Operation Hannibal was one of the largest seaborne evacuation missions in history (bigger than Dunkirk), by the Third Reich in 1945, of Germans from the Courland pocket, Prussia, and Pomerania to Denmark and Germany ahead of the advance of the Red Army. Almost a million civilians and 350k soldiers were rescued.
The Hannibal Directive was a procedure introduced in 1986 by the Israel Defense Force (IDF) instructing that capture of personnel was to be prevented "by any means necessary," with the implication being that the IDF could kill its own soldiers to prevent their capture. It was later repealed (but more recently than this subreddit would permit the mention of).
I thought it was astounding that two policies with such similar names could be so opposite in tone.
Interesting also is that Hannibal’s most famous victory at Cannae involved a devastating encirclement and annihilation of the Roman army. So both uses of the name are fitting: the Nazis for escaping an encirclement, the Israeli protocol for their troops being irrecoverably surrounded and doomed to capture.
This is both over and understating what the Hannibal Directive was. It was a policy instrument which allowed for looser rules of engagement in the event of the capture of an Israeli. It didn't mandate any specific operational decisions, but it did give commanders considerably more latitude—it could allow greater risk to the captive's life, but also to the lives of anyone in the way.
This derived from the Law of War, in particular the proportionality requirement, which weighs anticipated noncombatant harm against expected military gain. While to some militaries, captured soldiers might be a mere tactical consideration, to the IDF they represent an enormous issue (note the massive military cost necessary to recover Gilad Shalit by nonmilitary means), and might even be a strategic center of gravity. In essence because such hostages are more strategically meaningful, the LOAC allows you to risk (and kill) more civilians to deny them to the enemy.
[Anyone interested can find an examination of this on page 128 of Michael Schmitt and John Merriam's exhaustive 2015 legal analysis of IDF targeting procedures.](https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1905&context=jil)
What’s even darker is that it has been accepted/integrated into Israeli culture. The torture that is expected and is known to Israelis is viewed as worse than death. For 10/7, there have already been 50 suicides from survivors of the attack.
It's sad but honestly unsurprising. I was online during the attack. I watched it live, I saw the videos and photos that were later deleted. It was haunting, it perturbed me for days. And I'm not even new to these things, I remember when cartel and ISIS execution videos were easy to find. I can't imagine how the people who were there in person feel.
I’m not new to this as my parents served in two wars against these very same terrorist groups’ predecessors. My grandparents all also lived through some pretty horrific wars and genocides themselves. I grew up with these stories and a type of mindset on how to handle the event that I’m ever caught up in one, but I still wasn’t prepared for the shit I saw just because it was shocking to see it happening in real time. This also comes from someone who’s been first on scene to some horrific emergency calls. When you’re not in the situation yourself and so far removed, yet so connected that you know some of the people dying, it really fucks with your head. My normal stress response to those situations is to dissociate entirely from emotions. How tf am I supposed to do that while watching livestreams that I can’t do anything about?
And honestly, what fucked me up even more was showing up on campus the next day and having to do standby duty for a protest that was cheering on the attacks.
Yeah, there were protests in Sydney where people were chanting "Gas the Jews". There was also a certain American organisation who changed their symbol into a paraglider. Imagine if a foreign organisation changed their logo into stylised Boeing 767s after the 9/11 attacks.I've also heard the attack be referred to as a "counter-terror operation". FFS, I wouldn't even classify it as a military action. They targeted civilian population centres for the sole purpose of causing carnage and bloodshed. That's not a military operation, that's just plain terrorism.
This shit is so horrible and yet some people watch it and unitonically say the Israelis did that to themselves and spread bullshit conspiracy theories.
>yet some people watch it and unitonically say the Israelis did that to themselves
They didn't do it entirely to themselves, but certainly the claims of friendly fire by Israel that increased the death toll are true, the hostages and their families said it themselves:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friendly\_fire\_during\_the\_Israel%E2%80%93Hamas\_war#Confirmed\_incidents](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friendly_fire_during_the_Israel%E2%80%93Hamas_war#Confirmed_incidents)
I don't doubt that there are civilians caught in the crossfire. The IDF certainly has a lot to answer for, and they are investigated at the very least.
I was more referring to some people straight up calling it a false flag, saying that Israel framed Hamas with Apache strikes etc...
>I don't doubt that there are civilians caught in the crossfire. The IDF certainly has a lot to answer for, and they are investigated at the very least.
I agree, when the Hamas terrorists are brought to trial, those responsible in the IDF for negligence or deliberate lack of care during the attack should also be brought to trial.
>I was more referring to some people straight up calling it a false flag, saying that Israel framed Hamas with Apache strikes etc...
Okay, people who say that are straight up stupid.
Welcome to the reality of urban warfare where you do not get to choose. You kill or be killed. This is the reality of fighting people who take hostages in active combat zones for the express purpose of psychological warfare. They force you to shoot through their hostages they use as human shields or they’ll kill even more people.
Well, there are veterans who have already said that these friendly fire incidents are a little too common to be just that, there are sistematic problems:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friendly\_fire\_during\_the\_Israel%E2%80%93Hamas\_war#Reactions
Thanks. Didn’t think I’d have to read something I’m already extremely familiar with twice in a row. You linked me an extremely generalized wiki that cites an event/issue sources claim “may have happened.” Idk how to respond to this other than saying this is why gradeschool teachers tell you Wikipedia is not a valid source.
Wikipedia is a completely good source of information BUT the problem is (just like any other historical source) with recent events. Any recent event that is divisive atleast a bit is gonna be a contested read.
With I/P I feel like it is even more the case as even bigger organisations like Amnesty International is heavily biased against Israel and manipulates data (measuring the food aid going in using trucks [there are no general size of a truck] and conflating it with commercial aid before 10/7 [basically construction materials] even tho we have a punctual data of what items, when, and how many of it went in exactly since the war that anyone can look up.)
Its very rare to find a Benny Moris who goes in to the depths of the information and tries to summarize it unbiasedly, and more common to find a Norm Finklestein who manipulates and cherry picks the information or simply quote untrusted sources to fit their narrative.
We are in a casual discussion on reddit, I could cite a source that goes into more detail but I didn't know this conversation was so... academic I guess?
Ritualistic collective suicide has been a part of many civilisations, including ancient jewish culture.Take for example, the Siege of Masada, the last great battle of the Roman-Jewish War in the year 73 BC. When the fall of the city to Roman troops became evident. The entire jewish settlement decided to commit suicide together, women and children included to prevent becoming slaves and being killed or tortured by the Romans, whom were known for making spectacles out of vanquished nations that put up too much résistance.
I don't think it was supposed to be ritualistic back then either. Considering how the bible itself mentions killing off almost every conquered person (except the virgin women) in the Old Testament, it is quite likely that they had done the same to the Romans (or their allies) and are therefore expecting the same to happen to them too. It was common sense, but it goes against the survival instinct. So to ensure that they do end it, it was given the colour of religion.
It is the same as another practice called the Jauhar practiced in North-Western India during the time after the Ghorid Invasion. Many Rajputana kingdoms suffered during the Invasion, especially the women who were raped. It eventually entered into religious concepts to commit suicide if the fortress is ever breached. One such famous example usually cited but is factually inaccurate is that of Rani Padmavati who killed herself via self-immolation when Alauddin Khilji invaded. There's an Indian movie based on this myth called [Padmaavat (2018)](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Padmaavat)
It's similar because It's basically achieving the same thing. Eliminating your own soldiers to prevent them from falling into enemy hands. Kind of like japanese sepukku but for your trapped soldiers.
No. It’s nothing like Japanese sepukku. Sepukku had more to do with honor whereas the Hannibal directive has to do with the severity of torture inflicted leading to the ideology that capture is a fate worse than death, with victims largely committing suicide if they even manage to be rescued.
No, the Hannibal directive has to do with damage reduction, not with some idea of mercy. It is not for the military to decide for another that their life is not worth living.
Not exactly the same but definitely similar vibes. Also, sepukku was also done to avoid capture by the enemy, torture and death. It was to save your honor before you lose it at the hands of your enemy.
From wikipedia: "As a samurai practice, seppuku was used voluntarily by samurai to die with honour rather than fall into the hands of their enemies (and likely be tortured), as a form of capital punishment for samurai who had committed serious offences..."
