“Israel has built the most efficient starvation machine you can imagine.”
There's political opposition to this within Israel. Here's what happened to an elected member of the Knesset who spoke out against the cruelty in Gaza.[1] He was forcibly removed from the podium of the Knesset.
People sometimes forget how bitterly divided Israel was before October 7th, with hundreds of thousands of people protesting in the streets. The war put some of the infighting on hold for a while, but all the former problems still exist, and the stakes are higher.
The division is not about the starvation of Gaza. All Zionist parties in the Israeli parliament support the military campaign in Gaza. Apart from some lip-service from left-wing leaders, to my knowledge no Jewish leader has spoken against the starvation. Israeli media (except for Haaretz) have largely denied that there is a famine, and have called it a "propaganda campaign" by the Hamas.
> how bitterly divided Israel was before October 7th ... people protesting in the streets. The war put some of the infighting on hold ... the stakes are higher
What are the factors that transform a society that is generally decent, even if not free from flaws, into a society devoid of any moral restraints, into a multitude that wallows in the dubious pleasure of its cohesion and unity, indifferent to suffering, completely closed to others?
The victims of the Nazis' knowledge were indeed the Jews. Nazi anti-Semitism was indeed particularly destructive and murderous.
But the Nazis disregarded human life wherever it was. The extermination of hundreds of thousands of Russian prisoners of war is just another example, but their attitude towards their own army, on the Stalingrad front for example, was also devoid of any human consideration.
Hitler did indeed lead these moves, but only here and there did anyone voice a complaint or reservation. With the outbreak of the war, the spirit of those who could truly resist was completely broken.
Is it really that easy to break the spirit? How does that happen? Few history books deal with this. Huffner tries to explain, and even if he is not always convincing and does not see everything, this experience of his, so close to the moment of truth in Europe on the eve of the outbreak of World War II, is unique and one of a kind. I believe that even in our time and even in our places, it is worthy of in-depth study.
- Shulamit Volkov (afterword to "The Story of a German" by Sebastian Huffner).
Israel wasn't bitterly divided, and "hundreds of thousands" of people didn't protest on the street. Most of the Israeli population supported the judicial reform suggested by the government, along with parties that previously suggested the same changes.
The protests, fueled by foreign money (including from the US) were to change the government without elections.
The man speaking is Ayman Odeh [1], an Arab Israeli MK and chairman of Hadash, a left-wing Arab Israeli party. Arab Israelis and their political leaders are marginalized in Israeli society. Arab Israeli parties are largely considered illegitimate by a majority of Jewish Israelis.
Political opposition to the starvation of Gaza is still marginal, especially in Jewish society. Protests in Arab cities against the starvation and the genocide are being curbed and prevented by the police. the Jewish majority is still largely silent on these issues, if not outright supportive of the government policy.
Just to be fair, Israel itself is considered illegitimate by those parties. I doubt most democracies would let parties that are staunchly anti-state run, but Israel, for some reason, does.
Hadash is a communist party, first and foremost. But the Arab parties - Balad, Raam, Taal - they are advocating for Palestinian "right of return" and turning Israel into a bi-national state, therefore ending what we know as Israel today.
Canada has a federal party since 1991, the Bloc Québécois, "devoted to Quebecois nationalism, social democracy, and the promotion of Quebecois sovereignty."[0] They're explicitly separatist by policy. Quebec's last attempt at attaining sovereignty was a provincial referendum in 1995 that lost by 0.5%. Had it succeeded, the provincial gov't was prepared to declare full independence the next day.
As a Canadian I'd also say that having such a party is a huge boon to the country. Separatists are going to separatist - your choice, as a nation, is whether to allow them to organize and have their voices heard within the system of politics or whether to force them to resort to violence and underground organization. Those underground separatist groups will always exist but giving formal political representation to the desire for separation (even if it isn't granted) can help defuse extremism and provide better methods for airing grievances.
The modern BQ is much more tame than the BQ of thirty years prior - they've mainly morphed into a party focused on franophone rights within Canada and the maintenance of QC labor rights. So while they specifically no longer represent that separatist movement as directly there are other groups focused on prairie separatism that are a better modern parallel.
They are not parties considering Israel illegitimate nor are they calling for the destruction of Israel. They are parties calling for a two-state solution, and consider the globally-recognized-as-illegal settlements as illegitimate i.e. they call the ever expanding borders of Israel as illegitimate.
If you were to make them illegal, you're basically legally disenfranchising 25% of Israel's population.
Definitions matter. It's possible for an organization to redefine "acutely malnourished" as less than 4000 Cal/day, and then use that to make an accusation. Is that reasonable? No, because that does not match reality. It's unreasonable to criticize pushback on changing definitions because definitions should be pushed toward reality.
As you say definitions matter - so let's not invent hypothetical scenarios to dismiss points.
Israel was not arguing about the definition of 'acute malnourished'. The threshold for famine is 15%. The IPC said it had just hit 16% and was thus a famine. Israel was arguing that other data showed it was only 12.2-13.5% and therefore not a famine. When you get to the point of arguing "only 12% of the children are starving, not 16%" you probably shouldn't bother.
> When you get to the point of arguing "only 12% of the children are starving, not 16%" you probably shouldn't bother
Devil's advocate: we grow enough food to feed every human. What we lack is the logistics. War disrupts logistics. Food insecurity rising is thus, unfortunately, an expected (and probably unmitigatable) consequence of war.
That's why we have to define a line, based on history and capability, that sets what's a tolerable amount of starvation. And what is not.
Famine is not an inevitable outcome of war. It is the inevitable outcome of Israel's deliberate actions to limit access to food, which are well-documented.
Food insecurity is. Famine is not. The latter is statistically defined, which is why we have levels and people arguing about which side of that level they stand.
It has also been well-documented that the controlling interest within Gaza also limits access to food - of it's own citizens/people.
While it seems undeniable the people of Gaza are experiencing food scarcity - we cannot lay blame soley at the foot of Israel here. That would be grossly disengenous and an outright falsehood.
> we cannot lay blame soley at the foot of Israel here
For the famine, yes we can. Let the aid in. Let Hamas steal it. Now you can blame Hamas. The fact that we have zero evidence of Hamas stealing the current aid makes it entirely one side's fault.
Aid did get in, and Hamas did steal it. The media ignored it, so the narrative continues status-quo.
Israel has no reason to support Hamas and their efforts here. If Hamas wasn't stealing all of the aid earlier in this conflict, perhaps aid would still be flowing into Gaza.
It doesn't seem so absolute/cut-and-dry like you try to make it.
Does this particular (supposed) definition change matter here? Because if it doesn't, pushback by the aggressor is heinous and obviously disingenuous even if your abstract love of accuracy means you happen to agree with the objection.
> Their whole strategy since 1948 has been about distracting the Palestinians with fake peace processes that were never meant to lead to anything
Totally untrue. Israel unilaterally disengaged from Gaza in 2005 [1]. The current divides aren't as entrenched as the belligerents would have us believe.
Israel blocks the entry of Plumpy Nut into Gaza, a peanut-butter like paste meant for treating severe acute malnutrition. They say it is a luxury item Hamas might steal.[1] The amount of evidence Israel is committing genocide is embarrassing.
It's wild to me how many people here use the "it's war, bad things happen" to justify the situation. Weird that it needs to be said, but this is why war crimes are a thing. Just because it's an armed conflict, doesn't mean anything goes.
> wild to me how many people here use the "it's war, bad things happen" to justify the situation
The point is to distinguish this war from how others have been fought. A lot of accusations against the IDF's conduct have been baseless. Not wrong in that they're factually incorrect. Just wrong in that it's how everyone else fights wars when they go to war.
This is different. America didn't trigger a famine in Iraq or Afghanistan, and it's not like we fought those wars honorably. That is where it's worth answering the question, is this just war or is this worse.
It's war initiated by Hamas, and since it losses, they try to throw the blame on Israel. Hamas needs to release the hostages and disarm and the war will end, Israel have said so many times before including the latest Trump deal.
This is just a variant of "it's war, bad things happen", with the addition of "they started it".
Putting the debate of who started what aside, does someone starting a war justify war crimes against them?
- who started what
- specific conditions to end things
- who agrees to what
All of these are distractions. The core issues are, are there war crimes being committed or not? Is the population of Gaza starving or not? If so, is Israel actively contributing or deliberately causing the situation or not?
EDIT: this is a good example of how collective punishment is being justified, to blame the population of Gaza for the actions (or inaction) of Hamas. "Well, if they just do X, then they wouldn't have to starve".
It's not, this conflict was started by Israel in 1948. The current genocide is just the most extreme phase of an ongoing, highly unequal, struggle since then.
Hamas releasing hostages will not end the genocide. Look at how the last ceasefire was intentionally broken by Israel.
Gaza has been under blockade since 2007, and the roots of the conflict date back to the founding of the Zionist Organization by Theodor Herzl in 1897 with the purpose to facilitate the escape of Jews from persecution in Eastern Europe by establishing a colony in Palestine. Israel has persecuted the indigenous people of Palestine ever since.
> the roots of the conflict date back to the founding of the Zionist Organization by Theodor Herzl in 1897 with the purpose to facilitate the escape of Jews from persecution in Eastern Europe by establishing a colony in Palestine
Please, the roots of this conflict go back millenia. Nothing done in the last hundred years have helped it. And the Palestinian people keep getting fucked by outside powers using them for their own ends, whether it be the Arab countries invading Israel or Iran having their sock puppets invite bombs. But it's a bit silly to imagine that if we poofed Israel and turned Israel & Palestine into a democracy that we wouldn't, within like two minutes, start seeing missiles flying.
If they don't destroy Hamas now, then a war will happen again in another 10 years. At which point 10s of thousands of palestinians will needlessly die, again. The only resolution to all of this, will happen when Hamas is completely disarmed and out of power.
You can criticize how Israel goes about achieving that goal. But that goal is the only one that gets to a real, permanent peace.
1) As long as Israel treats Palestinians the way they current do, there will always be another Hamas. That or completely remove Palestinians from the area, which seems to be the current goal. So no, completely destroying hamas is not the only way to get to a real permanent peace.
2) How Israel is going about things is the exact issue at hand. You can't just hand wave it away.
3) Let's say for the sake of argument destroying Hamas IS the only way to achieve long lasting peace, how much death and destruction does it justify? 10% of the population? 20%? 50%?. So again just because it's an armed conflict, doesn't mean anything goes.
> As long as Israel treats Palestinians the way they current do, there will always be another Hamas
Eh, Trump's peace deal isn't great for Palestinians. But it gives them peace and a path to more peace in the future, and paths where considering options for resistance other than terrorism may flourish.
> Let's say for the sake of argument destroying Hamas IS the only way to achieve long lasting peace, how much death and destruction does it justify? 10% of the population?
Yikes. Based on precedent, I don't think countries have typically put an upper bound on this figure. I think a better question might be what's the upper bound on civilian deaths that should not be required to be exceeded if Hamas has to be routed out by force.
It is not possible to destroy an idea with violence. The more palestinians you shoot or starve the stronger Hamas will be when it returns. The only way for Israel to get real, permanent peace is probably removing all the palestinians which is why they are currently engaged in a genocide.
> It is not possible to destroy an idea with violence. The more palestinians you shoot or starve the stronger Hamas will be when it returns
One, lots of ideas have been destroyed by violence across history. When a nation with an oral tradition of history is exterminated, their ideas quite literally die with them.
Two, it's not a given that Palestinians will be terrorists. Eliminating Hamas gives room for other, better ideas around resistance to rise.
You are basically saying that regardless of criticisms and international condemnation, Israel has no choice but commit war crimes and genocide? This is like "look what you made me do" defence in court, not sure it will save genocider Netanyahu from rotting in the Hague jail.
Nor would it stop us from boycotting Israel and calling out their genocide.
Yeah thats basically how thing will end up. Because if they dont get rid of Hamas now, they will end up in another war and end up killing 10s of thousands of more Palestinians later. Thats just what would happen.
I mean, people are saying Israel is doing a genocide now right? If thats the case, why wouldn't they just do a genicide again if another October 7th happened? Obviously thats what they would do.
> Nor would it stop us
You don't have to stop doing anything. Just realize that they have a modern military that they are going to continue to use to kill their enemy until that enemy has surrendered or been destroyed. Thats the only way this ends.
The only question is how many people have to die and how much of gaza has to be flattened in order to achieve that outcome. Boycotts aren't going to stop anything. Nor will condemnation. The only thing that would come close is serious military action, but well would you look at that, every major of enemy of Israel is now destroyed, from Syria to Hezbollah to Iran. Military action seems rather unlikely now, given how successful Israel was in obliterating every enemy it has in the area.
So, the people of palestine are left with choice. Accept peace, or watch as Israel keeps killing people until Hamas is gone for good.
> rotting in the Hague jail.
Even if this fantasy land future did come to past, trials don't bring back the dead. If Israel has to kill another 50 thousand people to get rid of Hamas (because a peace deal with rejected), well those 50k genocide victims are still dead. The world's not turning on a dime here. Nobody is coming to save palestine. Boycotts don't stop bombs.
> only question is how many people have to die and how much of gaza has to be flattened in order to achieve that outcome. Boycotts aren't going to stop anything. Nor will condemnation
I agree with the last part of this sentiment: boycotts and weapons-sale bans won't stop Israel.
But they will decrease its wealth and power in the long term. That should be something Tel Aviv seeks to avoid. Eliminating Hamas should not require inducing a famine.
I would go as far as to say that the very existence of Hamas is due to the actions of Israel.
Do you think that Israel, with the most advanced intelligence agency in the world, capable of planting bombs in pagers just in case for when they need them, did not know about the october 7 attack beforehand ??
> Do you think that Israel, with the most advanced intelligence agency in the world, capable of planting bombs in pagers just in case for when they need them, did not know about the october 7 attack beforehand ??
Yes. Quite easily. We missed 9/11. And nobody can still find Al Houthi.
9/11 is incomparable. The amount of resources and interest Israel has to monitor the movements of Palestinians in Gaza and elsewhere, particularly the Hamas, cannot possibly compare with US trying to keep tabs on half a continent across the globe.
And finding a simple person that could be anywhere is also an incomparable situation.
9/11 was different. Yes, that's the difference. airport security was more lax, the way we dealt with hijackings was different, and the security on airplanes was minimal.
You had a heavily fortified military DMZ between the massive surveillance and military state of Israel and Hamas flying in with kites, bulldozers, and motorcycles. I hope it was merely a massive failure due to arrogance and misallocation of resources, because a plausible alternative is sadly realistic and believable.
We still don't have a comprehensive map of Hamas' tunnel systems. I think you're overestimating the degree to which 2 million people can be surveilled.
