In response to complaints about its coverage, CBC says Israeli state violence is different than Hamas’ violence because the killing of Palestinians happens “remotely”
Well, first of all is the idea that this level of destruction is in any way normal in war.
Take a look at this chart here. Those date ranges in the chart have some of the bloodiest conflict in each war, and yet on any given day only a handful of children would die.
Israel is killing an average of almost 150 children per day.
Did you ever wonder why the population of Gaza is majority children?
Do note that the people of Gaza have been under a complete border lockdown for the last 17 years. Nothing enters or exists without the IDF okay. Including money for Hamas.
That’s like describing the purposeful crushing under a steam roller of a person tied up in the middle of the road and unable to escape as a “more than normal” traffic accident.
Appreciate the good faith response. While I’m certainly not going to excuse thousands of dead children, I don’t find these other conflicts comparable for the following reasons:
these are averaged over about a decade, most of which is in the form of a “frozen” conflict between entrenched armies outside of populated areas. We might (I don’t have numbers on this) see a much higher rate if we focused in on the hottest/most urban part of each war. The “30 day” range for this conflict is widely out of step with the others. If we “froze” the conflict for a decade, we’d depress the number by 120x and it would suddenly match the others.
most of these did not involve significant urban conflict in populated areas, especially with an entrenched defender making use of human shields.
the average age in Gaza is only ~18, meaning all else being equal, child deaths will be outsized. Further, Hamas employs teenage soldiers and the provided numbers don’t make a civilian/militant distinction. As horrific as it is, there is a difference between an armed 17 year old child soldier and a 3 year old bystander.
Israel is using 2000lbs bombs in Gaza, using hundreds of them. These are not, in any way, targeted strikes. They kill civilians by the dozens.
In 20 years of war, the US only ever used 500lbs bombs in urban environments. Even that was often barbaric in the amount of collateral damage caused.
Also, are you calling the fucking Battle of Mosula frozen conflict?
That was some of the bloodiest fighting in the entire war, all of it urban. There were fewer children killed in the entire 9 months than there have been killed in 3 in Gaza. And not by a small amount.
An ad hominem would be “you are wrong because you are a coward”. My statement was in effect “you are wrong and you are a coward”.
You could call it an insult, although I would say it was a generous term for someone who offers up mealy mouthed equivocations over the wholesale slaughter of civilians from the air by a nuclear power.
You didn’t say much that was wrong; you didn’t say much at all. You were just asking questions.
If I said something factually wrong please correct me. Otherwise let’s leave the ad hominem attacks unsaid.
Well, first of all is the idea that this level of destruction is in any way normal in war.
Take a look at this chart here. Those date ranges in the chart have some of the bloodiest conflict in each war, and yet on any given day only a handful of children would die.
Israel is killing an average of almost 150 children per day.
That’s why we’re calling it a genocide.
Gazas population is like half children of course they show up more than normal
Did you ever wonder why the population of Gaza is majority children?
Do note that the people of Gaza have been under a complete border lockdown for the last 17 years. Nothing enters or exists without the IDF okay. Including money for Hamas.
Even before the current genocide, 40% of Gazan households experienced extreme food insecurity.
“more than normal” in this case is 1/3 of the total child deaths in 11 years in Syria, done in ONE MONTH
Weird how population density and firepower differences can be multiplicative. Welcome to war it sucks
That’s like describing the purposeful crushing under a steam roller of a person tied up in the middle of the road and unable to escape as a “more than normal” traffic accident.
Appreciate the good faith response. While I’m certainly not going to excuse thousands of dead children, I don’t find these other conflicts comparable for the following reasons:
Okay, city fighting is messy…
Except the second item on the list,
https://edition.cnn.com/gaza-israel-big-bombs
Israel is using 2000lbs bombs in Gaza, using hundreds of them. These are not, in any way, targeted strikes. They kill civilians by the dozens.
In 20 years of war, the US only ever used 500lbs bombs in urban environments. Even that was often barbaric in the amount of collateral damage caused.
Also, are you calling the fucking Battle of Mosula frozen conflict?
That was some of the bloodiest fighting in the entire war, all of it urban. There were fewer children killed in the entire 9 months than there have been killed in 3 in Gaza. And not by a small amount.
An ad hominem would be “you are wrong because you are a coward”. My statement was in effect “you are wrong and you are a coward”.
You could call it an insult, although I would say it was a generous term for someone who offers up mealy mouthed equivocations over the wholesale slaughter of civilians from the air by a nuclear power.
You didn’t say much that was wrong; you didn’t say much at all. You were just asking questions.
But thats not an ad hominem attack, it’s a direct critique of the form your statement takes.