Morch

If the tunnels were death traps, Hamas casualties would be higher. Regardless, if they had opened them to the general public, Israel would not have the same freedom attacking them. Maybe a miscalculation on their parts, or maybe they see the civilian death toll as more beneficial for the 'cause'. Israel did pressure Egypt to take in refugees, but was rebuffed. The point being that this part is Egypt's choice, not Israel's. Obviously, this could have been done years ago, as well. My issue is less with your post, and more with @thaibeachlovers constant nonsense.

But we already baked a cake.....

No place to hide, how? There are miles upon miles of underground tunnels and facilities in the Gaza Strip. There's a border pass with Egypt.

@thaibeachlovers The Gazans would not have to defend themselves had Hamas refrained from starting this war. As for Hamas not defending them - either through sharing the safety of its vast tunnel system, or not investing in defensive measures - take it up with Hamas leadership. Gazans not allowed to go anywhere would be an issue for Egypt, and possibly other Arab countries - something which I doubt you're not aware of. I hope that you don't think your opinion of what constitute war crimes (let alone crimes against humanity) is taken seriously.

@thaibeachlovers Interesting, because you seem to have forgotten about Hamas's sins, lumping them together with civilians as 'the Palestinians'.

Nothing it 'coming out now'. Most of it was known for years.

@ozimoron 'Deeply shocked'? Were they not aware of things? Is this the first time they review things in the Gaza Strip (before the war and currently)? Just a load of politician babble.

@ozimoron More like your contrived fantasies, again.

@ozimoron That Hamas would have 'faded away' is your opinion. It is not based on knowledge, analysis or anything much.

@spidermike007 You've copy pasted the same three times now. Here the copy pasted response to your copy pasted post: It's been a long while since the NYT could have been labeled as 'supportive of Israel'. Painting it this way is intentionally misleading. Same goes for 'brutality against women and children', leaving out all them Hamas men out of the picture. Hamas fans/Israel haters here seem very excited about the NYT story (I think like 6-8 references since last evening). So for starters, these were supplied by the USA, even as this current conflict was unfolding and going on - so was the USA supplying them with some caveat about them not being used? Was there any USA action to stop Israel from using them? I don't think so (with regard to both counts). And 200 craters - that sounds like a lot, unless, of course one recalls the total number of bombs and munitions used (making the figure more like 1% of the total, if that). As far as I'm aware, there is no analysis of how many casualties these specific bombings actually caused.

@ozimoron Hanegbi is often used to float things for Netanyahu, test the public waters, as it were. Here's another piece from just a day ago (it was already labeled a misunderstanding, maybe polls didn't show the right results): Israel may ease opposition to PA ruling post-war Gaza, Hanegbi implies in Arabic op-ed https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/israel-may-ease-opposition-to-pa-ruling-post-war-gaza-hanegbi-implies-in-arabic-op-ed/ar-AA1lQKMC Just another case of you posting stuff you're clueless about.

@ozimoron Other than you getting the timeline wrong, 'No reason', how? Wouldn't saving some of their people from death, allowing supplies in and so on be reason enough?

@thaibeachlovers That's not what he said. That's your own contrived version.

It's a nonsense article.

@thaibeachlovers Like your contributions are very different... eh?

@spidermike007 It's been a long while since the NYT could have been labeled as 'supportive of Israel'. Painting it this way is intentionally misleading. Same goes for 'brutality against women and children', leaving out all them Hamas men out of the picture. Hamas fans/Israel haters here seem very excited about the NYT story (I think like 6-8 references since last evening). So for starters, these were supplied by the USA, even as this current conflict was unfolding and going on - so was the USA supplying them with some caveat about them not being used? Was there any USA action to stop Israel from using them? I don't think so (with regard to both counts). And 200 craters - that sounds like a lot, unless, of course one recalls the total number of bombs and munitions used (making the figure more like 1% of the total, if that). As far as I'm aware, there is no analysis of how many casualties these specific bombings actually caused.

Handbags at dawn....

@ozimoron People living in glass houses and all that.

@ozimoron Got what right?

If you say so. Bottom line is the same, though. Personally, I think that if there was a feasible way to handle it with significantly less casualties, it would have been adopted.

You said they don't care. The next thing you say they'd do even more if they weren't worried about losing support. So even according to you, they care - if not for the reasons you'd like.

You contradict yourself.

What I read from reports here is that the USA sent thousands of these bombs to Israel. Where they sent with the expectation that they won't be used?

@ozimoron And?

You're just keeping the same on loop, without addressing what I posted. Not unusual, but tedious.