Israel airstrike on Gaza school kills more than 100, Hamas-run media office says

[Claira]

3 minutes ago, Grim Reaper 6 said:

It’s very easy to be an armchair quarterback with no real experience where combat is concerned. It’s easy to make comments based upon emotions, but it’s totally different to watch, see and smell death and when you do enough times it changes your perspective about such things. You may want to consider these things if you’re going to comment on topics like this.

Who are you to tell me what I must consider before commenting on this issue? My comments are based on facts and an understanding of the crisis that's far deeper than any you might have. I know Israel and the IDF first hand. You do not.

[Claira]

25 minutes ago, and-then said:

Most on this site and around the world who are giving their opinions, have never served in combat.

And most do not live next door to extremists and terrorists wanting to erase their very existence. How easy it is to criticize Israelis when one has no idea what day to day life against the backdrop of frequent acts of terror is like.

[Grim Reaper 6]

43 minutes ago, and-then said:

Most on this site and around the world who are giving their opinions, have never served in combat.  It doesn't make their opinions any less valid.  I'll say it again, those here who continually post the propaganda given by Hamas and who wail for the dead civilians in Gaza, have no other options for Israel and the bottom line is that to refrain from doing what Israel is doing would be to surrender to a group that wants the destruction of all Jews -EVERYWHERE - not just in Israel.  A person with years of experience in what war is and how it is waged should understand that it is horrible but that the only thing worse is surrender to an enemy that TRULY wants to commit genocide.

It all comes down to which side one believes and supports.  I support Israel and am unrepentant in it.

Until you have been faced with situations like this first hand it’s impossible to imagine what it’s actually like. You can’t unsee the things you have seen and it takes a little piece of your soul every time you encounter them. Like i said above it’s very easy to make comments about things you have never personally encountered. I have never said that Israel should surrender to Hamas, so please don’t put words in my mouth.

However, based upon my experience there is a time to bomb a target and there are times where ground troops must be used. You’re welcome to support anyone you choose, but your choices go against the way America would conduct similar operations. The US would have not bombed a target when it would cause massive collateral damage, they would have sent in ground troops to minimize civilian casualties. I don’t want Israel to lose this conflict, i just don’t agree with their methods when it comes to conducting combat operations..

Now your welcome to your opinion, but I also have a right to mine like it or not.

[Grim Reaper 6]

54 minutes ago, Claira said:

Who are you to tell me what I must consider before commenting on this issue? My comments are based on facts and an understanding of the crisis that's far deeper than any you might have. I know Israel and the IDF first hand. You do not.

You did not answer my question have you fought in combat, and seen dead civilians lying all over the street in pieces?

Who are you to tell me, you know nothing about me or the principles my comments are also based upon facts.

I don’t need to know Israel or the IDF, I know how terrible combat actually is, and obviously you certainly do not.

I want to see Israel win this war, but the question is at what cost obviously in your opinion anything goes no matter the cost and that’s sad.

Like I previously said you’re welcome to your opinion, so don’t tell me I am wrong for having my own.

[Claira]

9 minutes ago, Grim Reaper 6 said:

You did not answer my question have you fought in combat, and seen dead civilians lying all over the street in pieces?

I will preface my comments by stating your initial reply had absolutely no relevance to what I originally posted. Rather than comment on or challenge my statements, you instead launched into a misguided moral crusade — a crusade driven by arrogance and exaggerations spewed by Hamas.

The war in Gaza is a war like no other, and whilst I don't know where you've served and in what capacity, I am confident you've not found yourself in a situation anywhere close to that which the IDF currently finds itself in

I live in Israel, you do not. I've served with the IDF, you have not. I'm under no obligation to tell you anything more or to fully answer a question that is absolutely inane on its face and bears no relevance to the veracity of my opinions, other than to make it abundantly clear that I'm less of an 'armchair critic' than you are.

[+and-then]

1 hour ago, Grim Reaper 6 said:

I have never said that Israel should surrender to Hamas

I didn't claim that you used those words.  Your statement leaves no other recourse for Israel except to basically surrender.  Can't you see that?  Hamas uses civilians as shields, I'd hope we could at least agree on that fact.  There is another member here who regularly posts about "horrors" happening to Gazan civilians and they are based on nothing other than reports from Hamas in Gaza.  He, also, gives no opinions of how Israel could fight back against these demons and also exempt civilians from harm.  The reason for that is that both of you, perhaps for different reasons, seem willing to accept Hamas propaganda as an excuse to blame Israel for civilian losses - that cannot be verified - and demand that Israel "do more" to save those civilians, even though you apparently reject the word from Israel of the measures they have been taking since the war began.