Perhaps not, but it doesn't help when Israel demonstrates with pretty high frequency the ability to precisely target things, but then goes and drops a couple of 2000 pound bombs on a refugee camp. Or claim they know precisely how many hamas fighters have been killed but have no idea how many civilians have been killed.
Small thought exercise: What if the numbers were real? Would that change any of your stances/views? Would you self-reflect and consider that you had been tricked into spreading lies at the expense of thousands of lives?
Maybe it helps to start smaller. Many (Israeli's) have told me that the IDF is the world's most 'honest' military - one that even warns buildings before they're bombed!
Then, you can imagine how difficult it was for me to reconcile that with many facts from the ground. Here's one. Only one. The Rafah paramedic massacre:
"Israel at first claimed that the medics' vehicles did not have emergency signals on when troops opened fire but later backtracked. Cellphone video recovered from one of the medics contradicted Israel's initial account."[0]
Let me turn the mirror around a bit. If numbers or incidents turn out to be false, exaggerated, or stripped of context, would you also self-reflect and consider that you might have been tricked into spreading lies - at the expense of Israelis whose lives are also on the line?
Of course, militaries make mistakes and sometimes issue wrong statements, just as governments everywhere do in the fog of war. The Rafah paramedic case you cite is tragic, and investigations matter. But a single flawed or retracted statement doesn’t prove a systematic policy of “lying” or “massacre” just as one instance of misconduct in any country’s army doesn’t automatically invalidate its overall values or procedures.
if we’re going to judge Israel by its errors, we should also weigh the context in which those errors happen (urban warfare, Hamas embedding itself in civilian areas, use of ambulances to smuggle fighters or weapons, etc.). And we should also judge Hamas by its admitted policies - deliberately targeting civilians, embedding in hospitals, rejecting coexistence.
If we’re honest, both of us need to be open to the possibility that our sources and interpretations can be incomplete or biased. Real reflection means asking hard questions in both directions - not only of Israelis, not only of Palestinians.
Neither of which are around 600 thousand as the previous commenter posted. The French News Channel called France24 did a quick video explaining the current fake news that certain NGOs are spreading with misleading death counts -- https://www.france24.com/en/tv-shows/truth-or-fake/20250624-...
Well, these numbers are from July, and from that very first article:
"Official Palestinian tallies of direct deaths in the Gaza war likely undercounted the number of casualties by around 40% in the first nine months of the war as Gaza's healthcare infrastructure unravelled, according to a peer-reviewed study published in The Lancet journal in January."
Still, from those numbers, it seems difficult to stretch from 60k to 600k.
That said, even if you take the absolute tail number, 60k, how anyone can defend a genocide of 60k people in a land area smaller than Portland, in less than a year, is reprehensible. Especially when many of those are children. Almost one child murdered every 10 minutes, at the low end, for an entire year?
Are you surprised I'm being downvoted? I'm working towards my 500 karma so I can also start downvoting obvious nonsense like that comment but publicly correcting nonsense craters your karma.
Why don't you just do some basic fact checking of clearly ludicrous information?
Edit: sorry it wasn't you that posted it. But seriously, people need to stop spreading that lie. It's shocking how wrong it is and how people just believe it.
The horror that starvation inflicts on the human mind is beyond comparison. My grandfather experienced this firsthand when he fled from the Japanese invasion, an occupation that stripped civilians of their food supply. He helplessly watched as his parents, relatives, and even his older brother succumbed one by one to hunger. Barely escaping the same fate, he fled the country just before starvation could claim his own life.
When I was eight years old, I asked him why he always kept a room filled with dried cassava root. His reply was simple but unforgettable: dying from starvation is the most terrifying experience imaginable, and he was determined never to endure it again.
Starvation may also cause epigenetic and metabolic changes, which persist and are even passed to next generations. In children tissue dystrophy is particular damaging, since their bodies are still developing. Starvation is a really fucking bad thing.
There is simply no excuse for blocking the entry of food into a region wholesale. For that alone they should, at the very least, be an outcast in the international community. But here we are.
That they have the backing and blessing of the US government is the counter-argument to this. The US can almost unilaterally end this war if they want to.
US cannot end anything cause Israel fully controls USA (especially this administration) so this statement is like saying Malta can stop the war in Ukraine. You should by now know who is Boss is who is subordinate
US has a lot of both soft and hard power globally. If you don't treat their puppet state with deference (and do treat it as an outcast), you can face consequences. The current US admin is using this as a stick against its own citizens, even.
OK, but I still don't see how that's a counterargument to the proposition that "There is simply no excuse for blocking the entry of food into a region wholesale."
And even before then, Egypt's peace with Israel (and Egypt's subsequent ~$1B/yr in defense aid from the US) depends on playing nice with Israel in several respects, including deferring to Israeli policy on the Gaza border.
There has been smuggling of course, but (perhaps unintentionally) Israel gives them most of what they use.
> But recent intelligence has shown the extent to which Hamas has been able to build many of its rockets and anti-tank weaponry out of the thousands of munitions that failed to detonate when Israel lobbed them into Gaza, according to weapons experts and Israeli and Western intelligence officials. Hamas is also arming its fighters with weapons stolen from Israeli military bases.
> “Unexploded ordnance is a main source of explosives for Hamas,” said Michael Cardash, the former deputy head of the Israeli National Police Bomb Disposal Division and an Israeli police consultant. “They are cutting open bombs from Israel, artillery bombs from Israel, and a lot of them are being used, of course, and repurposed for their explosives and rockets.”
Also repurposed infrastructure like water pipes and lamposts. But they had plenty of weapons and explosives pre war, before egypt sealed their border to gaza.
The explosives are the part that obviously should be given the main focus.
And quite a bit of what's being talked about wrt to re-manufacturing Israeli unexploded ordance was stockpiled prior to Oct 7th. Israel did not start bombing Gaza only after Oct 7th (and in fact had been bombing Gaza as late as Sept 23, 2023).
The claim I've heard them make is that the food aid is making it in, but being stolen by Hamas so that it can be resold at markup. How do you convince people that believe this that it isn't true (or is irrelevant)?
The UN's own data (https://app.un2720.org/tracking) shows 86,531 pallets were intercepted, while only 26,772 pallets arrived at their intended destination.
We don't know many of the interceptions Hamas was behind, but that isn't really important.
What do people see with their own eyes? I see terrorists who committed mass murder and rape, in the name of their religion, hiding among civilians. I see a war of self defense by a country that is peacefully home to a population that is 30% minority.
I have no idea. I've heard a lot of "just because a minister says it it isn't true, do you believe everything Trump or congresspeople say?" in response to what ministers say. That, and the usual "the media (particularly mainstream, like NYT) is lying/anti-semitic/etc." So I imagine the reply would be the same.
There’s no “proof” but that doesn’t mean it isn’t happening. The pallets that never made it to people in need didn’t magically disappear. There is also a history of Hamas stealing aid that goes back MUCH longer than the post-October-7 conflict:
> How do you convince people that believe this that it isn't true
It's not like the Gazans have any money to speak of.
> (or is irrelevant)?
If the way to prevent starvation is to flood the zone with food shipments, it's a moral imperative to do that. That it will also help keep the enemy fed is entirely beside the point, since causing starvation is not a legal or ethical form of warfare.
Then Israel severely limiting the amount of food is helping Hamas by artificially, and cruelly, limiting supply. People want to feed their families and will go to great lengths: sell their valuables, harm others, or wait in line at a Gaza Health Ministry site with the knowledge the IDF might fire into the crowd.
If they flooded Gaza with food then Hamas would benefit less from the supposed stealing/reselling.
If that was true, wouldn’t the best course of action be to let as much aid as possible into Gaza to flood the market rather than restricting the flow (therefore increasing prices) like Israel has been doing?
No it cant because israel controls the borders and isnt letting any arms in. It can be used to pay terrorists but Israel just has to live with that. If they are confident aid is being used to pay terrorists the correct move is not cutting off aid its defending the aid
> And this didn't start in 2023. Gaza has been under Israeli blockade for decades.
The blockade was also imposed by Egypt[0] and Hamas certainly provided no shortage of security related justifications for the blockade. Unfortunately those security concerns turned out to be accurate[1].
> In February 2020, former Mossad Director Yossi Cohen and Israeli general Herzi Halevi, under Netanyahu's orders, went to Qatar to plead Qatari officials to continue the payments for Hamas.[8] Later, in September 2023, David Barnea, the Director of Mossad since 2021, went to Qatar to meet Qatari officials to discuss about the payments for Hamas.[10][44]
(...)
> Israeli intelligence officials believe that the money had a role in the success of 2023 Hamas-led attack.[10]
> Unfortunately Netanyahu actively encouraged Qatar to send cash to Hamas.
Yeah, Benjamin Netanyahu certainly got complacent thinking he could keep a genocidal terrorist group like Hamas under control with that strategy. Qatar and their support for terrorists has long been a problem as well.
It’s not been under a “blockade” for even a year continuously. Literally earlier this year, hundreds of trucks carrying aid were allowed in per day. That was during the ceasefire that didn’t last. If you go back to the history of blockades of Gaza you’ll see it was very intermittent. And when things were tightened, it was in response to incidents like Hamas rocket attacks.
The requirement is about five hundred trucks per day of food (so each truck feeding about four thousand people). The fact that on rare occasions they'd let in about half that isn't really a point in your favor.
food tracks fluctuate between 2000 and 3000 a month prior to oct 7th. a few more dozens of of tracks with "non-edible consumables" and "medical supplies". rest of tracks are construction materials
In 1942, Jewish doctors conducted the Warsaw Ghetto Hunger Study used the man made famine to study the physiological and psychological effects of hunger.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warsaw_Ghetto_Hunger_Study
Not all scientific studies need to be replicated.
UK surgeon Nick Maynard, a volunteer at Nasser Hospital, tells Good Morning Britain that he and other doctors tried to bring baby formula into Gaza and the Israelis confiscated it from them with no justification. [0]
If a justification was given we'd be able to evaluate the worthiness of that decision - if there were technical notes about, for instance, food safety concerns, we could evaluate the justification against other standards in different areas of the world around proper formula storage.
Without a justification the decision is arbitrary and silences any ability to push back against it within the normal bounds of dialog. A justification would potentially allow aid groups to remedy whatever the specific deficiency is if it is a reasonable deficiency to remedy.
If there was a justification it might be acceptable - depending on the justification - without a justification it is unacceptable when there is such a clear need. The aid is blocked and there is no recourse to unblock it outside the current attempts to just smuggle it in.
No, but the callousness of an arbitrary decision without even spending 10 seconds to make up a pretend reason is a pure display of power. They do what they want and they don’t care one bit about even looking like the good guys.
That rather depends on the justification. "We think you might be planning to use that to feed babies," no. "There's a small canister of nerve gas concealed in the middle," yes.
The reason for that is apparently that you can use baby formula to make rocket candy. Because apparently extracting the lactose from 40kg baby formula is all it takes to make a quassam rocket.
If you can get your hand om 20kg of oxidiser that is. It is all more than ridiculous.
Same for water. I've heard they could electrolyze drinking water into hydrogen and oxygen. Then they could explode the hydrogen using the oxygen as an oxidizer.
Only solution is to cut off all wells and water supplies.
Though different from the rocket fuel, I've read Israel has dumped so much ordinance on Gaza that the Hamas weapons primarily use material from unexploded ordinance as their warheads.
It might also be that Hamas intimidates people that go to food distribution sites, shoot at Israeli soldiers from within crowds of people, and also shoot at Gazan's to make it look like it was Israelis. The lows Hamas are capable of is beyond normal comprehension.
For anyone commenting on this, I'll leave this: Official aid delivery reported by UN. I'd also assume this to be of the lower side, as there probably is more that doesn't get reported thorugh UN 27720 mechanism. I find the fact that this article does not use this or point to this data very questionable, but maybe I am wrong and I am imagining things.
For reference: While the gas chambers were are the prominent way of death during the Holocaust, the majority of victims died of starvation. Starvation death looks like succumbing to a random sickness (the body is just too weak for a functional immune response), and thus saves the perpetrator from the usual psychological consequences of direct murder. This methodology was agreed on during the Wannsee conference in 1942.
I've seen air dropping videos, if random countries were to try that would they be at risk of being shot down, probably right for violating air space (cough cough).
Yes, airdrops are only done with permission from Israel since they control Gaza airspace (they have for decades). But airdrops are not an efficient way to feed millions of people (and the pallets have killed multiple people by landing on them). Shipping by truck allows a much larger volume much faster, and the UN has experience doing so, but they have been largely blocked from doing so for months by Israel, which runs its own much less efficient aid operation with many fewer distribution points guarded by mercenaries who regularly kill aid seekers who often have to travel long distances through dangerous areas.
This genocide reveals how much Israel truly controls the US government and other Western countries. I am beyond appalled this is allowed to happen.
The last couple of months also showed that international rules and agreements don't mean anything - they are in fact only there to please the Western countries, until they throw it in the bin when it is convenient to them.
Anyone who isn't from the West, hell even Southern Europeans, are taking note. There is no rights and freedoms for us. All this for to support a bully of a fundamentalist state and a bunch of theocratic kingdoms/emirates.
I've got to wonder if Israel is one the pillars propping up Trump along with China and Russia. It would make perfect sense with its relation to the Epstein files (in which Trump is likely mentioned every other paragraph).
I'm not saying the Democrats have done great by Gaza, but I feel like the point we're at - irrefutable genocide through starvation - there would at least be significant pressure to stop attacking humanitarian convoys.
All I can really say about the current situation is that it would be a great time for the EU to step up, demonstrate some international leadership, and forcibly deliver aid under the guard of military force.
I generally use conversations on this topic as a litmus test for a group or community. I’m pretty disappointed by all the whatabout-ism and false equivalence.
I expected better from HN.
We can study why this happened later. The genocide needs to stop now.
It's amazing to see how support of Israel has started collapsing. Scores of US-aligned nations now recognise Palestine. Even inside their traditional support base in the US, it's on the decline; 50% of Republicans under 50 don't support Israel. At least one republican is calling it a "genocide". MAGA split over Iran.
What's interesting is that I don't see the zionist talking points changing at all. They still hold out hope they can accuse everyone of "anti-semitism" and they'll all get back in line like it's 2020. I think they're holding out hope things can go back to normal, but it will be hard to put the toothpaste back in the tube.
Question:
There is a repeated claim that more calories have been provided to the Gaza people than several other human crisis scenarios, but that Hamas is currently stealing it all.
But I have never seen rampant obesity in Hamas prisoners that the IDF have captured alive? Hamas can't be extorting the Gazan people for those calories, the Gazan people have no money at this point by and large due to the huge swath of destruction of property and infrastructure via bombing-- only Hamas has those underground tunnels or somesuch.
