Children in Gaza are dying of starvations - faemine and starvation rampart

[paxmao]

[...]

You have the same expectations of Russia currently trying to hold together it's sphere of influence to that of Europe with 10x GDP of Russia and imposing it's will on others? Unfortunately these EU commodity sanctions just reshuffle oil supply, meaning Russia is now sending more of its oil to Israel. It'd be nice for them to stop, but the stakes for them stopping selling oil to Israel are much higher, they'll have to pay for it with their own blood and in current conditions could even be existential for them, so i just don't see it happening.

No one is asking for Europe to send troops, but when did Europe became so impotent that it's even unable to stop profiting from a genocide?

If you intend to use a moral argument, yes, Ruzzia should be held to the same moral standard. That is not dependent on how rich you are, but how committed you are to keep peace and do not allow war crimes.

Do you think Ruzzia is committed to prevent and punish war crimes?  

Rethorical, of course.

reality is this year has seen more food delivered into gaza than needed. by march alone there was enough food delivered to cover until october. and more food has been sent since to cover until mid 2026

what happens though is the supply trucks are ambushed en-route and most food ends up in HAMAS storage yards which hamas ration out the good stuff to the hamas troops and the crap stuff is sold to market at 3-15x inflated prices and the super crap stuff is passed out to communal kitchens
and yes if palestinians try to get to the food in HAMAS storage yards, HAMAS have shot palestinians..

as for baby food
isreal sent in more powdered milk than needed to feed the infants, however most ambushes result in taking the powdered milk and baby food(mashed vegetables) and it ends up becoming an ingredient to be mixed with other items to then be fed to adults
(30th june some hamas leaders were taken out at a operational beach front cafe(Al-Baqa Cafe) in northern gaza, guess where they got the milk for the coffees)
..
as for the ambushes themselves. before the supply trucks even reach the intended food distribution sites, HAMAS organise people to blockade the roads and rush the trucks. this leads to security concerns of the supply volunteers and truck drivers which leads to the security forces giving warning shots first, but due to how hamas have agitated the people, people become frantic and are pushed to rush forward, saying its worth risking their life..

isreali security do use tanks to try shooting through the vehicles used to blockade the roads. and hamas use people as human shields to defend or be cannon fodder for the blockade to trap the supply trucks if the supply security dont try to break through.

things would be more peaceful and food and supplies would be more fairly distributed if it was not for the tactics hamas apply and cause innocent people to follow and become cannon fodder of

(p.s to paxmao and pooya.. try to do some research and be less emotional violin players that dont know the keys or tune)

You are making all this up. "The deliveries are ambushed on-route", volunteers... volunteers have been frequently killed by Israel, the Doctor are the ones raising the alarms all over.

You call other emotional (as if that was actually an insult), but you knee-jerk reactions in the forum to anything that is not Trump are all over.

[franky1]

You are making all this up. "The deliveries are ambushed on-route", volunteers... volunteers have been frequently killed by Israel, the Doctor are the ones raising the alarms all over.

You call other emotional (as if that was actually an insult), but you knee-jerk reactions in the forum to anything that is not Trump are all over.

making it up??
do some research

when you read the news of palestinians getting hurt NEAR distribution sites.. this is because instead of waiting AT distribution sites, hamas have poked and pushed people to think there wont be enough food coming to the sites so the crowds should instead start heading up the routes the supply trucks will take and stop the trucks before they get to the distribution sites. they do it by blockading the roads. and then rushing the trucks

just read the many many events that have happened in the last few months
it got so bad the supply trucks are in convoy with tanks where the tanks end up cannon firing at the blockade of vehicles to try to make a passage through.
its got so bad the trucks themselves have guards with guns

isreal try to do warning shots (firing in the air at first) hoping it would disperse the crowds and make them back off. but again agitators in the crowd(hamas organisers) provoke the crowd into rushing the trucks putting the crowd in harms way(cannon fodder/human shields) so that hamas can then swoop in and take over and take the trucks to their own storage yards

its the same game as how agitators turn a peaceful protest at a staged event around the world, into a riot downtown in the main streets away from the staged event at area's the agitators plan the damage and harm to be done

try reading all the instances of people being harmed NEAR distribution sites.. and realise those events are ambushes
read the reports and realise why they are now trying food aid air drops instead of truck convoys

real research will enlighten you

[DaRude]

You are making all this up. "The deliveries are ambushed on-route", volunteers... volunteers have been frequently killed by Israel, the Doctor are the ones raising the alarms all over.

You call other emotional (as if that was actually an insult), but you knee-jerk reactions in the forum to anything that is not Trump are all over.

making it up??
do some research

when you read the news of palestinians getting hurt NEAR distribution sites.. this is because instead of waiting AT distribution sites, hamas have poked and pushed people to think there wont be enough food coming to the sites so the crowds should instead start heading up the routes the supply trucks will take and stop the trucks before they get to the distribution sites. they do it by blockading the roads. and then rushing the trucks

just read the many many events that have happened in the last few months
it got so bad the supply trucks are in convoy with tanks where the tanks end up cannon firing at the blockade of vehicles to try to make a passage through.
its got so bad the trucks themselves have guards with guns

isreal try to do warning shots (firing in the air at first) hoping it would disperse the crowds and make them back off. but again agitators in the crowd(hamas organisers) provoke the crowd into rushing the trucks putting the crowd in harms way(cannon fodder/human shields) so that hamas can then swoop in and take over and take the trucks to their own storage yards

its the same game as how agitators turn a peaceful protest at a staged event around the world, into a riot downtown in the main streets away from the staged event at area's the agitators plan the damage and harm to be done

try reading all the instances of people being harmed NEAR distribution sites.. and realise those events are ambushes
read the reports and realise why they are now trying food aid air drops instead of truck convoys

real research will enlighten you

Blah blah blah. Do you believes that the civilian casualty rate is excessive?

