Thread

Updated Google Maps shows destruction of the city of Rafah

943 points · 947 comments · slowin

bognition · 1790616426 · focus · HN ↗
Its really telling to see the destruction limited to where the structures used to be rather than to all of the surrounding green spaces. If the destruction of civilian dwellings was purely an accident you'd expect to see the destruction spread evenly over the area. Instead it looks much more like a prolonged set of surgical strikes to destroy the buildings while preserving as much of the surrounding areas as possible.
For a great example of this, look at this pin <a href="https://maps.app.goo.gl/ZcMbdFcx87PrqoYNA" rel="nofollow">https://maps.app.goo.gl/ZcMbdFcx87PrqoYNA
And here's a pin of where the farms were spared <a href="https://maps.app.goo.gl/iZbbTH4iH27FCz4s9" rel="nofollow">https://maps.app.goo.gl/iZbbTH4iH27FCz4s9
1. biimugan · 1790619643 · focus · HN ↗
  I don't quite understand your argument here. In your first pin I'm struggling to find a single building that isn't leveled, or at least severely damaged. Even buildings far away from the city center in the boonies are leveled.
  1. cogman10 · 1790637175 · focus · HN ↗
    They are saying that this is genocidal destruction. In a war sometimes civilian infrastructure is hit as collateral. But here, all infrastructure is destroyed and it's clear this wasn't done by 1 or 2 errant bombs but rather because of direct targeting. It can't be argued to be an accident because in farmland you see no bombs which hit the farmland by mistake. In other-words, this is entirely purposeful.
    rbanffy · 1790645192 · focus · HN ↗
    A war requires at least two militaries. This is what happens when a well armed military engages a mostly unarmed civilian society unable to mount significant opposition.
    bonesss · 1790664118 · focus · HN ↗
    There were a lot of arms used over the border on October 7th, more confiscated on video and being used on video against the IDF, and the constant stream of unguided rockets being shot at civilians year after year. Rockets are weapons.
    Hamas describes its fighters as their “military wing”. They engage in military training exercises and wear uniforms (when not fighting). That’s a military.
    While it may be dumb, gross, and a hate crime against their civilians: war was the exact and predicted outcome of the attacks Hamas launched. They made statements to that effect, kicking off a regional war was central to the plan on October the 7th.
    iririririr · 1790668058 · focus · HN ↗
    almost as if they didn't have the best interest of the civilians in mind uh
    rbanffy · 1790671530 · focus · HN ↗
    As Emiliano Zapata once said, "Better to die standing than to live on your knees".
    While I don't condone violence, it's a legitimate way to defend against occupation.
    someonebaggy · 1790678769 · focus · HN ↗
    This is actually codified in international law IIRC - a nation that's subject to some kind of apartheid occupation has literally unlimited rights to resist its occupiers.
    SiempreViernes · 1790681729 · focus · HN ↗
    While Hamas does have a right of armed struggle against the occupation, the taking of hostages and the killing of civilians are not permissible forms of resistance.
    That said, it is almost impossible to imagine that the Israeli response would have been something lesser than the current genocide attempt if Hamas had just taken POWs during the October 7 attack. Bibi would have arguably been even more humiliated if Hamas had been acting with restraint, so the impulse for revenge would be even greater.
    rhasimus · 1790682655 · focus · HN ↗
    Making up scenarios sure is fun. Let me try!
    It is almost impossible to imagine Israel would even look at the direction of Gaza had they just taken the statehood offers presented to them in 1947, 2000, 2001, or 2008, instead of repeatedly choosing terrorizing civilians over gasp compromising.
    ta8903 · 1790687846 · focus · HN ↗
    >It is almost impossible to imagine Israel would even look at the direction of Gaza had they just taken the statehood offers presented to them in 1947, 2000, 2001, or 2008
    It's very much possible to imagine that.
    someonebaggy · 1790697229 · focus · HN ↗
    Considering every single offer that was accepted by both sides was immediately violated by the Israeli side
    rhasimus · 1790716556 · focus · HN ↗
    Hey another flat out lie by the same user... "the Second Intifada began immediately after the collapse of major peace negotiations." You seem to be mixing up the aggressor with the Aggressé, seemingly intentionally, multiple times in a row.

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.