> Question: There is a repeated claim that more calories have been provided to the Gaza people than several other human crisis scenarios, but that Hamas is currently stealing it all.
This claim is made by supporters of the war _outside of Israel_ for external consumption. If you look at what the Israeli cabinet, generals and politicians are saying for internal consumption... it's pretty deliberate.
Intercepted is defined as "either peacefully by hungry people or forcefully by armed actors, during transit in Gaza." Some fraction of that may be Hamas. But we have no evidence of that.
the article also states that the US has looked into the reports of Hamas stealing the aid and found that none of the aid appears to have been stolen by anyone.
given the current US administration and their hard-on for Israel, I can't imagine this is a faked report. if it were faked, it'd be to agree with Israel
From the article: "An internal US government review found no evidence of widespread theft by Hamas of US-funded humanitarian aid in Gaza."
Other reporting supports this.
So what is going on is that the IDF are lying to justify their genocide. There is a massive propaganda machine at work to muddy the waters.
> A senior COGAT official told a briefing in early September that 27% of the trucks entering Gaza are UN vehicles, claiming it was “a lie” that the UN had brought in 600 aid trucks a day before the war.
food tracks fluctuate between 2000 and 3000 a month prior to oct 7th. a few more dozens of of tracks with "non-edible consumables" and "medical supplies". rest of tracks are construction materials
"farm land" part, they forgot to mention that gaza was always totally dependent on imported food. farmland iirc provides only few percent of calories required in gaza. live stock is also sustained by imported feed
There is massive narrative deception from Israel... wake up world:
>“There is no famine in Gaza. Period,” the [Israeli] official said, adding that “Israel and the IDF are trying to strengthen the humanitarian situation in Gaza with partners.”
If you want to see what Netanyaho looks like when he's covering things up [lying] just watch the 2024 documentary The Bibi Files — about his corruption charges (which features over an hour of Netanyaho lying to investigators about his accepting roses and leaves [wine and cigars]) — complete with his shit-eating-grins galore...
World leaders know this, they're pretending not to see it. For example, the Biden administration set specific aid targets for Israel to meet and even acknowledged that they weren't being met by the "deadline" but neglected to impose any consequences.
Israelis (including those who use this platform to repeat the same warmed-over genocide denials for the umpteenth time) know it's happening too. That's why the argument is usually 50% "it's not happening" and 50% "but they deserve it".
Probably because Israel violated the ceasefire earlier this year (that was a sham from the beginning) that lasted from January to March. The first phase of the ceasefire saw an exchange of hostages, but then the Israelis refused to move on to the second phase and broke the ceasefire by bombing Gaza in the middle of the night, killing over 400 Palestinians in one day, including over 200 children. [0]
Not to mention the fact that Israel just killed a top Hamas negotiator in Doha, Qatar only a few weeks ago. [1] How can you negotiate with someone who just killed your negotiator?
> Probably because Israel violated the ceasefire earlier this year (that was a sham from the beginning) that lasted from January to March. The first phase of the ceasefire saw an exchange of hostages, but then the Israelis refused to move on to the second phase and broke the ceasefire by bombing Gaza in the middle of the night, killing over 400 Palestinians in one day, including over 200 children.
Israel has been rather consistent that a permanent ceasefire will only happen when Hamas effectively surrenders and gives up power. Hamas had also refused to continue releasing hostages which effectively ended the ceasefire(as the terms of the second phase were never finalized).
> Not to mention the fact that Israel just killed a top Hamas negotiator in Doha, Qatar only a few weeks ago. [1] How can you negotiate with someone who just killed your negotiator?
I suppose when attempting to negotiate the surrender of Hamas if the negotiators refuse to surrender after having clearly lost a war they started then eliminating the current negotiators may result in their replacements being more likely to capitulate. That seemed to work out with Hezbollah at least.
> How can you negotiate with someone who just killed your negotiator?
The only other option seems to be that Israel is about to destroy the rest of Gaza City, and take out the last major location that Hamas controls. So their options are to either accept the peace plan, or die.
I don't think Israel cares that much which choice Hamas choses. But yeah accepting this peace deal sounds like it it quite obviously the mostly likely option to help prevent all the buildings that are about to be destroyed and people who will be killed.
I can't believe I'm weighing in on a political thread, but the "deal" is very one sided. It offers very little for the Palestinians in terms of creating their own country and ability to self govern and gives Israel pretty much everything they want including some control over Palestine.
The current "peace deal" is terrible for the Palestinians. No other country would sign it either.
the deal is not with palestinians but with hamas (unless you say that hamas represents palestinians). palestinians at large and palestinian authority support this deal.
Because it doesn't move the situation any closer to liberation of their people and their homeland.
They have been willing to constantly fight, and constantly keep getting killed by an enemy with overwhelming advantages, for their cause for two years now. Why would you assume that being able to escape with their lives is suddenly more important to them?
> They have been willing to constantly fight, and constantly keep getting killed by an enemy
Thats not true at all. Most people in palestine do not want to throw their lives away for nothing. Most of them want peace. Its only Hamas that would apparently prefer to get killed and have gaza be flattened instead of accepting peace.
The question I responded to was: "why is Hamas refusing a peace deal that ends all this and lets them escape with their lives?" Your responding that what I wrote is "not true at all" makes no sense in the context.
> They have been willing to constantly fight, and constantly keep getting killed by an enemy with overwhelming advantages, for their cause for two years now
Hamas has. If you put this deal to a plebescite in Gaza, do you really think they'd vote for more war?
Yes, Hamas (and all the other resistance factions that are active in Gaza). The question I responded to was: "why is Hamas refusing a peace deal that ends all this and lets them escape with their lives?" My answer was perfectly within the scope of the original question.
I mean, it moves the situation closer to not living in war and famine? Also the idea of amnesty to all Hamas members looks pretty generous to me - Nazis didn't enjoy the same privilege
> I mean, it moves the situation closer to not living in war and famine?
And then what? Look at the West Bank to see what happens when you don't resist the occupation and fully cooperate with the colonial state. You get slowly cleansed anyway.
> Also the idea of amnesty to all Hamas members looks pretty generous to me
Israel specializes in assassinations and has a history of relentlessly pursuing those it deems its enemies. If you were a Hamas fighter, your choice would be to either die fighting for a purpose, or be killed in exile without a purpose anymore.
The party refusing any kind of deal are Israel since their goal is annihilation of Palestinians. Hamas were ready from day one for a deal, their goal (contrary to israeli narrative of course) was to negotiate prisoner exchange for the 1000s of Palesitnian prisoners held by israel (including children). This is still their goal along with ceasefire and complete withdrawal from Gaza.
That's not true, if you’re referring to the Trump plan, as he contradicted one of the main points upon return to Israel. He selectively backed some part of it, which is not really “signing” on the same plan that was offered to other parties.
Also, what value has Netanyahu’s word? I mean, after blowing up a truce unilaterally, after killing negotiators, after all the corruption reckoning that is coming to him if/when out of office...
Whenever they've tried to agree to any peace deals in the past, what ends up happening is they make concessions and then Netanyahu turns around and resumes the war anyway.
Leadership of the political organisation, not all. However the military branch's leadership is/was in Gaza (like Yahya Sinwar and others who were killed)
Because Netanyahu is already saying he wouldn't comply with the deal that he's already agreed to, and isn't treating it as a peace deal.
> While Netanyahu agreed to the plan on Monday, he already appears to be pushing back on several of its terms.
> In a video posted on X, he insisted that the IDF would would be able to remain in parts of the territory and that Israel would 'forcibly resist' the establishment of a Palestinian state.
That is, technically, at odds with the truth, and morally, a transparent attempt at misinformation, please read the comments above you, or use “the internet”.
Killing 736 Israeli civilians, 79 foreign nationals, and 379 Israeli military and security personnel, and kidnapping an additional 250 civilians is not, by any fathomable definition, genocide. It is a war crime for sure, but it's not genocide.
Edit: the post I was replying to was claiming Hamas/the Palestinians perpetrated a genocide in Israel. It has since been edited to be a completely different thing.
I think you are mixing up genocide and the acts that are committed in furtherance of genocide.
Genocide is legally a set of acts committed with the intent to destroy a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group.
So yes, what Hamas did on Oct 7 was not genocide, and similarly what Israel does on any given day in Gaza is not genocide. Rather they are both part of ongoing campaigns that arguably are genocide.
> Killing 736 Israeli civilians, 79 foreign nationals, and 379 Israeli military and security personnel, and kidnapping an additional 250 civilians is not, by any fathomable definition, genocide. It is a war crime for sure, but it's not genocide.
I think the evidence is quite overwhelming that Hamas had clear genocidal intent, even if they did not have the means to accomplish that intent.
Something I try to explain to people is that HAMAS tries to kill civilians, but fails at achieving their goals, meanwhile Israel tries to avoid killing civilians, but fails to achieve that goal.
One of these is better than the other.
Weirdly, many people disagree over which one that is.
You are honestly blaming the killing of 60,000+ Palestinians on Hamas for not accepting a Peace Deal (Israel didn't honor the last one months ago) only?
Assume it is a hostage situation, 2,000,000 Hostages. Israel has killed 60,000+ hostages trying to rescue hostages. Starvation also counts as killings to me, but I supposed "Starved" is less direct than "Shot"
On the other hand: how idiotic would they have to be to believe the Israelis will let them escape with their lives, given all the evidence to the contrary?
I think people blaming it on Hamas need to realize that Israel funds Hamas and uses it as a tool to further their goals. Hamas is their version of Talibans. It fully lines up.
Well, if that was the case, it's not really working out for Israel now, is it? Considering that more and more countries are recognising Palestine, etc.
This comment is widespread on X or other social media as the n-th conspiracy theory that Israel has staged the attack etc. Crazy.
> Considering that more and more countries are recognising Palestine
Would note that none of the recent recognitions, to my knowledge, said anything about borders. A Palestinian state that solely exists in the West Bank would be consistent with these statements.
Doesn't prove anything, and it definitely doesn't prove he gave Hamas weapons so they would be victims of a terror attack.
Hell, we in the West have given Gaza (and indirectly, we knew it would go to Hamas) so much money. Did we support terrorism? How did we know that they would use our money to buy weapons to murder people in Israel instead of building good things?
For me this is more showing an utter incompetence both from Nethanyau and our Western leaders who totally didn't see how they outsmarted us for years. Why do you think our leaders can control everything and know everything? They can make mistakes out of incompetence.
I guess this strategy sometimes works in other countries, and sometimes they screw you :)
Israel's territory is still expanding, and Palestine's is still shrinking, so it seems to be working out pretty fine. All those countries recognising Palestine don't have the balls to actually conduct any kind of military intervention against Israel.
Samantha Power wrote an excellent book: "A Problem From Hell" - America and the Age of Genocide [0], [1]
She had seen war and genocide first-hand in Bosnia and that provided the impetus for her to study how America had responded to various genocides.
I will repeat the last paragraph of her Preface for some context.
>Before I began exploring America's relationship with genocide, I used to refer to U.S. policy towards Bosnia as a "failure." I have changed my mind. It is daunting to acknowledge, but this country's consistent policy of nonintervention in the face of genocide offers sad testimony not to a broken American political system but to one that is ruthlessly effective. The system, as it stands now, is working. No U.S. president has ever made genocide prevention a priority, and no U.S. president has ever suffered politically for his indifference to its occurrence. It is thus no coincidence that genocide rages on.
Readers should be dubious of her moral authority on this issue. When given influence, her advocacy of the war on Libya resulted in endemic violence and showed that she was as misguided as anyone else in American politics when it comes to intervention in world affairs.
Genocide is a terrible thing. But that doesn't mean the USA has any obligation to directly intervene in foreign conflicts. Most of these aren't worth sacrificing the life of a single US soldier, and even when we do intervene it often makes the situation worse. Unless critical US national interests are involved, our actions should usually be limited to sanctions and diplomacy.
(I am commenting on the general US policy and not making a statement about the current situation in Gaza.)
Most of the time US sells the weapons used to do the genocide. This time they're just giving them away, and that is what a lot of Americans have a problem with.
For those out of the loop the actions of the Israeli gov. are not some fringe overreaction. This is what the people want. by their own admission, 48% of Israeli Jews want Palestinians to be ethnically cleansed which would constitute a genocidal act, while 79% believe they should get preferential treatment over Arabs. [0]
Both Israeli Arabs & Palestinian Arabs. This is not some, 'oh no! it just happened.' Everyone who has actually spent time studying this conflict, the state of Israel has a policy of systematic rape, torture, mass incarceration, murder, and dehumanization of Palestinians at an industrial scale that's been in place for decades now.
They're just going mask-off in a way Western audiences can't pretend not to know about it any longer.
Israelis and their Western supporters try to make out their actions as that of fringe far-right loonies like Smotrich, etc. Nope. Systematic rape, torture, murder, of non-Jews has been their policy for decades now. You're just finally learning about it after so long. The ultra-orthodox don't make up a plurality of the population and used to not serve in the military until recently. So, if their abominable ideology is state policy, it's because Israelis are okay with it.
> Systematic rape, torture, murder, of non-Jews has been their policy for decades now.
I'd like some evidence for each of these three. I'm aware of the policy of interrogation which might count as "a policy of systematic torture". Can you do systematic rape and murder?
From a very particular pool of sources. Jewish sources like Jewish Chronicle, ADL and JVL are largely banned, as well as most of the major conservative news sources.
Meanwhile Al Jazeera has the highest status, and is the top source for most articles in the topic area, despite publishing misinformation like [1]. (It turned out to be fabricated [2] but remains up on their blog. They quietly took down a separate video about it, with no apology or retraction.)
That's how we end up with things like Wikipedia's updated definition of Zionism, based on anti-Zionist sources: "as much land, as many Jews, and as few Palestinian Arabs as possible".
Wikipedia is ultimately a numbers game, and editors interested in more balanced coverage have largely given up, since editors pushing an anti-Israeli agenda now have the numbers every time.
> Jewish sources like Jewish Chronicle, ADL and JVL are largely banned, as well as all the major conservative news sources.
Source?
My personal rule-of-thumb is that an international news source is likely to be fairly reliable so long as it's not reporting on something that they have a conflict of interest in (eg home country/demographic).
> Most editors seem to agree that Al Jazeera English and especially Al Jazeera Arabic are biased sources on the Arab–Israeli conflict and on topics for which the Qatari government has a conflict of interest.
> Al Jazeera's live blogs should be treated with caution, per the policy on news blogs.
The note about bias does nothing to prevent it from being used. Wikipedia doesn't really have any policy of avoiding biased sources; see WP:BIASED.