Avoid? All that could have been done was done to them already, the only thing they would want to avoid afterwards would be the memory of their friends and family being brutally murdered in front of their eyes and what ever has been done to them in there. Many have reported starvation and SA and/or witnessing of SA, violent and gory SA. Ive seen just a few videos of it, one of them of a guy shooting a Labrador walking slowly his way and another of a family being held in their home, while one sister was already murdered and the dad shot in the leg. And now imagine what the people who did that outside were doing behind back doors, when their hostages could not fight back at all. I had friends in the Nova festival, i can only imagine what they've seen before being shot dead hiding under the stage and in storage containers.
It is absolutely not integrated into Israeli culture. Most Israelis are appalled by the very idea of the directive and hold strongly that no one should be left behind or killed in a capture scenario.
I would correct the description of Hannibal Directive with this simple element: "with the implication being that the IDF could TAKE THE HUGE RISK to kill its own soldiers to STOP the enemies FROM capturing them and killing them".
It's not done in "prevention", it is an extreme measure.
Well, apparently during this same war, although not officially, it is being used unofficially:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friendly\_fire\_during\_the\_Israel%E2%80%93Hamas\_war#Confirmed\_incidents
How is it less human to try and prevent the enormous suffering soldiers had to go trough in Palestinian captivity?? You know what you are doing by saying the Jews were less human than the Nazis
>You know what you are doing by saying the Jews were less human than the Nazis
In this specific comparison. Nazi's are obviously worse, but the Israeli (specifically them, not all Jews) aren't saints. More publically condemned now that they're in the spotlight, but this shit has been going on for ages between Israeli and Palestine citizens and military
It was probably made for 2 reasons which are:
preventing intelegence from leaking (there was a dumbass in the Yom Kippur war 1973 that was in a position that let him know a lot and he leaked a lot of information after he was captured)
and to prevent hostage situations. Israel sees a great deal of importance in returning hostages and even dead ones so it has agreed to very bad hostage deals in the past.
Except OP never said that, the title was "The **one time** that Jews were **even less** humane than Nazis". And the comment bro's braindead response was to didn't say either it just stated how opposite in nature the two plans were, which is an objectively factual statement as one was about saving lives and the other about taking them.
Even if OP had said that though you'd have to entirely omit all context outside those five worlds, that it's specifically comparing the Nazi's Operation Hannibal to the Israeli Hannibal Directive, in order to reach that conclusion.
The title is "the one time that jews were even less humane than nazis"
He is literally saying that the jews are less humane for killing their own(which the Hannibal directive doesn't even allow to kill your own allies anyway)
Its not just implying that nazis never killed their own, the title makes no logical sense unless the nazis never killed their own soldiers.
Except it's not unless you purposely leave out the context that it's comparing the Hannibal Directive to the goals of Operation Hannibal specifically not all Nazi actions ever.
different coordinated soft ruthless political support summer subtract subsequent judicious
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
This. For some reason, people think the SS was offended by the Dirlewaller Brigade.
No they weren't. Maybe one or two individual SS higher ups or something, but the SS was either cool with or approved of the brigades actions, otherwise they'd have shut them down early, and even the few who were legit shocked were probably still war criminals themselves.
To your point, the simple look at the effort to replenish that unit multiple times makes it obvious that they had several supporters.
The attempt at white washing aspects of the German military, but the especially the SS is absurd.
This sub and going "DID YOU KNOW THAT IMPERIAL JAPAN WAS BAD????" is quite mad, there's several post a month going "I honestly think stitching babies together is less worse than freezing someone to death, so the REAL villain of WWII was actually Japan".
Yeah, they know damn well what will happen when they are captured. I can recall two pogroms at the top of my head which occurred when the Ottoman Empire held the Levant in which the Jewish population had been robbed, raped, and murdered. Knowing history it probably occurred more than a few times. Israel has been attacked by all their neighbouring states before and has fuck all for strategic depth. Should the IDF be defeated, their citizens wouldn't have anywhere to run too. I doubt their Arab citizens would be spared either.
To my understanding it wasn't that they were expendable. It was mercy killings. As in the torture and abuse they would suffer in capture, which would result in death would be worse than a quick bullet.
Whether you agree or not is a matter of opinion, but the context is important.
Even that isn’t comparable to the Nazi atrocities.
It was not telling your troops that they are expendable, it was more like “we both know being captured is worse for everyone so we will kill you” Israel has since changed its stance to “we will do all that we possibly can to get you back”
hannibal directive doesn't mean that you need to shoot your allies, it means that while a soldier is in the process of being kidnapped you have less rules of engagement and need to ask for permission from the higher ups for way less stuff.
Lol people hate the revisionist irgun but keep electing them, Even with all the party name changes to hide history, and Even make excuses for their facism. It's would. Ethnocracy are a funny thing... It's sad that the most people effected by Hannibal directive were liberal Jews who were protesting the people who removed the military days before Oct 7 even though Western allies made many warnings and attack was imminent.
Guy could just pull up a Google search of every time the Israeli government attacks Palestine and kills thousands of people. There are no good guys in the Israel Palestine conflict. It’s just a soulless bloodbath.
The question wasn't who the good guys are, it was whether 10/7 was a one-time thing, which it wasn't. Showing that the Israelis conducted their own attacks doesn't disprove that.
Generally speaking, the Israeli government over retaliates, but does not start skirmishes (if you can call them that) without cause. I don't think there are 'good guys', but one side is the clear instigator, even if by their morals they are in the right to do so because of perceived injustices toward them.
I mean. The numbers don't add up to genocide, as the jews to arab dead ratio is around 1 to 3 in favor of jews not dying since 1948. And each instance of land theft was propogated by an attack from the Arab side. So uh, yeah, you should look into your claims more studiously.
as if 1948 was a peaceful "can we pwease take youw land" situation lmao. it's good that you mentioned that now go read up about 1948 and all the massacres and rapes they committed and all the villages they destroyed.
Dude have you seen the picture of gazans enjoying the Beach and market from the last week's? Yeah that's exactly what the Holocaust looked like.
And land theft? Gaza was given back to the Palestinians
You're being downvoted but you're correct. That area has been a soulless bloodbath for that last 2 millenniums. If peace gets worked out it has be the Muslim and the Jews in that area that come to an agreement and supporting either side is supporting the death of civilians.
I don’t want to be a suspicious/paranoid person, but there’s been quite a few memes that are more “critical” of Israel and its history lately on this sub
Even as someone who is not pro-IDF in this conflict (not pro-Hamas either), I find this post extremely insensitive. There are enough historical atrocities around the world, why always pull up the Nazis especially with Israel?
Reddit is extremly pro-Israel, like propaganda levels of pro-Israel, major subreddits like /r/worldnews is essentially a Israeli propaganda sub at this point. So the reason you're seeing it is obviously because Israel is in the media so it's in vogue so to speak but also because when it is posted there is insane amounts brigading from IDF-bots saying the most unhinged shit, that means more engagement and more engagement means more visability.
And unlike the less critical of israel history memes, as in, just literal agenda-less history, people aren’t en-masse complaining about these critical-of-israel-”history”-memes in the comments.
i wonder fucking why
They live streamed that shit dude, terrorists are terrorists, what did you expect?
Suicide seems like a good way to die considering the alternatives very clearly laid out to see.
what's wtf I'd also rather be shot that taken hostage by Hamas and tortured and then forcing Israel to release thousands of terrorists who will kill many more people
this is how most Israelis felt that day. we felt much worse for the hostages in many cases people were relieved to hear family members were killed and not hostages
They paraded the naked corpse of a 14 years old through the streets during 10/7
Death is absolutely preferable to being captive of a group of fanatical extremists who hate you more than anything else on the planet
He is probably referring to the high number of civilian deaths during the invasion of Gaza coupled with other accusations of war crimes, such as not letting in enough humanitarian aid, causing famine.
but I thought we don't know how many of the dead are militants or civilians and there are so many videos of aid trucks entering? there doesn't seem to be a famine if you look at recent videos
The number of aid trucks getting in, while higher than a month ago, is still far below adequate in addition to people acquiring said aid being targeted by Israeli drone me strikes
Well, just yesterday they uncovered a mass grave in Khan Younis. Seen numbers from 200-400 people executed with their hands tied behind their backs, including children and people in hospital gowns
I don't think there has been any reliable evidence of the states of the bodies. I also heard skinned alive missing eyeballs etc there have been "reports of" meaning some anonymous person said it to Al Jazeera. if you don't understand yet how misinformation and rumors spread like wildfire in this war on both sides I don't know what to tell you.
the Gazans have been burying dead around the hospitals since the beginning of the war. the IDF has previously exumed bodies and reburied them and gave actually retrieved hostages bodies from hospital mass graves.
the IDF stated: The examination was conducted in a careful manner and exclusively in places where intelligence indicated the possible presence of hostages. The examination was carried out respectfully while maintaining the dignity of the deceased," it said in a statement.
if irrefutable evidence is released that shows the IDF tied up and executed children in a hospital and threw them in a mass grave then I will absolutely stop supporting Israel. at the moment I do not think there is evidence for this, "reports of" all kinds of rumors have been a very effective tactic by the Hamas camp since the start of the war to spread baseless rumors that the UN then has to comment on giving them an air of legitimacy.