Why doesn't Israel allow UN to bring more baby food into Gaza, that will lessen Hamas's leverage (of alleged stockpile of babfood) and show goodwill? What is the downside of that for Israel? Is Israel working with Hamas too, because they need an enemy to continue the war?

[...]

You have the same expectations of Russia currently trying to hold together it's sphere of influence to that of Europe with 10x GDP of Russia and imposing it's will on others? Unfortunately these EU commodity sanctions just reshuffle oil supply, meaning Russia is now sending more of its oil to Israel. It'd be nice for them to stop, but the stakes for them stopping selling oil to Israel are much higher, they'll have to pay for it with their own blood and in current conditions could even be existential for them, so i just don't see it happening.

No one is asking for Europe to send troops, but when did Europe became so impotent that it's even unable to stop profiting from a genocide?

If you intend to use a moral argument, yes, Ruzzia should be held to the same moral standard. That is not dependent on how rich you are, but how committed you are to keep peace and do not allow war crimes.

Do you think Ruzzia is committed to prevent and punish war crimes?  

Rethorical, of course.

Sure morally you're right, on practice unfortunately it doesn't always works this way. Even though Russia used more missiles in Ukraine than Israel in Gaza, and took over exponentially many more cities, people, and territory, while suffering exponentially higher losses of their own soldiers, Russia still managed to keep civilian losses in Ukraine at only a portion of those in Gaza. Nevertheless, USA closing their eyes on much higher civilian losses in Gaza is of clear benefit to Russia. So yes Russia is trying to prevent excessive civilian casualties. If Russia would just clear everything out for every Russian soldier killed, and had the same ratio of Ukrainian civilians killed to Russian soldier killed, as dead Israeli soldier to dead Palestinian civilians there wouldn't be anyone alive in Ukraine now. So clearly they're restraining and limiting themselves, at least more so than Israelis in Gaza and Americans in Iraq and Afghanistan.

[franky1]

any civilian casualty is bad.. excessive or minimal..

any civilian casualty is bad.. excessive or minimal..

any civilian casualty is bad.. excessive or minimal..

any civilian casualty is bad.. excessive or minimal..

any civilian casualty is bad.. excessive or minimal..

any civilian casualty is bad.. excessive or minimal..

but here is the thing..
1. its a warzone
2. hamas are using psy-ops to keep civilians nearby as human shields
3. its a warzone so expect casualties
4. its a warzone
5. ITS A WARZONE!!
6. expect casualties especially with hamas tactics at play
7.8.9.10 refer to point 2

and before you reply again

any civilian casualty is bad.. excessive or minimal..

any civilian casualty is bad.. excessive or minimal..

any civilian casualty is bad.. excessive or minimal..

any civilian casualty is bad.. excessive or minimal..

i hope you get it

i know you want me to say excessive just to then have you ask me what number is presumed proportional to then argue down a silly narrative rabbit hole your trying to dig
so "any casaulty" = 1 .. understand yet

now you know any civilian casualty is bad.. (as said many times). you then have to understand although its bad.. ITS A WARZONE so expect alot of BAD

WARS ARE NOT SUPPOSE TO BE PEACEFUL with 0 casualties.. thats why they are called wars

[DaRude]

any civilian casualty is bad.. excessive or minimal..

any civilian casualty is bad.. excessive or minimal..

any civilian casualty is bad.. excessive or minimal..

any civilian casualty is bad.. excessive or minimal..

any civilian casualty is bad.. excessive or minimal..

any civilian casualty is bad.. excessive or minimal..

but here is the thing..
1. its a warzone
2. hamas are using psy-ops to keep civilians nearby as human shields
3. its a warzone so expect casualties
4. its a warzone
5. ITS A WARZONE!!
6. expect casualties especially with hamas tactics at play
7.8.9.10 refer to point 2

and before you reply again

any civilian casualty is bad.. excessive or minimal..

any civilian casualty is bad.. excessive or minimal..

any civilian casualty is bad.. excessive or minimal..

any civilian casualty is bad.. excessive or minimal..

i hope you get it

i know you want me to say excessive just to then have you ask me what number is presumed proportional to then argue down a silly narrative rabbit hole your trying to dig
so "any casaulty" = 1 .. understand yet

now you know any civilian casualty is bad.. (as said many times). you then have to understand although its bad.. ITS A WARZONE so expect alot of BAD

WARS ARE NOT SUPPOSE TO BE PEACEFUL with 0 casualties.. thats why they are called wars

Hmm perhaps it's a language thing?   Let me try to break it down to you one more time. See "any civilian casualty is bad.. excessive or minimal.." would be a perfect answer to a question like "How many civilian casualties are bad?" it would also work for answering "Are minimal or excessive civilian casualties bad?" But it in no way answers "Do you believe over 50% civilian casualty rate is excessive for a military operation". Now you can always say that you don't want to answer something, but repeating a non answer over and over, and then claiming that you've answered when you in fact did not, just makes you a laughingstock to everyone that can read.



