steventhedev @ steventhedev @lemmy.world

Posts

48

Comments

494

Joined

2 yr. ago

The main arguments for wiggling around it are based on balancing multiple lives against one. There's a ton of commentary that are basically trolley problem examples. So self-defense is ok, intent matters, etc. Very similar to how most Western legal codes (quite possibly more, I'm just less familiar) distinguish between manslaughter, murder in the moment, planned murder, etc.

Keep in mind it is a religious text, so it obviously also carves out a bunch of stuff around killing for the purpose of enforcing laws (capital punishment), warfare, etc.

I would not be surprised if there's something in there about how it's ok to kill people who tie their shoes the wrong way.

Literally the headline is "Israel diplomat calls...". It's incredibly misleading - hell, even the tagline that you copied in as the post body doesn't even qualify it.

Feiglin is absolutely a fringe nutjob, and has been pushed out of politics because he was too extreme even for Netanyahu. His wikipedia entry has more content under the "Controversy and criticism" section than outside it.

I'm less familiar with the other one.

The headline is misleading. From the article:

Dror Eydar, Israel’s former ambassador to Italy ... who is also a columnist with the Israeli daily newspaper Israel Hayom...

He is no longer in public service and does not represent Israeli interests in any official capacity.

...former Knesset member Moshe Feiglin...

He has not held public office since 2015.

Their statements are incredibly racist and dehumanizing, and have been condemned by the majority of the world. But they do not represent Israel in any official capacity. They are simply not newsworthy outside of documenting their existence on the off chance they reenter public life in the future.

I won't stoop to the New Arab's level of trawling for extremist wannabe politicians. I'll just look for a current Qatari public figure who are currently holding public office. That didn't take long.

The Hebrew is לֹ֥֖א תִּֿרְצָֽ֖ח which in modern Hebrew translates as "Don't murder". It's also the 6th, not the 1st.

Followup on this: the settler has been arrested by military police

Reuters, AP, and NYT don't cover it comprehensively, but there is single-sentence coverage in almost every daily summary:

• VOA
• Times of Israel
• Focus article on a single fatality

The biggest difference is that Israel at least claims to be bombing military infrastructure - barracks, magazines, rocket launch sites, etc. Hamas are aiming primarily at civilians.

Dude are you watching me? I am sitting on my couch typing on my laptop. While you're out making such a difference, can you also pick up eggs and milk?

On a more serious note, calling it a genocidal occupation precludes any discussion. It's signalling that you believe that Palestinians are starving and dying and are in danger of being completely wiped out. There really isn't any evidence supporting that over the last 75 years except Hamas propaganda.

I'll answer your question and hopefully you'll answer mine.

The hypothetical boy could choose life. He could work in agriculture, or study, or literally just live his life. Palestinians are not starving on a daily basis, and certainly not in the west bank. He can go on with his life, get married, have kids, and literally choose to move on and not take violent revenge.

Now my question for you: do you support Hamas?

I ask because It sounds like you drank the Hamas koolaid. Their charter literally state that every Palestinian must engage in violent resistance, and have no alternative.

If you truly believe that violence is the only answer the Palestinians have, then you've given up any hope for peace.

It's not oversimplified. It's a statement of principles.

The reality of our world is that murderers walk free all the time. But saying "x caused y and we should fix the root cause of this" is wildly different than saying "can you blame him?" Because the answer to that is yes! You can blame him for choosing violence and choosing terror.

More likely they want to run away from the 8000 daily rocket attacks on Israeli cities

If it was unprovoked (likely, but I'll hold out until more evidence comes to light), and it was a random civilian (sounds likely), and it was based on racial hatred (yeah, that tracks 100%), then yes - this is terrorism. He'll probably only get charged with murder because it was only one person, but that's a failing of legal codes rather than moral ones.

No. The Israeli-Gazan border has been sealed since October 7th, and the Rafah Crossing has been similarly closed for egress.

But I'm sure if they did, they wouldn't have a mob waiting for them to land to hunt them down, or raiding a hotel inspecting passports.

Alternative articles:

• https://www.timesofisrael.com/palestinian-shot-dead-by-settler-while-harvesting-olives-in-west-bank-report/

My personal speculation:

Off duty means he will likely end up in front of a military court and they will ask three things: if he followed military procedure for opening live fire, if he felt there was a non-violent way to resolve the incident, and why he was there in the first place. He'll get reprimanded, potentially sentenced for murder, and possibly discharged. More likely is he'll deny guilt, make some claims and bring family as witnesses. In the end, he might even get away with less than a year in military prison.

I refuse to not call things as they are; it's called having principles, not "irrelevant partisan labeling".

If the settler doesn't go to prison, he's still a murderer.

If he murders the person who murdered his father he would be a murderer.

If he murders random civilians who were unrelated to the incident, then yes. He is a terrorist.

Terror is terror. There is no excuse for intentionally targeting civilians. It's murder at best, and terrorism at worst.

For comparison, Israel has had its credit rating downgraded and there is a major economic downturn there as well. Quark was wrong - war is bad for business.

Thank you fellow human!

Alternative sources:

• Reuters - lemmy !world post
• Times of Israel

Primary sources:

• UNRWA press release

Additional context:

• CNN - World Food Programme says 40 more aid trucks expected to enter Gaza but it "needs more"
• New York Times - As Gazans Scrounge for Food and Water, Hamas Sits on a Rich Trove of Supplies

I try to take people at what they say. Israel says they are shooting at Hamas members. Hamas are pretty up front that they target Israeli civilians. Always have been.

For what it's worth, I hope you're wrong about Israel. The alternative would mean there is no hope for any mutual lasting peace. Certainly not so long as you believe it.