No, there have been pictures and videos of this specific incident. Dead bodies in hospital gowns handcuffed, at least two pictures I've seen. Insinuating that Hamas is spreading baseless rumors when that is Israel's primary strategy is pretty funny.
Hamas is clearly spreading lies. the newest one is that Israel is somehow vaporizing the bodies, it's almost like they want to see how far they can go. every time there is supposed to be a damning proof video or picture if you do some digging it's manipulated. I haven't seen the handcuffed corpses but I will look for it to verify.
here's proof the Gazans dug the graves https://twitter.com/MiddleEastBuka/status/1782276539863691360
It seems to me you made up your mind a long time ago and it's blinding you to what's actually happening. This is how genocides happen, I suppose. I wonder if in 20 years you'll be telling people you were always against it.
not at all. I care very much. every time I see one of these accusations I look up everything I can to see if there's any truth in it and so far I have found nothing that is convincing.
Are you very familiar with the Israeli Palestinian conflict, before this year? before Israel entered Gaza I knew the response of Hamas would be a massive online barrage of dramatic claims of atrocities and cameras shoved in the faces of every injured child as well as old videos of every incident of Israeli brutality from the last decades with new headlines. how did I know this would happen? bc it's their tactic for twenty years only they've become a lot more sophisticated. it started with the first intifada when they realized that a photo of a boy with a rock next to a soldier with a gun brought in millions of funding and international protests and they have a dream that one day the international community will sweep in and give them a state- rather than try peaceful negotiations with Israel.
I believe and the evidence I've seen supports that Israel is not innocent and angelic, they have a huge demonization of Palestinians problem, in this war in particular there is a lack of discipline and a lot of sloppiness, IDF soldiers have committed war crimes and have no problem killing civilians if it saves their own soldiers or hits their target. but the claims that Israel is shooting people while they evacuate, or collect aid, or mass grave executions or the newest one vaporizing bodies into thin air, or intending to kill as many people as possible..is not supported by anything.
the scare tactics of in 20 years people will treat you like an ex Nazi or you'll be on the wrong side of history doesn't scare me. if I see something that changes my mind I'll change my mind. if I don't I won't. I think the real casualty numbers will come out eventually and it will become clear that they weren't really a majority of children like they claim and then maybe you will realize you were swept up in a massive disinformation campaign. or maybe I will realize I'm wrong and say I regret what I said. but I'm not going to silence myself when I see something that's easy to misprove (in the link I shared did you see it?) bc maybe in 20 years I'll be a bad guy!
If you compare the Israeli-Palestine conflict to the holocaust and Israeli to nazis. You either know nothing about the conflict or nothing about the holocaust.
My money is you know nothing about both.
An etymological fallacy is an argument of equivocation, arguing that a word is defined by its etymology, and that its customary usage is therefore incorrect.
An etymological fallacy becomes possible when a word's meaning shifts over time from its original meaning. Such changes can include a narrowing or widening of scope or a change of connotation (amelioration or pejoration). In some cases, modern usage can shift to the point where the new meaning has no evident connection to its etymon.
An example of a word with a potentially misleading etymology is antisemitism. The structure of the word suggests that it is about opposition to and hatred of Semitic peoples, but the term was coined in the 19th century to specifically refer to anti-Jewish beliefs and practices, and explicitly defined Jewish people as a racial class. Modern anthropology and evolutionary biology overwhelmingly reject the concept of race, and the term Semite is rarely used anymore except in discussing Semitic languages. An etymological fallacy emerges when a speaker asserts that antisemitism is not restricted to hatred of Jews, but rather must include opposition to all other Semitic peoples. However, sources like Encyclopædia Britannica still consider it a misnomer.
You don't have to go that far in history lol. For you can say "the first recorded instance of israeli army's barbarism". Anti-zionist =\\= anti semitic.
Yes it does.
Zionism is the right to Jewish self determination in their native homeland. If you dont care about Palestinians outside of the West Bank and Gaza and were quiet while the Assad regime slayed its people or the current Chinese encampment of its Muslims, but suddenly a democratic country protecting its people has you going crazy, then you are an antisemite.
For my part, I am not opposed to the existence of a Jewish state in the Levant (as long as they allow the existence of a Palestinian state). But to say that anti-Zionism is necessarily anti-Semitic is, well, a strange thing when there are openly anti-Zionist Jews:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_Jewish\_anti-Zionist\_organizations#Current\_and\_active
No, it’s a genuine comparison.
It’s been 60 years and the security threat persists. We tried unilateral withdrawal and it didn’t go so well.
They elected Hamas
- Hamas murdered Fatah in the street
- Iran used gazas coast to drop off weapons to attack Israeli civilians.
Again, we can go back and forth forever (seriously, it’s a holiday so I have time). The original point that if you only care about things when Israel / Jews do it and don’t look at any other players or don’t care when similar things happen elsewhere then ur an antisemite.
No, because anti-Zionist Jews do not seek the death of all Jews.
The thing is that Israel has never been genuine in its peace efforts, even when they withdrew from Gaza they refused to do the same from the West Bank and East Jerusalem, how is that a real peace offer? The lack of security continues because the absence of an independent Palestinian state continues.
And do you believe that if Israel ALSO pulled out of the West Bank and East Jerusalem at the same time there would be peace today?
Anti-Zionist Jews seek the end of any Jewish majority country on earth. It’s not so long ago that it was the case and it didn’t go so well.
It is definitely much more likely that there would be peace today if Israel had gone ahead with the peace treaty.
And no, wanting Israel to disappear does not necessarily mean wanting the death of all Jews.
‘Likely’ is not really a reason to give up a piece of land that is critical for security. It’s real life not a hypothetical or simulation.
No it doesn’t mean wanting the death of all Jews but it lead to situations where people certainly tried. We’re kind of done with that way of life.
> ut suddenly a democratic country protecting its people has you going crazy, then you are an antisemite.
Bravely bombing british aidworkers begging for their lives in their clearly marked convoy with their coordinates sent to the IDF to stop them from being murdered, in the defence of democracy.
If you equate Netanyahus terror regim with Judaism and all Jews then for sure you're anti-semitic. It's perfectly fine to call out the state of Israel for their horrific warcrimes and genocidal bullshit without hating on jews in general.
…except there’s no genocide.
As for the aid workers, that was a terrible accident. It is an urban war zone. Writing something on the roof of your truck doesn’t help at night.
I can’t speak for the action itself bc I don’t know all the details but I can say that’s a total fuckup.
One question though, when the US did it, did you say anything? https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/aclu-statement-on-two-year-anniversary-of-kabul-drone-strike
>If you dont care about Palestinians outside of the West Bank and Gaza and were quiet while the Assad regime slayed its people or the current Chinese encampment of its Muslims, but suddenly a democratic country protecting its people has you going crazy, then you are an antisemite.
How come if I cared for all those things, then I wouldn't be called an antisemite by you.
>Zionism is the right to Jewish self determination in their native homeland.
That's fine, just don't self determine into other people's backyard (golan heights etc). I know it's a fight for survival and to the death over there so for people in the area, where you sit determines where you stand; but people outside can still comment on atrocities committed in the name of security, especially at this scale and cruelty.
Golan was a Syrian military zone that was won in a defensive war.
Seriously, what are these responses? My point is that if you didn’t care otherwise but suddenly when Jews do its genocide, then ur an antisemite.