Perhaps AI can explain it better

Gemini

Code:

Summarize in one paragraph why "any civilian casualty is bad.. excessive or minimal" doesn't answer the question "Do you believe over 50% civilian casualty rate is excessive for a military operation" 

The statement "any civilian casualty is bad—excessive or minimal" doesn't answer whether an over 50% civilian casualty rate is excessive because it's a universal moral stance, not a quantitative judgment based on the laws of armed conflict. While it correctly asserts that all civilian deaths are regrettable, it avoids the specific question of proportionality, which requires assessing if the anticipated civilian harm from a military operation is disproportionate to the concrete military advantage gained. The question asks for a threshold, acknowledging that some collateral damage may occur but seeking to define an unacceptable level, a distinction the general statement doesn't address.

Do you now understand how much of a fool you're making yourself by repeating a wrong answer over and over?

[Zackz5000]

I am astonished at the lack of information that is happening across many countries. The current Israeli government trying to kill every single person in Gaza by preventing the right amount of food to enter the strip and by shooting at the people queuing for food.

There is no doubt this is a genocide and it is comming from the people who constantly (and rightfully BTW) claim to have suffered one themselves.

I am no fan of terrorist, nor Hamas nor any of that shit, but the children of Gaza have nothing to do with it.

This is very bad and I really feel for GAZA, it is very clear that the organization called the UN is not functioning anymore why will such a thing be happening and no one is saying anything about it even the nation called the world power that we see is always against this kind of situation is not doing anything to help Gaza, what Israel is doing his totally wrong, the citizens are suffering and people are dying every day, now my question is what do Israel really want to achieve with all this.
I'm not interested in knowing who caused the war anymore all I want is peace, OP you should have attached some pictures to the situation of things in Gaza so people will see for there self because just saying it will look some how, some pictures I saw online which I will be dropping here is something that is very bad I'm really feeling for Gaza all I need is peace, let the first stop the citizens are suffering innocent children are suffering, why will children suffer like this why, peace is not hard to achieve I want peace war is not good at all.

The world President Donald Trump should have done something about this to stop the slow killing in Gaza  looking at this pictures one can clearly understand that people over there and mostly the children are suffering, most of them are dieing due to unhealthy food they lack malnutrition, the Israeli should have at least considered the children in Gaza and stoping the killing in Gaza. I have heard several news of death in Gaza all the time, the Israeli should to be mercyfull to the innocent children in Gaza.

[franky1]

50% casualty rate?

so of the 2m population your saying 1m have been killed...
sorry but your math does not math

but it does reveal your assumptive number which you set for yourself as a acceptable amount before becoming excessive
after all, you are the only one throwing around the amount 50% so its a number thats in your head you decided on

how about saying of 2m population, 1 innocent persons death is bad/unacceptable/excesive..
i know you think many should die and then you want to know how many should die before normal people think its excessive..
but
lets instead go with the notion that no one should die,
lets go with the notion that war is bad and peace should be an aim, not death..
lets go with the notion that continual war is excessive and war should be minimised and casualties should be minimised

there should be no acceptable number of casualties, any and all death should be avoided/minimalised
but in war we also need to be realistic and know death is expected because its war, expected but not desired..
even if we dont want death or want war, deaths are expected during war.

we should not be putting numbers of acceptable amount of death before defining something as excessive, and instead just say any death is excessive and needs to be minimised.

the UN's notion is that a certain amount of collateral damage/casualty amount is acceptable if the underlying threat has the potential of killing more than that amount if left to fulfil their aims

in short if 5 casualties die as collateral damage, its legal in UN's eyes if the intended target(hamas leaders) have plans to kill way more than 5 others..
and before you even try.. no 5 is not a set number. its an example. whereby if the hamas terror group want you kill X++, than the overall good is made if <x die (in the UN's eyes)

EG if hamas are shouting death to isreal(9.7m), death to america(340m) then any number below 349m could be seen as acceptable if hamas ever got hands on nukes that could effectuate such large mass killing

i personally though think any and all death is excessive and peace should be the aim, but i am aware and a realist that in war deaths do occur

when it comes to isreal military tactics vs hamas military tactics

isreal has shown many many examples of giving warnings before turning an area into a warzone. giving innocent people an opportunity to remove themselves from the area.. thus minimising the death/casualty rate

hamas however use tactics to surround themselves with innocent people, causing innocent people to become collateral damage/casualties, thus making the death/casualty rate more excessive than needed
hamas do not give warnings, thus dont give people a chance


anyways, back to the topic
video shows hamas troops hiding in tunnels beneath civilian area's, showing off how well they are fed.. whilst innocent palestinians above are not getting good nutritional food distributed fairly
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hBut7Xo-Rs

[DaRude]

50% casualty rate?

so of the 2m population your saying 1m have been killed...
sorry but your math does not math

but it does reveal your assumptive number which you set for yourself as a acceptable amount before becoming excessive
after all, you are the only one throwing around the amount 50% so its a number thats in your head you decided on

how about saying of 2m population, 1 innocent persons death is bad/unacceptable/excesive..
i know you think many should die and then you want to know how many should die before normal people think its excessive..
but
lets instead go with the notion that no one should die,
lets go with the notion that war is bad and peace should be an aim, not death..
lets go with the notion that continual war is excessive and war should be minimised and casualties should be minimised

there should be no acceptable number of casualties, any and all death should be avoided/minimalised
but in war we also need to be realistic and know death is expected because its war, expected but not desired..
even if we dont want death or want war, deaths are expected during war.

