Forum Topic

3,100 children aged under five have been killed in Gaza - Save the Children

"The occupied Palestinian territory is now ranked as the deadliest place in the world for children: about 30% of the 11,300 identified children killed in Gaza were younger than five and Gaza currently has the highest rates of child malnutrition globally.""GAZA, 10 October 2024 – At least 3,100 children aged under five have been killed in Gaza with other under-fives at risk from severe malnutrition as the conflict shatters the start of Palestinian children’s lives, Save the Children said.About 30% of the 11,300 identified children killed in Gaza between last October and 31 August were younger than five, according to a newly published breakdown of the ages of about 34,000 people whose deaths have been verified by Gaza’s Ministry of Health. Of those about 710 were babies aged under 12 months. Another 2,800 children killed have yet to be identified.""Of those about 710 were babies aged under 12 months."

David Ainsworth ● 77d34 Comments

To be honest that is really what I would also do😉 !We should use the tactics of Mrs Thatcher over the The Iranian Embassy siege that took place from 30 April to 5 May 1980; a battle between Arabic Iranians seeking regional independence and the forces of the theocratic dictator of Iran Ayatollah Khomeini.To end the foreign war on Britain's streets she sent in the SAS to flush out the insurgents.In hindsight she might have been more prescient and let the Arab rebels win !

John Hawkes ● 68d

You wouldn't apply the Hannibal Directive then?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hannibal_Directive

David Ainsworth ● 70d

Here's what I would doI would play to the better nature of the terrorists and call on them to put the patients, whose well being they are endangering, first and to surrender and to release the them; promising the terrorists a fair trial for the atrocities they had committed.When they rejected that I would send in the troops to clear them out, with orders to save as many civilians as possible.

Michael Brigo ● 70d

'If terrorists took over St Georges hospital would you simply call in an airstrike on the hospital knowing that this will cause mass civilian deaths'?No.I would play to the better nature of the terrorists and call on them to put the patients, whose well being they are endangering, first and to surrender and to release the them; promising the terrorists a fair trial for the atrocities they had committed.That of course assumes the terrorists also placed a premium on putting the well being of the patients before their own.I would put on hold any thought of an investigation as to why and how the terrorists had manged to build tunnels under the hospital where it seems they themselves hide and where they keep those innocent people they had kidnapped.Bit vague a response I know.However what would you do ?

John Hawkes ● 70d

I refer you to my previous question some weeks ago that remains unanswered.If terrorists took over St Georges hospital would you simply call in an airstrike on the hospital knowing that this will cause mass civilian deaths?

Michael Brigo ● 71d

'https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2024/06/israeli-authorities-palestinian-armed-groups-are-responsible-war-crimesAccording to this both Israel and Palestine are accused of war crimes.The fact of the matter is though that Palestine started the current bout of conflict by invading Israel from Gaza on 7th October 2023 slaughtering and sexually abusing women, children and the elderly.Under the circumstances of where Hamas chose to hide and deploy its forces in Israel's subsequent war of retaliation, it is terribly sad that many innocent Palestinians have been killed.

John Hawkes ● 71d

"Which group of people is being threatened with genocide and by whom ?"I think the UN proceedings have been widely covered in the international press. If you missed it there are some links below:The UN definition can be found here:    https://www.un.org/en/genocide-prevention/definitionDetails of the UN Inquiry findings can be found here:    https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2024/06/israeli-authorities-palestinian-armed-groups-are-responsible-war-crimesAccusations of genocide concerning Gaza can be found here:     https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/03/1147976Articles on the subject can also be found here:    https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2024-09-24/ty-article-magazine/.premium/israels-channel-14-has-repeatedly-called-for-genocide-against-palestinians-in-gaza/00000192-1f2e-d515-a1fa-5f3e99550000    https://www.haaretz.com/opinion/2024-01-14/ty-article-opinion/.premium/if-it-isnt-a-genocide-in-gaza-then-what-is-it/0000018d-040c-dd07-a7df-cf7e8b980000

Ed Robinson ● 75d

"No Israelis or Jews involved, only Arabs. So nothing to see here so move along please".https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/oct/11/world-humanitarian-disaster-sudan'There’s not even a rough estimate of the death toll – you can see ranges that go up to 150,000 or more – because no one is counting all the dead. In this civil war, there is no official state machinery, no health ministry, to publish daily figures. No international NGOs can do it because, says Ferguson, “no one has big teams on the ground”. Local groups do their best, but “the world isn’t listening to them”. *****That goes for the media too, whose coverage of, say, the disaster that is the Israel-Hamas war, has been orders of magnitude more extensive than its coverage of the violence in Sudan*****.