The live blog warning is mostly ignored in practice, even though it reflects a broader policy (WP:NEWSBLOG). Al Jazeera's live blog alone is probably used more than any other source in the topic area.
There is an abundance of allegations and testimony from not exactly neutral sources and a few isolated cases that have actual evidence going for them - which have been investigated and prosecuted by authorities.
Not in a thousand years I would have expected CNN to start reporting on this.
Hope they got some good lines responding to accusations on how every single one of them, including the janitors at the CNN Center in Atlanta are antisemitic.
-"But we're not!" -"Aha, that's exactly what they always say, clearly a sign of guilt!" /s
Reminder: Only right wing supporters of Iaraeli Likud party actually support genocide going on.
Literally half of Israeli citizens hate Likud and Natanyahu.
ps. Interesting trivia: Mahmoud Abbas (President of the Palestinian West Bank) and FATAH militia also are against Hamas. They always have been:
This is a popular idea in the Israeli propaganda. Israelis like to say that they hate Netanyahu, but in reality, majority of Israeli Jews fully align with his policies towards Palestinians, and multiple polls confirm this. https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2025-08-05/ty-article/.p...
There tends to be a lot more nuance[0] when it comes to polling results like these, the reality is that opinions amongst Israelis vary quite a lot. There are also a lot of problems with organizations like the UN historically wildly misrepresenting the food situation[1] which are likely to make Israelis question the accuracy of many of these starvation reports, especially from organizations that have historically made many highly inaccurate claims. UN backed IPC reports like those cited in the CNN article likewise have serious credibility issues as well[2], additionally there are extremely biased individuals like Michael Fakhri(the UN’s special rapporteur on the right to food) cited in the CNN article that even publish comic books with some rather overt antisemitic tropes[3].
This equivocation is absurd. Literally every international aid organization is saying the same thing - and even a few Israeli ones are now recognizing the genocide in Gaza. The fact that Israel, far from sending "large amounts of aid", has, in fact, systematically blocked aid to Gaza was recognized even by the US government. The US even resorted to building a pier to send their own aid in.
Edit: looking at the claims more specifically, this one is particularly easy to debunk:
> even publish comic books with some rather overt antisemitic trope
The supposed "antisemitic trope" is an image of a person holding a cracked globe. The blog post implies that this is supposed to be an image representing the antisemitic "masters of the world" trope. In fact, the image represents the UN rapporteur himself looking at how the lack of international reaction to Israel's crimes has left a crack in the UN-led rules-based world order.
“Here's a challenge - find me just one article in the mainstream media that calls for the de-radicalization of Israeli society. I'll save you the effort - you can't!”
The demonstrations are about his power grabs. They have 0 to do with the genocide. On that topic most Israelis are not against him. It is, in fact, what is keeping him in power and why he wants this war so badly.
~15% of Israelis believe that a terrorist who shot up a mosque (literally all he did) is a national hero.
It shouldnt be that that hard to imagine that most of the rest are willing to look the other way in the event of a genocide against the same untermensch.
(It's an archive link because the original is paywalled).
> Nearly half (47 percent) of respondents agreed that "when conquering an enemy city, the Israel Defense Forces should act as the Israelites did in Jericho under Joshua's command – killing all its inhabitants."
Does Israel have a government structure that allows for a counter-majoritarian government?
In the US, we do... due to the structure of the Senate and Electoral College, low population states wield outsize influence on national politics. This goes as far as allowing the election of a president with <50% national support. Add in political gerrymandering (setting electrical districts to constrain the influence of certain demographics), and we have a national government that's opposed to policies that have wide support across the population in general.
Opposition to Netanyahu inside Israel is almost entirely about domestic issues (like judicial reform) and the fact that he refuses to accept any negotiated deal to get the hostages back. Relatively few Israelis care about what he's doing to the Palestinians.
Israeli society is deeply complicit in the mass killing and starvation in Gaza. The IDF is a citizen army. There haven't been mass refusals or resistance. It's not just Netanyahu.
I wish this were true, but it looks like that even if Natanyahu has little support (mostly because of corruption), the genocide is well accepted by israeli public
What I find the most jarring about this on a day-to-day being in tech circles is how some of the smartest people I know are not only unwilling to call out what's happening, they're unwilling to acknowledge it to begin with, and some like the triangle man and Collison brothers even support it.
The more time I spend in tech the more I realize there's a deep moral rot here covered up by noveau-rich wealth
The problem is we’re in an age of mass disinformation that makes any claim potentially propaganda. It comes down to trust and belief and those things are either easier than ever or harder than ever depending on media you consume and common sense.
I feel like the community is censored or rather finds inconvenient to talk about it because of the big role that Israel plays in the tech scene. SV has an ethos of avoiding name calling and finger pointing at members of the community, since they know it's a long repeated game they are playing.
But I'm glad to see some prominent voices step up. Particularly, PG and Amjad Massad (Replit) have been very vocal. I hope their voice makes people feel like it's OK to call out human right violations when they see them.
Then there's the other extreme of the tech scene that simply decided to play politics for its own gain. The All In Pod crew as the poster children of this. Their cynicism is s transparent and disgusting in how they kiss the ring to get favor of the king in turn. I think that's a bit of what triangle man is trying to get, and it's certainly what sama was trying to do when this admin started.
Where did the idea that being smart meant being moral come from? Why would anyone assume that people in tech are "good"? A lot of (I would say most) people go into tech to make money. All the people you expect to say something won't because doing so could jeopardize the amount of money they make. The same goes with celebrities, academics, politicians, etc. If you are someone who makes a lot of money, and you speak negatively about america's greatest ally, you will probably make less money as a direct result.
Because tech people spent probably 5 years signalling their moral goodness about a wide array of topics, indeed proclaiming these the most important political topics. IT was and still is insufferable.
Way to whitewash a genocide. The title make it sound like the famine is accidental or an unintended consequence of Israel's "actions". While in reality, it's the sole purpose of what Israel is doing in Gaza for years, they are conducting a genocide, plain and simple.
One, really important to specify that the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and Israel said this, not the UN as a whole. "The UN" is generally held to be the General Assembly.
Two, I'm not disputing that it probably is a genocide. I'm just saying that people have been calling it a genocide well before we had evidence it was one. As a result, the term has lost moral weight.
Put another way, I don't think support for Palestine increases by calling it a genocide again. I do think it increases by showing, specifically, what the famine means for the kids on the ground can change hearts and minds. (Nobody, at this point, is probably going to be swung on a fundamental opinion. People may, however, re-prioritise this politically.)
“Israel has built the most efficient starvation machine you can imagine.”
There's political opposition to this within Israel. Here's what happened to an elected member of the Knesset who spoke out against the cruelty in Gaza.[1] He was forcibly removed from the podium of the Knesset.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UzDxV7jnAos
People sometimes forget how bitterly divided Israel was before October 7th, with hundreds of thousands of people protesting in the streets. The war put some of the infighting on hold for a while, but all the former problems still exist, and the stakes are higher.
Even Charlie Kirk, of all people, was talking about this (ignore the clickbait video title): https://youtu.be/3wUq3t9f6ug?si=nV_NukcsjHZgj0MT
The division is not about the starvation of Gaza. All Zionist parties in the Israeli parliament support the military campaign in Gaza. Apart from some lip-service from left-wing leaders, to my knowledge no Jewish leader has spoken against the starvation. Israeli media (except for Haaretz) have largely denied that there is a famine, and have called it a "propaganda campaign" by the Hamas.
> All Zionist parties in the Israeli parliament support the military campaign in Gaza
Source?
Some Orthodox Jews are very active against it, on very sound religious grounds.
They're a very tiny minority, and unfortunately they also get harrassed by Zionist Israelis
Pretty sure there's some commandment about this.
> how bitterly divided Israel was before October 7th ... people protesting in the streets. The war put some of the infighting on hold ... the stakes are higher
- Shulamit Volkov (afterword to "The Story of a German" by Sebastian Huffner).Huffner is Haffner:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sebastian_Haffner
Israel wasn't bitterly divided, and "hundreds of thousands" of people didn't protest on the street. Most of the Israeli population supported the judicial reform suggested by the government, along with parties that previously suggested the same changes. The protests, fueled by foreign money (including from the US) were to change the government without elections.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-64929563
The man speaking is Ayman Odeh [1], an Arab Israeli MK and chairman of Hadash, a left-wing Arab Israeli party. Arab Israelis and their political leaders are marginalized in Israeli society. Arab Israeli parties are largely considered illegitimate by a majority of Jewish Israelis.
Political opposition to the starvation of Gaza is still marginal, especially in Jewish society. Protests in Arab cities against the starvation and the genocide are being curbed and prevented by the police. the Jewish majority is still largely silent on these issues, if not outright supportive of the government policy.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayman_Odeh
Just to be fair, Israel itself is considered illegitimate by those parties. I doubt most democracies would let parties that are staunchly anti-state run, but Israel, for some reason, does.
Do any of the Scottish National Party, Plaid Cymru or Sinn Féin count? I have no doubt there are similar elsewhere...
Hadash is not an anti-state party. For instance it explicitly supports a two state solution.
Hadash is a communist party, first and foremost. But the Arab parties - Balad, Raam, Taal - they are advocating for Palestinian "right of return" and turning Israel into a bi-national state, therefore ending what we know as Israel today.
Being against Israel's status as an ethnostate is hardly "anti-state".
Canada has a federal party since 1991, the Bloc Québécois, "devoted to Quebecois nationalism, social democracy, and the promotion of Quebecois sovereignty."[0] They're explicitly separatist by policy. Quebec's last attempt at attaining sovereignty was a provincial referendum in 1995 that lost by 0.5%. Had it succeeded, the provincial gov't was prepared to declare full independence the next day.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloc_Qu%C3%A9b%C3%A9cois
As a Canadian I'd also say that having such a party is a huge boon to the country. Separatists are going to separatist - your choice, as a nation, is whether to allow them to organize and have their voices heard within the system of politics or whether to force them to resort to violence and underground organization. Those underground separatist groups will always exist but giving formal political representation to the desire for separation (even if it isn't granted) can help defuse extremism and provide better methods for airing grievances.
The modern BQ is much more tame than the BQ of thirty years prior - they've mainly morphed into a party focused on franophone rights within Canada and the maintenance of QC labor rights. So while they specifically no longer represent that separatist movement as directly there are other groups focused on prairie separatism that are a better modern parallel.
They are not parties considering Israel illegitimate nor are they calling for the destruction of Israel. They are parties calling for a two-state solution, and consider the globally-recognized-as-illegal settlements as illegitimate i.e. they call the ever expanding borders of Israel as illegitimate.
If you were to make them illegal, you're basically legally disenfranchising 25% of Israel's population.
"Israel accused the IPC of lowering the second threshold of acutely malnourished children for a famine declaration, which the IPC has denied."
Damn, Israel is really arguing about how much child starvation they are allowed to inflict before it becomes egregious?
That might be another one of those "are we the baddies?" moments right there.
Definitions matter. It's possible for an organization to redefine "acutely malnourished" as less than 4000 Cal/day, and then use that to make an accusation. Is that reasonable? No, because that does not match reality. It's unreasonable to criticize pushback on changing definitions because definitions should be pushed toward reality.
As you say definitions matter - so let's not invent hypothetical scenarios to dismiss points.
Israel was not arguing about the definition of 'acute malnourished'. The threshold for famine is 15%. The IPC said it had just hit 16% and was thus a famine. Israel was arguing that other data showed it was only 12.2-13.5% and therefore not a famine. When you get to the point of arguing "only 12% of the children are starving, not 16%" you probably shouldn't bother.
> When you get to the point of arguing "only 12% of the children are starving, not 16%" you probably shouldn't bother
Devil's advocate: we grow enough food to feed every human. What we lack is the logistics. War disrupts logistics. Food insecurity rising is thus, unfortunately, an expected (and probably unmitigatable) consequence of war.
That's why we have to define a line, based on history and capability, that sets what's a tolerable amount of starvation. And what is not.
Famine is not an inevitable outcome of war. It is the inevitable outcome of Israel's deliberate actions to limit access to food, which are well-documented.
> Famine is not an inevitable outcome of war
Food insecurity is. Famine is not. The latter is statistically defined, which is why we have levels and people arguing about which side of that level they stand.
It has also been well-documented that the controlling interest within Gaza also limits access to food - of it's own citizens/people.
While it seems undeniable the people of Gaza are experiencing food scarcity - we cannot lay blame soley at the foot of Israel here. That would be grossly disengenous and an outright falsehood.
> we cannot lay blame soley at the foot of Israel here
For the famine, yes we can. Let the aid in. Let Hamas steal it. Now you can blame Hamas. The fact that we have zero evidence of Hamas stealing the current aid makes it entirely one side's fault.
Aid did get in, and Hamas did steal it. The media ignored it, so the narrative continues status-quo.
Israel has no reason to support Hamas and their efforts here. If Hamas wasn't stealing all of the aid earlier in this conflict, perhaps aid would still be flowing into Gaza.
It doesn't seem so absolute/cut-and-dry like you try to make it.
> Aid did get in, and Hamas did steal it
We have no proof this was routinely happening [1].
[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/26/world/middleeast/hamas-un...
Hamas regularly brags in their recruitment videos about how much food they have, and how their fighters get to eat as much as they want.
There is enough food to feed the children but Israel won't let the food in. Not logistics someone trying to kill them and claiming to be the victim.
Does this particular (supposed) definition change matter here? Because if it doesn't, pushback by the aggressor is heinous and obviously disingenuous even if your abstract love of accuracy means you happen to agree with the objection.
From the latest "peace plan":
> 7. Upon acceptance of this agreement, full aid will be immediately sent into the Gaza Strip.
Full. Fucking. Admission. Right. There.
Sent by whom?
Also, the Israeli government cannot be trusted.
Their whole strategy since 1948 has been about distracting the Palestinians with fake peace processes that were never meant to lead to anything.
(see the book "The Hundred Years’ War on Palestine")
> Their whole strategy since 1948 has been about distracting the Palestinians with fake peace processes that were never meant to lead to anything
Totally untrue. Israel unilaterally disengaged from Gaza in 2005 [1]. The current divides aren't as entrenched as the belligerents would have us believe.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_disengagement_from_the...
Israel blocks the entry of Plumpy Nut into Gaza, a peanut-butter like paste meant for treating severe acute malnutrition. They say it is a luxury item Hamas might steal.[1] The amount of evidence Israel is committing genocide is embarrassing.
[1] https://x.com/DropSiteNews/status/1971582137947295831
It's wild to me how many people here use the "it's war, bad things happen" to justify the situation. Weird that it needs to be said, but this is why war crimes are a thing. Just because it's an armed conflict, doesn't mean anything goes.
