The article accuses Israel of potentially committing war crimes in its conflict with Hamas, focusing on a siege on Gaza, airstrikes harming civilians, and evacuation orders. It criticizes the U.S. for not condemning Israel’s actions and emphasizes the need for diplomatic solutions. The piece argues that Israel’s approach could backfire politically and suggests that there’s no military solution to the conflict. It calls for the U.S. to exercise influence to deter such actions, asserting it’s in the interests of both the U.S. and Israel to prevent further civilian casualties and maintain regional stability.
I don’t recall Ukraine targeting civilians, even though it’s clear they could cause horrific civilian casualties in Russia if they wanted to.
Israel has a lot of Palestinians prisoners who were civilians and many are children. In order to get prisoners, you need prisoners to exchange. Britney Griner wasn’t brought back from Russia using money or resources but another prisoner. Palestinians have no int’l negotiating power.
So we live in a world that has made rules that criminalize Palestinians right to defend themselves. Some take desperate action, after 50+ years of violence and apartheid, and you’re judging the reaction and not the the thing being reacted to?
I don’t understand logic like this. It leads to awful communities where violent people are propped up at the expense of their victims. No one responds well to apartheid and illegal annexation.
I mean Palestinians don’t have an army and no means to create one. The Troubles would be a better comparison. Not perfect, but better.
Neither does Russia use white phosphorus if I remember.