The Children of Gaza = More than 7000 Killed.

[CharlieH]

Special Report: One little girl desperately wanted to be a YouTube star. Her brother adored football and his favourite player, Cristiano Ronaldo. Their cousin was a teenage electronics wiz. Since the start of Israel’s offensive in Gaza, more than 7,000 children have been killed in airstrikes, artillery and mortar fire. Often entire families disappeared in an instant. Here are the stories of nine Palestinian children who’ve been killed in the war.

 

 

Before the war began, Gaza’s streets teemed with children. Roughly half of the two million people who call the narrow strip of land home are under 18. At the weekend, and when school was out, the beaches, parks and playgrounds were full of the sounds of children laughing and playing.

But Gaza’s children have had to endure so much in their short lives. A 15-year-old will have lived through five wars in their lifetime, including the current conflict. Many have been displaced several times because their homes were destroyed by bombing.

Even so, they had never experienced destruction like this.

 

Since the start of Israel’s offensive in Gaza, more than 7,000 children have been killed in airstrikes, artillery and mortar fire. That number only accounts for those who have been identified, and many more likely lie beneath the rubble. Thousands have been injured. The United Nations has described Gaza as “a graveyard for thousands of children,” and “the most dangerous place in the world to be a child.”

Lost in those unfathomable numbers are the faces, the names, the lives, and the moments of joy those children brought. Here are some of their stories.

The confident athlete: Siwar Almadhoun, 13

Siwar was tall for her age, and she put it to good use. Basketball was her passion. She played whenever she could – at school, in her own time, in the summer – and she won trophies. There’s a video of her, taken after winning a basketball tournament, showing her dancing on a big stage in front of a crowd while confetti sprays around her and music blares. The whole team jumps up and down with their medals. She used to wear an old basketball jersey from a Florida high school all the time because it had a hoop and a ball on the front. She loved volleyball, too – another sport where her height gave her an advantage.

Siwar was much more independent than most girls her age. “She didn’t care. She would go out and run errands on her own, she would go to the beach and swim. She was always doing things, she wasn’t shy at all,” says her uncle, Hani Almadhoun.

She was the most outgoing of all of her siblings; despite only being 13, she brimmed with confidence. Hani remembers her always wanting to help her parents.

Siwar loved to picnic. If she had a dollar in her hand she would go to a nearby restaurant with her girlfriends where they would order the same meal every time: a shawarma sandwich, pickles, a corn salad and fries. It came in a clamshell contained.

 

FULL REPORT

 

[Morch]

True to Independent form, they managed a heart breaking (it is) account, while dropping any mention of what prompted Israel's offensive, or even acknowledging Israeli children were murdered.

 

These thousands of children would have been alive today, if it was not for the Hamas 7/10 attack.

[thaibeachlovers]

18 minutes ago, Morch said:

True to Independent form, they managed a heart breaking (it is) account, while dropping any mention of what prompted Israel's offensive, or even acknowledging Israeli children were murdered.

 

These thousands of children would have been alive today, if it was not for the Hamas 7/10 attack.

Alive and under a brutal illegal blockade.

 

The Hamas attack did not happen in a vacuum, to quote the UN secretary general.

[Morch]

4 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Alive and under a brutal illegal blockade.

 

The Hamas attack did not happen in a vacuum, to quote the UN secretary general.

 

@thaibeachlovers

 

Alive being the key word here, following the thrust of the OP.

As for the blockade, same applies - it was in place because....? Maybe something to do with Hamas?

Or do you think that the blockade came about in a vacuum...?

 

Hamas decided it is worth sacrificing the people of the Gaza Strip, including the children.

Nothing prevented or prevents Hamas from affording the children shelter in then tunnels.

Nothing prevented or prevents Hamas from stopping this war.

 

On a side note, just yesterday you were pretending I'm on your 'ignore' list....you're doing it wrong.

 

Edited December 15, 2023 by Morch

[Nick Carter icp]

7 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Alive and under a brutal illegal blockade.

 

 

 

   It isn't an illegal blockade, it is a legal one .

The U.N says.......................