> wild to me how many people here use the "it's war, bad things happen" to justify the situation
The point is to distinguish this war from how others have been fought. A lot of accusations against the IDF's conduct have been baseless. Not wrong in that they're factually incorrect. Just wrong in that it's how everyone else fights wars when they go to war.
This is different. America didn't trigger a famine in Iraq or Afghanistan, and it's not like we fought those wars honorably. That is where it's worth answering the question, is this just war or is this worse.
It's war initiated by Hamas, and since it losses, they try to throw the blame on Israel. Hamas needs to release the hostages and disarm and the war will end, Israel have said so many times before including the latest Trump deal.
This is just a variant of "it's war, bad things happen", with the addition of "they started it".
Putting the debate of who started what aside, does someone starting a war justify war crimes against them?
- who started what
- specific conditions to end things
- who agrees to what
All of these are distractions. The core issues are, are there war crimes being committed or not? Is the population of Gaza starving or not? If so, is Israel actively contributing or deliberately causing the situation or not?
EDIT: this is a good example of how collective punishment is being justified, to blame the population of Gaza for the actions (or inaction) of Hamas. "Well, if they just do X, then they wouldn't have to starve".
It's not, this conflict was started by Israel in 1948. The current genocide is just the most extreme phase of an ongoing, highly unequal, struggle since then.
Hamas releasing hostages will not end the genocide. Look at how the last ceasefire was intentionally broken by Israel.
> It's war initiated by Hamas
Takes two to tango. Hamas started the war. Israel has continued it way past where it made sense. (No later than after Sinwar was killed.)
Gaza has been under blockade since 2007, and the roots of the conflict date back to the founding of the Zionist Organization by Theodor Herzl in 1897 with the purpose to facilitate the escape of Jews from persecution in Eastern Europe by establishing a colony in Palestine. Israel has persecuted the indigenous people of Palestine ever since.
> the roots of the conflict date back to the founding of the Zionist Organization by Theodor Herzl in 1897 with the purpose to facilitate the escape of Jews from persecution in Eastern Europe by establishing a colony in Palestine
Please, the roots of this conflict go back millenia. Nothing done in the last hundred years have helped it. And the Palestinian people keep getting fucked by outside powers using them for their own ends, whether it be the Arab countries invading Israel or Iran having their sock puppets invite bombs. But it's a bit silly to imagine that if we poofed Israel and turned Israel & Palestine into a democracy that we wouldn't, within like two minutes, start seeing missiles flying.
> within like two minutes, start seeing missiles flying.
And that’s worse than the current situation how exactly?
In fact, it would be objectively better because there would be justice: no apartheid, no occupation, no tiered citizenship, and no blockade.
> way past where it made sense.
If they don't destroy Hamas now, then a war will happen again in another 10 years. At which point 10s of thousands of palestinians will needlessly die, again. The only resolution to all of this, will happen when Hamas is completely disarmed and out of power.
You can criticize how Israel goes about achieving that goal. But that goal is the only one that gets to a real, permanent peace.
A lot of problems with this.
1) As long as Israel treats Palestinians the way they current do, there will always be another Hamas. That or completely remove Palestinians from the area, which seems to be the current goal. So no, completely destroying hamas is not the only way to get to a real permanent peace.
2) How Israel is going about things is the exact issue at hand. You can't just hand wave it away.
3) Let's say for the sake of argument destroying Hamas IS the only way to achieve long lasting peace, how much death and destruction does it justify? 10% of the population? 20%? 50%?. So again just because it's an armed conflict, doesn't mean anything goes.
> As long as Israel treats Palestinians the way they current do, there will always be another Hamas
Eh, Trump's peace deal isn't great for Palestinians. But it gives them peace and a path to more peace in the future, and paths where considering options for resistance other than terrorism may flourish.
> Let's say for the sake of argument destroying Hamas IS the only way to achieve long lasting peace, how much death and destruction does it justify? 10% of the population?
Yikes. Based on precedent, I don't think countries have typically put an upper bound on this figure. I think a better question might be what's the upper bound on civilian deaths that should not be required to be exceeded if Hamas has to be routed out by force.
Replace Palestinians with Black South Africans, and imagine this offer was made in 1990 to the ANC, then reread your comment.
They are not going to be able eliminate or disarm Hamas by force. Heck, they only were able to “rescue” the vast majority of hostages via negotiation.
The only way forward is negotiation.
> If they don't destroy Hamas now, then a war will happen again in another 10 years
Sure. Destroying Hamas doesn't require starving children. Let food in. Keep targeting Hamas.
It is not possible to destroy an idea with violence. The more palestinians you shoot or starve the stronger Hamas will be when it returns. The only way for Israel to get real, permanent peace is probably removing all the palestinians which is why they are currently engaged in a genocide.
> It is not possible to destroy an idea with violence. The more palestinians you shoot or starve the stronger Hamas will be when it returns
One, lots of ideas have been destroyed by violence across history. When a nation with an oral tradition of history is exterminated, their ideas quite literally die with them.
Two, it's not a given that Palestinians will be terrorists. Eliminating Hamas gives room for other, better ideas around resistance to rise.
You are basically saying that regardless of criticisms and international condemnation, Israel has no choice but commit war crimes and genocide? This is like "look what you made me do" defence in court, not sure it will save genocider Netanyahu from rotting in the Hague jail.
Nor would it stop us from boycotting Israel and calling out their genocide.
> Israel has no choice
Yeah thats basically how thing will end up. Because if they dont get rid of Hamas now, they will end up in another war and end up killing 10s of thousands of more Palestinians later. Thats just what would happen.
I mean, people are saying Israel is doing a genocide now right? If thats the case, why wouldn't they just do a genicide again if another October 7th happened? Obviously thats what they would do.
> Nor would it stop us
You don't have to stop doing anything. Just realize that they have a modern military that they are going to continue to use to kill their enemy until that enemy has surrendered or been destroyed. Thats the only way this ends.
The only question is how many people have to die and how much of gaza has to be flattened in order to achieve that outcome. Boycotts aren't going to stop anything. Nor will condemnation. The only thing that would come close is serious military action, but well would you look at that, every major of enemy of Israel is now destroyed, from Syria to Hezbollah to Iran. Military action seems rather unlikely now, given how successful Israel was in obliterating every enemy it has in the area.
So, the people of palestine are left with choice. Accept peace, or watch as Israel keeps killing people until Hamas is gone for good.
> rotting in the Hague jail.
Even if this fantasy land future did come to past, trials don't bring back the dead. If Israel has to kill another 50 thousand people to get rid of Hamas (because a peace deal with rejected), well those 50k genocide victims are still dead. The world's not turning on a dime here. Nobody is coming to save palestine. Boycotts don't stop bombs.
> only question is how many people have to die and how much of gaza has to be flattened in order to achieve that outcome. Boycotts aren't going to stop anything. Nor will condemnation
I agree with the last part of this sentiment: boycotts and weapons-sale bans won't stop Israel.
But they will decrease its wealth and power in the long term. That should be something Tel Aviv seeks to avoid. Eliminating Hamas should not require inducing a famine.
I would go as far as to say that the very existence of Hamas is due to the actions of Israel.
Do you think that Israel, with the most advanced intelligence agency in the world, capable of planting bombs in pagers just in case for when they need them, did not know about the october 7 attack beforehand ??
> Do you think that Israel, with the most advanced intelligence agency in the world, capable of planting bombs in pagers just in case for when they need them, did not know about the october 7 attack beforehand ??
Yes. Quite easily. We missed 9/11. And nobody can still find Al Houthi.
9/11 is incomparable. The amount of resources and interest Israel has to monitor the movements of Palestinians in Gaza and elsewhere, particularly the Hamas, cannot possibly compare with US trying to keep tabs on half a continent across the globe.
And finding a simple person that could be anywhere is also an incomparable situation.
9/11 was different. Yes, that's the difference. airport security was more lax, the way we dealt with hijackings was different, and the security on airplanes was minimal.
You had a heavily fortified military DMZ between the massive surveillance and military state of Israel and Hamas flying in with kites, bulldozers, and motorcycles. I hope it was merely a massive failure due to arrogance and misallocation of resources, because a plausible alternative is sadly realistic and believable.
We still don't have a comprehensive map of Hamas' tunnel systems. I think you're overestimating the degree to which 2 million people can be surveilled.
Perhaps not, but it doesn't help when Israel demonstrates with pretty high frequency the ability to precisely target things, but then goes and drops a couple of 2000 pound bombs on a refugee camp. Or claim they know precisely how many hamas fighters have been killed but have no idea how many civilians have been killed.
Two numbers on the effectiveness of that strategy:
680.000 and 380.000.
The total number of Palestinians murdered, and the number of those who were kids under 5 years old.
https://arena.org.au/politics-of-counting-gazas-dead/
I haven't seen any numbers exceeding 100k. Where did you get 600k from ?
the article is taking projections and applying multiple extrapolations to them. It is a bad estimate.
The current estimates are between 53000 - 66000. About 10x lower than what you propose.
These numbers are just false. Even the Hamas numbers are 10x less than this!
Small thought exercise: What if the numbers were real? Would that change any of your stances/views? Would you self-reflect and consider that you had been tricked into spreading lies at the expense of thousands of lives?
Maybe it helps to start smaller. Many (Israeli's) have told me that the IDF is the world's most 'honest' military - one that even warns buildings before they're bombed!
Then, you can imagine how difficult it was for me to reconcile that with many facts from the ground. Here's one. Only one. The Rafah paramedic massacre:
"Israel at first claimed that the medics' vehicles did not have emergency signals on when troops opened fire but later backtracked. Cellphone video recovered from one of the medics contradicted Israel's initial account."[0]
Is that a one-off lie?
0: https://www.npr.org/2025/04/20/nx-s1-5370617/israeli-probe-k...
Let me turn the mirror around a bit. If numbers or incidents turn out to be false, exaggerated, or stripped of context, would you also self-reflect and consider that you might have been tricked into spreading lies - at the expense of Israelis whose lives are also on the line?
Of course, militaries make mistakes and sometimes issue wrong statements, just as governments everywhere do in the fog of war. The Rafah paramedic case you cite is tragic, and investigations matter. But a single flawed or retracted statement doesn’t prove a systematic policy of “lying” or “massacre” just as one instance of misconduct in any country’s army doesn’t automatically invalidate its overall values or procedures.
if we’re going to judge Israel by its errors, we should also weigh the context in which those errors happen (urban warfare, Hamas embedding itself in civilian areas, use of ambulances to smuggle fighters or weapons, etc.). And we should also judge Hamas by its admitted policies - deliberately targeting civilians, embedding in hospitals, rejecting coexistence.
If we’re honest, both of us need to be open to the possibility that our sources and interpretations can be incomplete or biased. Real reflection means asking hard questions in both directions - not only of Israelis, not only of Palestinians.
I'm not sure why you're being down-voted... But here's two credible sources:
Reuters estimates the deaths at 60,000 [ https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/how-many-palestini... ]
The UN estimates it to be at about 65,000 [ https://www.ochaopt.org/content/reported-impact-snapshot-gaz... ]
Neither of which are around 600 thousand as the previous commenter posted. The French News Channel called France24 did a quick video explaining the current fake news that certain NGOs are spreading with misleading death counts -- https://www.france24.com/en/tv-shows/truth-or-fake/20250624-...
Because the linked article clearly states why the official numbers are not accurate in the authors opinions.
Also "These numbers are just false" is not a valid argument.
Well, these numbers are from July, and from that very first article:
"Official Palestinian tallies of direct deaths in the Gaza war likely undercounted the number of casualties by around 40% in the first nine months of the war as Gaza's healthcare infrastructure unravelled, according to a peer-reviewed study published in The Lancet journal in January."
Still, from those numbers, it seems difficult to stretch from 60k to 600k.
That said, even if you take the absolute tail number, 60k, how anyone can defend a genocide of 60k people in a land area smaller than Portland, in less than a year, is reprehensible. Especially when many of those are children. Almost one child murdered every 10 minutes, at the low end, for an entire year?
Are you surprised I'm being downvoted? I'm working towards my 500 karma so I can also start downvoting obvious nonsense like that comment but publicly correcting nonsense craters your karma.
What are the numbers then?
440+ according to Wikipedia. Only a lower bound I guess.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza_Strip_famine
EDIT: only due to starvation
10x less.
https://data.techforpalestine.org/docs/killed-in-gaza/
Why don't you just do some basic fact checking of clearly ludicrous information?
Edit: sorry it wasn't you that posted it. But seriously, people need to stop spreading that lie. It's shocking how wrong it is and how people just believe it.
I was referencing numbers from the article which I linked, which clearly states the reasons for why those researchers don't believe official numbers.
The page you linked seems to only include deaths where the name of the person is known. Who is left in Gaza to count or report the dead?
Who is left in Gaza to count or report all the dead? The people who die of famine?
Official numbers have increased by less than 20.000 in the last year of genocide. Isn't that curious?
It's not as if Hamas is only counting hospital/morgue records. There's a Google form where any Gazan can report a casualty.
The drop is to be expected, since the fighting was much more intense in earlier phases of the war.
The population of Gaza is higher now than before the conflict. Did you know that? Least effective "genocide" ever.
Where did you get that information from? :)
This person isn't worth responding to, as they are very likely paid propaganda (see links below).
- https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-news-from-elsewhere-23695896 - https://www.versobooks.com/blogs/news/social-media-is-a-warz... - https://worldcrunch.com/culture-society/tweet-offensive-soci...
The horror that starvation inflicts on the human mind is beyond comparison. My grandfather experienced this firsthand when he fled from the Japanese invasion, an occupation that stripped civilians of their food supply. He helplessly watched as his parents, relatives, and even his older brother succumbed one by one to hunger. Barely escaping the same fate, he fled the country just before starvation could claim his own life.
When I was eight years old, I asked him why he always kept a room filled with dried cassava root. His reply was simple but unforgettable: dying from starvation is the most terrifying experience imaginable, and he was determined never to endure it again.
Starvation may also cause epigenetic and metabolic changes, which persist and are even passed to next generations. In children tissue dystrophy is particular damaging, since their bodies are still developing. Starvation is a really fucking bad thing.
There is simply no excuse for blocking the entry of food into a region wholesale. For that alone they should, at the very least, be an outcast in the international community. But here we are.
That they have the backing and blessing of the US government is the counter-argument to this. The US can almost unilaterally end this war if they want to.
> US can almost unilaterally end this war if they want to
Almost but not quite.
