It seems that there are a lot of Israelis that believe that there are no innocents in Gaza. And one could argue that it’s possible that a significant majority of the population is hateful towards Israelis, considering the history.
If you agree with this argument, can you please explain why and elaborate? And if you don’t, how would you refute it? There is no data that shows that there isn’t a significant majority that’s hateful towards the Israelis.
DISCLAIMER: I’m not stating my opinion as I want to hear an unbiased opinion from you.
That’s what you say to justify genocide. There are children there.
They are brainwashed supporters of genocide. I read about a guy who left to get his 2 newborn twins registered at the hospital and they got killed along with his wife while he was away.
“No innocents.”? Fuck you. I wouldn’t wish this misery on my absolute most hated enemy.
Wish I could find the quote from whatever Israeli minister about “hamas babies.”
That is usually how a genocide is justified to the public. Every member of the ‘undesireabe’ group is guilty of being an undesirable, and can thus be justifyably murdered.
Examples:
All Jewish people are guilty of some conspiracy and/or killing Jesus
All Muslim people are guilty of replacing white christians and/or terrorism
All LGBTQ people are guilty of grooming kids
All Palestinians are guilty of ‘occupying’ Israeli land.
etc.
Every example of this is a tool of propaganda to get the public to go along with unfair treatment up to and including genocide. The fact that they’re all easily refuted doesn’t matter. It goes hand in hand with the view that the group aren’t fully people.
This reasoning is never ok, no matter what group of people it’s used against this time. When you recognize it, call it out for the sham it is.
nobody thinks a whole group of civilians deserve to be killed off that isn’t a complete dumbass
You know that a disturbing amount of people actually do right?
everyone is listening to their own narrative. my israeli friends honestly think that muslims are trying to kill them, because some king in the old testament disobeyed god
If there are no innocent ones, how can anyone be a judge of someone else
Let the sinless one throw the first stove
Hard no.
The idea that your can judge an entire group of people to be innocent or not is heavily flawed. Even if any groups cultural influence was hypothetically incredibly evil, do people deserve death for being influenced by their surroundings? How do we gauge who has true evil in their heart, and who was harbouring doubts but couldn’t say anything? We literally can’t, and that kind of thinking shouldn’t be used to decide judgement of a person, let alone who lives and who dies. In practical terms things get muddier sure, but we’re way past that point.
At this point I feel like the conclusion of violence is made first, then the justification coming afterwards.
How about there are no innocent billionaires?
See that one is a touch different, billionaires aren’t something that generally just happens. People making that much money are usually exploiting someone to get there. However, hypothetically, it might be possible to have an outlier billionaire that has done nothing wrong, though unlikely. Though I’d say it’s difficult to imagine an ethical billionaire that stays a billionaire as well, given how much good that kind of money could do for the world in general.
I think it’s important to judge each individual based on their actions, even if their actions may fit the profile for an unethical businessperson or the like.
Unfortunately though it is pretty safe to generalise when it comes to the wealthy.
A core principle of modern (western) legal states is that it’s preferable to let 10 guilty people walk free before wrongfully punishing one innocent. I’m aware that we often don’t manage to live up to that, but it is the ideal.
That’s why guilt of the individual (!) has to be proven beyond reasonable doubt, it’s why certain evidence may become inadmissible if it’s been acquired illegally, it’s why suspect’s may walk free due to formal errors. We try to make absolutely sure that cutting corners doesn’t lead to wrong conclusions, even if it means that we sometimes have to let criminals go unpunished.
Following that same principle, “it’s possible that there’s a significant majority” isn’t enough. Where’s the proof that there’s not a single inhabitant of Gaza who doesn’t support Hamas?
Also, since when is it a crime punishable by lifelong imprisonment or death to be hateful of someone?
And if you and your entire people were held in an open air prison for as long as you could think back, would you not grow hateful of your jailers?
Last but not least: The logic that “there are no innocents [on the other side of the fence]” applied by Hamas towards the Israelis led to October 7th. If it was flawed then, how is it not flawed now?
There’s plenty of examples of people of both nationalities living, working, cooperating, or interacting together.
“They’re all guilty” is bullshit.
Those people who say that are just trying to justify their own hatred/bigotry/war crimes.
I don’t care if someone says that there are no innocent Israelis or no innocent Gazans. It’s despicable either way, and if it’s coming from a person of faith - Jewish, Muslim, or Christian, then they are directly violating the will of God. (Gen 18:17 ff)
If they are a Kahanist or Hamas supporter, then they are in favor of literal terrorism.
First part everyone would agree. Second part, no way in hell.
Hamas is also the government, which means they are government employees who have never taken a gun or done anything. But you go beyond and call every supporter of them “in favor of literal terrorism”
It’s like blaming all jews and supporters of judaism for the action of zionists
Ask those people if there are any innocents in Israel. All of that society contributed to a genocide. We could ask the same thingabout the US. I didn’t get thrown in jail from repeated protesting, so I’m just as much to blame.
If you had, you think any good would have come of it?
Me? No. A million of us, back in July? Yeah. We could have a made a dent.
A million huh? At that point there would not be any arrests. But if that was what was necessary, i don’t think it was a possibility to begin with. I generally do not believe that protesting does much unless it is super disruptive to everyday life. People protest every day, exactly where and how the powers aT be allow them to happen. Out of sight out of mind.
This bs reasoning is literally “I dont vote because Im just one in a million and it doesnt make a difference”
Insofar that you add “innocent of absolutely anything and everything that anyone could ever morally doubt, on a philosophical lebel”, definitely no.
Innocent as in not responsible for the crimes of others? Yeah, obviously. Depends though but vastly yes.
it is a valid view.
but i do not support it.
imo, anything that uses absolutes tends to get out of reasonable bounds.
no innocentsin Gaza is really hard to prove.no, because you cannot hold one person accountable for the actions of a different person unless they directly enabled it.
Isn’t that just neutrality?
Edit: Oh you meant “no innocents in enemy territory”. No, that’s not valid.
