• stevehobbes@lemy.lol
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    You can say that - but seemingly also can’t explain why the death count isn’t stratospherically higher if that was their goal.

    Asymmetric warfare always sucks for civilians. The whole point is knowing who a civilian and who’s a combatant is intentionally difficult.

    Hamas doesn’t wear uniforms, because they’re terrorists and not a government or regular army.

    • Victor@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      death count isn’t stratospherically higher

      You also can’t prove how much higher the death toll would actually be, because we’re all just speculating fools. You are using an argumentative fallacy, which is “you can’t explain why this hypothetical thing isn’t occurring” when it doesn’t really have to be occurring. Can’t remember which that is. Red herring? Straw man? Ah, I can’t remember.

      Anyway, we’re going by what we’re seeing, which is the bombing of innocent civilians. Terrible, terrible state of the world right now.

      • stevehobbes@lemy.lol
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        I can’t say exactly how many people they could kill if they were targeting civilians, but I can with certainty say it would be significantly more than have currently died.

        They could drop many more bombs and shell the entire strip for weeks. These aren’t hypotheticals - we know they have the armament to do that.

        There are around 20,000 people dead - out of almost 800,000 in Gaza. If their goal was a maximizing death, they could have killed significantly more. They certainly have the ammunition and means to do it - and that’s not a hypothetical.