US cannot end anything cause Israel fully controls USA (especially this administration) so this statement is like saying Malta can stop the war in Ukraine. You should by now know who is Boss is who is subordinate
How is that a counter-argument?
US has a lot of both soft and hard power globally. If you don't treat their puppet state with deference (and do treat it as an outcast), you can face consequences. The current US admin is using this as a stick against its own citizens, even.
OK, but I still don't see how that's a counterargument to the proposition that "There is simply no excuse for blocking the entry of food into a region wholesale."
Oh, I reacted to GP's entire comment, not just the first sentence.
Honest question, why can it not just go through the 14 km border with Egypt? Is Egypt also blocking access for food and aid?
Because the Rafah crossing is currently controlled by the Israeli army. Egypt can allow all the aid it wants, it’ll still get stopped by the Israelis.
And even before then, Egypt's peace with Israel (and Egypt's subsequent ~$1B/yr in defense aid from the US) depends on playing nice with Israel in several respects, including deferring to Israeli policy on the Gaza border.
There's also the fact that Israel has been bombing aid trucks and killing aid workers and burying them alive.
Before May 2024, Egypt was the primary route for aid to get it, but getting from Southern Gaza to northern Gaza was incredibly dangerous.
according to UN data egypt was primary route only for a few months following october 7th, as all of Israeli border was an active war zone:
https://www.ochaopt.org/data/crossings
Not that it's ever prevented smuggling. Curious where all of hamas weapons are coming from.
There has been smuggling of course, but (perhaps unintentionally) Israel gives them most of what they use.
> But recent intelligence has shown the extent to which Hamas has been able to build many of its rockets and anti-tank weaponry out of the thousands of munitions that failed to detonate when Israel lobbed them into Gaza, according to weapons experts and Israeli and Western intelligence officials. Hamas is also arming its fighters with weapons stolen from Israeli military bases.
> “Unexploded ordnance is a main source of explosives for Hamas,” said Michael Cardash, the former deputy head of the Israeli National Police Bomb Disposal Division and an Israeli police consultant. “They are cutting open bombs from Israel, artillery bombs from Israel, and a lot of them are being used, of course, and repurposed for their explosives and rockets.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/28/world/middleeast/israel-h...
Also repurposed infrastructure like water pipes and lamposts. But they had plenty of weapons and explosives pre war, before egypt sealed their border to gaza.
The explosives are the part that obviously should be given the main focus.
And quite a bit of what's being talked about wrt to re-manufacturing Israeli unexploded ordance was stockpiled prior to Oct 7th. Israel did not start bombing Gaza only after Oct 7th (and in fact had been bombing Gaza as late as Sept 23, 2023).
> Not that it's ever prevented smuggling. Curious where all of hamas weapons are coming from.
Gaza is on the ocean: they could have been brought in via boat.
To be fair, Israel has had a complete naval blockade of Gaza for some 20 years, and is probably the more effective part of their blockade.
Egypt has made it fairly clear they want nothing to do with Gaza and Palenstine. I don't believe they would send aid or allow crossings anyway.
"What interest they have to come to such place"
Israel controls that border.
The claim I've heard them make is that the food aid is making it in, but being stolen by Hamas so that it can be resold at markup. How do you convince people that believe this that it isn't true (or is irrelevant)?
Would reporting from the NYT citing Israeli military officials saying that this didn't happen on any notable scale help convince people?
No Proof Hamas Routinely Stole U.N. Aid, Israeli Military Officials Say
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/26/world/middleeast/hamas-un...
The UN's own data (https://app.un2720.org/tracking) shows 86,531 pallets were intercepted, while only 26,772 pallets arrived at their intended destination.
We don't know many of the interceptions Hamas was behind, but that isn't really important.
> We don't know much many of the interceptions Hamas was behind, but that isn't really important.
Sure it is when Israel is funding other groups that are known for stealing aid. It changes the entire narrative.
Israel backs an anti-Hamas armed group known for looting aid in Gaza. Here’s what we know
https://apnews.com/article/gaza-armed-groups-hamas-israel-lo...
First of all your own link clearly states "Intercepted: Either peacefully by hungry people or forcefully by armed actors, during transit in Gaza".
Secondly, nobody can tell who intercepted what, it could very well be that the IDF is intercepting them covertly.
are you doing okay? you're all over these comments in a manic way trying to refute something people can see with their own eyes
What do people see with their own eyes? I see terrorists who committed mass murder and rape, in the name of their religion, hiding among civilians. I see a war of self defense by a country that is peacefully home to a population that is 30% minority.
Can't tell if you're an antisemite or Zionist from this comment
Is 0 better than 26,772 pallets?
Who is suggesting making it 0?
The Israeli government in March of this year. And it wasn't a suggestion, it was an implemented policy.
https://www.cnn.com/2025/03/02/middleeast/israel-halts-gaza-...
I have no idea. I've heard a lot of "just because a minister says it it isn't true, do you believe everything Trump or congresspeople say?" in response to what ministers say. That, and the usual "the media (particularly mainstream, like NYT) is lying/anti-semitic/etc." So I imagine the reply would be the same.
There’s no “proof” but that doesn’t mean it isn’t happening. The pallets that never made it to people in need didn’t magically disappear. There is also a history of Hamas stealing aid that goes back MUCH longer than the post-October-7 conflict:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blockade_of_the_Gaza_Strip#Feb...
> How do you convince people that believe this that it isn't true
It's not like the Gazans have any money to speak of.
> (or is irrelevant)?
If the way to prevent starvation is to flood the zone with food shipments, it's a moral imperative to do that. That it will also help keep the enemy fed is entirely beside the point, since causing starvation is not a legal or ethical form of warfare.
> It's not like the Gazans have any money to speak of.
This is more of an argument in favor of the other side. It immediately becomes clear why they don't have the money.
20 years of economic warfare where all exports were banned as a mechanism for destroying their economy being a primary reason.
https://web.archive.org/web/20100612001046/http://www.mcclat...
un data showing hundreds of trucks exporting goods from gaza every month:
https://www.ochaopt.org/data/crossings
Then Israel severely limiting the amount of food is helping Hamas by artificially, and cruelly, limiting supply. People want to feed their families and will go to great lengths: sell their valuables, harm others, or wait in line at a Gaza Health Ministry site with the knowledge the IDF might fire into the crowd.
If they flooded Gaza with food then Hamas would benefit less from the supposed stealing/reselling.
> stolen by Hamas
And/or the Israel-backed ISIS groups[1][2].
[1]: https://www.ynetnews.com/article/sytu2q1mel
[2]: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/israel-hamas-war-netanyahu-armi...
Hamas actually cleaned house of a couple of the leaders of these gangs recently.
If that was true, wouldn’t the best course of action be to let as much aid as possible into Gaza to flood the market rather than restricting the flow (therefore increasing prices) like Israel has been doing?
See this Tucker Carlson interview with a former US special forces colonel who worked distributing aid in Gaza https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QRjEMbHXM4Q
It is irrelevant. Israel shouldn't block other countries from sending whatever aid, obviously making sure there's no arms.
Aid can be used to procure arms. You can confiscate it, sell it to people, and use the money to buy arms.
No it cant because israel controls the borders and isnt letting any arms in. It can be used to pay terrorists but Israel just has to live with that. If they are confident aid is being used to pay terrorists the correct move is not cutting off aid its defending the aid
Who is in Gaza right now selling arms?
> Who is in Gaza right now selling arms?
Aid can be used to pay fighters. That doesn't justify blocking aid. Just that there are military reasons to be careful about how it's distributed.
Joo gaslighting is insane
In conditions of desperation, aren’t the strong people with the guns always the last to starve?
What's the best way of reducing this markup if it were true? Not sending in aid (no supply = lots of demand) or flooding the area with aid?
Seems to me, if the claim is true, Israel is trying to give Hamas more power, not less.
Satanyahu funded Hamas so they could raise to power so he'd have an excuse to genocide all Palestinians. This is all a part of his plan.
even if it was true, and the charities say it is not, would that make it OK to starve the people of Gaza?
And this didn't start in 2023. Gaza has been under Israeli blockade for decades.
> And this didn't start in 2023. Gaza has been under Israeli blockade for decades.
The blockade was also imposed by Egypt[0] and Hamas certainly provided no shortage of security related justifications for the blockade. Unfortunately those security concerns turned out to be accurate[1].
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blockade_of_the_Gaza_Strip
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/October_7_attacks
Unfortunately Netanyahu actively encouraged Qatar to send cash to Hamas.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_support_for_Hamas
> In February 2020, former Mossad Director Yossi Cohen and Israeli general Herzi Halevi, under Netanyahu's orders, went to Qatar to plead Qatari officials to continue the payments for Hamas.[8] Later, in September 2023, David Barnea, the Director of Mossad since 2021, went to Qatar to meet Qatari officials to discuss about the payments for Hamas.[10][44]
(...)
> Israeli intelligence officials believe that the money had a role in the success of 2023 Hamas-led attack.[10]
> Unfortunately Netanyahu actively encouraged Qatar to send cash to Hamas.
Yeah, Benjamin Netanyahu certainly got complacent thinking he could keep a genocidal terrorist group like Hamas under control with that strategy. Qatar and their support for terrorists has long been a problem as well.
The October 7 attacks only succeeded because Netanyahu opened the military border to let them in.
The level of blockade now is on a whole other level.
Not to mention that the blockade was enforced by Egypt as well.
It’s not been under a “blockade” for even a year continuously. Literally earlier this year, hundreds of trucks carrying aid were allowed in per day. That was during the ceasefire that didn’t last. If you go back to the history of blockades of Gaza you’ll see it was very intermittent. And when things were tightened, it was in response to incidents like Hamas rocket attacks.
The requirement is about five hundred trucks per day of food (so each truck feeding about four thousand people). The fact that on rare occasions they'd let in about half that isn't really a point in your favor.
un own statistics site https://www.ochaopt.org/data/crossings
food tracks fluctuate between 2000 and 3000 a month prior to oct 7th. a few more dozens of of tracks with "non-edible consumables" and "medical supplies". rest of tracks are construction materials
In 1942, Jewish doctors conducted the Warsaw Ghetto Hunger Study used the man made famine to study the physiological and psychological effects of hunger. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warsaw_Ghetto_Hunger_Study Not all scientific studies need to be replicated.
UK surgeon Nick Maynard, a volunteer at Nasser Hospital, tells Good Morning Britain that he and other doctors tried to bring baby formula into Gaza and the Israelis confiscated it from them with no justification. [0]
[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ipJEROtHOs
Would it be acceptable even with a justification?
If a justification was given we'd be able to evaluate the worthiness of that decision - if there were technical notes about, for instance, food safety concerns, we could evaluate the justification against other standards in different areas of the world around proper formula storage.
Without a justification the decision is arbitrary and silences any ability to push back against it within the normal bounds of dialog. A justification would potentially allow aid groups to remedy whatever the specific deficiency is if it is a reasonable deficiency to remedy.
If there was a justification it might be acceptable - depending on the justification - without a justification it is unacceptable when there is such a clear need. The aid is blocked and there is no recourse to unblock it outside the current attempts to just smuggle it in.
No, but the callousness of an arbitrary decision without even spending 10 seconds to make up a pretend reason is a pure display of power. They do what they want and they don’t care one bit about even looking like the good guys.
That rather depends on the justification. "We think you might be planning to use that to feed babies," no. "There's a small canister of nerve gas concealed in the middle," yes.
I think we all know what their 'justification' was unfortunately.
The reason for that is apparently that you can use baby formula to make rocket candy. Because apparently extracting the lactose from 40kg baby formula is all it takes to make a quassam rocket.
If you can get your hand om 20kg of oxidiser that is. It is all more than ridiculous.
Edit: and Nick Maynard is a national treasure.
Same for water. I've heard they could electrolyze drinking water into hydrogen and oxygen. Then they could explode the hydrogen using the oxygen as an oxidizer.
Only solution is to cut off all wells and water supplies.
https://www.dhmo.org/
Though different from the rocket fuel, I've read Israel has dumped so much ordinance on Gaza that the Hamas weapons primarily use material from unexploded ordinance as their warheads.
Fixed headline: "How Israel caused famine in Gaza".
There is an editorial voice reserved purely for blunting reporting on American and Israeli state crimes that drives me nuts.
It might also be that Hamas intimidates people that go to food distribution sites, shoot at Israeli soldiers from within crowds of people, and also shoot at Gazan's to make it look like it was Israelis. The lows Hamas are capable of is beyond normal comprehension.
Mhh, what if we let enough food into Gaza so that everyone can survive?
Why would Hamas have any reason to steal food then?
Did you know that the population of Gaza has actually increased since the start of the conflict?
Could you please link a source for that piece of information?
For anyone commenting on this, I'll leave this: Official aid delivery reported by UN. I'd also assume this to be of the lower side, as there probably is more that doesn't get reported thorugh UN 27720 mechanism. I find the fact that this article does not use this or point to this data very questionable, but maybe I am wrong and I am imagining things.
https://app.un2720.org/tracking
I think the most amazing part of the comments is how much the sentiment has changed over the last 2 years. Is anybody else noticing this?
Plausible deniability dried up as the blatantly skewed results of this “conflict” became impossible to ignore.
For reference: While the gas chambers were are the prominent way of death during the Holocaust, the majority of victims died of starvation. Starvation death looks like succumbing to a random sickness (the body is just too weak for a functional immune response), and thus saves the perpetrator from the usual psychological consequences of direct murder. This methodology was agreed on during the Wannsee conference in 1942.
See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunger_Plan
I've seen air dropping videos, if random countries were to try that would they be at risk of being shot down, probably right for violating air space (cough cough).
Yes, airdrops are only done with permission from Israel since they control Gaza airspace (they have for decades). But airdrops are not an efficient way to feed millions of people (and the pallets have killed multiple people by landing on them). Shipping by truck allows a much larger volume much faster, and the UN has experience doing so, but they have been largely blocked from doing so for months by Israel, which runs its own much less efficient aid operation with many fewer distribution points guarded by mercenaries who regularly kill aid seekers who often have to travel long distances through dangerous areas.
This genocide reveals how much Israel truly controls the US government and other Western countries. I am beyond appalled this is allowed to happen. The last couple of months also showed that international rules and agreements don't mean anything - they are in fact only there to please the Western countries, until they throw it in the bin when it is convenient to them.
Anyone who isn't from the West, hell even Southern Europeans, are taking note. There is no rights and freedoms for us. All this for to support a bully of a fundamentalist state and a bunch of theocratic kingdoms/emirates.
I've got to wonder if Israel is one the pillars propping up Trump along with China and Russia. It would make perfect sense with its relation to the Epstein files (in which Trump is likely mentioned every other paragraph).