 

 

 

"The United Nations itself, in the Secretary-General’s Panel of Inquiry report of 2011 concerning the Mavi Marmara incident from the previous year, found that Israel’s Gaza blockade is legal under international law. “Israel faces a real threat to its security from militant groups in Gaza,” determined the UN inquiry, headed by Sir Geoffrey Palmer, the former Prime Minister of New Zealand. “The naval blockade was imposed as a legitimate security measure in order to prevent weapons from entering Gaza by sea and its implementation complied with the requirements of international law."

 

 

https://unwatch.org/item-7/claim/claim-6-israels-blockade-of-gaza-is-illegal/

 

[Tropicalevo]

What is happening in Gaza is 100% down to Hamas.

They invaded Israel and murdered unarmed innocents.

They hide behind, with and under unarmed innocents.

They have NEVER honoured a ceasefire.

They kill without fear and lie about everything.

Israel 'bombed' a hospital??? That was the easiest one to prove to be a lie.

Sad that the Independent is not what it says it is.

[Drumbuie]

1 hour ago, Morch said:

 

@thaibeachlovers

 

Alive being the key word here, following the thrust of the OP.

As for the blockade, same applies - it was in place because....? Maybe something to do with Hamas?

Or do you think that the blockade came about in a vacuum...?

 

Hamas decided it is worth sacrificing the people of the Gaza Strip, including the children.

Nothing prevented or prevents Hamas from affording the children shelter in then tunnels.

Nothing prevented or prevents Hamas from stopping this war.

 

On a side note, just yesterday you were pretending I'm on your 'ignore' list....you're doing it wrong.

 

Look at the map of Israel when it was established after WW2, then look at it today's it has encroached again and again, with violence, into Palestinian territory. The IDF destroys the olive trees that the Palestinians depend on. A huge number of Israelis are as horrified by their government's behaviour as any one watching  from beyond their borders - as one of them said to me in August, the trouble with our protesters is they're too well behaved. 

Hamas would not exist if Israel had behaved decently. 

[wombat]

did Hamas start this round...yes or no?
Stockholm Syndrome is endemic.

[Hanaguma]

16 minutes ago, Drumbuie said:

Look at the map of Israel when it was established after WW2, then look at it today's it has encroached again and again, with violence, into Palestinian territory. The IDF destroys the olive trees that the Palestinians depend on. A huge number of Israelis are as horrified by their government's behaviour as any one watching  from beyond their borders - as one of them said to me in August, the trouble with our protesters is they're too well behaved. 

Hamas would not exist if Israel had behaved decently. 

Encroach? Hardly. Israel was invaded constantly. They took territory to stay safe. You forget that five countries invaded Israel in 1948 and tried to wage a war of genocide? Of course the losers lost territory. That is the way of the world. Lose a war, lose land. Germany lost a lot of land after WW2, but you dont see ex residents of Prussia sitting around complaining. 

[Morch]

31 minutes ago, Drumbuie said:

Look at the map of Israel when it was established after WW2, then look at it today's it has encroached again and again, with violence, into Palestinian territory. The IDF destroys the olive trees that the Palestinians depend on. A huge number of Israelis are as horrified by their government's behaviour as any one watching  from beyond their borders - as one of them said to me in August, the trouble with our protesters is they're too well behaved. 

Hamas would not exist if Israel had behaved decently. 

 

What you post ignores is that neither the Palestinians, nor Israel's neighbors accepted the partition plan until decades later. The position adopted was one of hostility and rejectionism - representing a hope that Israel's creation will be undone.

 

When you talk about 'again and again' - I guess that doesn't include handing back the Sinai Peninsula to Egypt after a peace agreement was signed, handing back lands conquered from Jordan (and long term leasing them, instead) following yet another peace agreement, or withdrawing from the Gaza Strip well over a decade ago.

 

So yes, Israel does occupy the West Bank, and the illegal Israeli settlement effort is a reality. But that too would not have come about had the Palestinians adopted a different approach back when.

 

Your post seems to be one of them attempt to paint the Palestinians as having no responsibility for anything concerning their situation. No accountability expected or required. It's all about Israel Bad.

