• chaogomu@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    10 months ago

    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.

      • xor@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        “more than normal” in this case is 1/3 of the total child deaths in 11 years in Syria, done in ONE MONTH

      • Aceticon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        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.

    • Arete@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      15
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      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.
      • chaogomu@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        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.