I'm not saying the Democrats have done great by Gaza, but I feel like the point we're at - irrefutable genocide through starvation - there would at least be significant pressure to stop attacking humanitarian convoys.
All I can really say about the current situation is that it would be a great time for the EU to step up, demonstrate some international leadership, and forcibly deliver aid under the guard of military force.
I generally use conversations on this topic as a litmus test for a group or community. I’m pretty disappointed by all the whatabout-ism and false equivalence.
I expected better from HN.
We can study why this happened later. The genocide needs to stop now.
It's amazing to see how support of Israel has started collapsing. Scores of US-aligned nations now recognise Palestine. Even inside their traditional support base in the US, it's on the decline; 50% of Republicans under 50 don't support Israel. At least one republican is calling it a "genocide". MAGA split over Iran.
What's interesting is that I don't see the zionist talking points changing at all. They still hold out hope they can accuse everyone of "anti-semitism" and they'll all get back in line like it's 2020. I think they're holding out hope things can go back to normal, but it will be hard to put the toothpaste back in the tube.
Chill with the antisemitism, will ya
Where do you see antisemitism?
Question: There is a repeated claim that more calories have been provided to the Gaza people than several other human crisis scenarios, but that Hamas is currently stealing it all.
But I have never seen rampant obesity in Hamas prisoners that the IDF have captured alive? Hamas can't be extorting the Gazan people for those calories, the Gazan people have no money at this point by and large due to the huge swath of destruction of property and infrastructure via bombing-- only Hamas has those underground tunnels or somesuch.
So like... what is going on here
> Question: There is a repeated claim that more calories have been provided to the Gaza people than several other human crisis scenarios, but that Hamas is currently stealing it all.
This claim is made by supporters of the war _outside of Israel_ for external consumption. If you look at what the Israeli cabinet, generals and politicians are saying for internal consumption... it's pretty deliberate.
UN data, compare numbers "arrived" and "intercepted": https://app.un2720.org/tracking
are you saying un supports the war then?
Intercepted is defined as "either peacefully by hungry people or forcefully by armed actors, during transit in Gaza." Some fraction of that may be Hamas. But we have no evidence of that.
> Either peacefully by hungry people or forcefully armed actors, during transit in Gaza
the article also states that the US has looked into the reports of Hamas stealing the aid and found that none of the aid appears to have been stolen by anyone.
given the current US administration and their hard-on for Israel, I can't imagine this is a faked report. if it were faked, it'd be to agree with Israel
Have a look here:
https://apnews.com/article/mideast-wars-photo-gallery-hostag...
Plenty of Hamas fighters looking in pretty great shape.
Congratulations on discovering an easily identifyable lie.
From the article: "An internal US government review found no evidence of widespread theft by Hamas of US-funded humanitarian aid in Gaza." Other reporting supports this.
So what is going on is that the IDF are lying to justify their genocide. There is a massive propaganda machine at work to muddy the waters.
Kinda silly logic, access to calories doesn't mean someone has to be obese.
Not saying that the claim is true, just that your logic is faulty.
Thats eye opening
> A senior COGAT official told a briefing in early September that 27% of the trucks entering Gaza are UN vehicles, claiming it was “a lie” that the UN had brought in 600 aid trucks a day before the war.
un own statistics site https://www.ochaopt.org/data/crossings
food tracks fluctuate between 2000 and 3000 a month prior to oct 7th. a few more dozens of of tracks with "non-edible consumables" and "medical supplies". rest of tracks are construction materials
"farm land" part, they forgot to mention that gaza was always totally dependent on imported food. farmland iirc provides only few percent of calories required in gaza. live stock is also sustained by imported feed
There is massive narrative deception from Israel... wake up world:
>“There is no famine in Gaza. Period,” the [Israeli] official said, adding that “Israel and the IDF are trying to strengthen the humanitarian situation in Gaza with partners.”
If you want to see what Netanyaho looks like when he's covering things up [lying] just watch the 2024 documentary The Bibi Files — about his corruption charges (which features over an hour of Netanyaho lying to investigators about his accepting roses and leaves [wine and cigars]) — complete with his shit-eating-grins galore...
World leaders know this, they're pretending not to see it. For example, the Biden administration set specific aid targets for Israel to meet and even acknowledged that they weren't being met by the "deadline" but neglected to impose any consequences.
https://www.propublica.org/article/biden-blinken-state-depar...
Israelis (including those who use this platform to repeat the same warmed-over genocide denials for the umpteenth time) know it's happening too. That's why the argument is usually 50% "it's not happening" and 50% "but they deserve it".
So assuming all this is true, why is Hamas refusing a peace deal that ends all this and lets them escape with their lives?
Can someone provide a realistic answer?
Probably because Israel violated the ceasefire earlier this year (that was a sham from the beginning) that lasted from January to March. The first phase of the ceasefire saw an exchange of hostages, but then the Israelis refused to move on to the second phase and broke the ceasefire by bombing Gaza in the middle of the night, killing over 400 Palestinians in one day, including over 200 children. [0]
Not to mention the fact that Israel just killed a top Hamas negotiator in Doha, Qatar only a few weeks ago. [1] How can you negotiate with someone who just killed your negotiator?
[0] https://apnews.com/live/latest-updates-israel-launches-new-w...
[1] https://apnews.com/article/qatar-explosion-doha-e319dd51b170...
> Probably because Israel violated the ceasefire earlier this year (that was a sham from the beginning) that lasted from January to March. The first phase of the ceasefire saw an exchange of hostages, but then the Israelis refused to move on to the second phase and broke the ceasefire by bombing Gaza in the middle of the night, killing over 400 Palestinians in one day, including over 200 children.
Israel has been rather consistent that a permanent ceasefire will only happen when Hamas effectively surrenders and gives up power. Hamas had also refused to continue releasing hostages which effectively ended the ceasefire(as the terms of the second phase were never finalized).
> Not to mention the fact that Israel just killed a top Hamas negotiator in Doha, Qatar only a few weeks ago. [1] How can you negotiate with someone who just killed your negotiator?
I suppose when attempting to negotiate the surrender of Hamas if the negotiators refuse to surrender after having clearly lost a war they started then eliminating the current negotiators may result in their replacements being more likely to capitulate. That seemed to work out with Hezbollah at least.
That wasn't a ceasefire violation. It was a six week ceasefire that had expired at the beginning of March
> How can you negotiate with someone who just killed your negotiator?
The only other option seems to be that Israel is about to destroy the rest of Gaza City, and take out the last major location that Hamas controls. So their options are to either accept the peace plan, or die.
I don't think Israel cares that much which choice Hamas choses. But yeah accepting this peace deal sounds like it it quite obviously the mostly likely option to help prevent all the buildings that are about to be destroyed and people who will be killed.
I can't believe I'm weighing in on a political thread, but the "deal" is very one sided. It offers very little for the Palestinians in terms of creating their own country and ability to self govern and gives Israel pretty much everything they want including some control over Palestine.
The current "peace deal" is terrible for the Palestinians. No other country would sign it either.
> the "deal" is very one sided
This is pretty much one should expect when one starts and loses a war, same as with the surrender of Nazi Germany and the Japanese at the end of WW2.
> The current "peace deal" is terrible for the Palestinians. No other country would sign it either.
It's a surrender agreement effectively, it's certainly not a peace deal amongst equal parties.
The indigenous people of Palestine did not start this conflict. They did not choose to be colonized by Jews fleeing persecution in Eastern Europe.
> This is pretty much one should expect when one starts and loses a war, same as with the surrender of Nazi Germany and the Japanese at the end of WW2
You're being downvoted, but this is pretty much it. Gaza gets peace out of the deal. That's about all they have left to negotiate for.
Well the palestinians shouldnt have launched a terrorist attack if they wanted a good deal. Now their choices are bad deal or genocide
the deal is not with palestinians but with hamas (unless you say that hamas represents palestinians). palestinians at large and palestinian authority support this deal.
Because it doesn't move the situation any closer to liberation of their people and their homeland.
They have been willing to constantly fight, and constantly keep getting killed by an enemy with overwhelming advantages, for their cause for two years now. Why would you assume that being able to escape with their lives is suddenly more important to them?
> They have been willing to constantly fight, and constantly keep getting killed by an enemy
Thats not true at all. Most people in palestine do not want to throw their lives away for nothing. Most of them want peace. Its only Hamas that would apparently prefer to get killed and have gaza be flattened instead of accepting peace.
The question I responded to was: "why is Hamas refusing a peace deal that ends all this and lets them escape with their lives?" Your responding that what I wrote is "not true at all" makes no sense in the context.
> They have been willing to constantly fight, and constantly keep getting killed by an enemy with overwhelming advantages, for their cause for two years now
Hamas has. If you put this deal to a plebescite in Gaza, do you really think they'd vote for more war?
Yes, Hamas (and all the other resistance factions that are active in Gaza). The question I responded to was: "why is Hamas refusing a peace deal that ends all this and lets them escape with their lives?" My answer was perfectly within the scope of the original question.
I mean, it moves the situation closer to not living in war and famine? Also the idea of amnesty to all Hamas members looks pretty generous to me - Nazis didn't enjoy the same privilege
> I mean, it moves the situation closer to not living in war and famine?
And then what? Look at the West Bank to see what happens when you don't resist the occupation and fully cooperate with the colonial state. You get slowly cleansed anyway.
> Also the idea of amnesty to all Hamas members looks pretty generous to me
Israel specializes in assassinations and has a history of relentlessly pursuing those it deems its enemies. If you were a Hamas fighter, your choice would be to either die fighting for a purpose, or be killed in exile without a purpose anymore.
> doesn't move the situation any closer to liberation of their people and their homeland.
From Hamas?
From the people killing them in places where Hamas has no control and building illegal settlements on their land.
The party refusing any kind of deal are Israel since their goal is annihilation of Palestinians. Hamas were ready from day one for a deal, their goal (contrary to israeli narrative of course) was to negotiate prisoner exchange for the 1000s of Palesitnian prisoners held by israel (including children). This is still their goal along with ceasefire and complete withdrawal from Gaza.
> a peace deal that ends all this
Netanyahu, Smotrich and Ben-Gvir do not want this peace deal either. There is 0 chance it would be honored.
Netanyahu signed on. I am asking why Hamas won't accept it.
It amazes me how anyone can believe Netanyahu's theatrics at this point.
It would make Hamas entirely useless, how could they accept it?
That's not true, if you’re referring to the Trump plan, as he contradicted one of the main points upon return to Israel. He selectively backed some part of it, which is not really “signing” on the same plan that was offered to other parties.
Also, what value has Netanyahu’s word? I mean, after blowing up a truce unilaterally, after killing negotiators, after all the corruption reckoning that is coming to him if/when out of office...
When Israel has broken all of the previous peace deals, you would have to be deeply idiotic to accept one brokered by Trump of all people.
Whenever they've tried to agree to any peace deals in the past, what ends up happening is they make concessions and then Netanyahu turns around and resumes the war anyway.
Isn’t it true that some of the leadership doesn’t live in gaza at all?
Yes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_leaders_of_Hamas
Leadership of the political organisation, not all. However the military branch's leadership is/was in Gaza (like Yahya Sinwar and others who were killed)
Yes, that's who was bombed in Qatar.
They do some finances and politics but aren't involved in running Gaza or the military/militants.
Then it makes a lot of sense they might fear for their life less than the militants actually trapped in gaza
Because Netanyahu is already saying he wouldn't comply with the deal that he's already agreed to, and isn't treating it as a peace deal.
> While Netanyahu agreed to the plan on Monday, he already appears to be pushing back on several of its terms.
> In a video posted on X, he insisted that the IDF would would be able to remain in parts of the territory and that Israel would 'forcibly resist' the establishment of a Palestinian state.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15156091/Hamas-mili...
Cause they are islamists and have nothing against turning all of Gaza's population into "martyrs"?
Has there been a peace deal that ends any of this for long?
Hamas and Israel only had ceasefire deals from what I recall, not an actual peace deal.
It was introduced by Trump on Monday, iirc. Israel and most of Arab nations signed on. Hamas is the one likely saying no.
That is, technically, at odds with the truth, and morally, a transparent attempt at misinformation, please read the comments above you, or use “the internet”.
Killing 736 Israeli civilians, 79 foreign nationals, and 379 Israeli military and security personnel, and kidnapping an additional 250 civilians is not, by any fathomable definition, genocide. It is a war crime for sure, but it's not genocide.
Edit: the post I was replying to was claiming Hamas/the Palestinians perpetrated a genocide in Israel. It has since been edited to be a completely different thing.
I think you are mixing up genocide and the acts that are committed in furtherance of genocide.
Genocide is legally a set of acts committed with the intent to destroy a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group.
So yes, what Hamas did on Oct 7 was not genocide, and similarly what Israel does on any given day in Gaza is not genocide. Rather they are both part of ongoing campaigns that arguably are genocide.
Did you even read the question?
> Killing 736 Israeli civilians, 79 foreign nationals, and 379 Israeli military and security personnel, and kidnapping an additional 250 civilians is not, by any fathomable definition, genocide. It is a war crime for sure, but it's not genocide.
I think the evidence is quite overwhelming that Hamas had clear genocidal intent, even if they did not have the means to accomplish that intent.
Something I try to explain to people is that HAMAS tries to kill civilians, but fails at achieving their goals, meanwhile Israel tries to avoid killing civilians, but fails to achieve that goal.
One of these is better than the other.
Weirdly, many people disagree over which one that is.
Why would the answer to this question matter in any way?
It's not a war anymore, wars are between armies, not civilians.
You are honestly blaming the killing of 60,000+ Palestinians on Hamas for not accepting a Peace Deal (Israel didn't honor the last one months ago) only?
Assume it is a hostage situation, 2,000,000 Hostages. Israel has killed 60,000+ hostages trying to rescue hostages. Starvation also counts as killings to me, but I supposed "Starved" is less direct than "Shot"
> why is Hamas refusing a peace deal
They're psychotic idiots.
> lets them escape with their lives
On the other hand: how idiotic would they have to be to believe the Israelis will let them escape with their lives, given all the evidence to the contrary?
The Trump peace plan calls for a resumption of aid contingent on the Palestinians accepting the deal.
Please understand that this is a war crime. You can not use starvation of civilians as a weapon or as leverage against combatants.
> this is a war crime. You can not use starvation of civilians as a weapon or as leverage against combatants
America withholding its own aid is not a war crime.
I think people blaming it on Hamas need to realize that Israel funds Hamas and uses it as a tool to further their goals. Hamas is their version of Talibans. It fully lines up.
> Israel funds Hamas
Funded. Past tense. We funded the Mujahideen, once, and then got bombed by their successors.
