Uhh… yeah Hamas committed real genocide. You see when it’s actual genocide and not edgy teenage internet keyboard warrior “genocide” people are going to call it evil and completely destroy the evil people responsible. The evil people responsible are Hamas. This war is termed the Israel-Hamas war by the Israelis. Hamas are the evil people that have committed genocide.

The war is termed things other than the Israel-Hamas war by propaganda channels in an attempt to characterize the war as being against the Palestinian people. But that’s not Israel doing that, it’s propaganda channels that are opposed to Israel that are doing that.

There are members of Hamas who went into villages and massacred everyone they could find. Men, women, children, babies. Decapitated people. Played around with the severed heads like they were toys. They did these things under orders from their commanders. These specific people that did these horrific acts were referred to as “human animals”.

The propaganda channels you’re subscribed to probably left out some details on that, didn’t they? That’s all they have to do, just don’t mention a few specifics and people will jump to the conclusion that someone was saying it about an entire ethnicity. But it’s false. Someone referred to the specific people that committed the most horrific acts imaginable as being animals. Personally I prefer to use terms like “psychopath” or on occasion “monster” to describe people capable of doing the things that were done on October 7, but it’s not all that offensive to me to call people like that “animals” since those kinds of acts are inhuman. How do you describe the people that went into villages and massacred men, women, and children? Freedom fighters?

I don’t have time to go through all of the propaganda you’ve collected via your “internet research”. But I think it should be plain to see that you’ve been misled on a lot of things.

What are you talking about? I’m sure analogy sounded good in your head, but it only indicates you understand nothing about a military operation.

In a civilian context you don’t need to first invade a country so you can have boots on the ground so you can send someone into the school. Invading a country will result in a huge number of civilian casualties before you can send soldiers into that school to take out the target. Is that what you want?

There is basically no probability that you’re sending soldiers into an ambush, there’s no probability that the school is rigged to explode as soon as the soldier opens the door when it’s a school shooting.

It’s actually more the opposite. Terrorists have been known to blow up schools do you understand that? So if you have just one opportunity to take out that terrorist and you don’t do it, and next week that same terrorist blows up a school and 50 children die, did you make the right decision?

These kinds of scenarios are a constant trolley cart problem. No matter what you do, civilians are going to die. You’re just ignorantly calling the guy operating the track switch of genocide triggers the switch and you also accuse him of genocide if he doesn’t trigger the switch, you’re just someone accusing everyone of genocide constantly which means that word doesn’t mean anything anymore. That only benefits the people that actually commit genocide.