John Hawkes ● 75d

Meanwhile NOTE: "No Israelis or Jews involved, only Arabs. So nothing to see here so move along please".'Sudan is the world’s gravest humanitarian disaster – but almost nobody cares'- Jonathan Freedlandhttps://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/oct/11/world-humanitarian-disaster-sudan'The conflict has raged since April 2023, so there’s been no shortage of time to notice it. Nor is it lacking epic scale. On the contrary, aid organisations say Sudan faces “the world’s worst humanitarian crisis”. The suffering is not complicated or abstract, but heart-rending, brimming with the kind of horror that ordinarily would seize global attention.Take the testimony of one of those many millions who has fled Sudan for neighbouring Chad, a young woman called Maryam Suleiman. She told the New York Times about the day that the RAPID SUPPORT FORCES, THE REBADGED VERSION OF THE JANJAWEED - THE ARAB MALITIA GUILTY OF THE DAFUR SLAUGHTER TWO DECADES AGO – stormed into her village. The gunmen lined up the men and the boys as their leader declared: “We don’t want to see any Black people. We don’t even want to see black trash bags.” He then promptly shot a black donkey, signalling his intent. After that, the RSF men set about executing all Black males over the age of 10, including Maryam’s five brothers, and some younger ones too. A day-old baby boy was thrown to the ground and killed, and a male toddler chucked into a pond to drown. And then, “they raped many, many girls”. They called them “slaves” and told them: “There is no place for you Black people in Sudan.”Nice people.

John Hawkes ● 75d

'Failing to stop one genocide does not mean that we should cease trying to stop another'.Which group of people is being threatened with genocide and by whom ?

John Hawkes ● 75d

'Genocide is violence that targets individuals because of their membership of a group and aims at the destruction of a people.Raphael Lemkin, who first coined the term, defined genocide as "the destruction of a nation or of an ethnic group" by means such as "the disintegration of [its] political and social institutions, of [its] culture, language, national feelings, religion, and [its] economic existence"."Failing to stop one genocide does not mean that we should cease trying to stop another".True.Who in this conflict is being threatened with genocide and by whom ?

John Hawkes ● 75d

Just to be clear it has been reported that the Israelis have set up next to the UN base.Failing to stop one genocide does not mean that we should cease trying to stop another. The failure of one UN peace operation does not mean all peace operations should be stopped. Many UN operations have flaws and are only going to as good as the troops that they send. The Haiti cholera incident springs to mind.Each UN operation has its own remit, so perhaps it is unfair to compare.There has been criticism of Ireland which is meant to be neutral, for allowing US military to use airports. Supporting EU funding of Ukraine would also seem constitutionally questionable as governance of such funds seems non-existent.What is clear is that our government is actively participating in this conflict. As citizens at end of the day we can support upholding international law by voting accordingly.The logic in participating in conflicts leading to a high numbers of civilian casualties and refugees then sending overseas aid is completely bonkers.https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg3r2d6p42o.amp

Ed Robinson ● 75d

What about Srebrenica? The UN declared the enclave a ‘safe area’ under its protection but then failed to deter the massacre of its civilian population.S to being in harm’s way, if Hezbollah fire rockets into Israel from positions close to Unifil bases, any Israeli reply is likely to put UN personnel in danger.

Steven Rose ● 75d

"unwilling to engage militants in armed combat,"I think the various articles and links made clear they have no mandate to engage militarily unless fired upon. If that is what you mean by engage.But they do engage non-militarily with armed forces on both sides.They are only in harms way if specifically targeted.

Ed Robinson ● 75d

I think the answer to your question is, nothing at all. UN peacekeepers, perhaps understandably, are unwilling to engage militants in armed combat, so they are powerless to maintain the peace if the warring parties are determined to fight. In Lebanon at the moment it seems to me that all the UN  peacekeepers are doing is putting themselves in harm’s way to no purpose.

Steven Rose ● 76d

If you want to through the ball into the other court, what did the peace keepers achieve in Kosovo?

Ivonne Holliday ● 76d

What exactly have the UN peacekeepers achieved in southern Lebanon?

Steven Rose ● 76d

I would suggest you read more than the first paragraph only.  The situation is rather more complicated that your explanation.

Ivonne Holliday ● 76d

Unifil consists of 10 000 personnel from 46 countries whose job supposedly is to keep the south of Lebanon protected from ‘unauthorised armed personnel  such as Hezbollah’ . But despite an annual budget running into several hundred million dollars, it has not prevented Hezbollah from sending more than 8000 rockets into Israel since October 7.

Steven Rose ● 76d

Please see the link below to learn what Unifil is doing in Lebanon and when it was established.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Interim_Force_in_Lebanon

Ivonne Holliday ● 76d

"The UN seem to think it was deliberate, difficult to see."Seems fairly clear in the UN press release. It details a number of incidents.How is it difficult to see?https://unifil.unmissions.org/unifil-statement-10-octoberThe UN resolution is quite well described in the second link below.https://www.controlrisks.com/our-thinking/insights/unifil-mandate-renewed-what-it-means-for-lebanon-and-israelIf you want to keep supporting this conflict and the creation of millions of refugees, many will end up here, then keep voting and supporting the main parties.

Ed Robinson ● 76d

The UN seem to think it was deliberate, difficult to see. I suppose if it was an accident the IDF will be apologising to the UN and paying reparations for the cost of medical care and equipment replacement, etc?I'm not sure what the UN peacekeeping mandate is for the Israeli/Lebanese border, it may be primarily observational. Hence my original suspicions; purely a personal observation based on the fact western journalists aren't allowed into Gaza.