we should not be putting numbers of acceptable amount of death before defining something as excessive, and instead just say any death is excessive and needs to be minimised.

the UN's notion is that a certain amount of collateral damage/casualty amount is acceptable if the underlying threat has the potential of killing more than that amount if left to fulfil their aims

in short if 5 casualties die as collateral damage, its legal in UN's eyes if the intended target(hamas leaders) have plans to kill way more than 5 others..
and before you even try.. no 5 is not a set number. its an example. whereby if the hamas terror group want you kill X++, than the overall good is made if <x die (in the UN's eyes)

EG if hamas are shouting death to isreal(9.7m), death to america(340m) then any number below 349m could be seen as acceptable if hamas ever got hands on nukes that could effectuate such large mass killing

i personally though think any and all death is excessive and peace should be the aim, but i am aware and a realist that in war deaths do occur

when it comes to isreal military tactics vs hamas military tactics

isreal has shown many many examples of giving warnings before turning an area into a warzone. giving innocent people an opportunity to remove themselves from the area.. thus minimising the death/casualty rate

hamas however use tactics to surround themselves with innocent people, causing innocent people to become collateral damage/casualties, thus making the death/casualty rate more excessive than needed
hamas do not give warnings, thus dont give people a chance


anyways, back to the topic
video shows hamas troops hiding in tunnels beneath civilian area's, showing off how well they are fed.. whilst innocent palestinians above are not getting good nutritional food distributed fairly
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hBut7Xo-Rs

Clearly I'm referring to the ratio of civilian casualties to combatant casualties.

Correct, i made up 50% in the question because even if we assume that every single male in Palestine is a combatant the ratio of killed women and children (non compatants) to males is over 50%. I rounded off the number to 50% in my example because i didn't want to confuse you even more.

Good! "Even one innocent death is excessive" (even though philosophical and not really constructive), is at least technically an answer to my question, so if anything, you should've spammed that.

Article 51 — Protection of the civilian population
5. Among others, the following types of attacks are to be considered as indiscriminate:
b) an attack which may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof, which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated.

Article 57 — Precautions in attack
1. In the conduct of military operations, constant care shall be taken to spare the civilian population, civilians and civilian objects.
2. With respect to attacks, the following precautions shall be taken:
a) those who plan or decide upon an attack shall:
ii) take all feasible precautions in the choice of means and methods of attack with a view to avoiding, and in any event to minimizing, incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians and damage to civilian objects;

How would you interpret the concept of excessive deaths in a context of Geneva conventions articles 51 and 57? Do you see how it's expected end results of civilian casualties and not justifications that matter for Geneva conventions? i.e. it's irrelevant whether you provide a warning if you still expect civilians not to comply because they're unable or even just unwilling for whatever reason.

So, you believe that just shouting death to whoever is enough justification to wipe all of Palestinians from the face of the earth?

[franky1]

Article 51 — Protection of the civilian population
5. Among others, the following types of attacks are to be considered as indiscriminate:
b) an attack which may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof, which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated.

Article 57 — Precautions in attack
1. In the conduct of military operations, constant care shall be taken to spare the civilian population, civilians and civilian objects.
2. With respect to attacks, the following precautions shall be taken:
a) those who plan or decide upon an attack shall:
ii) take all feasible precautions in the choice of means and methods of attack with a view to avoiding, and in any event to minimizing, incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians and damage to civilian objects;

How would you interpret the concept of excessive deaths in a context of Geneva conventions articles 51 and 57? Do you see how it's expected end results of civilian casualties and not justifications that matter for Geneva conventions? i.e. it's irrelevant whether you provide a warning if you still expect civilians not to comply because they're unable or even just unwilling for whatever reason.

you need to learn to read.. because yet again i answered that question

we should not be putting numbers of acceptable amount of death before defining something as excessive, and instead just say any death is excessive and needs to be minimised.

the UN's notion is that a certain amount of collateral damage/casualty amount is acceptable if the underlying threat has the potential of killing more than that amount if left to fulfil their aims

in short if 5 casualties die as collateral damage, its legal in UN's eyes if the intended target(hamas leaders) have plans to kill way more than 5 others..
and before you even try.. no 5 is not a set number. its an example. whereby if the hamas terror group want you kill X++, than the overall good is made if <x die (in the UN's eyes)

EG if hamas are shouting 'death to isreal(9.7m), death to america(340m)' then any number below 349m could be seen as acceptable if hamas ever got hands on nukes that could effectuate such large mass killing

i personally though think any and all death is excessive and peace should be the aim, but i am aware and a realist that in war deaths do occur

So, you believe that just shouting death to whoever is enough justification to wipe all of Palestinians from the face of the earth?

you are soo deranged and bad at math
"all palestinians"??