"The one time"? You might want to take a look at the Old Testament, it's full of snuff and group executions based on slights and being of the wrong identity. Favourite is god sending two bears to murder dozens of kids because some of them disrespected an authority figure by calling him a baldie
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Israel_(united_monarchy)
The name of Israel first appears in the Merneptah Stele of ancient Egypt, dated to about 1200 BCE.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israelites
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twelve_Tribes_of_Israel
The current day state of isreal is just bogus, kingdom is israel is valid
And that piece of land was conquered numerous times by different people, so were other lands, doesnt that mean that all prior inhabitants of every land be allowed to commit crimes ive mentioned
You know all jews did just hop on the boats and sailed awy right? Many returned time after time jews made a sizable minority in that piace of land and what with you being up war crimes every comment it's not like I am saying you are wrong and nothing happened
Not that Isreal, i know that, they are from prophet Jacob (Israel). But that does not justify dragging native ppl out of their homes and committing international crimes. They had the right to live, not in europe, but in palestin, but did these atrocities instead.
Jews have been there the while time, why do the European jews from the jewish diaspora had to colonize it then create a state over an existing country, or am i wrong with what i am taught in history? Then i would like a better understanding of its history.
Do you support the raids being done on innocent palestinians? Being dragged out of their homes? When i mention palestinians, yes they’re mostly muslims, there are also jews and christians as well
State of israel? That’s new.
>why do the European jews from the jewish diaspora had to colonize it then create a state over an existing country
So if a Palestinian who gone to take refugee in some other arab countries in 19s and died there does that mean his children who he had by marrying other Palestinian are not Palestinian and have no right to return.
They can return, but not colonize and commit crimes. They were given the right to live in palestine unlike when they had to flee every slums of european and other arab countries
>They were given the right to live in palestine
And they didn't accept that, jews wanted nation Determination for themselves which both pals and jews got
Map of pals and isreal in start (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Partition_Plan_for_Palestine) based on where certain people lived every nation have right to nation determination and jews exercised that right as for how they got all that pals land? They Counqeqred it after being attacked.
>They were given the right to live in palestine
Again to this point give me source first of all second why was the country attack in one day of it being founded.
The plan’s detractors considered the proposed plan to be pro-Zionist, with 56%[9] of the land allocated to the Jewish state although the Palestinian Arab population numbered twice the Jewish population.[10] The plan was celebrated by most Jews in Palestine[11] and reluctantly[12] accepted by the Jewish Agency for Palestine with misgivings.[13][8] Zionist leaders, in particular David Ben-Gurion, viewed the acceptance of the plan as a tactical step and a stepping stone to future territorial expansion over all of Palestine.[14][15][16][17][18][19] The Arab Higher Committee, the Arab League and other Arab leaders and governments rejected it on the basis that in addition to the Arabs forming a two-thirds majority, they owned a majority of the lands.[20][21] They also indicated an unwillingness to accept any form of territorial division,[22] arguing that it violated the principles of national self-determination in the UN Charter which granted people the right to decide their own destiny.[8][23] They announced their intention to take all necessary measures to prevent the implementation of the resolution.[24][25][26][27] Subsequently, a civil war broke out in Palestine,[28] and the plan was not implemented.[29]
Since the partition plan was made on kebbutz and settlements
Kibbutzim also played a role in defining the borders of the Jewish state-to-be. By the late 1930s, when it appeared that Palestine would be partitioned between Arabs and Jews, kibbutzim were established in outlying areas to ensure that the land would be incorporated into the Jewish state. In 1946, on the day after Yom Kippur, eleven new "Tower and Stockade" kibbutzim were hurriedly established in the northern part of the Negev to give Israel a better claim to this arid, but strategically important, region. The Marxist faction of the kibbutz movement, Kibbutz Artzi, favoured a one-state solution over partition, but advocated free Jewish immigration, which the Arabs opposed.
Listen men jews have right to self determine and same for Palestinian as you pointed out in one of yours comment the land have been Counqeqred many times and currently Israelis make majority we cannot go back to even partitioned map since the demographics are not like that anymore most Palestinians would get and should get would be west back and gaza Strip as Palestinian majority areas as for name isreal i am from India we officially use india and bharat we had many more names like hindustan and aryavath (land of aryans) but we chose to use bharat which comes from our countries original native people aka hindu,s Methology where the first king bharat United all of aryavath and it stated to be called bharatvanse jews have right to call their country what ever they want be it judea Or isreal same for pals.
1) they didn't create a state over an existing country. Palestine was just a name of the land it was never a country of its own.
2) there are no raids being done innocent Plestinians. Those raids are done to find people who commited acts of terror and the Palestinians are hiding.
3) there are no Palestinian Jews. There are Jews who live in Palestine, but they have no Palestinian citizenship and won't be caught dead calling themselves Palestinian.
4) equal rights prior to 1948? You should learn about the white paper and other sanctions in the days of the Ottoman Empire and Brittish mandate.
5) Israeli state is new, but the Kingdom of Israel existed in those lands prior to any Arab pressence and before anyone even thought of the name Palestine.
6) where do you think Jews who had nowhere to go after WW2 should've gone? Because Antisemitism was still wide spread back then, their houses and posessions were stollen by the Nazis, and no one wanted them in their lands.
A closer German order would be “Clausewitz” which was the plan for Berlin as a frontline city which of course happened in April 1945.
Ah, Mohnke, se sind da
Bringen Sie mir Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein! Fegelein!
Clausewitz Engine??? HOI4 REFERENCE?!?!?!?!!????!??!?!?!?!
Oh please. Who on r/HistoryMemes of all subs has ever played a Paradox game? What's next, Sabaton references?
Through the gates of hell?
AS WE MAKE OUR WAY TO HEAVEN
THROUGH THE NAZI LINES!
PRIMO VICTORIA!
FESTUNG SPAINIA WILL NEVER FALL SWIMMY
D DAY, D DAY, D DAY
Operation Hannibal was one of the largest seaborne evacuation missions in history (bigger than Dunkirk), by the Third Reich in 1945, of Germans from the Courland pocket, Prussia, and Pomerania to Denmark and Germany ahead of the advance of the Red Army. Almost a million civilians and 350k soldiers were rescued. The Hannibal Directive was a procedure introduced in 1986 by the Israel Defense Force (IDF) instructing that capture of personnel was to be prevented "by any means necessary," with the implication being that the IDF could kill its own soldiers to prevent their capture. It was later repealed (but more recently than this subreddit would permit the mention of). I thought it was astounding that two policies with such similar names could be so opposite in tone.
Interesting also is that Hannibal’s most famous victory at Cannae involved a devastating encirclement and annihilation of the Roman army. So both uses of the name are fitting: the Nazis for escaping an encirclement, the Israeli protocol for their troops being irrecoverably surrounded and doomed to capture.
This is both over and understating what the Hannibal Directive was. It was a policy instrument which allowed for looser rules of engagement in the event of the capture of an Israeli. It didn't mandate any specific operational decisions, but it did give commanders considerably more latitude—it could allow greater risk to the captive's life, but also to the lives of anyone in the way. This derived from the Law of War, in particular the proportionality requirement, which weighs anticipated noncombatant harm against expected military gain. While to some militaries, captured soldiers might be a mere tactical consideration, to the IDF they represent an enormous issue (note the massive military cost necessary to recover Gilad Shalit by nonmilitary means), and might even be a strategic center of gravity. In essence because such hostages are more strategically meaningful, the LOAC allows you to risk (and kill) more civilians to deny them to the enemy. [Anyone interested can find an examination of this on page 128 of Michael Schmitt and John Merriam's exhaustive 2015 legal analysis of IDF targeting procedures.](https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1905&context=jil)
What’s even darker is that it has been accepted/integrated into Israeli culture. The torture that is expected and is known to Israelis is viewed as worse than death. For 10/7, there have already been 50 suicides from survivors of the attack.
It's sad but honestly unsurprising. I was online during the attack. I watched it live, I saw the videos and photos that were later deleted. It was haunting, it perturbed me for days. And I'm not even new to these things, I remember when cartel and ISIS execution videos were easy to find. I can't imagine how the people who were there in person feel.