 

I concur most of what Israel does in the West Bank is wrong. Not so (IMO) when it comes to the Gaza Strip.

This topic is about the Gaza Strip (there's a parallel one dealing with the situation in the West Bank).

[Morch]

21 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

Encroach? Hardly. Israel was invaded constantly. They took territory to stay safe. You forget that five countries invaded Israel in 1948 and tried to wage a war of genocide? Of course the losers lost territory. That is the way of the world. Lose a war, lose land. Germany lost a lot of land after WW2, but you dont see ex residents of Prussia sitting around complaining. 

 

Israel was not invaded 1967, which is when the issue became a thing.

Invasions such as you refer to apply to the 1948 and 1973 wars.

 

Whether conquering and holding on to the West Bank improves Israel's security is an open question.

 

I think that nowadays, territory taken by force does not automatically count as 'spoils of war'.

Not very acceptable, actually. Some countries get away with it regardless, sure.

The more problematic issue is them illegal settlements. If it was 'just' a military occupation, there's be less trouble.

 

[simple1]

4 hours ago, Morch said:

True to Independent form, they managed a heart breaking (it is) account, while dropping any mention of what prompted Israel's offensive, or even acknowledging Israeli children were murdered.

 

These thousands of children would have been alive today, if it was not for the Hamas 7/10 attack.

 

On the other side of the coin perhaps thousands of Gazan children would be alive today if Israel had not conducted, as claimed by Pres Biden, indiscriminate bombing. Apparently past due for the Israeli's to wind back the level of aggression.

[Nick Carter icp]

1 minute ago, simple1 said:

 

On the other side of the coin perhaps thousands of Gazan children would be alive today if Israel had not conducted, as claimed by Pres Biden, indiscriminate bombing. Apparently past due for the Israeli's to wind back the level of aggression.

 

   Seems that Joe was wrong bout that , Israeli have explained to him how they operate and I don't think that Joe will be saying it again 

[ozimoron]

4 hours ago, Morch said:

True to Independent form, they managed a heart breaking (it is) account, while dropping any mention of what prompted Israel's offensive, or even acknowledging Israeli children were murdered.

 

These thousands of children would have been alive today, if it was not for the Hamas 7/10 attack.

 

The Hamas attack did not kill these children. Kids did not slaughter those Israelis on 10/7.

 

You're again blaming the victims for Israeli war crimes.

Edited December 15, 2023 by ozimoron

[Thingamabob]

The Palestinian/Hamas attack on Israel was barbaric, to put it mildly. Hard retaliation was inevitable and entirely justifiable.

[ozimoron]

Just now, Thingamabob said:

The Palestinian/Hamas attack on Israel was barbaric, to put it mildly. Hard retaliation was inevitable and entirely justifiable.

 

War crimes against children are abhorrent and can never be justified.

[Nick Carter icp]

5 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

 

War crimes against children are abhorrent and can never be justified.

 

   Yes, Gazians are paying the price for Hamas's war crimes against Children 

[placnx]

4 hours ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   It isn't an illegal blockade, it is a legal one .

The U.N says.......................

 

 

 

"The United Nations itself, in the Secretary-General’s Panel of Inquiry report of 2011 concerning the Mavi Marmara incident from the previous year, found that Israel’s Gaza blockade is legal under international law. “Israel faces a real threat to its security from militant groups in Gaza,” determined the UN inquiry, headed by Sir Geoffrey Palmer, the former Prime Minister of New Zealand. “The naval blockade was imposed as a legitimate security measure in order to prevent weapons from entering Gaza by sea and its implementation complied with the requirements of international law."

 

 

https://unwatch.org/item-7/claim/claim-6-israels-blockade-of-gaza-is-illegal/

 

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UN_Watch:

The American journalist and political activist Phyllis Bennis described UN Watch as a "small Geneva-based right-wing organisation" that is "hardly known outside of UN headquarters".[67] She stressed that "undermining and delegitimising" Richard Falk through "scurrilous accusations" has been an "obsession of UN Watch" when he became Special Rapporteur.[67]

Agence France-Presse has described UN Watch both as "a lobby group with strong ties to Israel"[12] and as a group which "champion[s] human rights worldwide".[68] The Economist has described UN Watch as a "pro-Israeli monitor".