so again you think out of 2m population only 1m remain.... and now none remain or shouldnt remain
come on do the real math
come on realise the palestinians are not the intended targets
come on wake up and stop licking pro-iranian influencers ass.. grow a few braincells and look at the real facts not the pro-iranian narrative
if hamas/iran are shouting death to 349m people then it becomes IN UN's justification that the HAMAS AND IRANIAN military should be taken out in its totality as intended targets.. and if other collateral damage was to incur as long as its less than the direct military advantage anticipated and all feasible precautions taken to minimise said collateral loss


stop listening to pro-iran social media narrative that over use the word genocide without them even knowing what the word even means

isreal is not directly purposefully targeting palestinians. so its not an aim to abolish a whole race.. but when your silly pro-iran narrative abuses the word genocide it makes people think the death toll is in the millions.. aswell as thinking the death of palestinians were the intended targets.. both notions are false

ok i have 3 questions for you.. and please dont seek out a pro-iranian narrative or some speech that makes you ejaculate.. just have a responsible level headed independent thought and answer this without trying to appease and pleasure some regime you wish to show loyalty and seductive love towards

heres the questions
1. do you think "palestine" is the land mass now known as gaza.. or all the land "from the river to the sea" which is equal to the ancient lands of isreal and judah?
2. how many infants do you think actually died due to starvation of zero access to any sustenance/nutrition/food,
3. how many infants died due to malnutrition due to other underlying disease/birth defects that required special diets which standard rations did not fulfil nutritionally?

[BADecker]

Children in Gaza are dying of starvations - faemine and starvation rampart. This is happening because of two things:
1. They are mostly Muslim, and God doesn't like Islam at all... because they don't preach 'Jesus Christ and Him crucified for you sins';
2. The Western banking system doesn't like that Muslim banking systems are free enough to act outside the authority of... Western banking systems.

That's really it. Everything else hinges on these two things.

Note that the little children may die, but if they do, they are saved from the Hell that most adult Muslims might be going to... saved for two reasons:
1. Ignorance;
2. They are so close to their formation in Mommy's tummy, done by the authority of Jesus, that they haven't had time to reject Jesus, yet.

[DeathAngel]

The photos coming out of Gaza are terrible. I know that they are receiving aid from many countries in an effort to help them but it’s not enough to stop the devastation there. Hopefully peace is brokered soon because too many innocent civilians have been killed.

[Big_UNKLE]

Children in Gaza are dying of starvations - faemine and starvation rampart. This is happening because of two things:
1. They are mostly Muslim, and God doesn't like Islam at all... because they don't preach 'Jesus Christ and Him crucified for you sins';
2. The Western banking system doesn't like that Muslim banking systems are free enough to act outside the authority of... Western banking systems.

That's really it. Everything else hinges on these two things.

Note that the little children may die, but if they do, they are saved from the Hell that most adult Muslims might be going to... saved for two reasons:
1. Ignorance;
2. They are so close to their formation in Mommy's tummy, done by the authority of Jesus, that they haven't had time to reject Jesus, yet.

How can such claims—mixing theology, geopolitics, and finance—justify or distract from the urgent moral responsibility to protect innocent lives, regardless of religion or economics?

[BADecker]

Children in Gaza are dying of starvations - faemine and starvation rampart. This is happening because of two things:
1. They are mostly Muslim, and God doesn't like Islam at all... because they don't preach 'Jesus Christ and Him crucified for you sins';
2. The Western banking system doesn't like that Muslim banking systems are free enough to act outside the authority of... Western banking systems.

That's really it. Everything else hinges on these two things.

Note that the little children may die, but if they do, they are saved from the Hell that most adult Muslims might be going to... saved for two reasons:
1. Ignorance;
2. They are so close to their formation in Mommy's tummy, done by the authority of Jesus, that they haven't had time to reject Jesus, yet.

How can such claims—mixing theology, geopolitics, and finance—justify or distract from the urgent moral responsibility to protect innocent lives, regardless of religion or economics?

Theology is naturally in everything. Why? Because God started the whole thing, and controls it in the way that He wants... freedom for everybody.

Almost all people who have not died will die. God is ready to catch them at their time of death, and to preserve them for the Judgment. At the Judgment God will correctly judge everybody.

Standard life on earth is 70 years average, sort of. Eternity is not 10,000 years. It's not 100,000 years. It is not 100-million years. It's forever. The final Judgment will produce results that last forever.

Most people who died as little children will be adjudicated by God to live in Goodness forever in Glory and Joy and Goodness. Loads of evil people who repent of their evil before death, will be forgiven by God, because that is the way He is... forgiving. But those who do not repent of their evil before death will be cast out forever. Jesus-God is the Judge.

Your question has to have much more thinking behind it for it to be an appropriate question. It seems that you are in favor of the good. Now, repent of the rest of the evil that you have, asking Jesus-God to forgive you, so that you can be among those who will be saved for the Glory and Joy and Goodness.

[farsky]

Trusting Hamas propaganda and statistics from a ministry made up of Hamas members? That’s the last thing I would ever do.
Unfortunately, in the West, there are many simple, trusting people who are not very interested in history, reality, or the legacy of communism, nor in how propaganda has evolved.
Now that I’ve moved to Europe, I see just how many Europeans learn about the world from media headlines and emotionally charged texts.

Propaganda is a whole industry that most of you know nothing about.
I grew up and spent my entire life in one of the greatest propaganda states — the USSR and Russia.
They invested enormous sums of money in global propaganda. And by "enormous," I don’t mean what you’re probably imagining... I mean much more.

Soviet propaganda managed to convince its own people that, despite living in a prison cut off from the outside world, they were better off than anyone else.
It made them feel happy — and they really were happy.

As for Hamas propaganda — it surpasses Soviet propaganda because Arab propagandists realized that instead of only using lies and manipulation, they could also sacrifice real people — Palestinians.
If the USSR merely lied and distorted the truth, Iran’s propaganda uses Palestinians like a small, vicious dog that attacks a much bigger dog and then gets beaten — all in front of the cameras.
Palestinians are hostages to this situation. They've been forced into it.

