“Yeah but women and girls will give birth to terrorists, and boys will become terrorists. These are just preemptive-preemptive strikes… Historians may call this genocide but we disagree semantically”. - Israeli government probably
Actually responsibility of civilian deaths are on those who use civilians as human shields
I don’t get that mindset. Why is it ok to shoot through people to get to the bad guys?
If the police did that when criminals took hostages it wouldn’t be acceptable so why is it acceptable for Israel?
It is a talking point meant to engage you and waste your time, it doesn’t have to make sense. This is conservative playbook 101.
By eliminating the next generation(s) and the females in fertile age, it is more effective at wiping out a population than engaging directly with it.
This is valid for getting rid of vermin, capable of explosive breeding.
No need to guess what the results will be when applied to human beings.
In the US those who abstained from voting or voted third party have sealed Gaza’s fate.
Who the hell do you think has been president for the entirety of this slaughter?
Liberals can’t accept they endorse this genocide.
Neither of the candidates for election.
deleted by creator
Right, that includes Trump. Its been a democrat funding and supporting this genocide the entire time. You hypocrites cant use these deaths to fuckin support democrats.
because Donald “I will let Netyanahu finish the job” Trump is somehow better for this. Get your head out of your ass lol
He’s been finishing the job just fine under Biden. I’ve gotten to the point where I can’t honestly see what the difference is(in this particular issue). There was a time where wholesale annihilation and annexation was unacceptable but since that’s cool can you point me to where exactly you think the Dems red line exists? Because it certainly seems to be beyond the ethnic cleansing of Gaza.
Take a minute to read that headline again. You got Trump for this now, because you insisted to everyone to accept that headline, those deaths, that ‘better than this’ just isnt an option. You wouldnt permit people that care about life, that oppose genocide somewhere else to go. So they went nowhere, because genocide is not an option.
And yet accelerated genocide is the option that was chosen.
Look, I get the argument you’re making. The problem is that it hinges entirely on accepting a premise that isn’t based in reality. Progress, specifically as it relates to harm reduction, doesn’t happen instantaneously. It never has. You take the wins you can get and then push for the next step. You can be mad about that, and I would argue that we all should be, but it’s not going to change the way things work. In this case you’ve let idealism get in the way of actual tangible improvement. Even if you disagree with that characterization you can’t dispute the fact that you’ve at least helped shut the door on the potential for improvement. If you can find a way to rationalize that in your head to make you feel like the good guy then I understand why you would want to take that path, but do you honestly believe the people of Gaza take solace in the fact that you had good intentions? I’d wager they don’t give a shit how you frame this in your mind. They’re just thinking about what a Trump presidency means for the future of this conflict and that isn’t good by any stretch of the imagination.
Yes it is. It’s the one you got. Congrats on maintaining your ideological purity. It’s going to be quite a show.
The ideological purity of
checks notes
Not supporting genocide
Thanks we will take it.
This slaughter so far
I put it this way, Trump comes in and wipes Gaza off the map. Hes only responsible for a fraction of the destruction because the vast majority of Gaza is already gone.
Are you talking about buildings or people? Because the death toll in Gaza is estimated to be ~40,000 while the population is ~3,000,000. That’s 1.3% for those playing along at home.
Which, if you’re a bit slow on the uptake, means get ready for Trump and Netanyahu to have their way with the remaining 98.7% of Gaza.
But hey, that’s democracy I guess. Personally I enthusiastically voted for Harris, but the people of the US and Israel have spoken and so now we let the chips fall where they may.
So how far do we go back then? Because Israel has been causing destruction in Gaza for probably a dozen presidents
Given that most Palestinians are under the age of 14, this was to be expected: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_State_of_Palestine
Not most, technically - wiki says 0-14 make 44% of population. But this article breaks down the 70% further by saying 44% killed were 14 or under, so it’s pretty much bang on for indicating that they’re killing Palestinians at random.
And if 44% are children, that leaves 56% as adults. Cut that roughly in half to 28% for a 50/50 male/female split you get 72% (28 and 44) of the population is “women and children”. If that’s accurate, the title would be better stated as “Isreal kills indiscriminately”.
Random is giving them way too much. Those are targeted numbers
I mean, sure, but this assumes that the killing is completely indiscriminate.
It is, but it’s important that you’re clear on that
They’re obliterating entire cities, so yeah.
What fraction is under 18? It’s hard to tell by looking at the graph. I want to calculate what ratio of combatants to civilians killed a number of 70% implies.
That’s 70% of confirmed deaths. So essentially this number is meaningless, as we don’t know the whole picture.
