I have been banned from unpopularopinion for exposing person defending genocide and use of human shields by IDF.

One of the users in unpopularopinion thread was complaining about someone calling him a “fascist”

https://feddit.uk/comment/17531487

In response I did paste a screenshot of his comment claiming IDF are not using human shields, it is Hamas who do that:

https://feddit.uk/comment/17529782

… And the mod of unpopularopinion banned me. I can only guess he is a another genocide apologist.

  • Opinionhaver@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    18
    ·
    2 months ago

    I’m more than happy to explain my actual views to anyone genuinely interested in hearing what I actually think about the subject - rather than what OP wants you to think I believe. I know my reply was intentionally provocative, but I stand by everything I said. You only need to compare the length of OP’s moderation history to mine to see who’s really acting in bad faith here.

    Here’s my responses to that thread for further context.

    I’m not sure “human shield” is the correct term here. That implies using the civilian population to deter your enemy from shooting at you - which has been Hamas’ strategy from the beginning. It would make zero sense for the IDF to do that, since it wouldn’t deter anyone.

    EDIT: It may be more accurate to categorize this as using a protected person to perform military duties, which is also prohibited under international humanitarian law - but it’s a different category of war crime.

    Human shield is defined under Geneva Conventions as “utilizing the presence of a civilian or other protected person to render certain points, areas or military forces immune from military operations”

    I’m not here to deny the atrocities committed by the IDF - I’m simply questioning the legitimacy of the term in this specific context, while somewhat provocatively trying to highlight the fact that accusing Israel of using human shields is a bit like accusing Ukraine of killing civilians. While both may be technically true, it still paints a somewhat dishonest picture of the actual reality - which, in this case, is that using human shields is Hamas’ number one tactic, and no intellectually honest person can seriously claim otherwise.

    when they tie Palestinians to the front of their vehicles, I think we can say they’re using literal human shields.

    That would absolutely count as using them as human shields. However, the example used in the article, in my opinion, doesn’t. What they’re doing is still just as immoral and still a war crime, but I don’t think it qualifies as an example of using someone as a human shield.

    This has nothing to do with defending the IDF - don’t be ridiculous.

    Am I being pedantic? Yeah. But that still doesn’t change the fact that what I’m saying has nothing to do with defending the IDF. I have no dog in that fight. I’m not rooting for either side in this conflict - I’m only rooting for the civilian population suffering on both sides.

    • _cryptagion [he/him]@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      2 months ago

      I’m not rooting for either side in this conflict

      One side is committing genocide. If you’re not rooting for the other side, then you’re rooting for genocide.

      • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        The hamas vector of discussion is to conflate the civilian population with “enemy” combatants. At least gen pop finally seeing it for what it is. Shill op to down play genocide.

    • Dragonstaff@leminal.space
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      “Hamas uses Palestinians as human shields” is one of the weirdest arguments in existence.

      1. Gaza City is home to nearly 2 million people living in an 88-square-mile expanse, which is about 21,000 people per square mile. Is it “using people as human shields” if your fighters have no unpopulated place to strike from?

      2. Even if we grant that the accusation is true, that doesn’t make it okay to retaliate against innocent civilians. If we all agree that October 7th was bad, I’ve got terrible news for you about the last 70 years of Israeli occupation.

      3. Israel has killed 40,000 innocent civilians. I haven’t checked in a while, this number is surely low. It’s obvious to everyone that “human shields” aren’t effective, so why would Hamas think it was? Almost like this is just a talking point to use as Israel blows up another hospital.

      4. Israel has fired at UN delegations, clearly marked Red Cross/Red Crescent vehicles, Aid NGOs, and Israeli hostages trying to escape under a white flag. Are we really supposed to trust them about “Hamas using human shields” when they shoot everything that moves and claim they were Hamas afterwards?

    • rumimevlevi@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      Soldiers literally admit it. Human right organizations mentioned the use of human shield since the second intifadha but you have the audacity to claim it’s false. No unbiased person believe your words, you are just an hypocrite.