Let me be clear:

Israel is fighting a war it did not start.  Wars always kill innocents, ALWAYS.

Hamas was elected to lead Palestinians and TO THIS DAY are still supported by the great majority of them.

There have been several expert statisticians who have said Hamas' numbers are an impossibility, yet you guys and a few others here still cite them and blame Israel for them as though they were irrefutable.

The bottom line is simple.  Israel can prosecute this war as they have done and eventually achieve their goals of destroying Hamas as a military and political entity or they can follow the urgings of those like you guys and allow Hamas to survive, rebuild, and slaughter Israelis again.  There is no third option.  The only other option I've seen any of you cite is to send large numbers of IDF ground troops into those kill zones Hamas has created.  I don't blame Israel at all for refusing to sacrifice their young men as a means of saving the lives of people who STILL hate them and want all of them dead.  NO NATION OWES THAT TO ANY ENEMY.

 

[Grim Reaper 6]

24 minutes ago, Claira said:

I will preface my comments by stating your initial reply had absolutely no relevance to what I originally posted. Rather than comment on or challenge my statements, you instead launched into a misguided moral crusade — a crusade driven by arrogance and exaggerations spewed by Hamas.

I am sorry you feel that way, but it’s not an accurate statement at all, I asked some simple questions it was no misguided moral crusade although since you mentioned it maybe it should be one. I don’t speak for Hamas, and in my opinion a war crime is a war crime and no one is justified in committing them. 

24 minutes ago, Claira said:

The war in Gaza is a war like no other, and whilst I don't know where you've served and in what capacity, I am confident you've not found yourself in a situation anywhere close to that which the IDF currently finds itself in

That isn’t an accurate statement, I served in Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan as soldier or as a civilian contractor and to answer your question I have found myself in similar situations to what the IDF faces today. 

24 minutes ago, Claira said:

I live in Israel, you do not. I've served with the IDF, you have not. I'm under no obligation to tell you anything more or to fully answer a question that is absolutely inane on its face and bears no relevance to the veracity of my opinions, other than to make it abundantly clear that I'm less of an 'armchair critic' than you are.

Thanks for partly answering my question, and your right your under no obligation to answer my question. Please except my apology for my comments about you being an armchair quarterback, there are so many online these days it’s difficult to ascertain who is and who isn’t these days. I spent 23 years in the US military and 10+ years as a civilian contractor working in middle eastern operations, I have seen more than anyone ever should when it comes to death.

During my career I was trained to minimize collateral damage whenever it is possible, civilians don’t deserve to die because of the circumstances they find themselves in. The US would have used ground troops in a situation like we are discussing to minimize civilian casualties and that explains my mind set and my comments.

I have always supported Israel’s right to exist and to live in a peaceful environment, however that has never been the case no fault of Israel’s. However, I don’t support and never will support atrocities committed against civilians no matter who commits them. My soldiers were trained to follow the international Rules of engagement and they were aware there would be hell to pay if they didn’t.

That is my only disagreement with the manner in which this conflict is going and this is also why the International Criminal Court has charged the Israeli government with war crimes along with Hamas. I am aware you don’t agree with it, but that changes nothing the facts are the facts. Sadly, no matter when this conflict ends Israel will always face adversity caused by their Arab neighbors and I doubt that will ever change.

[Grim Reaper 6]

12 minutes ago, and-then said:

I didn't claim that you used those words.  Your statement leaves no other recourse for Israel except to basically surrender.  Can't you see that?  Hamas uses civilians as shields, I'd hope we could at least agree on that fact.  There is another member here who regularly posts about "horrors" happening to Gazan civilians and they are based on nothing other than reports from Hamas in Gaza.  He, also, gives no opinions of how Israel could fight back against these demons and also exempt civilians from harm.  The reason for that is that both of you, perhaps for different reasons, seem willing to accept Hamas propaganda as an excuse to blame Israel for civilian losses - that cannot be verified - and demand that Israel "do more" to save those civilians, even though you apparently reject the word from Israel of the measures they have been taking since the war began.

You are well aware how the United States would handle a situation like this, they would use ground troops to destroy the target. I am well aware that Hamas is using civilians as shields, this is nothing new all terrorists do that on a regular basis. The US has faced this very problem across the Middle East it’s nothing new, there are only two choices, either you act in the same manner as the terrorists or you take the high ground and follow the international rules of war. I don’t except any propaganda from either side, but that is where we are different, you do except anything Israel says as gospel. You know you kill all the evil b******* and let god sort them out is not a very Christian attitude coming from someone who posts scripture on this forum. 