The goal? To create an image of an external enemy (the Western world) for their own population (Iranians).
But now, the propaganda has gone even further: it has actually succeeded in dividing and fragmenting Western society.

My suggestion to Westerners: start studying the history of the Soviet Union, especially how many terrorist movements the USSR created and supported around the world.
By the way, the monster that emerged in Iran — that’s the direct result of Soviet actions.
The USSR deliberately weakened Iran’s pro-Western government, hoping it would be replaced by an anti-Western regime.
And indeed, one came to power in 1979! But ironically, the new regime was also anti-Soviet.

And yet… Iran inherited the USSR’s propaganda playbook.
So now, even though Iranian propaganda is more sophisticated than Soviet or Russian propaganda, it is still built on Soviet foundations.

Want more details? You can read them here
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5551741.msg65645757#msg65645757

[Lida93]

I am astonished at the lack of information that is happening across many countries. The current Israeli government trying to kill every single person in Gaza by preventing the right amount of food to enter the strip and by shooting at the people queuing for food.

There is no doubt this is a genocide and it is comming from the people who constantly (and rightfully BTW) claim to have suffered one themselves.

I am no fan of terrorist, nor Hamas nor any of that shit, but the children of Gaza have nothing to do with it.

This is very bad and I really feel for GAZA, it is very clear that the organization called the UN is not functioning anymore why will such a thing be happening and no one is saying anything about it even the nation called the world power that we see is always against this kind of situation is not doing anything to help Gaza, what Israel is doing his totally wrong, the citizens are suffering and people are dying every day, now my question is what do Israel really want to achieve with all this.
I'm not interested in knowing who caused the war anymore all I want is peace, OP you should have attached some pictures to the situation of things in Gaza so people will see for there self because just saying it will look some how, some pictures I saw online which I will be dropping here is something that is very bad I'm really feeling for Gaza all I need is peace, let the first stop the citizens are suffering innocent children are suffering, why will children suffer like this why, peace is not hard to achieve I want peace war is not good at all.
...

Children are dying of hunger every day in Gaza, what is happening will make you cry this are more pictures and the leaders are see all this but still not finding a way to stop all this.

If the UN are not reacting against this happenings which has led to the extent of depriving children the right to life all because they are from Gaza. For Christ sake these are innocent children who doesn't even know a thing about this war. They don't deserve been treated as casualties of war. These pictures are really touching and I do condemn any act of war anywhere in the world because it's usually the innocent people that suffers the most.

[puloweh555]

I don't understand these Jews. They seize and kill without a second thought, expelling people. I can understand why Hitler massacred them in the past. Perhaps if they were allowed to live in the past, they would have destroyed Europe more quickly, as is happening today in the Middle East.

And it's important to understand that Gaza isn't their only target; they will be like a pest that continues to spread if they get what they want.

That's the way the Jews are, they even view Palestinians as pests to be exterminated, regardless of whether they consider children or women equal. Yes, I think so too. Perhaps that's why Hitler massacred them at that time, because Jews often caused trouble wherever they went. Now, Palestinians are no longer dying from bombs, but from starvation, which is slowly killing them. Strangely, many countries can't do much about Israel's crimes.

Israel once suffered from genocide in Germany; they were the victims. But now, Israel is committing genocide in Gaza; they are the perpetrators. I see this as Palestine's fault. They once accepted Israeli refugees as a result of Hitler's genocide in Germany. Now, Palestine is suffering the consequences, with much of its territory being claimed by Israel and occupied by Israel.

[franky1]

That's the way the Jews are, they even view Palestinians as pests to be exterminated, regardless of whether they consider children or women equal. Yes, I think so too. Perhaps that's why Hitler massacred them at that time, because Jews often caused trouble wherever they went. Now, Palestinians are no longer dying from bombs, but from starvation, which is slowly killing them. Strangely, many countries can't do much about Israel's crimes.

aww look another empty brain ^ just repeating a narrative... but notice the lack of using the word hamas.. look at the obvious avoidance of pointing out hamas. look at how the narrative quoted is trying to use the usual propaganda wordage of genocide against palestinians, instead of looking at reality

isreal want peace and unity with palestinians. BUT its hamas that want to get rid of isreal. its hamas that are abusing the palestinians also

the UN dont want egypt, isreal or any other nation helping move the aid inside the gaza border, the UN want only hamas to control the food within the border.
the food UN send to the border ends up staying at the border because of this..(hamas are too afriad to walk up to the border to get it)
isreal separately send its own food supply resources through the border and into deep gaza and try to get it to food aid distribution stations. but hamas blockade and organise civil unrest to cause ambushes on the aid before it gets to the distribution sites (that are not owned by hamas)
hamas take over the aid supply enroute deep within gaza away from the border

read the news for once and dont go just looking for buzzwords, look deeper than the propaganda and actually articulate whats being said.
when bias media says there was an attack on food trucks or an attack on people NEAR a distribution site. realise that what is not being highlighted is the NEAR part.. because showing that isreal try to get the aid to the site but it never gets there because they get ambushed enroute.

dig deeper, learn, educate yourself and do some research..

if hamas were eliminated then isreali's and palestinians can sign peace deals.. its hamas that decline to sign peace deals and were the ones instigating attacks over the years. isreal do not treat palestinians the same as hamas. isreal know the difference. so stop trying to use the word palestinians when its obviously a isreal vs hamas.. and yes i know there is collateral damage and innocent bystander casualties of palestinians. but thats called war. isreal atleast do try to do warning shots and alert the civilians when an area is to become a target zone, giving them time to move. but its hamas that dont want civilians to move away/seek shelter. its hamas that dont give warnings before their attacks, its also hamas that boobytrap infrustructure and use it as cover to cause alot of unneeded damage

yes gaza should be called palestine. it has ancient historic provenance and land claims(philistia/philistines) BUT not under hamas control

[DaRude]

Article 51 — Protection of the civilian population
5. Among others, the following types of attacks are to be considered as indiscriminate:
b) an attack which may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof, which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated.