Well, if that was the case, it's not really working out for Israel now, is it? Considering that more and more countries are recognising Palestine, etc.
This comment is widespread on X or other social media as the n-th conspiracy theory that Israel has staged the attack etc. Crazy.
> Considering that more and more countries are recognising Palestine
Would note that none of the recent recognitions, to my knowledge, said anything about borders. A Palestinian state that solely exists in the West Bank would be consistent with these statements.
You really need to google “Netanyahu. Hamas. Qatar”. Pick your favourite news source. You’re in for some surprises.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_support_for_Hamas
Doesn't prove anything, and it definitely doesn't prove he gave Hamas weapons so they would be victims of a terror attack.
Hell, we in the West have given Gaza (and indirectly, we knew it would go to Hamas) so much money. Did we support terrorism? How did we know that they would use our money to buy weapons to murder people in Israel instead of building good things?
For me this is more showing an utter incompetence both from Nethanyau and our Western leaders who totally didn't see how they outsmarted us for years. Why do you think our leaders can control everything and know everything? They can make mistakes out of incompetence.
I guess this strategy sometimes works in other countries, and sometimes they screw you :)
Israel's territory is still expanding, and Palestine's is still shrinking, so it seems to be working out pretty fine. All those countries recognising Palestine don't have the balls to actually conduct any kind of military intervention against Israel.
Samantha Power wrote an excellent book: "A Problem From Hell" - America and the Age of Genocide [0], [1]
She had seen war and genocide first-hand in Bosnia and that provided the impetus for her to study how America had responded to various genocides.
I will repeat the last paragraph of her Preface for some context.
>Before I began exploring America's relationship with genocide, I used to refer to U.S. policy towards Bosnia as a "failure." I have changed my mind. It is daunting to acknowledge, but this country's consistent policy of nonintervention in the face of genocide offers sad testimony not to a broken American political system but to one that is ruthlessly effective. The system, as it stands now, is working. No U.S. president has ever made genocide prevention a priority, and no U.S. president has ever suffered politically for his indifference to its occurrence. It is thus no coincidence that genocide rages on.
[0] https://samanthapower.com/books/a-problem-from-hell-america-...
[1] https://www.amazon.com/Problem-Hell-America-Age-Genocide/dp/...
Readers should be dubious of her moral authority on this issue. When given influence, her advocacy of the war on Libya resulted in endemic violence and showed that she was as misguided as anyone else in American politics when it comes to intervention in world affairs.
Genocide is a terrible thing. But that doesn't mean the USA has any obligation to directly intervene in foreign conflicts. Most of these aren't worth sacrificing the life of a single US soldier, and even when we do intervene it often makes the situation worse. Unless critical US national interests are involved, our actions should usually be limited to sanctions and diplomacy.
(I am commenting on the general US policy and not making a statement about the current situation in Gaza.)
Most of the time US sells the weapons used to do the genocide. This time they're just giving them away, and that is what a lot of Americans have a problem with.
For those out of the loop the actions of the Israeli gov. are not some fringe overreaction. This is what the people want. by their own admission, 48% of Israeli Jews want Palestinians to be ethnically cleansed which would constitute a genocidal act, while 79% believe they should get preferential treatment over Arabs. [0]
Both Israeli Arabs & Palestinian Arabs. This is not some, 'oh no! it just happened.' Everyone who has actually spent time studying this conflict, the state of Israel has a policy of systematic rape, torture, mass incarceration, murder, and dehumanization of Palestinians at an industrial scale that's been in place for decades now.
They're just going mask-off in a way Western audiences can't pretend not to know about it any longer.
Israelis and their Western supporters try to make out their actions as that of fringe far-right loonies like Smotrich, etc. Nope. Systematic rape, torture, murder, of non-Jews has been their policy for decades now. You're just finally learning about it after so long. The ultra-orthodox don't make up a plurality of the population and used to not serve in the military until recently. So, if their abominable ideology is state policy, it's because Israelis are okay with it.
[0]: https://www.timesofisrael.com/plurality-of-jewish-israelis-w...
Their hubris will be their own downfall.
>Israel has denied the allegations. [from linked CNN article]
People are waking up.
> Systematic rape, torture, murder, of non-Jews has been their policy for decades now.
I'd like some evidence for each of these three. I'm aware of the policy of interrogation which might count as "a policy of systematic torture". Can you do systematic rape and murder?
>Can you do systematic rape and murder?
Was hoping you'd ask that.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza_genocide
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinians_as_animals_in_Isr...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_war_crimes
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_and_gender-based_violen...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_war_crimes_in_the_Gaza...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_war_crimes_in_the_Gaza...
You may have ideological axes to grind with Wikipedia but every claim is abundantly sourced and backed by evidence from neutral sources.
> but every claim is abundantly sourced
From a very particular pool of sources. Jewish sources like Jewish Chronicle, ADL and JVL are largely banned, as well as most of the major conservative news sources.
Meanwhile Al Jazeera has the highest status, and is the top source for most articles in the topic area, despite publishing misinformation like [1]. (It turned out to be fabricated [2] but remains up on their blog. They quietly took down a separate video about it, with no apology or retraction.)
That's how we end up with things like Wikipedia's updated definition of Zionism, based on anti-Zionist sources: "as much land, as many Jews, and as few Palestinian Arabs as possible".
Wikipedia is ultimately a numbers game, and editors interested in more balanced coverage have largely given up, since editors pushing an anti-Israeli agenda now have the numbers every time.
[1] https://www.aljazeera.com/news/liveblog/2024/3/24/israels-wa...
[2] https://www.timesofisrael.com/al-jazeera-report-alleging-idf...
> Jewish sources like Jewish Chronicle, ADL and JVL are largely banned, as well as all the major conservative news sources.
Source?
My personal rule-of-thumb is that an international news source is likely to be fairly reliable so long as it's not reporting on something that they have a conflict of interest in (eg home country/demographic).
The source ratings (for sources that have been discussed substantially) are on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Per...
> Most editors seem to agree that Al Jazeera English and especially Al Jazeera Arabic are biased sources on the Arab–Israeli conflict and on topics for which the Qatari government has a conflict of interest.
> Al Jazeera's live blogs should be treated with caution, per the policy on news blogs.
The note about bias does nothing to prevent it from being used. Wikipedia doesn't really have any policy of avoiding biased sources; see WP:BIASED.
The live blog warning is mostly ignored in practice, even though it reflects a broader policy (WP:NEWSBLOG). Al Jazeera's live blog alone is probably used more than any other source in the topic area.
There is an abundance of allegations and testimony from not exactly neutral sources and a few isolated cases that have actual evidence going for them - which have been investigated and prosecuted by authorities.
Not in a thousand years I would have expected CNN to start reporting on this.
Hope they got some good lines responding to accusations on how every single one of them, including the janitors at the CNN Center in Atlanta are antisemitic.
-"But we're not!" -"Aha, that's exactly what they always say, clearly a sign of guilt!" /s
Too little too late in order to save face now that the tide of public opinion has shifted
Reminder: Only right wing supporters of Iaraeli Likud party actually support genocide going on. Literally half of Israeli citizens hate Likud and Natanyahu.
ps. Interesting trivia: Mahmoud Abbas (President of the Palestinian West Bank) and FATAH militia also are against Hamas. They always have been:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fatah%E2%80%93Hamas_conflict
Nothing is black or white.
This is a popular idea in the Israeli propaganda. Israelis like to say that they hate Netanyahu, but in reality, majority of Israeli Jews fully align with his policies towards Palestinians, and multiple polls confirm this. https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2025-08-05/ty-article/.p...
> Israelis like to say that they hate Netanyahu, but in reality, majority of Israeli Jews fully align with his policies towards Palestinians, and multiple polls confirm this. https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2025-08-05/ty-article/.p...
There tends to be a lot more nuance[0] when it comes to polling results like these, the reality is that opinions amongst Israelis vary quite a lot. There are also a lot of problems with organizations like the UN historically wildly misrepresenting the food situation[1] which are likely to make Israelis question the accuracy of many of these starvation reports, especially from organizations that have historically made many highly inaccurate claims. UN backed IPC reports like those cited in the CNN article likewise have serious credibility issues as well[2], additionally there are extremely biased individuals like Michael Fakhri(the UN’s special rapporteur on the right to food) cited in the CNN article that even publish comic books with some rather overt antisemitic tropes[3].
[0] https://www.haaretz.com/opinion/2025-06-04/ty-article-opinio...
[1] https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/how-one-un-leaders-mistak...
[2] https://unwatch.org/hillel-neuer-on-sky-news-fabricated-u-n-...
[3] https://unwatch.org/legal-analysis-of-un-food-rapporteur-mic...
This equivocation is absurd. Literally every international aid organization is saying the same thing - and even a few Israeli ones are now recognizing the genocide in Gaza. The fact that Israel, far from sending "large amounts of aid", has, in fact, systematically blocked aid to Gaza was recognized even by the US government. The US even resorted to building a pier to send their own aid in.
Edit: looking at the claims more specifically, this one is particularly easy to debunk:
> even publish comic books with some rather overt antisemitic trope
The supposed "antisemitic trope" is an image of a person holding a cracked globe. The blog post implies that this is supposed to be an image representing the antisemitic "masters of the world" trope. In fact, the image represents the UN rapporteur himself looking at how the lack of international reaction to Israel's crimes has left a crack in the UN-led rules-based world order.
“Here's a challenge - find me just one article in the mainstream media that calls for the de-radicalization of Israeli society. I'll save you the effort - you can't!”
https://youtu.be/lHuUJTPhN0A
"Fully align" is not supported by your reference.
The massive demonstrations in the street seem to counter your narrative though.
The demonstrations are about his power grabs. They have 0 to do with the genocide. On that topic most Israelis are not against him. It is, in fact, what is keeping him in power and why he wants this war so badly.
~15% of Israelis believe that a terrorist who shot up a mosque (literally all he did) is a national hero.
It shouldnt be that that hard to imagine that most of the rest are willing to look the other way in the event of a genocide against the same untermensch.
More evidence of this in a poll from earlier this year.
https://archive.is/nNzq4
(It's an archive link because the original is paywalled).
> Nearly half (47 percent) of respondents agreed that "when conquering an enemy city, the Israel Defense Forces should act as the Israelites did in Jericho under Joshua's command – killing all its inhabitants."
Does Israel have a government structure that allows for a counter-majoritarian government?
In the US, we do... due to the structure of the Senate and Electoral College, low population states wield outsize influence on national politics. This goes as far as allowing the election of a president with <50% national support. Add in political gerrymandering (setting electrical districts to constrain the influence of certain demographics), and we have a national government that's opposed to policies that have wide support across the population in general.
majority of Israeli keep supporting IDF policies, shame on them
Moderate Israelis are the only people who have the power to peacefully defuse the situation.
Opposition to Netanyahu inside Israel is almost entirely about domestic issues (like judicial reform) and the fact that he refuses to accept any negotiated deal to get the hostages back. Relatively few Israelis care about what he's doing to the Palestinians.
Israeli society is deeply complicit in the mass killing and starvation in Gaza. The IDF is a citizen army. There haven't been mass refusals or resistance. It's not just Netanyahu.
I wish this were true, but it looks like that even if Natanyahu has little support (mostly because of corruption), the genocide is well accepted by israeli public
https://www.genocidewatch.com/single-post/poll-show-most-jew...
This is nonsense, Israel's center right "opposition" won't even acknowledge the genocide, how can they be against it?
Reminder: The US does support the genocide. Both the Republicans and the Democrats.
What I find the most jarring about this on a day-to-day being in tech circles is how some of the smartest people I know are not only unwilling to call out what's happening, they're unwilling to acknowledge it to begin with, and some like the triangle man and Collison brothers even support it.
The more time I spend in tech the more I realize there's a deep moral rot here covered up by noveau-rich wealth
The problem is we’re in an age of mass disinformation that makes any claim potentially propaganda. It comes down to trust and belief and those things are either easier than ever or harder than ever depending on media you consume and common sense.
Yea... It's sad and worrying.
I feel like the community is censored or rather finds inconvenient to talk about it because of the big role that Israel plays in the tech scene. SV has an ethos of avoiding name calling and finger pointing at members of the community, since they know it's a long repeated game they are playing.
But I'm glad to see some prominent voices step up. Particularly, PG and Amjad Massad (Replit) have been very vocal. I hope their voice makes people feel like it's OK to call out human right violations when they see them.
Then there's the other extreme of the tech scene that simply decided to play politics for its own gain. The All In Pod crew as the poster children of this. Their cynicism is s transparent and disgusting in how they kiss the ring to get favor of the king in turn. I think that's a bit of what triangle man is trying to get, and it's certainly what sama was trying to do when this admin started.
Where did the idea that being smart meant being moral come from? Why would anyone assume that people in tech are "good"? A lot of (I would say most) people go into tech to make money. All the people you expect to say something won't because doing so could jeopardize the amount of money they make. The same goes with celebrities, academics, politicians, etc. If you are someone who makes a lot of money, and you speak negatively about america's greatest ally, you will probably make less money as a direct result.
Because tech people spent probably 5 years signalling their moral goodness about a wide array of topics, indeed proclaiming these the most important political topics. IT was and still is insufferable.
It’s called marketing and value signaling. Doesn’t mean they believe what they spew.
> How Israeli actions caused famine in Gaza
Way to whitewash a genocide. The title make it sound like the famine is accidental or an unintended consequence of Israel's "actions". While in reality, it's the sole purpose of what Israel is doing in Gaza for years, they are conducting a genocide, plain and simple.
Is there any difference between carrying it out and intending to carry it out if given the chance? From the river to the sea?
> Way to whitewash a genocide
I honestly think invoking the g- word is harmful to the Palestinian cause at this point.
It's a war. There are war crimes. Maybe there's genocidal intent. But that seems like a distraction compared to actual harm on the ground.
The UN calls it a genocide now. What evidence more do you need?
> UN calls it a genocide now
One, really important to specify that the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and Israel said this, not the UN as a whole. "The UN" is generally held to be the General Assembly.
Two, I'm not disputing that it probably is a genocide. I'm just saying that people have been calling it a genocide well before we had evidence it was one. As a result, the term has lost moral weight.
Put another way, I don't think support for Palestine increases by calling it a genocide again. I do think it increases by showing, specifically, what the famine means for the kids on the ground can change hearts and minds. (Nobody, at this point, is probably going to be swung on a fundamental opinion. People may, however, re-prioritise this politically.)
If the world would stop rewarding Hamas for using its civilians and children as propaganda, they might actually surrender.
Let Greta and the world start shouting at Hamas to surrender instead of shouting at Israel for fighting a foe who wants them obliterated.
According to the unrevoked 1988 Hamas Charter:
"Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it."