12 minutes ago, and-then said:

Let me be clear:

Israel is fighting a war it did not start.  Wars always kill innocents, ALWAYS.

Hamas was elected to lead Palestinians and TO THIS DAY are still supported by the great majority of them.

There have been several expert statisticians who have said Hamas' numbers are an impossibility, yet you guys and a few others here still cite them and blame Israel for them as though they were irrefutable.

I never said all the reports of civilian casualties are accurate because I don’t believe they are. You say you guys did this and that, but you’re also a part of the problem because according to your comments you think all Palestinians are enemy combatants and they deserve what they get. You also come across like Israel has done nothing wrong which is ludicrous. You don’t have the moral high ground you claim you have, you down in the mud like the rest of us and your opinion is no better than mine which is a fact you don’t seem to understand.

12 minutes ago, and-then said:

The bottom line is simple.  Israel can prosecute this war as they have done and eventually achieve their goals of destroying Hamas as a military and political entity or they can follow the urgings of those like you guys and allow Hamas to survive, rebuild, and slaughter Israelis again.  There is no third option.  The only other option I've seen any of you cite is to send large numbers of IDF ground troops into those kill zones Hamas has created.  I don't blame Israel at all for refusing to sacrifice their young men as a means of saving the lives of people who STILL hate them and want all of them dead.  NO NATION OWES THAT TO ANY ENEMY.

I don’t know who your talking about when you say YOU GUYS but let me say this you do not have the moral high ground here, none of us do, we only offer our opinions nothing more. Israel may destroy Hamas, however another terrorist organization will pop up using a different name made up of previous Hamas members and the cycle will continue. Unlike you I don’t ever see an end to this it’s been going on for 60+ years and there is no end in sight. Let me say again none of us have the moral high ground only opinions based upon our experiences nothing more. 

[+and-then]

13 minutes ago, Grim Reaper 6 said:

but you’re also a part of the problem because according to your comments you think all Palestinians are enemy combatants and they deserve what they get

Not so.  I am saying that in order to save more civilian lives - civilians that still want all Jews dead - Israel would have to sacrifice far more of their youth to the killing zones Hamas have created in Gaza.  I don't blame Israel at all for refusing to do this.  Gazan civilians supported and still support Hamas and its goals.  I will never be repentant of supporting Israelis right to destroy an enemy that wants ALL OF THEM dead.

If Israel was not trying to spare civilians, this war could have been finished 8 months or more ago.  All the IDF would have had to do was systematically turn all of Gaza into a field of rubble.  That is precisely what America would do to any nation that shared a border and was as dedicated to killing our citizens as Hamas is to killing Jews.

[+and-then]

22 minutes ago, Grim Reaper 6 said:

Unlike you I don’t ever see an end to this it’s been going on for 60+ years and there is no end in sight.

Then Israel's choices are to keep killing those who would kill their children for the "crime" of breathing while Jewish, or surrendering and leaving the land.  The difference between us is that I believe there will come a day when Israel will live in peace and the Palestinians will no longer trouble them.  It will not come as a result of Palestinians ever changing their minds or hearts about their hatred for Jews, a hatred their religion nourishes and demands.

[Grim Reaper 6]

13 minutes ago, and-then said:

Not so.  I am saying that in order to save more civilian lives - civilians that still want all Jews dead - Israel would have to sacrifice far more of their youth to the killing zones Hamas have created in Gaza.  I don't blame Israel at all for refusing to do this.  Gazan civilians supported and still support Hamas and its goals.  I will never be repentant of supporting Israelis right to destroy an enemy that wants ALL OF THEM dead.

If Israel was not trying to spare civilians, this war could have been finished 8 months or more ago.  All the IDF would have had to do was systematically turn all of Gaza into a field of rubble.  That is precisely what America would do to any nation that shared a border and was as dedicated to killing our citizens as Hamas is to killing Jews.

No matter who commits them I do not under any circumstance condone war crimes and I don’t care who commits them. Between 2003 and 2006 under Bush the United States committed war crimes, I was very disappointed in my own country and I spoke out against it. This is where our opinions differ, I just will not turn a blind eye to atrocities by any Nation. Because, once a Nation goes there they lose the moral high ground and they end up no better than the enemy they are facing..

JIMHO

[Grim Reaper 6]

1 hour ago, and-then said:

Then Israel's choices are to keep killing those who would kill their children for the "crime" of breathing while Jewish, or surrendering and leaving the land.  The difference between us is that I believe there will come a day when Israel will live in peace and the Palestinians will no longer trouble them.  It will not come as a result of Palestinians ever changing their minds or hearts about their hatred for Jews, a hatred their religion nourishes and demands.