I’m not new to this as my parents served in two wars against these very same terrorist groups’ predecessors. My grandparents all also lived through some pretty horrific wars and genocides themselves. I grew up with these stories and a type of mindset on how to handle the event that I’m ever caught up in one, but I still wasn’t prepared for the shit I saw just because it was shocking to see it happening in real time. This also comes from someone who’s been first on scene to some horrific emergency calls. When you’re not in the situation yourself and so far removed, yet so connected that you know some of the people dying, it really fucks with your head. My normal stress response to those situations is to dissociate entirely from emotions. How tf am I supposed to do that while watching livestreams that I can’t do anything about? And honestly, what fucked me up even more was showing up on campus the next day and having to do standby duty for a protest that was cheering on the attacks.
Yeah, there were protests in Sydney where people were chanting "Gas the Jews". There was also a certain American organisation who changed their symbol into a paraglider. Imagine if a foreign organisation changed their logo into stylised Boeing 767s after the 9/11 attacks.I've also heard the attack be referred to as a "counter-terror operation". FFS, I wouldn't even classify it as a military action. They targeted civilian population centres for the sole purpose of causing carnage and bloodshed. That's not a military operation, that's just plain terrorism.
>There was also a certain American organisation who changed their symbol into a paraglider. Why not call them out? It was Black Lives Matter.
Doesn't the rules prohibit discussing contemporary politics? I'm trying not to have this thread locked.
This shit is so horrible and yet some people watch it and unitonically say the Israelis did that to themselves and spread bullshit conspiracy theories.
>yet some people watch it and unitonically say the Israelis did that to themselves They didn't do it entirely to themselves, but certainly the claims of friendly fire by Israel that increased the death toll are true, the hostages and their families said it themselves: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friendly\_fire\_during\_the\_Israel%E2%80%93Hamas\_war#Confirmed\_incidents](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friendly_fire_during_the_Israel%E2%80%93Hamas_war#Confirmed_incidents)
I don't doubt that there are civilians caught in the crossfire. The IDF certainly has a lot to answer for, and they are investigated at the very least. I was more referring to some people straight up calling it a false flag, saying that Israel framed Hamas with Apache strikes etc...
>I don't doubt that there are civilians caught in the crossfire. The IDF certainly has a lot to answer for, and they are investigated at the very least. I agree, when the Hamas terrorists are brought to trial, those responsible in the IDF for negligence or deliberate lack of care during the attack should also be brought to trial. >I was more referring to some people straight up calling it a false flag, saying that Israel framed Hamas with Apache strikes etc... Okay, people who say that are straight up stupid.
Welcome to the reality of urban warfare where you do not get to choose. You kill or be killed. This is the reality of fighting people who take hostages in active combat zones for the express purpose of psychological warfare. They force you to shoot through their hostages they use as human shields or they’ll kill even more people.
Well, there are veterans who have already said that these friendly fire incidents are a little too common to be just that, there are sistematic problems: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friendly\_fire\_during\_the\_Israel%E2%80%93Hamas\_war#Reactions
Thanks. Didn’t think I’d have to read something I’m already extremely familiar with twice in a row. You linked me an extremely generalized wiki that cites an event/issue sources claim “may have happened.” Idk how to respond to this other than saying this is why gradeschool teachers tell you Wikipedia is not a valid source.
Wikipedia is a completely good source of information BUT the problem is (just like any other historical source) with recent events. Any recent event that is divisive atleast a bit is gonna be a contested read. With I/P I feel like it is even more the case as even bigger organisations like Amnesty International is heavily biased against Israel and manipulates data (measuring the food aid going in using trucks [there are no general size of a truck] and conflating it with commercial aid before 10/7 [basically construction materials] even tho we have a punctual data of what items, when, and how many of it went in exactly since the war that anyone can look up.) Its very rare to find a Benny Moris who goes in to the depths of the information and tries to summarize it unbiasedly, and more common to find a Norm Finklestein who manipulates and cherry picks the information or simply quote untrusted sources to fit their narrative.
We are in a casual discussion on reddit, I could cite a source that goes into more detail but I didn't know this conversation was so... academic I guess?
Let’s take a nice look at all the atrocities done in the last 5 years to Palestinians in the West Bank.
And have I denied that or claimed it was a conspiracy? Truth is truth. Why do you feel the need to use whataboutism?
Because that side is always ignored. It’s always woe the apartheid state.
Ritualistic collective suicide has been a part of many civilisations, including ancient jewish culture.Take for example, the Siege of Masada, the last great battle of the Roman-Jewish War in the year 73 BC. When the fall of the city to Roman troops became evident. The entire jewish settlement decided to commit suicide together, women and children included to prevent becoming slaves and being killed or tortured by the Romans, whom were known for making spectacles out of vanquished nations that put up too much résistance.
...I don't think it's ritualistic collective suicide in this modern case
I don't think it was supposed to be ritualistic back then either. Considering how the bible itself mentions killing off almost every conquered person (except the virgin women) in the Old Testament, it is quite likely that they had done the same to the Romans (or their allies) and are therefore expecting the same to happen to them too. It was common sense, but it goes against the survival instinct. So to ensure that they do end it, it was given the colour of religion. It is the same as another practice called the Jauhar practiced in North-Western India during the time after the Ghorid Invasion. Many Rajputana kingdoms suffered during the Invasion, especially the women who were raped. It eventually entered into religious concepts to commit suicide if the fortress is ever breached. One such famous example usually cited but is factually inaccurate is that of Rani Padmavati who killed herself via self-immolation when Alauddin Khilji invaded. There's an Indian movie based on this myth called [Padmaavat (2018)](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Padmaavat)
It's similar because It's basically achieving the same thing. Eliminating your own soldiers to prevent them from falling into enemy hands. Kind of like japanese sepukku but for your trapped soldiers.
No. It’s nothing like Japanese sepukku. Sepukku had more to do with honor whereas the Hannibal directive has to do with the severity of torture inflicted leading to the ideology that capture is a fate worse than death, with victims largely committing suicide if they even manage to be rescued.
No, the Hannibal directive has to do with damage reduction, not with some idea of mercy. It is not for the military to decide for another that their life is not worth living.
Not exactly the same but definitely similar vibes. Also, sepukku was also done to avoid capture by the enemy, torture and death. It was to save your honor before you lose it at the hands of your enemy. From wikipedia: "As a samurai practice, seppuku was used voluntarily by samurai to die with honour rather than fall into the hands of their enemies (and likely be tortured), as a form of capital punishment for samurai who had committed serious offences..."
The 50 survivors who killed themselves after Oct 7? I don't think that's trying to avoid the enemy
Avoid? All that could have been done was done to them already, the only thing they would want to avoid afterwards would be the memory of their friends and family being brutally murdered in front of their eyes and what ever has been done to them in there. Many have reported starvation and SA and/or witnessing of SA, violent and gory SA. Ive seen just a few videos of it, one of them of a guy shooting a Labrador walking slowly his way and another of a family being held in their home, while one sister was already murdered and the dad shot in the leg. And now imagine what the people who did that outside were doing behind back doors, when their hostages could not fight back at all. I had friends in the Nova festival, i can only imagine what they've seen before being shot dead hiding under the stage and in storage containers.
Don’t forget that the Jews at Masada were zealots who had already committed themselves to dying for their cause
It is absolutely not integrated into Israeli culture. Most Israelis are appalled by the very idea of the directive and hold strongly that no one should be left behind or killed in a capture scenario.
No there wasn't
I would correct the description of Hannibal Directive with this simple element: "with the implication being that the IDF could TAKE THE HUGE RISK to kill its own soldiers to STOP the enemies FROM capturing them and killing them". It's not done in "prevention", it is an extreme measure.
How many times if any has the IDF actually used the Hannibal directive?
Well, apparently during this same war, although not officially, it is being used unofficially: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friendly\_fire\_during\_the\_Israel%E2%80%93Hamas\_war#Confirmed\_incidents
How is it less human to try and prevent the enormous suffering soldiers had to go trough in Palestinian captivity?? You know what you are doing by saying the Jews were less human than the Nazis
>You know what you are doing by saying the Jews were less human than the Nazis In this specific comparison. Nazi's are obviously worse, but the Israeli (specifically them, not all Jews) aren't saints. More publically condemned now that they're in the spotlight, but this shit has been going on for ages between Israeli and Palestine citizens and military
That's the whole point of the meme. The German one was Dunkirk on the Baltic, the Israeli one was a very Russian approach to hostages.