 

Looking at the unwatch link shows the obvious obsession with countering legitimate criticism of Israel.

[NickyLouie]

[placnx]

2 hours ago, Hanaguma said:

Encroach? Hardly. Israel was invaded constantly. They took territory to stay safe. You forget that five countries invaded Israel in 1948 and tried to wage a war of genocide? Of course the losers lost territory. That is the way of the world. Lose a war, lose land. Germany lost a lot of land after WW2, but you dont see ex residents of Prussia sitting around complaining. 

In answer to you whataboutism citing Germany, when Poland joined the EU, lawsuits from Germans started over their lost property when East Prussia was taken over by Poland.

[Morch]

59 minutes ago, simple1 said:

 

On the other side of the coin perhaps thousands of Gazan children would be alive today if Israel had not conducted, as claimed by Pres Biden, indiscriminate bombing. Apparently past due for the Israeli's to wind back the level of aggression.

 

Flip side how?

 

There were no bombing on the morning of 7/10.

 

Hamas leadership said these are 'necessary sacrifices'.

There was no attempt to provide them with any sort of shelter (and it is available).

Their own leadership doesn't care about them, other than propaganda tools and future terrorists.

 

People expect, for some reason, that Israel would care more about Palestinian children, than the Palestinians themselves.

 

I'm yet to hear what would have been a plausible alternative to 'the level of aggression'.

 

 

[Nick Carter icp]

4 minutes ago, placnx said:

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UN_Watch:

The American journalist and political activist Phyllis Bennis described UN Watch as a "small Geneva-based right-wing organisation" that is "hardly known outside of UN headquarters".[67] She stressed that "undermining and delegitimising" Richard Falk through "scurrilous accusations" has been an "obsession of UN Watch" when he became Special Rapporteur.[67]

Agence France-Presse has described UN Watch both as "a lobby group with strong ties to Israel"[12] and as a group which "champion[s] human rights worldwide".[68] The Economist has described UN Watch as a "pro-Israeli monitor".

 

Looking at the unwatch link shows the obvious obsession with countering legitimate criticism of Israel.

 

   Shooting the messenger there .

It was a report on what the U.N said , the website where it was posted is irrelevant 

[Morch]

1 hour ago, ozimoron said:

 

The Hamas attack did not kill these children. Kids did not slaughter those Israelis on 10/7.

 

You're again blaming the victims for Israeli war crimes.

 

The Hamas attack brought about the Israeli reaction.

It was anticipated.

Hamas did not do anything to protect the children it sheds crocodile tears over.

Instead, Hamas leadership called them 'necessary sacrifices' and left them to fend for themselves.

Hamas could have provided them shelter, Hamas could have stopped the carnage at any time.

 

I'm not blaming the victims. The children are not blamed.

Hamas is.

 

What you are doing, on the other hand, is once again absolving Hamas of any accountability and responsibility for anything whatsoever.

[Morch]

1 hour ago, ozimoron said:

 

War crimes against children are abhorrent and can never be justified.

 

 

You do not decide whether 'war crimes' were committed.

[peter zwart]

You cannot possibly choose one side. Both factions are responsible for the entire situation. It would be a significant step forward if you could eliminate both Hamas and the Orthodox Jews.

[Morch]

13 minutes ago, placnx said:

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UN_Watch:

The American journalist and political activist Phyllis Bennis described UN Watch as a "small Geneva-based right-wing organisation" that is "hardly known outside of UN headquarters".[67] She stressed that "undermining and delegitimising" Richard Falk through "scurrilous accusations" has been an "obsession of UN Watch" when he became Special Rapporteur.[67]

Agence France-Presse has described UN Watch both as "a lobby group with strong ties to Israel"[12] and as a group which "champion[s] human rights worldwide".[68] The Economist has described UN Watch as a "pro-Israeli monitor".

 

Looking at the unwatch link shows the obvious obsession with countering legitimate criticism of Israel.

 

It is an acceptable source on this forum. And Bennis is not a neutral commentator.