I certainly don’t agree, I don’t see this cycle of violence never ending. So, in this case I hope you’re right and I am wrong because the alternative is a horrible way to exist.

Edited August 11 by Grim Reaper 6

[+and-then]

2 hours ago, Grim Reaper 6 said:

Because, once a Nation goes there they lose the moral high ground

Israel is fighting for its SURVIVAL.  Wars are nearly always fought with one side or the other breaking the rules.  The bottom line is that you choose to believe or at a minimum, overlook, the fact that you are tacitly accepting the numbers given by Hamas rather than giving Israel credit for doing all they can already to save civilian lives.  It get's down to who a person trusts.  I do not trust an entity that attacked civilians and committed unspeakable atrocities against them.

[Grim Reaper 6]

8 minutes ago, and-then said:

Israel is fighting for its SURVIVAL.  Wars are nearly always fought with one side or the other breaking the rules.  The bottom line is that you choose to believe or at a minimum, overlook, the fact that you are tacitly accepting the numbers given by Hamas rather than giving Israel credit for doing all they can already to save civilian lives.  It get's down to who a person trusts.  I do not trust an entity that attacked civilians and committed unspeakable atrocities against them.

No I don’t accept the numbers given by Hamas, I believe the numbers are inflated the only question is by how much. It does come down to who a person trusts, and as far as the number killed is concerned I don’t trust the word of either side, but I do trust Israel more than Hamas. The truth is the International Criminal Court has charged both Israel and Hamas with war crimes, now I am uncertain how they came to that conclusion, but I have read the courts minutes and the ICC Prosecutor has come to that conclusion. I doubt they will ever enforce their warrants on members of the Israeli government, but their warrants don’t have a statute of limitations.

My only complaint is war is bad enough and without rules it becomes even more horrific. Like I said once you see the horror of war you can never unsee it, where war crimes and crimes against humanity are concerned there is no justification that anyone can give.

[+and-then]

20 minutes ago, Grim Reaper 6 said:

My only complaint is war is bad enough and without rules it becomes even more horrific. Like I said once you see the horror of war you can never unsee it, where war crimes and crimes against humanity are concerned there is no justification that anyone can give.

I'm not arguing that point.  I'm simply saying that demanding that Israel obey rules that Hamas never will be held to, is unreasonable and it should not be expected of them.  I accept their word when they say they are doing eveything possible to save civilians.  The strike that is being screamed about around the world today is a blatant lie against the IDF.  I cited an image of the building the IAF struck that Hamas says was hit with a 2000lb bomb.  It's obvious that amuch smaller munition was used.  Those in media who are spreading lies do so consistently against Israel and the world laps them up without question.

[Grim Reaper 6]

14 minutes ago, and-then said:

I'm not arguing that point.  I'm simply saying that demanding that Israel obey rules that Hamas never will be held to, is unreasonable and it should not be expected of them.  I accept their word when they say they are doing eveything possible to save civilians.  The strike that is being screamed about around the world today is a blatant lie against the IDF.  I cited an image of the building the IAF struck that Hamas says was hit with a 2000lb bomb.  It's obvious that amuch smaller munition was used.  Those in media who are spreading lies do so consistently against Israel and the world laps them up without question.

The image you provided doesn’t prove or disprove that 2000 lb bombs were used because it only gives a small view of the area. Hopefully, better images will be posted, until then in my opinion it’s impossible to prove either way. The media is going off assumptions because they don’t have access to the areas in question and this has been a problem throughout this conflict. For some reason Israel will not embed news correspondents like every other Nation does during conflicts and until they do the media will use the sources they are given and unfortunately that means the information they receive is bias. All of this could be solved with embedded media correspondents.

Edited August 11 by Grim Reaper 6

[Claira]

6 hours ago, Grim Reaper 6 said:

You are well aware how the United States would handle a situation like this, they would use ground troops to destroy the target.

No they wouldn't. Ground warfare offers advantages to the defender but comes at a massive cost to both soldiers and civilians. The IDF made the right call in his instance. A precision strike against the terrorists in one specific building of the compound (where intel indicated no women and children were present) was by far the better option. A ground operation would have been longer and bloodier with immense risk to the civilians sheltering in the area, resulting in casualties far greater than what Hamas is currently reporting.

[acidhead]

54 minutes ago, Claira said:

A precision strike against the terrorists in one specific building of the compound (where intel indicated no women and children were present) was by far the better option. 

There's literally photographs and video of women and children blown to pieces due to that precision strike. 