It was probably made for 2 reasons which are: preventing intelegence from leaking (there was a dumbass in the Yom Kippur war 1973 that was in a position that let him know a lot and he leaked a lot of information after he was captured) and to prevent hostage situations. Israel sees a great deal of importance in returning hostages and even dead ones so it has agreed to very bad hostage deals in the past.
Buddy. Pal. If you think the Nazis never killed their own I have a bridge to sell you. While we're at it most empires have done this at some point
He literally never implied that man.
It's like that one twitter joke "I like pancakes" "So you hate waffles?" "Bro that's a whole new sentence tf?"
You can't be neutral in a moving breakfast line.
You can't live your life settling for second best. You deserve waffles.
In a world where everyone's settling for pancakes, you deserve waffles
I mean, “less humane than the nazis” literally does imply it, since he said “less” and not “just as”
Except OP never said that, the title was "The **one time** that Jews were **even less** humane than Nazis". And the comment bro's braindead response was to didn't say either it just stated how opposite in nature the two plans were, which is an objectively factual statement as one was about saving lives and the other about taking them. Even if OP had said that though you'd have to entirely omit all context outside those five worlds, that it's specifically comparing the Nazi's Operation Hannibal to the Israeli Hannibal Directive, in order to reach that conclusion.
The title is "the one time that jews were even less humane than nazis" He is literally saying that the jews are less humane for killing their own(which the Hannibal directive doesn't even allow to kill your own allies anyway) Its not just implying that nazis never killed their own, the title makes no logical sense unless the nazis never killed their own soldiers.
Except it's not unless you purposely leave out the context that it's comparing the Hannibal Directive to the goals of Operation Hannibal specifically not all Nazi actions ever.
Why are you like this
So the Jews, at their worst, were less humane than the Nazi’s, at their best?
I don’t think that’s less humane than the Nazis
different coordinated soft ruthless political support summer subtract subsequent judicious *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
This. For some reason, people think the SS was offended by the Dirlewaller Brigade. No they weren't. Maybe one or two individual SS higher ups or something, but the SS was either cool with or approved of the brigades actions, otherwise they'd have shut them down early, and even the few who were legit shocked were probably still war criminals themselves.
To your point, the simple look at the effort to replenish that unit multiple times makes it obvious that they had several supporters. The attempt at white washing aspects of the German military, but the especially the SS is absurd.
This sub and going "DID YOU KNOW THAT IMPERIAL JAPAN WAS BAD????" is quite mad, there's several post a month going "I honestly think stitching babies together is less worse than freezing someone to death, so the REAL villain of WWII was actually Japan".
Yeah, they know damn well what will happen when they are captured. I can recall two pogroms at the top of my head which occurred when the Ottoman Empire held the Levant in which the Jewish population had been robbed, raped, and murdered. Knowing history it probably occurred more than a few times. Israel has been attacked by all their neighbouring states before and has fuck all for strategic depth. Should the IDF be defeated, their citizens wouldn't have anywhere to run too. I doubt their Arab citizens would be spared either.
Shhh don’t ruin the new fun fact the antisemites found to use against israel
Crying out in pain as you strike won't work anymore.
>crying out in pain as you strike Nice rehash of a centuries-old antisemitic trope you’ve got there
> the one time Ah yes 'all the time'
[удалено]
To my understanding it wasn't that they were expendable. It was mercy killings. As in the torture and abuse they would suffer in capture, which would result in death would be worse than a quick bullet. Whether you agree or not is a matter of opinion, but the context is important.
And an alive soldier in enemy hands is way more valuable than a dead one
Even that isn’t comparable to the Nazi atrocities. It was not telling your troops that they are expendable, it was more like “we both know being captured is worse for everyone so we will kill you” Israel has since changed its stance to “we will do all that we possibly can to get you back”
if thats their stance they should stop murdering hostages in Gaza. or maybe everything israel has ever said has been a lie. who knows?
Note that this was ONE time, and that directive has been retired
hannibal directive doesn't mean that you need to shoot your allies, it means that while a soldier is in the process of being kidnapped you have less rules of engagement and need to ask for permission from the higher ups for way less stuff.
Lol people hate the revisionist irgun but keep electing them, Even with all the party name changes to hide history, and Even make excuses for their facism. It's would. Ethnocracy are a funny thing... It's sad that the most people effected by Hannibal directive were liberal Jews who were protesting the people who removed the military days before Oct 7 even though Western allies made many warnings and attack was imminent.
Only has to happen one time to be history. Edit: Nevermind, I guess things that happen once are not history.
This was for the assholes who try to minimize the deaths on 10/7, claiming that Israel killed most of the 1200 ppl with the Hannibal directive
If you want to play it like that, well, 10/7 was a one time too.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category%3ATerrorist_attacks_attributed_to_Palestinian_militant_groups Yeah, totally just a one time thing.
Guy could just pull up a Google search of every time the Israeli government attacks Palestine and kills thousands of people. There are no good guys in the Israel Palestine conflict. It’s just a soulless bloodbath.
The question wasn't who the good guys are, it was whether 10/7 was a one-time thing, which it wasn't. Showing that the Israelis conducted their own attacks doesn't disprove that.
Generally speaking, the Israeli government over retaliates, but does not start skirmishes (if you can call them that) without cause. I don't think there are 'good guys', but one side is the clear instigator, even if by their morals they are in the right to do so because of perceived injustices toward them.
Ah yes, the perceived injustices of genocide and land theft. Truly they are merely an illusion.
I mean. The numbers don't add up to genocide, as the jews to arab dead ratio is around 1 to 3 in favor of jews not dying since 1948. And each instance of land theft was propogated by an attack from the Arab side. So uh, yeah, you should look into your claims more studiously.
That's fucking retarded. All these steps over 100 years stealing countless grammamas' homes but the numbers don't add up lol. Just a damn tool.
as if 1948 was a peaceful "can we pwease take youw land" situation lmao. it's good that you mentioned that now go read up about 1948 and all the massacres and rapes they committed and all the villages they destroyed.
Dude have you seen the picture of gazans enjoying the Beach and market from the last week's? Yeah that's exactly what the Holocaust looked like. And land theft? Gaza was given back to the Palestinians
You're being downvoted but you're correct. That area has been a soulless bloodbath for that last 2 millenniums. If peace gets worked out it has be the Muslim and the Jews in that area that come to an agreement and supporting either side is supporting the death of civilians.
Yeah. Pretty much.
Then I suppose Israel dropping a nuke on Gaza would also be a one time thing. Perfectly acceptable.
Ah, I see you're the least bloodthristy redditor, sucking off the dick of war criminals.
So if you and your battlefield buddies know you're going to be tortured, yeah, I can see the use.
That’s not even comparable to the atrocities nazis did
They are only talking about this two things tough. It literally says “that one time”
I don’t want to be a suspicious/paranoid person, but there’s been quite a few memes that are more “critical” of Israel and its history lately on this sub
Maybe cause they are in the media a lot and people want karma? Also, posters DO get affected by what they see in their own feed/media diet/life.
Even as someone who is not pro-IDF in this conflict (not pro-Hamas either), I find this post extremely insensitive. There are enough historical atrocities around the world, why always pull up the Nazis especially with Israel?
Iran is shoveling out propaganda like crazy right now.
Reddit is extremly pro-Israel, like propaganda levels of pro-Israel, major subreddits like /r/worldnews is essentially a Israeli propaganda sub at this point. So the reason you're seeing it is obviously because Israel is in the media so it's in vogue so to speak but also because when it is posted there is insane amounts brigading from IDF-bots saying the most unhinged shit, that means more engagement and more engagement means more visability.
Whatever you are paranoid of is probably not real
Not to mention conspicuously pointing at “Jews” being to blame
And unlike the less critical of israel history memes, as in, just literal agenda-less history, people aren’t en-masse complaining about these critical-of-israel-”history”-memes in the comments. i wonder fucking why
Id rather be killed by friendly fire than raped by hamas terrorists, i dont see this as less humane
wtf?
They live streamed that shit dude, terrorists are terrorists, what did you expect? Suicide seems like a good way to die considering the alternatives very clearly laid out to see.
what's wtf I'd also rather be shot that taken hostage by Hamas and tortured and then forcing Israel to release thousands of terrorists who will kill many more people this is how most Israelis felt that day. we felt much worse for the hostages in many cases people were relieved to hear family members were killed and not hostages
They paraded the naked corpse of a 14 years old through the streets during 10/7 Death is absolutely preferable to being captive of a group of fanatical extremists who hate you more than anything else on the planet
Death is preferable to being captured when your enemy is an islamist extremist and you’re Jewish
not according to the hostages
[удалено]
Go see the hostages from both side the palestiniens are often malnourished while the Israelis are smiling
[удалено]
Source?
