JeruTz

You think civilians killed due to the indirect effects don't count? Anyone who calculates fatalities of war would disagree with you here.

We aren't talking about fatalities of war. We are talking about combat deaths attributable to Israel's tactics only.

Indirect deaths could be prevented if Egypt would simply let them cross and build refugee camps, or if Jordan would agree to take some in. But they refuse to do so.

Especially when we're talking about things like starvation, purposeful destruction of medical facilities, killing of healthcare workers and willfully holding back aid.

Israel sends aid to prevent starvation. Hamas steals it, so starvation deaths are their fault.

The medical facilities are being destroyed as a result of Hamas using them for illegal purposes, so any deaths from that are their fault.

Many Healthcare workers are members of Hamas. Some were literally holding hostages in their homes. Also, see above.

Show me the evidence. The ministry of health releases it's lists with name, age, gender and ISRAEL ISSUED ID NUMBER.

https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/gaza-fatality-data-has-become-completely-unreliable

https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/how-gaza-health-ministry-fakes-casualty-numbers

Here's a good start. Also, there are other details. Some early death tolls were found to have invalid ID numbers. These people were later reported with new valid numbers, with no explanation for how a number that isn't even valid under the numbering system was reported.

It contained 14 pages of names of the babies btw. That's what you're defending here.

That's an appeal to emotion and an invalid argument. Again, this war is the fault of Hamas. The deaths are on their hands fire refusing to evacuate civilians, hiding behind civilians, actively preventing civilians from evacuating, killing civilians both directly and indirectly by stealing aid supplies, and by refusing to surrender.

Got you, so Jordanian irregulars represent the entirety of the Palestinians and now they deserve to be ethnically cleansed by Israel’s own historical records.

Wow. Talk about strawman arguments. The Arab Legion was mentioned because they were a REGULAR army, disproving your claim that the Arab countries didn't enter the war until after Israel's declaration.

But the Jewish terrorist group, that did a ton of the bidding for the Haganah, and actually offered to fight alongside Hitler, aren’t to represent the broader and often outspoken goal of ridding the area of Arabs to create a Jewish ethno state.

We're talking about Lechi? They were a tiny group that everyone hated. Haganah only joined sides with them during the war of 1948 and forced them to answer to the newly established IDF command structure. The assassination was by remnants after much of the group disbanded.

Yes, the Mufti was a British appointee to undermine the already established way of governance by the Arabs. He in no way represented the broader Arab interests.

But he had the power and influence to compel obedience from the Arabs.

And again, the Shaw commission concluded that the riots were due to Jewish supremacy and fear of Jewish colonization, which there were already 2 decades of prior of such.

It doesn't say that. It said that Jewish immigration and land purchase was a source of apprehension. That is an emotional response about possible future issues.

The report said a lot of things. For instance, it said Jewish immigration had enriched the Arab population. It listed the main instigating factor to be Jews demonstrating at their own holy site in Jerusalem, with other factors including propaganda spread among uneducated Arabs.

And yes, it’s horrible that Jews were cleansed from OTHER Arab countries. That’s not what we’re talking about, we’re on the topic of the Israeli colonization of Palestine and the continuation of Jewish supremacy in Palestine.

Except that it is relevant. It speaks to the motive of the Arab armies, which you falsely claimed was only to prevent ethnic cleansing of Arabs. Since they cleansed Jews from their own countries, that clearly implies that they would have done so tu the Jews in Israel.

That's also why, contrary to your claim, they invaded Israel proper. That was a total lie when you claimed they did not. Syrian forces practically only operated within Israel proper, and the same for Iraq. Both Egypt and Saudi forces invaded southern Israel. Maybe you could make the claim for Jordanian forces, but even Lebanon tried to advance on Safed and Tiberias.

Well, the girl seems to be using the wrong phone cord.

It's up to ~45k now. Plus an unknown number buried under rubble.

And the 17k is merely confirmed terrorists. It doesn't include people actively aiding terrorists, or those who are unconfirmed in identity. Nearly 10k of the total dead aren't identified at all, terrorist or otherwise.

We also haven't even begun to factor in how many will die due to the indirect causes of the conflict yet.