[Grim Reaper 6]

1 hour ago, Claira said:

No they wouldn't. Ground warfare offers advantages to the defender but comes at a massive cost to both soldiers and civilians. The IDF made the right call in his instance. A precision strike against the terrorists in one specific building of the compound (where intel indicated no women and children were present) was by far the better option. A ground operation would have been longer and bloodier with immense risk to the civilians sheltering in the area, resulting in casualties far greater than what Hamas is currently reporting.

Thanks for your opinion, however the United States would not have used ordinance on a target where such collateral damage would have taken place. There is no such thing as a precision strike when a target area is covered with refugees. The United States would have used a JSOC strike force to eliminate any combatants at that location, that is exactly what they are trained for. You can justify this incident anyway you choose, because you’re certainly welcome to your opinion. But don’t tell me how US Forces would have handled that situation because you completely wrong in your assessment. 

[Claira]

2 hours ago, acidhead said:

There's literally photographs and video of women and children blown to pieces due to that precision strike. 

I would argue that images of civilians 'blown to pieces' would be difficult to identify, but realize that part of your comment is an exaggeration not meant to be taken literally. Hamas has stated that 93 civilians were killed, including 11 children and 6 women. Assuming those figures are accurate, it goes without saying that 11 children dead is 11 too many. The same applies to other innocent civilians. But I stand by my earlier comment. Those numbers would have been significantly higher had ground troops been deployed.

[Claira]

2 hours ago, Grim Reaper 6 said:

Thanks for your opinion, however the United States would not have used ordinance on a target where such collateral damage would have taken place. There is no such thing as a precision strike when a target area is covered with refugees. The United States would have used a JSOC strike force to eliminate any combatants at that location, that is exactly what they are trained for. You can justify this incident anyway you choose, because you’re certainly welcome to your opinion. But don’t tell me how US Forces would have handled that situation because you completely wrong in your assessment. 

The US may have used a JSOC strike under the same circumstances, but only if those circumstances were such that a team could enter, complete their mission, and leave with little to no resistance. If all hell were to break loose, imagine the carnage that would ensue. Furthermore, such operations typically require extensive planning, and there are times when a more timely strike is required so that a window of opportunity is not missed.

[CrimsonKing]

2 hours ago, Claira said:

The US may have used a JSOC strike under the same circumstances, but only if those circumstances were such that a team could enter, complete their mission, and leave with little to no resistance. If all hell were to break loose, imagine the carnage that would ensue. Furthermore, such operations typically require extensive planning, and there are times when a more timely strike is required so that a window of opportunity is not missed.

Timing being more key in Gaza than just about any other "battlefield" type situation than I can think of...miles and miles of tunnels.

Not sure that's been encountered by US forces anywhere... it's almost like the "Hive" in Resident Evil,you don't get them when you have the chance,it could be months even years,or hell there may still be tunnels escaping to other countries still.

All my opinion of course.

@Grim Reaper 6 I keep in mind you're Buddhist as well,after serving I reckon you just want to see the most peaceful solution,my opinion is I just don't see Iran ever letting that happen...

[+and-then]

12 hours ago, Grim Reaper 6 said:

The image you provided doesn’t prove or disprove that 2000 lb bombs were used because it only gives a small view of the area

The image was provided by the IDF.  It mentions having overhead imagery as well but I think a 2000lb bomb anywhere near a concrete structure like that would have collapsed the building.  The claims being made sound like what Hamas claimed after some very small ordnance was used next to a tent encampment that then burned down.  Hamas and the media never tell the truth about how these things happen.

[+and-then]

8 hours ago, acidhead said:

There's literally photographs and video of women and children blown to pieces due to that precision strike. 

The only photos I've seen were indistinguishable and the intact bodies were of military-aged males.  That said, there is no claim that Israel killed NO civilians, just that the numbers Hamas claimed were exaggerated.  You've admitted that you feel Israel has no right to defend itself unless they can do so without killing any civilians.  I hope you never find yourself in a conflict where such rules are demanded of you.

[Grim Reaper 6]

6 hours ago, Claira said:

The US may have used a JSOC strike under the same circumstances, but only if those circumstances were such that a team could enter, complete their mission, and leave with little to no resistance. If all hell were to break loose, imagine the carnage that would ensue. Furthermore, such operations typically require extensive planning, and there are times when a more timely strike is required so that a window of opportunity is not missed.

I agree with you, sometimes a more timely strike is necessary. However, under those circumstances a Drone strike would not have been carried out by the US due to collateral damage. In all situations the US will carry out threat assessment and that would be weighed with collateral damage, if collateral damage tips the scale the drone strike option would not have been taken based upon current US rules of engagement (ROE).