Article 57 — Precautions in attack
1. In the conduct of military operations, constant care shall be taken to spare the civilian population, civilians and civilian objects.
2. With respect to attacks, the following precautions shall be taken:
a) those who plan or decide upon an attack shall:
ii) take all feasible precautions in the choice of means and methods of attack with a view to avoiding, and in any event to minimizing, incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians and damage to civilian objects;

How would you interpret the concept of excessive deaths in a context of Geneva conventions articles 51 and 57? Do you see how it's expected end results of civilian casualties and not justifications that matter for Geneva conventions? i.e. it's irrelevant whether you provide a warning if you still expect civilians not to comply because they're unable or even just unwilling for whatever reason.

you need to learn to read.. because yet again i answered that question

we should not be putting numbers of acceptable amount of death before defining something as excessive, and instead just say any death is excessive and needs to be minimised.

the UN's notion is that a certain amount of collateral damage/casualty amount is acceptable if the underlying threat has the potential of killing more than that amount if left to fulfil their aims

in short if 5 casualties die as collateral damage, its legal in UN's eyes if the intended target(hamas leaders) have plans to kill way more than 5 others..
and before you even try.. no 5 is not a set number. its an example. whereby if the hamas terror group want you kill X++, than the overall good is made if <x die (in the UN's eyes)

EG if hamas are shouting 'death to isreal(9.7m), death to america(340m)' then any number below 349m could be seen as acceptable if hamas ever got hands on nukes that could effectuate such large mass killing

i personally though think any and all death is excessive and peace should be the aim, but i am aware and a realist that in war deaths do occur

So, you believe that just shouting death to whoever is enough justification to wipe all of Palestinians from the face of the earth?

you are soo deranged and bad at math
"all palestinians"??

so again you think out of 2m population only 1m remain.... and now none remain or shouldnt remain
come on do the real math
come on realise the palestinians are not the intended targets
come on wake up and stop licking pro-iranian influencers ass.. grow a few braincells and look at the real facts not the pro-iranian narrative
if hamas/iran are shouting death to 349m people then it becomes IN UN's justification that the HAMAS AND IRANIAN military should be taken out in its totality as intended targets.. and if other collateral damage was to incur as long as its less than the direct military advantage anticipated and all feasible precautions taken to minimise said collateral loss


stop listening to pro-iran social media narrative that over use the word genocide without them even knowing what the word even means

isreal is not directly purposefully targeting palestinians. so its not an aim to abolish a whole race.. but when your silly pro-iran narrative abuses the word genocide it makes people think the death toll is in the millions.. aswell as thinking the death of palestinians were the intended targets.. both notions are false

ok i have 3 questions for you.. and please dont seek out a pro-iranian narrative or some speech that makes you ejaculate.. just have a responsible level headed independent thought and answer this without trying to appease and pleasure some regime you wish to show loyalty and seductive love towards

heres the questions
1. do you think "palestine" is the land mass now known as gaza.. or all the land "from the river to the sea" which is equal to the ancient lands of isreal and judah?
2. how many infants do you think actually died due to starvation of zero access to any sustenance/nutrition/food,
3. how many infants died due to malnutrition due to other underlying disease/birth defects that required special diets which standard rations did not fulfil nutritionally?

You keep intentionally confusing everyone. Regardless, your main thesis that Palestinians are not being wiped out intentionally, but even if they are it's not Israel's fault, seems laughable to everyone. My grown braincells care not for your words of intent, but for the actual outcome. Argument that since Hamas is shouting death to isreal, death to america, justifies Israel "unintentional" murder of as many Palestinians as they wish, would not stand in any court of law or for any critically thinking person.

Once again it doesn't matter if Israel claims it doesn't purposefully targeting palestinians. What matters is the proportionality of the military action and the loss of life of innocent civilians from said military action.



1-I believe that Palestine is the land decided unanimously by UN resolutions in 1967.
2-According to Gaza’s Ministry of Health, the number of deaths from starvation in the territory stands at 162, including 92 children.
Of 74 malnutrition-related deaths in 2025, 63 occurred in July – including 24 children under five, a child over five, and 38 adults. Most of these people were declared dead on arrival at health facilities or died shortly after, their bodies showing clear signs of severe wasting.
3-I do not posses this information, seems like a silly preventable infant deaths that could be easily prevented if red cross was allowed to do their job.

I believe i answered your questions to the best of my abilities. Now can i expect you to do the same, that is to truthfully answer the following simple questions

1-What must be the death toll in Gaza, with population of about 2m, for genocide to occur?
2-Why doesn't Israel want to devalue Hamas's food holding by allowing in as much food as international organizations want to bring in? What would be the downside for Israel?