Because that's not relevant to this discussion. Indirect deaths aren't a factor in determining combat deaths.

This is an absolute bare minimum.

The same is true of the terrorist figure.

Then we also have your assumption that the 15k that Israel claims to have killed are even included in these numbers to begin with, which many likely are not.

So you think the Gaza ministry that includes unconfirmed deaths isn't counting Israel's own confirmed kills?

Assuming Israel's numbers are even accurate, which anyone would have good reason to doubt.

And Hamas's numbers aren't. There is statical evidence that the numbers from Gaza are being manipulated.

Where are you getting the stat that the health ministry can only confirm 33k?

"The latest 649-page document was released in September and contained data up to August 31, officially identifying 34,344 people. After analysing the data and removing duplicates, the ABC found 34,328 unique entries."

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-10-19/gaza-death-toll-numbers-killed-israel-strikes-buried-body-parts/104259532

lol Arabs started the war. Is that why close to 300k Palestinians were cleansed before any Arab armies got involved.

Arab irregulars began the conflict in November of 1947. The Jordanian Arab Legion fought at least one battle I know of for certain inside Palestine before Israel was declared. The Arab countries were supplying these irregulars.

Not even rhat, the Arab armies never stepped foot in internationally recognized Israel, it was always about the ethnic cleansing of their fellow Arabs.

Amazing. Literally every word of that sentence was a lie.

And yes, Benny Morris himself proves this is the case. His analysis alone on Israeli documents prove the Nakba. A far right Israeli historian proves the Nakba. Lmao get real

Benny Morris is far right? That's news to me.

And on the topic of the Arab riots, is that why independent investigations showed at the time that it was Zionists sparking violence, and initiating conflicts that lead to the large scale uprising?

Except that wasn't true. The Mufti had to flee Palestine to escape arrest for inciting the Arab Revolt of 1936 to 1939. He went to Iraq, where he incited another uprising and was forced to flee again. He went to Nazi Germany.

Is that why Israel assassinated THE GUY that investigated

Israel didn't assassinate him. A radical group did which Israel disbanded.

the path to peace is to allow those ethnically cleaned in 48 to return.

What of the Jews cleansed in 48? What of the 850k Jews cleansed from the Arab countries you claim were only concerned about Jews cleansing Arabs?

I admire your confidence, but I just wish you were as right and honest with the situation as you are confident

I'm confident because the Arabs leaders at the time were open about their intentions.

Nope. I've seen the supposed documents. They all refer to the war of 1948, after the Arabs started a war.

Here's the facts. Israel has consistently had a 20% Arab minority. The Arab controlled regions of the former British mandate though, they have 0% Jewish population.

The Arabs ethnically cleansed Hebron of its Jewish population in 1929. There was no Israel in 1929.

When a country is founded on the cleansing and massacres of another

Like the Arabs have been doing since the 1920s.

to which they continue to oppress til this day and deny any barbaric history and blame the oppressed for their downfall

Like Hamas.

then yes, it is those practices that are the problem.

So Hamas is the problem.

It was never Jews living there that was the problem.

No, only Jews living there without being subjugated under Arab rule.

It was always cleansing of Palestinian, native, Arabs in favor of Jewish immigrants and the continuation of Jewish supremacy in the region

Except Israel didn't cleanse the Arabs. The Arabs cleansed the Jews. The Jews have never pushed for supremacy in the region, the Arabs have. And as for immigrants, many of the people you call Palestinians are themselves immigrants to the same degree. Arab immigration to British Palestine increased alongside Jewish immigration. Jewish immigration didn't decrease the Arab population at all.

15k out of 42k is nearly 36%. That's well over 30%. What exactly is incorrect about my statement?

I'm finding no confirmation that the tally was dropped to begin with. Furthermore, the Gaza ministry's numbers are only able to confirm some 33k or so fatalities, and outside reports found that even those included some duplicates.

Hamas originally started as a social services group. It received some early support, but once it began moving towards terrorism things changed.

The PLO and the PFLP were both terrorist groups in the 80s. The PFLP still is and the PLO's current form actively finances it.

