• HeartyBeast
    link
    fedilink
    129 months ago

    Serious question- and I’m
    It being argumentative- this is a question I have wrestled forth myself.

    What would proportionate response look like?

    • @PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      169 months ago

      A well executed police raid to drag Hamas’ leadership out

      This is 1,000,000% corruption coming from the head, so chopping off the head will go a long way towards ending Hamas’ problem causing.

      Problem is that Netenyahu trying this is what got Hamas into power in the first place because he decided he wanted a replacement govt to be a hateable enemy so I’m not too hopeful

      • HeartyBeast
        link
        fedilink
        99 months ago

        I think that sounds absolutely right. But I worry about while it sounds good from my armchair, to what extent it’s really possible given conditions on the ground and the hostages.

      • @kbotc@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        29 months ago

        … How do you identify government leadership in a group that notably violates the Geneva conventions at least as often as Israel by going plain clothes and hiding in the civilian population? Do you think Israel has police forces in Gaza still?

        • @PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          89 months ago

          Well we know who the literal president of Hamas is, start with him and work your way down the list of more and more obscure leaders

          • @Mirshe@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            99 months ago

            Additionally, Mossad is one of the most successful and widespread intelligence agencies in the planet. I don’t buy anyone saying they don’t already have lists a mile long and the resources to carry it out.

            • @PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              19 months ago

              Others have pointed out but Mossad are a different branch of the Israeli intelligence apparatus than the folks who’d likely be handling this, but the point most likely stands either way that this whole incident represents an abject failure of intelligence ops in preventing a large scale attack.

        • @SpudTech@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          4
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          Speaking out of my ass and for America, we would use our “intelligence” and latest spy equipment.

          Edit: What did I say that is so upsetting?

            • @SpudTech@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              49 months ago

              That may have taken us years but I don’t think we have an open policy of shutting down whole cities with threat of annihilation.

              These quick comments are not enough to do justice to these topics but I do not mean to upset anyone.

    • NoneOfUrBusiness
      link
      fedilink
      5
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Well first of all military response, proportionate or not, is meaningless in such a conflict. Israel is feeding Hamas who’s in turn feeding Israel etc etc, so the answer is to work on securing peace rather than radicalize the Gazan population more (because God knows after this shit they’ll be out for blood), but if there needs to be a military response it should at least follow Israel’s own roof knocking policy, which they’re not following in these attacks, where they drops small non explosive rounds to warn civilians to evacuate before bombing their homes (which is also bad but less bad than indiscriminate murder). See also: Not using actual fucking white phorphorus, not bombing routes and locations they designated as safe, and definitely not bombing hospitals and ambulances. These are all things the IDF has been confirmed doing in the past few days. Usually the response to Hamas attacks is airstrikes, but the last time anything like what we’re seeing now happened was in 2014.

    • @Puzzle_Sluts_4Ever@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      49 months ago

      Ignoring morals and ethics and focusing mostly on historic precedent?

      Firebombing a few city blocks. Possibly letting the angry young soldiers run wild on the civilian populace under the guise of getting “justice” for the civilians that hamas brutalized.

      That is more or less “war”. You raid one of my towns, I’ll raid two of yours. Ends when one side has been beaten into submission.

      Actively attacking third party civilians is not. The IDF has a very long history of doing this.

      • @lanolinoil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        6
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        That is more or less “war”. You raid one of my towns, I’ll raid two of yours. Ends when one side has been beaten into submission.

        Actively attacking third party civilians is not.

        I don’t think I agree – This is an awesome blog post you should totally read if you’re interested in history. https://acoup.blog/2022/07/29/collections-logistics-how-did-they-do-it-part-ii-foraging/

        I’d say anything post train you’re going to try to capture infrastructure to make war, so saying we’re sieging cities sounds more ancient to me.

        If you read that post, you’ll see ‘foraging’ really meant robbing and brutalizing local populaces for their food since anything but the smallest sized army can’t feed itself for more than a few weeks. Not to mention once we are sieging a city and starving all the people out.

        What are some modern examples of ‘letting your army run wild on the populace’? I know that happens quite a bit but I can’t think of any sanctioned ones unless we go to wwii Japan maybe? and that was more than a little wild. Seems like most of the time a platoon or w/e just goes berserker.

        • @Puzzle_Sluts_4Ever@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          5
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          There is strategy and there is retaliation. Shockingly, retaliation usually results in a prolonged war and long term rebellion.

          But if your goal is to hurt them for hurting you?

          As for recent wars where soldiers commit horrific crimes against civillian populaces. Off the top of my head:

          1. EVERY army in WW2. Japan took it down to a science but The Allies and the rest of The Axis were no saints
          2. Vietnam with US soldiers commiting horrific atrocities against the Vietnamese people
          3. Pretty much every civil war in Africa
          4. The Yugoslav Wars
          5. Russia’s actions in Ukraine (every time they invade)

          It is mostly that the US shockingly went hard on stopping troops from those kinds of massacres during the various invasions of the Middle East. That isn’t to say we didn’t find OTHER horrible shit to do but…

          As for logistics and resupplies: Gaza is literally within Israel’s borders. Supply chains won’t be an issue.

          • @lanolinoil@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            19 months ago

            I don’t think you can call My Lai ‘sanctioned’ or official even though it was done by a commissioned officer who was court martialed (but got off). Even then they gave the heli pilot that landed between US troops and a group of civilians about to get murdered a silver star – https://www.britannica.com/event/My-Lai-Massacre

            Japan wwII definitely tactical and sanctioned but that one is weird because all of the military operated so independently.

            I don’t know enough about your other examples. It makes sense though and I like the word you use ‘retaliation’

            A good modern war planner isn’t going to waste energy on retaliation but when you get onto the ground and have a bunch of killers that don’t think of the enemy as all the way human (so you can convince them to do so much killing) retaliation would come up often. Also if you have some crazy strong man dictator, he may need retaliation to keep the image or drive his paranoia.