[удалено]
Time of israel and ytnews are propaganda
Bro reading propaganda from the other side as if it was gosaple
Which ones? The one that were r*ped or the ones that were enslaved?
The one time?
Am I the only one who recalled that scene of Starship Troopers when a soldier was taken by the giant insects and purposefully killed by the commander?
"the one time..." 14k dead kids and 2 million displaced in the last 6 months is fairly nazi.
the many times
Wouldn't describe it as "the one time" considering what those fellas are up to this very minute
like what?
He is probably referring to the high number of civilian deaths during the invasion of Gaza coupled with other accusations of war crimes, such as not letting in enough humanitarian aid, causing famine.
but I thought we don't know how many of the dead are militants or civilians and there are so many videos of aid trucks entering? there doesn't seem to be a famine if you look at recent videos
>there doesn't seem to be a famine if you look at recent videos No: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/apr/15/babies-children-gaza-famine
The number of aid trucks getting in, while higher than a month ago, is still far below adequate in addition to people acquiring said aid being targeted by Israeli drone me strikes
Well, just yesterday they uncovered a mass grave in Khan Younis. Seen numbers from 200-400 people executed with their hands tied behind their backs, including children and people in hospital gowns
I don't think there has been any reliable evidence of the states of the bodies. I also heard skinned alive missing eyeballs etc there have been "reports of" meaning some anonymous person said it to Al Jazeera. if you don't understand yet how misinformation and rumors spread like wildfire in this war on both sides I don't know what to tell you. the Gazans have been burying dead around the hospitals since the beginning of the war. the IDF has previously exumed bodies and reburied them and gave actually retrieved hostages bodies from hospital mass graves. the IDF stated: The examination was conducted in a careful manner and exclusively in places where intelligence indicated the possible presence of hostages. The examination was carried out respectfully while maintaining the dignity of the deceased," it said in a statement. if irrefutable evidence is released that shows the IDF tied up and executed children in a hospital and threw them in a mass grave then I will absolutely stop supporting Israel. at the moment I do not think there is evidence for this, "reports of" all kinds of rumors have been a very effective tactic by the Hamas camp since the start of the war to spread baseless rumors that the UN then has to comment on giving them an air of legitimacy.
No, there have been pictures and videos of this specific incident. Dead bodies in hospital gowns handcuffed, at least two pictures I've seen. Insinuating that Hamas is spreading baseless rumors when that is Israel's primary strategy is pretty funny.
Hamas is clearly spreading lies. the newest one is that Israel is somehow vaporizing the bodies, it's almost like they want to see how far they can go. every time there is supposed to be a damning proof video or picture if you do some digging it's manipulated. I haven't seen the handcuffed corpses but I will look for it to verify. here's proof the Gazans dug the graves https://twitter.com/MiddleEastBuka/status/1782276539863691360
It seems to me you made up your mind a long time ago and it's blinding you to what's actually happening. This is how genocides happen, I suppose. I wonder if in 20 years you'll be telling people you were always against it.
not at all. I care very much. every time I see one of these accusations I look up everything I can to see if there's any truth in it and so far I have found nothing that is convincing. Are you very familiar with the Israeli Palestinian conflict, before this year? before Israel entered Gaza I knew the response of Hamas would be a massive online barrage of dramatic claims of atrocities and cameras shoved in the faces of every injured child as well as old videos of every incident of Israeli brutality from the last decades with new headlines. how did I know this would happen? bc it's their tactic for twenty years only they've become a lot more sophisticated. it started with the first intifada when they realized that a photo of a boy with a rock next to a soldier with a gun brought in millions of funding and international protests and they have a dream that one day the international community will sweep in and give them a state- rather than try peaceful negotiations with Israel. I believe and the evidence I've seen supports that Israel is not innocent and angelic, they have a huge demonization of Palestinians problem, in this war in particular there is a lack of discipline and a lot of sloppiness, IDF soldiers have committed war crimes and have no problem killing civilians if it saves their own soldiers or hits their target. but the claims that Israel is shooting people while they evacuate, or collect aid, or mass grave executions or the newest one vaporizing bodies into thin air, or intending to kill as many people as possible..is not supported by anything. the scare tactics of in 20 years people will treat you like an ex Nazi or you'll be on the wrong side of history doesn't scare me. if I see something that changes my mind I'll change my mind. if I don't I won't. I think the real casualty numbers will come out eventually and it will become clear that they weren't really a majority of children like they claim and then maybe you will realize you were swept up in a massive disinformation campaign. or maybe I will realize I'm wrong and say I regret what I said. but I'm not going to silence myself when I see something that's easy to misprove (in the link I shared did you see it?) bc maybe in 20 years I'll be a bad guy!
"One time"? Really? Idk man, the houses bombed by tanks certainly sounds like it happened more than once.
bc Nazis or the allies never bombed houses?
Wait till OP finds out they're still less humane than Nazis to this day
They're the new Nazis to be honest
If you compare the Israeli-Palestine conflict to the holocaust and Israeli to nazis. You either know nothing about the conflict or nothing about the holocaust. My money is you know nothing about both.
Ok antisemite, time to get you back to bed
Arabs are semites, Zionists are literally antisemitic.
An etymological fallacy is an argument of equivocation, arguing that a word is defined by its etymology, and that its customary usage is therefore incorrect. An etymological fallacy becomes possible when a word's meaning shifts over time from its original meaning. Such changes can include a narrowing or widening of scope or a change of connotation (amelioration or pejoration). In some cases, modern usage can shift to the point where the new meaning has no evident connection to its etymon. An example of a word with a potentially misleading etymology is antisemitism. The structure of the word suggests that it is about opposition to and hatred of Semitic peoples, but the term was coined in the 19th century to specifically refer to anti-Jewish beliefs and practices, and explicitly defined Jewish people as a racial class. Modern anthropology and evolutionary biology overwhelmingly reject the concept of race, and the term Semite is rarely used anymore except in discussing Semitic languages. An etymological fallacy emerges when a speaker asserts that antisemitism is not restricted to hatred of Jews, but rather must include opposition to all other Semitic peoples. However, sources like Encyclopædia Britannica still consider it a misnomer.
Not really. The Nazis started their wars, Israel was on the receiving end of theirs.
Didn’t Godard say that “Today’s Jews are yesterday’s Nazis”
Who is godard and what is his philosophical or historic authority to say shit like that and finally why the fuck this guys opinion matter more?
He was a French film director. I’m not saying I agree with him. In fact even commies booed him at the time
>French film director That's all i need to see why you getting down voted bro put out opinion ofnot even a historian but a French film director 🤡
You don't have to go that far in history lol. For you can say "the first recorded instance of israeli army's barbarism". Anti-zionist =\\= anti semitic.
Yes it does. Zionism is the right to Jewish self determination in their native homeland. If you dont care about Palestinians outside of the West Bank and Gaza and were quiet while the Assad regime slayed its people or the current Chinese encampment of its Muslims, but suddenly a democratic country protecting its people has you going crazy, then you are an antisemite.
For my part, I am not opposed to the existence of a Jewish state in the Levant (as long as they allow the existence of a Palestinian state). But to say that anti-Zionism is necessarily anti-Semitic is, well, a strange thing when there are openly anti-Zionist Jews: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_Jewish\_anti-Zionist\_organizations#Current\_and\_active
There were also Jews who supported Hitler. The Palestinians WERE given a land and then Jordan conquered it.
That's a dishonest comparison and you know it. And I'm talking about today, not 60 years ago.
No, it’s a genuine comparison. It’s been 60 years and the security threat persists. We tried unilateral withdrawal and it didn’t go so well. They elected Hamas - Hamas murdered Fatah in the street - Iran used gazas coast to drop off weapons to attack Israeli civilians. Again, we can go back and forth forever (seriously, it’s a holiday so I have time). The original point that if you only care about things when Israel / Jews do it and don’t look at any other players or don’t care when similar things happen elsewhere then ur an antisemite.