If the UN was not so obviously biased vs. Israel, there would have been no UN Watch.

[Nick Carter icp]

1 minute ago, peter zwart said:

You cannot possibly choose one side. Both factions are responsible for the entire situation. It would be a significant step forward if you could eliminate both Hamas and the Orthodox Jews.

 

   You don't know much about Orthodox Jews, do you ?

[placnx]

2 hours ago, Morch said:

 

What you post ignores is that neither the Palestinians, nor Israel's neighbors accepted the partition plan until decades later. The position adopted was one of hostility and rejectionism - representing a hope that Israel's creation will be undone.

 

When you talk about 'again and again' - I guess that doesn't include handing back the Sinai Peninsula to Egypt after a peace agreement was signed, handing back lands conquered from Jordan (and long term leasing them, instead) following yet another peace agreement, or withdrawing from the Gaza Strip well over a decade ago.

 

So yes, Israel does occupy the West Bank, and the illegal Israeli settlement effort is a reality. But that too would not have come about had the Palestinians adopted a different approach back when.

 

Your post seems to be one of them attempt to paint the Palestinians as having no responsibility for anything concerning their situation. No accountability expected or required. It's all about Israel Bad.

 

I concur most of what Israel does in the West Bank is wrong. Not so (IMO) when it comes to the Gaza Strip.

This topic is about the Gaza Strip (there's a parallel one dealing with the situation in the West Bank).

There was UNGA resolution 194 which called for the implementation of international law, by which the then 750,000 Palestinians expelled from 1948 Israel could return to their homes. This was the stumbling block that lasted for years. Back in those days, the Palestinians were under Jordan's and Egypt's control. We could say that they were pawns in geopolitics. Not until 1967 could the Palestinians be visible, but their issue was subordinate to Israel's occupation of the Sinai. The Palestinians had no responsibility for the 1967 war. They were just the victims. BTW In 1967 Nasser would have backed down, but then Israel staged a surprise attack in destoying the Egyptian airforce. Tragically King Hussein got Jordan involved in response. 

 

The problem with previous peace proposals including Camp David 2000 and its aftermath was that the Palestinians were not offered a state with true sovereignty, plus there were then already 100,000 settlers, with Israel demanding the rights to territory to accomodate natural population growth.

 

Israel should be required to take back all the 700,000 settlers (including East Jerusalem). If any remained they can only be secular people who are not a threat to the peace and who will accept Palestinian nationality, living under Palestinian law.  

[placnx]

1 hour ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   Seems that Joe was wrong bout that , Israeli have explained to him how they operate and I don't think that Joe will be saying it again 

Instead of criticizing indiscriminate bombing, Biden is now getting louder about making the operation precisely targeted. Meanwhile Netanyahu et al continue to predict that their operation will go on for months. Reportedly, Biden is blocking the order for 10000+ rifles, due to fear that they will be used by settlers to kill more Palestinians. US fears a explosion on the West Bank.

[Nick Carter icp]

13 minutes ago, placnx said:

There was UNGA resolution 194 which called for the implementation of international law, by which the then 750,000 Palestinians expelled from 1948 Israel could return to their homes. This was the stumbling block that lasted for years. Back in those days, the Palestinians were under Jordan's and Egypt's control. We could say that they were pawns in geopolitics. Not until 1967 could the Palestinians be visible, but their issue was subordinate to Israel's occupation of the Sinai. The Palestinians had no responsibility for the 1967 war. They were just the victims. BTW In 1967 Nasser would have backed down, but then Israel staged a surprise attack in destoying the Egyptian airforce. Tragically King Hussein got Jordan involved in response. 

 

The problem with previous peace proposals including Camp David 2000 and its aftermath was that the Palestinians were not offered a state with true sovereignty, plus there were then already 100,000 settlers, with Israel demanding the rights to territory to accomodate natural population growth.

 

Israel should be required to take back all the 700,000 settlers (including East Jerusalem). If any remained they can only be secular people who are not a threat to the peace and who will accept Palestinian nationality, living under Palestinian law.  

 

   We have been asked to stop giving history lessons and to keep on topic