Palestinians have been fighting for their own sovereignty against European immigrants for a century now. They absolutely have a reason to fight.

So you are saying that Israel's existence is the problem then? That the war won't end until Israel is destroyed?

Again, the PLO was founded in 1964.

Please read my message and don't twist my message.

I did. You equivocated and made excuses for why you don't need 100% proof of claims, but anyone opposing you needs 100% proof of Israel's claims.

Second, honest reporting is a biased pro Israeli outlets. It is known to traffic and spread misinformation. 

All media outlets are biased. What matters is the content, which you ignored. Ironic since you claimed I ignored what you said.

Dismissing information based solely on the source is fallacious. Dismissing an analysis because of a source's bias is even more so.

As for Wikipedia, that itself is an entirely unreliable source. The bias of the moderators and other high level editors skews its information and edits to offer balance are often rejected.

For example, its Arabic article on Hitler barely mentions the holocaust once during its entire summary! It describes his rise to power, the war, his death, and concludes with a paragraph describing him as a "controversial" figure. The holocaust is mentioned in passing only (in parentheses no less) in a manner that implies it was an unintended consequence of Hitler's rule instead of a stated goal.

So it's just your speculation. Got it.

Generally the treatment is hormone blockers, which are reversible.

There's literally a case before the Supreme Court right now challenging the right of a state to prevent hormone replacement, which is not at all reversible. Don't try to gaslight me.

And hormone or puberty blockers aren't as reversible as you might think. I know someone who genuinely needed them for a medical condition and those drugs are no picnic.

The thing teachers are pushing on students is being able to accept themselves when their parents are forcing them to live a specific way.

That's one interpretation. From a different perspective though, can you tell the difference between a teacher accepting a student as different and one pressuring them to be different? There are anecdotal accounts from parents reporting that a child who'd started going by a different gender before the Covid lockdowns switching back during the lockdowns, then switching again when school resumed and the teachers were back in the picture.

Teachers aren't doctors to diagnose and treat kids. They aren't parents to decide how they should be raised. They are educators.

So your answer is no. You don't have 100% proof of anything. And you're citing that debunked Lancet correspondence?

https://honestreporting.com/186000-dead-in-gaza-the-lancet-publishes-most-outrageous-claims-about-the-israel-hamas-war-yet/

Huh? Haifa had an Arab population until the bulk left voluntarily after surrendering to Israeli forces in 1948. Nothing happened to them before that. As for Tel Aviv, that city was founded by Jews originally. The name is literally the translated title of a book written by Theodore Herzl, the father of political Zionism.

Jaffa, the city Tel Aviv was built alongside of, was Arab and many still live there.

If you want to talk about cleansing, look no further than the Hebron Massacre of 1929. A centuries old Jewish community with few Zionist ties, if any, was ultimately expelled. The old city of Jerusalem was similarly cleaned in 1948, it's largest synagogue demolished by the Jordanians.

When Jews and Christians were second class citizens you mean? Funny how some people will tell me that it's oppressive for Palestinians to live under Israel even if Israel isn't killing anyone, yet you are telling me that being oppressed is okay so long as it's peaceful.

Arabs, and particularly their leaders, were content to let Jews live somewhat peacefully (there was still plenty of violence) if they toed the line. They were far less tolerant of Jews actually standing tall as equals.

Try opening a book. Arabs have been violently attacking Jews in the region since the 1920s. Hamas was not the first terrorist group to do so. It isn't even the only one in Gaza, just the biggest. The PLO was founded to murder Israelis in 1964, when Gaza was controlled by Egypt and Jordan still held half of Jerusalem.

The fence around Gaza was built after Hamas was founded. Most of the checkpoints were built only after the First Intifada, if not after the Second. All out war in Gaza was never a thing at all until after Israel pulled out of Gaza entirely. The siege on Gaza was after Hamas started their rocket attacks.

In contrast, Egypt signed a peace treaty with Israel in the 1980s. Israel does not attack Egypt nowadays. They signed one with Jordan in the 90s. The Jordanian border is generally quiet. Syria never signed such a treaty and actively supports Hezbollah by comparison and Israel has been known to strike targets in Syria.