Michael Ixer ● 77d

Clearly the IDF should not have fired on UN peacekeepers, though this is unlikely to have been deliberate. What possible motive could the Israelis have to fire on the UN when their purpose is to degrade Hezbollah positions. But since the issue of the UN peacekeepers has been introduced, what exactly is their role in Lebanon? They certainly aren’t keeping the peace. They have not prevented Hezbollah from firing 8000 missiles into Israel since October 7 last year.

Steven Rose ● 77d

When does the continual criticism of Israel whilst ignoring and even justifying the actions (even atrocities ?) of the Palestinians cross the line into antisemitism ?Or are those that do such simply trying to educate us in the long and complex history of the region which we are deemed too thick to comprehend for ourselves ?If so I am not convinced that I am being presented with a balanced critique, and were I to be a university student I think I might ask for my tuition fees back.

John Hawkes ● 77d

"It would suggest to me the IDF has something to hide?"Don't worry. All will be well. The IDF will "look into it".

David Ainsworth ● 77d

'"The violence of this year follows 76 years of systemic oppression and dehumanization of Palestinians.'"Another trawl onto a contrarian and probably minority anti-Government Jewish website.This conflict over territory between two peoples that both have claim on it has been surely going on for millennia.And then the historians and intellectuals that make up Hamas suddenly decided to bring the issue to a head - by attacking the state of Israel.Or was it the consequence of their desire to fulfil their Charter declaration to annihilate it.Note:As of June 2024, the State of Israel is recognized as a sovereign state by 164 of the 192 member states of the United Nations. The State of Israel was formally established by the Israeli Declaration of Independence on 14 May 1948, and was admitted to the United Nations (UN) as a full member state on 11 May 1949. It also maintains bilateral ties with all of the UNSC Permanent Five.28 member states have either never recognized Israel or have withdrawn their recognition; others have severed diplomatic relations without explicitly withdrawing their recognition. Additionally, many non-recognizing countries have challenged Israel's existence—predominantly those in the Muslim world—due to significant animosity stemming from the Israeli–Palestinian conflict and the Arab–Israeli conflict'.Take a look at this map and see what countries recognise Israel and which do not.Then draw your own conclusions.https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=67827249Is it not about time that both parties to the conflict, the world community (and even the armchair liberationists in leafy Putney) came to terms with the reality of territorial rights as they now exist and tried to live peacefully alongside each other ?

John Hawkes ● 77d

There's certainly no case for deliberately firing at UN peacekeepers.  It would suggest to me the IDF has something to hide?https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cr54lyg2j8ztYes, too much religion ...

Michael Ixer ● 77d

Mocking criticism of those who offer one sided accounts of the conflict, or of those who go on demonstrations attended by Islamists chanting antisemitic slogans, does not imply indifference to the suffering of innocent civilians.

Steven Rose ● 77d

"Isn't there a Pro-Palestian March anywhere today for you to wave your little flag?  You could go with the other one!"Usual utterly heartless response.

Michael Brigo ● 77d

Is there one? I never know. I never go. So not waving any little thing anywhere.

David Ainsworth ● 77d

Isn't there a Pro-Palestian March anywhere today for you to wave your little flag?  You could go with the other one!

Sue Hammond ● 77d

"Actions have consequences."Indeed they do. Of what do you think that the October 7th massacre might be the consequence? Or does it just stand alone?https://www.jewishvoiceforpeace.org/2023/11/24/countdown-to-genocide/"The violence of this year follows 76 years of systemic oppression and dehumanization of Palestinians."

David Ainsworth ● 77d

Absolutely shocking and utterly heartbreaking. However if Hamas had not launched its deadly attack on Israel a year ago these children might still be alive. Actions have consequences.

Sue Hammond ● 77d

"The occupied Palestinian territory is now ranked as the deadliest place in the world for children: about 30% of the 11,300 identified children killed in Gaza were younger than five and Gaza currently has the highest rates of child malnutrition globally."An awful consequence of any war is that the vulnerable and often children suffer the most.This quote is obviously meant as an implicit condemnation of how Israel is conducting its defence following the attack on its territory by Gazan Palestinians.In this attack Hamas took no steps to avoid harming children and in fact videoed instances of them being attacked, assaulted and killed.Some are still held hostage.Hamas has also taken few if any steps to move children as well as women and the elderly from the current conflict zone.Nor is it seen as willing to negotiate sensibly to end the conflict.Are the figures quoted those from Save the Children's own on the ground representatives or are they relaying numbers from Gaza's 'Ministry of Health' which all know is just a mouthpiece for Hamas.The ultimate question though is who really thinks it credible that Israel would deliberately set out to kill hundreds of babies under 12 months ?Are the Israelis so barbaric ?What purpose would such actions serve not least in terms of public relations and world opinions ?All in all, just more propaganda of the form: Jews evil killers - Palestinians benign and peace loving sufferers.NOT !

John Hawkes ● 77d