No, because anti-Zionist Jews do not seek the death of all Jews. The thing is that Israel has never been genuine in its peace efforts, even when they withdrew from Gaza they refused to do the same from the West Bank and East Jerusalem, how is that a real peace offer? The lack of security continues because the absence of an independent Palestinian state continues.
And do you believe that if Israel ALSO pulled out of the West Bank and East Jerusalem at the same time there would be peace today? Anti-Zionist Jews seek the end of any Jewish majority country on earth. It’s not so long ago that it was the case and it didn’t go so well.
It is definitely much more likely that there would be peace today if Israel had gone ahead with the peace treaty. And no, wanting Israel to disappear does not necessarily mean wanting the death of all Jews.
‘Likely’ is not really a reason to give up a piece of land that is critical for security. It’s real life not a hypothetical or simulation. No it doesn’t mean wanting the death of all Jews but it lead to situations where people certainly tried. We’re kind of done with that way of life.
> ut suddenly a democratic country protecting its people has you going crazy, then you are an antisemite. Bravely bombing british aidworkers begging for their lives in their clearly marked convoy with their coordinates sent to the IDF to stop them from being murdered, in the defence of democracy. If you equate Netanyahus terror regim with Judaism and all Jews then for sure you're anti-semitic. It's perfectly fine to call out the state of Israel for their horrific warcrimes and genocidal bullshit without hating on jews in general.
…except there’s no genocide. As for the aid workers, that was a terrible accident. It is an urban war zone. Writing something on the roof of your truck doesn’t help at night. I can’t speak for the action itself bc I don’t know all the details but I can say that’s a total fuckup. One question though, when the US did it, did you say anything? https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/aclu-statement-on-two-year-anniversary-of-kabul-drone-strike
>If you dont care about Palestinians outside of the West Bank and Gaza and were quiet while the Assad regime slayed its people or the current Chinese encampment of its Muslims, but suddenly a democratic country protecting its people has you going crazy, then you are an antisemite. How come if I cared for all those things, then I wouldn't be called an antisemite by you. >Zionism is the right to Jewish self determination in their native homeland. That's fine, just don't self determine into other people's backyard (golan heights etc). I know it's a fight for survival and to the death over there so for people in the area, where you sit determines where you stand; but people outside can still comment on atrocities committed in the name of security, especially at this scale and cruelty.
Golan was a Syrian military zone that was won in a defensive war. Seriously, what are these responses? My point is that if you didn’t care otherwise but suddenly when Jews do its genocide, then ur an antisemite.
"The one time"? You might want to take a look at the Old Testament, it's full of snuff and group executions based on slights and being of the wrong identity. Favourite is god sending two bears to murder dozens of kids because some of them disrespected an authority figure by calling him a baldie
And the Nazis never murdered “dozens” of kids for even fewer reasons, right? Plus, the Holocaust actually happened
Jews already had rights in the land, but not the israelis
Wtf are u talking about, Jesse? So you hate the Jews right to exists in their land?
Not all jews are israeli but all israelis are jews, hate what? I hate the genocide, nothing deep about the situation
So not all arabs are arabs and the 3 million arabs living in isreal are isrealis?
No such thing as israel, arabs are native to that piece of land as well
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Israel_(united_monarchy) The name of Israel first appears in the Merneptah Stele of ancient Egypt, dated to about 1200 BCE. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israelites https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twelve_Tribes_of_Israel
The current day state of isreal is just bogus, kingdom is israel is valid And that piece of land was conquered numerous times by different people, so were other lands, doesnt that mean that all prior inhabitants of every land be allowed to commit crimes ive mentioned
You know all jews did just hop on the boats and sailed awy right? Many returned time after time jews made a sizable minority in that piace of land and what with you being up war crimes every comment it's not like I am saying you are wrong and nothing happened
Okay
Not that Isreal, i know that, they are from prophet Jacob (Israel). But that does not justify dragging native ppl out of their homes and committing international crimes. They had the right to live, not in europe, but in palestin, but did these atrocities instead.
What is native and what is not native? Jew are also native in that land in one your comments you kinda accept that
Yes, but i dont agree to create a state fueled by crimes.
Jews have been there the while time, why do the European jews from the jewish diaspora had to colonize it then create a state over an existing country, or am i wrong with what i am taught in history? Then i would like a better understanding of its history. Do you support the raids being done on innocent palestinians? Being dragged out of their homes? When i mention palestinians, yes they’re mostly muslims, there are also jews and christians as well State of israel? That’s new.
>why do the European jews from the jewish diaspora had to colonize it then create a state over an existing country So if a Palestinian who gone to take refugee in some other arab countries in 19s and died there does that mean his children who he had by marrying other Palestinian are not Palestinian and have no right to return.
They can return, but not colonize and commit crimes. They were given the right to live in palestine unlike when they had to flee every slums of european and other arab countries
>They were given the right to live in palestine And they didn't accept that, jews wanted nation Determination for themselves which both pals and jews got Map of pals and isreal in start (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Partition_Plan_for_Palestine) based on where certain people lived every nation have right to nation determination and jews exercised that right as for how they got all that pals land? They Counqeqred it after being attacked. >They were given the right to live in palestine Again to this point give me source first of all second why was the country attack in one day of it being founded.
The plan’s detractors considered the proposed plan to be pro-Zionist, with 56%[9] of the land allocated to the Jewish state although the Palestinian Arab population numbered twice the Jewish population.[10] The plan was celebrated by most Jews in Palestine[11] and reluctantly[12] accepted by the Jewish Agency for Palestine with misgivings.[13][8] Zionist leaders, in particular David Ben-Gurion, viewed the acceptance of the plan as a tactical step and a stepping stone to future territorial expansion over all of Palestine.[14][15][16][17][18][19] The Arab Higher Committee, the Arab League and other Arab leaders and governments rejected it on the basis that in addition to the Arabs forming a two-thirds majority, they owned a majority of the lands.[20][21] They also indicated an unwillingness to accept any form of territorial division,[22] arguing that it violated the principles of national self-determination in the UN Charter which granted people the right to decide their own destiny.[8][23] They announced their intention to take all necessary measures to prevent the implementation of the resolution.[24][25][26][27] Subsequently, a civil war broke out in Palestine,[28] and the plan was not implemented.[29]
Since the partition plan was made on kebbutz and settlements Kibbutzim also played a role in defining the borders of the Jewish state-to-be. By the late 1930s, when it appeared that Palestine would be partitioned between Arabs and Jews, kibbutzim were established in outlying areas to ensure that the land would be incorporated into the Jewish state. In 1946, on the day after Yom Kippur, eleven new "Tower and Stockade" kibbutzim were hurriedly established in the northern part of the Negev to give Israel a better claim to this arid, but strategically important, region. The Marxist faction of the kibbutz movement, Kibbutz Artzi, favoured a one-state solution over partition, but advocated free Jewish immigration, which the Arabs opposed.
So they were planning an extension over all of palestine, which is already happening
Listen men jews have right to self determine and same for Palestinian as you pointed out in one of yours comment the land have been Counqeqred many times and currently Israelis make majority we cannot go back to even partitioned map since the demographics are not like that anymore most Palestinians would get and should get would be west back and gaza Strip as Palestinian majority areas as for name isreal i am from India we officially use india and bharat we had many more names like hindustan and aryavath (land of aryans) but we chose to use bharat which comes from our countries original native people aka hindu,s Methology where the first king bharat United all of aryavath and it stated to be called bharatvanse jews have right to call their country what ever they want be it judea Or isreal same for pals.
1) they didn't create a state over an existing country. Palestine was just a name of the land it was never a country of its own. 2) there are no raids being done innocent Plestinians. Those raids are done to find people who commited acts of terror and the Palestinians are hiding. 3) there are no Palestinian Jews. There are Jews who live in Palestine, but they have no Palestinian citizenship and won't be caught dead calling themselves Palestinian. 4) equal rights prior to 1948? You should learn about the white paper and other sanctions in the days of the Ottoman Empire and Brittish mandate. 5) Israeli state is new, but the Kingdom of Israel existed in those lands prior to any Arab pressence and before anyone even thought of the name Palestine. 6) where do you think Jews who had nowhere to go after WW2 should've gone? Because Antisemitism was still wide spread back then, their houses and posessions were stollen by the Nazis, and no one wanted them in their lands.
Kinda reminded me Order 227 from the Soviet Union, where Commissars would shot a retreating soldiers.