Yes, but her critics is happily used by Hamas on propaganda channels becomes propaganda, and doesn't make anything better and doesn't solve anything.

So the mother should just shut up and accept that her children are not to be spoken about?

How about on the other hand, the IDF does care again, where their bombs explode?

"Israel's defense minister said he has "released all restraints" on the Israel Defense Forces' troops in their fight "

https://edition.cnn.com/middleeast/live-news/israel-hamas-wa...

> So the mother should just shut up and accept that her children are not to be spoken about?

for sake of mutual peace and future every human should think hard before talking on sensitive topics. But humans can't, so we butcher each other instead for thousands of years.

You are seriously demanding of a mother who lost her children to shut up? Would you demand the same of an israeli Mother?

I said "think hard", not "shut up", then she may realize that Hamas role in death of her kids is significant, and she is a puppet for Hamas propaganda. The same is relevant to you btw.

I am a puppet for Hamas, because I say killing of children is bad and the IDF should not give up restraint while operating in densely populated ares? Ok then, I got your opinion. But in my world, things are not so black and white.

> because I say killing of children is bad

No, you are puppet because you distribute point from one side, and are manipulative (distort my words).

> the IDF should not give up restraint while operating in densely populated ares?

I don't think we discussed this topic. What kind of restrain you are talking about now?

"I don't think we discussed this topic. What kind of restrain you are talking about now? "

Well, it surely is possible you did not read it, but just look above in the thread:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38746724

"Israel's defense minister said he has "released all restraints" on the Israel Defense Forces' troops in their fight "

Militray restrain means watching where you are shooting - and not shooting if the danger of civilian deaths are too high. The IDF officially given up on using restraint - and the number of civilian deaths and among them many, many children show it.

So fighting terror with terror? That's what it seems to me. And being called a puppet for one side, because I critize both sides - is just a very typical thing for this whole debate.

Would you please stop posting in the flamewar style? You've done it repeatedly in this thread, and that's exactly what we're trying to avoid here.

If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.

I think you stretched your speculations too far.

Israel obviously didn't literally released all restraints, otherwise we would see some carpet bombing like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wnd3IYH7x1o

Now you define what is the "civilian deaths are too high" exactly, what is the evidence that IDF is not using such protocol already, and if this will be sufficient to defeat Hamas.

No, obviously not all restraint. They would loose US support if they would.

But the israeli defense minister literally said he ordered the IDF to give up restraint. How much more official do you want it?

And the evidence that they are following this order, is the high civilian death number.

"and if this will be sufficient to defeat Hamas."

And this is the thing - as long as the Hamas leaders are safe in Quatar and being supported by Turkey as "freedom fighters" and others - this is not a fight that can be won with just using more brute force.

To be clear, I do think Israel has a right to militarily target the Hamas - but not palestinian people as a whole. Every innocent child that dies fuels anger and new terrorism.

Even if all of Gaza is cleared and its population send to the Sinai desert - it would not really make Israel safer. It is just a really complicated conflict with very, very old roots.

> this is not a fight that can be won with just using more brute force.

it totally can be: if 95% of Hamas fighters killed or jailed and 95% of their infra/inventory destroyed, it will be much weaker and won't be able to deliver large scale attacks.

> Every innocent child that dies fuels anger and new terrorism.

and not acting also fuels terrorists.

"> Every innocent child that dies fuels anger and new terrorism.

and not acting also fuels terrorists."

So killing a child or not killing a child has the same outcome?

I don't think so, but I also think this is going nowhere.

Would you please stop posting in the flamewar style? You've done it repeatedly in this thread, and that's exactly what we're trying to avoid here.

If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.