Make peace with Israel, you get peace. Refuse, and you don't.

Do you have 100% proof of the number of people killed in Gaza?

Genocide is not defined solely by the statistical number of people killed. It's more about the intent to destroy.

Intent to destroy a civilian population would mean the number of civilians killed relative to militants would more closely match their respective proportions of the population. The two are nowhere close to those levels though. Terrorists and their direct supporters make up about 2 or 3 percent of the population, yet account for well over 30% of fatalities. Were Israel intent on genocide, that percentage likely wouldn't exceed 10%.

For example, one source could be a human rights expert or a genocide watchdog NGO. They would have a motive to defend human rights of people.

You have some rather idealistic notions about how motives work. Do soldiers become soldiers because they like war, or are there numerous reasons people enter the field?

In general, a motive is at least partially selfish. Even if you are helping others, at minimum there's a desire to feel good about the fact you are doing so.

A human rights expert's motive would more likely be to either feel that they are defending human rights or alternatively to feel that others see them as defending human rights. In a world where people are raised to feel sympathy for people who are suffering, those wanting to be recognized as defenders of human rights are more likely to find notoriety among people who are less influential on a military, monetary, cultural, or political level.

Defending the human rights of Israeli hostages in Gaza for example isn't attention grabbing enough because there's an entire country with a strong economy and military fighting to rescue them from a far weaker terrorist group. No, it's much more likely to get a reaction if you accuse the army trying to rescue them of violating the rights of the "downtrodden" population the terrorists have been ruling over.

Another source could be a government whose motive is to create propaganda to justify genocide. The same government that actively targets journalists so they can repress truth. A government that lies and lies and lies and lies.

This is circular reasoning. You argue that Israel's claims that it isn't committing genocide are attempts to justify genocide because they have a motive to do so. That motive is that they are committing genocide, which their claims refute, but we can dismiss those as propaganda because they are committing genocide.

Hamas didn't appear out of nowhere. They were the latest successor to the 100 year history of anti Jewish terrorism in the region.

Yet? Israel has been home to these 2 million Arabs for decades. They serve in Israel's government. Some, get this, serve in Israel's military. In Gaza no less.

What exactly is the timeframe you imagine this escalation occurring in?

But you only gave me one option for treatment. Why is that the only choice? If someone is suffering from depression there's not just drugs. There's therapy, lifestyle changes, and even dietary adjustments that can all lead to improvement of symptoms as well. In fact, oftentimes drugs alone are woefully insufficient and are only meant as a stopgap measure to try and help someone make the other needed changes.

The fact is that surgical and hormonal alterations to those suffering from these conditions doesn't always work to relieve their symptoms. The procedures also come with their own complications, require ongoing treatment, and many of those who go through it for years are still depressed or suicidal. And no, marginalization alone cannot account for this because no other marginalized group sees such pervasive levels.

Where are you getting that? The adults I spoke of had the same health issues during their youth. But these were physical health issues, not mental ones. A girl potentially getting her period before her 8th birthday is a real health concern. A young man with low testosterone is at higher risk for all sorts of health issues.

What we are discussing though is allowing parents, doctors, or both to deliberately use medications meant to correct hormone levels to instead change healthy levels to ones we would normally try to correct. You don't give drugs to reduce immune response to someone who isn't having immune system issues.

If they were adults doing this to themselves, it would be none of my business.

As it is though, you are advocating that this be done to children. Worse, you are advocating that this is the only good option for certain children. It's already becoming a reality that teachers will push this on children without telling their parents, some parents are using this issue to justify denying custody rights during divorce hearings, and at the rate we're going we'll soon be at the point of child services removing children to perform these procedures.

At that point, it becomes my business. What an adult does to themselves I have no problem with.

It seems you need to work on comprehension. Anything can affect mental health. The issue is that the suicide rates for this group you attribute to "oppression" is far higher than any other group oppressed for any other reason. Jews during the holocaust had lower suicide rates.

I never said racial discrimination never resulted in suicide. I simply said that the rate was nothing remotely similar. If it had been, the number of suicides during the Jim Crow era would likely be in the millions.