I posted a link in my very first comment that showed this isn't true. People in Khan Younis were given conflicting information to both stay and leave. The day before Layan's family was killed, the IDF told people in Khan Younis to stay in place. And if neither the north or the south of Gaza are safe, what, exactly, are Gazans supposed to do??
We've already done the "human shield" thing. Those people aren't shields, they're families, men, women and children, desperately trying to move out of the way of Israel's bombs. Shields don't do that, right? Shields stay in place and protect targets. Whether by choice or because they're forced to. None of the people in Gaza are doing that. They're running for their lives. There's just nowhere to run.
So if you're going to shrug your shoulders as Israel does this, at least don't dehumanise these people by calling them "shields."
Oh, and just for fun, here's what using somebody as a human shield actually looks like (please note, this is long before this latest conflict). If you'd like to see more, try searching "Israel using human shields"
...
It's interesting to see this idea that some other country should take Gazans. First, because as I said, this would mean handing over yet more Palestinian land to Israel. Palestinians (and everybody else who's paying attention) know that if they leave their land they're never going to get it back. Heck, even when they don't leave their land settlers come and steal it.
So yes, it is Israel's fault if they have such a track record of stealing land that everybody knows that taking in refugees from Gaza would turn into a permanent settlement. Israel has absolutely no right to "not let people back into their homes later"! This is a significant part of the issue Palestinians have with Israel, remember? The Nakba??
Second, no, Gazan's can't leave. This is another significant part of the issue. Israel has blockaded them into Gaza, destroyed their airport, and controls all access by air, land and sea. The only exception is the border with Egypt. And I don't think Egypt is going to accept 2 million refugees.
But third, and by far most important, this is exactly the same rhetoric espoused by the Nazis before WWII. When, during the Evian conference, countries around the world were reluctant to save Jews from the Holocaust.
...
Indiscriminate means "done at random or without careful judgement." That's the dictionary definition.
You don't kill 25,000 people in 100 days with unguided bombs if you're applying careful judgement. And I can't believe it's taken me this long to point this out, but the word "indiscriminate" in the article was a direct quote of Joe Biden. Israels greatest and blindest supporter in the West, the person responsible for keeping Israel supplied with bombs, and with likely far greater knowledge of what's happening on the ground than you or I, called the bombing indiscriminate.
Continuing to argue about this word is silly. You want me to favour your personal definition over Joe Biden's, the UN's and countless humanitarian organisations'. I'm obviously not going to do that. And if you want to make any claim whatsoever to rationality on this issue, the fact all these people disagree with you, should give you serious pause.
Not to mention the ICJ, who just sided with South Africa in their case against Israel. Not to mention the outgoing Dutch prime minister, who asked "What can we say so that it appears as if Israel is not committing war crimes (https://nltimes.nl/2024/01/26/pm-rutte-denies-obstructing-israel-disclosures-icj-issue-first-genocide-ruling-today#:~:text=Last%20week%2C%20NRC%20reported%20that,%E2%80%9CThat%20is%20normal.%E2%80%9D)?"
I swear, I have never seen such extreme levels of denialism in my life. Not you personally, just in general. This is the most well documented genocide in history and were quibbling about phrasing. And while you might "basically agree" that "both sides" have done things wrong, you only seem resistant to fully acknowledging what Israel has done wrong.
You seem like a good person, you genuinely do. But what you're trying to excuse here, and let's be honest, you are trying to excuse or at least minimise it, is monstrous. I'm certain you haven't had any multiple-day-long conversations about whether the word "savage" or "brutal" or "despicable" applies to Hamas' actions.
