This is going to be unpopular, but how do we know they’re non-combatants? Just because they’re unarmed at the moment the video is filmed, doesn’t make the non-combatants, AFAIK.
We’re basing this on the opinion of a a biased reporter, who wached the video and described what they saw?
Disclaimer, required around here:
Fuck Israeli Government.
Fuck Hamas.If you’ve ever seen a Hamas video they sneak through the opnenings in the sides of buildings. They certainly don’t walk around in the open like this without worries.
The burden of evidence lies on israel, and just like that time they drone striked an ambulance, no evidence will be presented.
We can’t deduce shit from a video like this, especially when it’s just posted on “X” by a strongly biased source.
I’ll wait for a credible source to report on this, twitter bullshit can stay in twitter.
That’s an interesting way to deny video evidence.
deleted by creator
Lmao, you have no idea what those words mean.
Yep, there is no context for this and heavy framing in the article. I agree with both of your Disclamers, but this is just propaganda.
The context is the HD video footage of the IDF drone striking obvious unarmed civilians.
Where’s the context showing these people were enemy combatants deserving a death sentence by drone strike? Do you always take the “guilty until proven innocent” line, or is this a race thing?
And this is how you turn a conversation into a pile of shit.
By pointing to evidence to back my claim and asking for consistent standards and something vaguely resembling the rule of law?
How do you propose we make the conversation better?
You’re implying racism when there might be none in order to bolster your weak argument.
By all means, tell me what their position is. Failing that, what’s the charitable assumption to make here?
As far as I can see, the likely options are:
-
They support the genocide
-
They don’t care about the rule of law
The former is more common in this context, but it’s both weird and worthless of you to insert yourself into the conversation to defend someone’s positions that (unless you can confidently answer this question) you don’t understand. Just like that, you’ve derailed the conversation into this irrelevant shit - what was your complaint again? Oh…
As far as I can see, the likely options are:
You can’t see very far then.
I don’t agree with your position, so you’re probably racist. Good day.
-
Genocide is the goal. How do you negotiate peace between 2 sides that 100 % believe the other side should be eradicated
One is an ally, and the other isn’t. It should be clear how to resolve it.
The cynic in me thinks the IDF would not use $3000 in munitions to kill four random guys. Bullets are dirt cheap fpv bomb drones are expensive. From that I can only assume someone really wanted to kill one of them for some reason that we can not determine from the limited footage. I’m not saying war crimes including intentional starvation and indiscriminate fire are not happening but I don’t think this is one of them this looks far too coordinated and planned to be a random act of aggression.