[franky1]

You keep intentionally confusing everyone. Regardless, your main thesis that Palestinians are not being wiped out intentionally, but even if they are it's not Israel's fault, seems laughable to everyone. My grown braincells care not for your words of intent, but for the actual outcome. Argument that since Hamas is shouting death to isreal, death to america, justifies Israel "unintentional" murder of as many Palestinians as they wish, would not stand in any court of law or for any critically thinking person.

Once again it doesn't matter if Israel claims it doesn't purposefully targeting palestinians. What matters is the proportionality of the military action and the loss of life of innocent civilians from said military action.

its a warzone.. people do die.. accept that fact then you can transition your braincells onto the deeper topic
isreal are not purposefully targetting palestinians.. accept that fact then you can transition you braincells onto the deeper topic
isreal are not trying to starve palestinians.. accept that and move onto the deeper topic
isreal are actually sending in aid. and trying to get around/avoid hamas tactics
isreal are trying to get rid of hamas so that palestinians can have some self control and sign some peacedeals
isreal send warnings and give notice when a new area is about to become a warzone.

when you realise its hamas not sharing the food, when you realise its hamas telling palestinians to stay in warzones and such. you will use a braincell or two to realise the amount of innocent death would be far less if hamas was gone. the amount of deaths would have been avoided if hamas never got into power and things played out with a continuation of PLO and the peace process
...
the amount of infant milk powder sent into gaza is far far more then needed to feed all infants multiple times over for months.. and yet its not getting to the kids because.... hamas

ive already answered my opinion as to the proportionality of death.. but as for the UN's legal definition of allowable collateral damage in proportion to the risks the intended targets could cause.. thats for you to read the UN documents and debate them about

1-I believe that Palestine is the land decided unanimously by UN resolutions in 1967.
2-According to Gaza’s Ministry of Health, the number of deaths from starvation in the territory stands at 162, including 92 children.
Of 74 malnutrition-related deaths in 2025, 63 occurred in July – including 24 children under five, a child over five, and 38 adults. Most of these people were declared dead on arrival at health facilities or died shortly after, their bodies showing clear signs of severe wasting.
3-I do not posses this information, seems like a silly preventable infant deaths that could be easily prevented if red cross was allowed to do their job.

92* children since october 2023.. and you call that genocide. of which 25 in july(compared to the 36 children hamas killed in one day on oct 7th 2023)
genocide is the intentional desire of death of a whole nation/race/ethnicity/creed..
EG hamas killed isreali's purely because of their nationality/creed

isreal are not trying to kill all palestinians, there are many attempts at peacedeals to prove it.. isreal are trying to remove hamas, which is something totally different to your narrative and something your trying to avoid discussing

*have you tried to look deeper into that number to see if its actual death due to starvation, or whether malnutrition was a co-morbidity of another illness/issue that could have been prevented with special diet thats not part of normal rations.. EG if infants only given milk formula but some children are lactose intolerant. they could have been fed milk but also being malnourished and suffering due to not getting special non-lactose milk. for instance

She needed a special baby formula which did not exist in Gaza,” Zainab’s father, Ahmed Abu Halib, told The Associated Press as he prepared for her funeral prayers in the hospital’s courtyard in the southern city of Khan Younis.

Dr. Ahmed al-Farah, head of the pediatric department, said the girl had needed a special type of formula that helps with babies allergic to cow’s milk.

He said she hadn’t suffered from any diseases, but the lack of the formula led to chronic diarrhea and vomiting. She wasn’t able to swallow as her weakened immune system led to a bacterial infection and sepsis, and quickly lost more weight.

have you looked into the details of area's where hamas have stockpiles of milk AND canned vegetables which could have been mashed up into pastes for infants.. but just not handed to palestinians

I believe i answered your questions to the best of my abilities. Now can i expect you to do the same, that is to truthfully answer the following simple questions

1-What must be the death toll in Gaza, with population of about 2m, for genocide to occur?
2-Why doesn't Israel want to devalue Hamas's food holding by allowing in as much food as international organisations want to bring in? What would be the downside for Israel?

its not a number of already committed murder, its the intention(of a nation/race/ethnicity/creed eradication) behind those deaths.. isreal have no intention to kill all palestinians
yet hamas do have nation/ethnic/creed intentions of death. so if you want to look at whom have the views/intentions of genocide, look and point towards hamas and iran

isreal have no control of the markets inside gaza. isreal can send 50, 200, 500 trucks a day. it wont make a difference if hamas ambush the trucks. hamas would just keep hoarding it and only release whatever amount they want, and price it at whatever amount they want
(personally i feel there should be zero price on the supplies.. but we all know hamas wont allow that)


this is why isreal are trying air drops instead, to bypass ambush risk routes and spread the aid wide enough that hamas cant organise attacks on one collective shipment, thus allowing palestinians a better chance of grabbing it. the idea and hope is that palestinians grab the dropped crates and they self organise sharing it with with fellow villagers and extended family before hamas hoard it

[Donneski]

I honestly frown deeply at the inhumane treatment the people of Gaza are facing. It's painful to see innocent children dying of hunger while the world watches. Israel under the claim of security, is doing everything possible to block food and aid from getting in.

Just the other day, I watched the Israeli Prime Minister on CNN deny stopping food from entering Gaza even from other countries. But truthfully, I didn’t believe him. The reality on ground tells a different story from what he was saying.

I’m not a fan of Hamas or terrorism in any form but starving civilians especially children has nothing to do with fighting terror. It’s cruel and it feels like deliberate punishment on an entire population which is definitely different from fighting terror. No one deserves to suffer like what the people of Gaza are currently going through