Hacker News Reader

Comment by Veraticus | Hacker News Reader

Israel does not view its current military operation as collective punishment, so certainly it would not go to the UN and ask for its permission to do something it does not think it’s doing.

Leaving your disingenuous framing aside, yes, Israel has brought complaints to the UN before. See: https://www.newarab.com/news/israel-complains-un-over-hezbol...

View on HN

I think the disingenuity is with you. Here is a quote from the current Israeli President Isaac Herzog: “It is an entire nation out there that is responsible. It is not true this rhetoric about civilians not being aware, not involved. It’s absolutely not true"

I asked you for an example of Israel and the US going to the UNSC first and only after that launching an excursion into Gaza. You respond with a complaint about Lebanon moving troops within its own borders. What was the expectation from the UNSC there? How does that relate to my question?

In what sense does your quote confirm that Israel is engaging in collective punishment? Israel believes it is rooting out Hamas and that there is an embedded civilian component to its operation (which is unequivocally true). This is the problem with taking three sentences out of someone’s mouth and deciding they support an idea as broad as “collective punishment.” Perhaps you should understand the context of his words before you use them?

In any event, you asked for one time Israel brought a complaint to the UN and I provided it. Please don’t alter the goalposts you yourself set.

What was the UN’s response? Was there an intervention? A censure of Hezbollah or Lebanon? An investigation?

What exactly is your ask here? To censure Lebanon for moving troops within inside its own country? And how does that relate to my question about Gaza.

Anything! Israel has gone to the UN before and the response is radio silence. Oh, except for literally anything Israel itself does, which results in waves of censure and resolutions condemning Israel and its existence.

Given the UN’s history towards Israel, why would it ever take anything to the UNSC or believe that its arbitrations and judgments are anything but massively biased against it?

> Given the UN’s history towards Israel, why would it ever take anything to the UNSC or believe that its arbitrations and judgments are anything but massively biased against it?

I don't really understand that line of reasoning, doesn't Israel owe its existence to the UN security council resolution in 1948?

Quite the opposite. Israel owes its existence only to its willingness to fight tooth and claw for that existence. The UN has never shown even the slightest willingness to police or enforce any of its resolutions. (Also I think you’re referring to the partition resolution of 1947, which was a dead letter literally on its arrival as civil war had already broken out in Palestine.)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com