Comment by josephg | Hacker News Reader

Comment by josephg | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

That logic cuts both ways.

We could equally say that this overreaction by Israel was entirely predictable - and inevitable - after Hamas’s murderous rampage on Oct 7. And to take hostages and not return them? What did they think Israel would do? Capitulate to Hamas’s demands, thereby encouraging Hamas to do the same thing again every few months when they want treats? Invasion was perhaps the only option the Israelis had. Hamas played chicken, using their own civilians as human shields. And Israel called their bluff. To the death of tens of thousands of innocent lives.

The heartbreaking part is that I agree with you. I feel like this conflict is inevitable. And it’s the civilians on both sides - but especially Gaza - who are bearing the brunt of misery as a result.

What on earth do I have to be sorry about? Of course their murderous rampage through Gaza happened after October 7. Even with the benefit of hindsight I’m not sure what better options Israel had.

I just wish they’d pull out and let the rebuilding begin. This conflict won’t be healed with more blood.

>That logic cuts both ways.

What both ways are you talking about? GP is arguing on behalf of those who were called antisemites because they stated “international community should rein in Israel to prevent them to commit atrocities because of rage”, and your response seems to be “well atrocities were given because Hamas”.

This is exactly why this “mea culpa” rings hollow. People who apparently condemn the reaction will tumble on their own arguments to excuse the same actions.

The "mea culpa" you're looking for rings hollow because I - and others - aren't sorry.

As I said, what do I have to be sorry for? For not condemning Israel after Hamas murdered and kidnapped hundreds of their civilians? Should I have condemned them for doing everything they could to bring their kidnapped people home?

Its lazy and incredibly selfish to condemn others for making hard choices when you don't know how you would have acted yourself. Me? I still can't answer the question of how I would have acted differently if I were in charge of Israel when October 7 happened. If I was president, and a bunch of armed militants came into my country, murdered our children and kidnapped hundreds of people, I can see myself sending my soldiers out with orders to bring them home.

Would you have done any different, if you were Israel's president? If so, what?

If you would have done the same thing and sent soldiers in, your condemnation rings pretty hollow.

On your hypothetical, do I woke up as Israeli president on Oct 7 2023? Because if that’s the case, then yes, maybe I would do the same, although most likely I would be ousted for not being bloodthirsty enough.

But in a less unrealistic scenario, if I were by chance, to be president of Israel, I would try first to dismantle illegal settlements and defuse conflict to avoid, for example, 2023 being the deadliest year for children in west bank way before Oct 7.

Any hypothetical scenario that doesn’t engage on what the Israeli government can do before Oct 7, is pretty much a scenario where you are representing an occupying and murderous regime, so likely you will behave as those who represent murderous regimes do.

> Its lazy and incredibly selfish to condemn others for making hard choices when you don't know how you would have acted yourself

No, it's how our world improves.

I, personally, do not have to be a perfect paragon of morality and justice and righteousness in order to condemn other people for doing immoral and evil things.

Also there's a huge difference between "a week after the attacks" and "12 months after the attacks". Humans, pretty much universally, will justify/excuse reactions based on immediate rage and anger and hurt and forgive people who did it... assuming they, you know, stop doing it.

Would I personally have sent soldiers in or done any of the other things? No idea. I certainly hope not, but there's no way to prove that. It's like asking if I would have bought a slave if I lived in 1800s texas or 150 ce rome. There's no real way to answer the question, but the important part is that it would still be wrong if I did it.

We can quibble about how wrong it would be, and more usefully, what the punishment should be for doing so, but none of that changes the fact that it's wrong.

And as a general take on the whole israel-palestine thing, yes, hamas has done any number of awful immortal crimes. So has israel. The difference is that israel has a lot more power over palestine than hamas has over israel.

Sure, maybe the 8 year old did in fact kick you in the shin and spit on you. I still expect the adult to act with a higher moral standard.

Yep, I agree that they should have stopped by now.

> Sure, maybe the 8 year old did in fact kick you in the shin and spit on you. I still expect the adult to act with a higher moral standard.

Nah. Morality isn’t just for when it’s convenient. I find it kind of racist to liken Palestine to children. They know what they were doing when they went on a killing spree on October 7. Just like Israel did when they bombed peoples homes.

They're not a child in this analogy because they lack the knowledge of right and wrong, but because they lack power.

To relitigate this analogy, it is morally wrong for the child to kick you in the shin, but it's far more useful to worry about the actions the adults are taking because, again, they have most of the power.

Hamas had more than enough power on October 7 to murder and kidnap a whole lot of people. They also have the funding and power to build a network of tunnels under Gaza which has so far thwarted the IDF's capacity to find the kidnapped civilians and bring them home.

They're not all-powerful. But thats cold comfort to everyone who lost loved ones in the attack. They sure kicked Israel in the teeth.

Yes, obviously, but my point is that focusing on them, or even treating them as equal, is not the most effective way to actually solve the problem.

Designating someone as a "bad person" and then focusing on punishing them is simple and feels good. It's just not effective.

I'm pretty sure Hamas went into this expecting Israel to respond with war crimes, it was probably the reaction they were going for with the kidnappings. What I don't understand is how Hamas thought that they could take advantage of it (if not for the betterment of the Gazans, for themselves)?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com