from NATO, I assumed there'd be more to say here. But the list of incidents they referenced are primarily "IDF Spokesperson".

If true, then Israel's "best" is not very good, because Israel has already made far more civilian casualties than Hamas over the past couple of days. And also over the past 2 decades.

No, I don't think Israel is doing its best. At best, they're paying lip service to the idea of avoiding civilian casualties, but it's pretty clear that to many people in Israel, including military and civilian leadership, the lives of Palestinian civilians aren't worth much.

It is true that Hamas tries to kill as many civilians as possible, and in that sense they are undoubtedly the more evil party (but evil does not justify more evil), but the reason Hamas does that, is to provoke exactly this kind of overly brutal retaliation from Israel. Because then more Palestinians will be confronted by their kids and neighbours being massacred by Israel, and they will be radicalised and willing to take up arms to avenge their family. And Israel obliges. In this sense, Israel is helping Hamas, enabling their recruitment, and keeping them alive.

If Israel really wants peace, an end to this violence, and avoiding civilian casualties, then they must be massive idiots, because they are instrumental in keeping the violence going, and Hamas is playing them like a fiddle. Note that the real leadership of Hamas is not in Gaza at all, but in Qatar.

True, a decade long conflict takes its toll, messages that advocate genocide do also influence opinion. And still I think Israel puts more value on Palestinian life than the martyrs attacking it.

Also, Israels military tactics are quite "unbloody" compared to other conflicts, i.e. Syria, where there is deployment of sarin gas on civilians.

The Palestinian population is played like a fiddle. I don't think Hamas is too happy with the current results of their aggression.

Is that your standard?

Before this new escalation, Israel had killed 14,212 Palestinians since 2000. I'd say that's pretty bloody. But we should be happy that they're not actively gassing all Palestinians...

> I don't think Hamas is too happy with the current results of their aggression.

Why not?

Perhaps they should tune down trying to ethnically cleanse Jews, maybe a bit of success can come back into their lives.

"Palestine" launched over 10,000 rockets in the last 20 years and Israel defending itself is only right.

And no, this is not something that came into existence at the same time as Israel, the hatred predates that.

This is not enough to condemn Palestinians as a whole, but this is a war for survival and in any war there will be casualties. This is something the attacker has to take into account. And they know that fully well, it is part of their strategy.

Contrary to common wisdom that you should never negotiate with terrorists, Israel actually does that. That behavior has kept casualties to a minimum. Expecting more is unrealistic and very few countries would take the long road here.

To keep casualties to a minimum in any future conflict, there needs to be a push by Palestinians to condemn terrorist attacks or similar reactions will be a necessity.