Far-right Israeli government minister Ben-Gvir believes that Israeli soldiers must shoot Palestinian women and children in Gaza to stop ‘another October 7’.


Far-right Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir demanded the army shoot Palestinian women and children in Gaza during a cabinet meeting, according to the Israeli media on Monday.

“We cannot have women and children getting close to the border… anyone who gets near must get a bullet [in the head],” Ben-Gvir said during a debate with Israeli military chief Herzi Halevi on the army’s “open-fire” rules at the cabinet meeting on Sunday.

Ben-Gvir, who heads the extreme right Jewish Power party, told Halevi that Israel’s rules of engagement in Gaza were too lenient and ought to be broadened out to encompass civilians.

“You know how our enemies operate… they will try us,” Ben-Gvir said according to The Jerusalem Post.

“They will send women and children as undercover terrorists. If we continue like this, we will reach another October 7.”

Halevi did not argue with Ben-Gvir over the ethics of shooting Palestinian women and children, but rather claimed that it might lead to more “friendly fire” incidents.

read more: https://www.newarab.com/news/ben-gvir-says-israeli-army-can-shoot-women-children-gaza

    • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      If it weren’t for the embedded racism in our society, we’d treat Israel-Palestine the same way the West has treated every other ethnic conflict. But, many Jews are white, so…

      (I’m still unclear on what the instance rules around this are, by the way)

  • livus@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 years ago

    Okay so if this is true then it’s a clear incitement to war crimes.

    Israel continuing to let these kinds of speech happen is a part of what makes this a genocide.

    Genocidaires are sometimes brought to trial many years after they think they have gotten away with it.

    I honestly think there is so much evidence now that if the US ever loosens its stranglehold on the world this will happen with the Israeli genocidaires.

    • dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      War crimes as a designation only mean something if you catch the criminals, which generally means a complete collapse of their sovereign state. In the case of a nuclear weapon possessing nation, that’s not gonna end well. Most western governments are still very much willing to do business with Israel because they represent a friendly foothold in the Middle East. Everyone, literally everyone, is well aware they are committing genocide.

      The Nazis were able to be tried for war crimes because the world utterly destroyed Nazi Germany. Milosovic was able to be tried for war crimes because Yugoslavia was a failed state and he lost the war. Again, no nukes.

      • livus@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        @dangblingus I agree with most of what you have said. Exceptions are things like Comrade Duch who was eventually prosecuted despite the history there.

        But I’m pointing out that the world has an especially long memory when it comes to genocides. There are always survivors and their sympathisers who will prosecute if they get the chance. And in this case there is plenty of evidence.

        Personally I don’t think the current orthodoxy will hold for another 50 years - perhaps not even 30. US hegemony is slipping and becoming more reliant on hard power. As for Israel, it’s an arms dealer and a tech exporter. But I’ve noticed companies in my part of the world have no trouble doing business with countries like UAE and Saudi Arabia.

    • kibiz0r@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      We’ll see how the Feb 26 report goes. I can’t imagine how Israel will possibly argue that they’ve improved humanitarian aid access and protection for civilians.

  • OatChalice@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    “They will send women and children as undercover terrorists. If we continue like this, we will reach another October 7.”

    He’s not exactly wrong — why won’t the West realize that terrorizing the terrorists doesn’t make them less radicalized? To justify one heinous act of violence with another is an investment in more of the same.

    Obviously it’s a big messy situation that’s too complicated for simple blanket statements (and what do I know?), but it seems fair to say that history repeats itself unless we can reject this flawed zero-sum premise that my suffering can justify yours.

    Do I condone Hamas? Absolutely not. Would I condone attacking Israel if they bombed my home and murdered my family? I bet I would…

    It’s easy to espouse aggressively simplistic moral principles from the privilege of safety. Much harder and more important to root those principles in a foundation of empathy.

    • iain@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      It’s easy from the privilege of safety to say that Israel has no choice but to keep Palestinians locked up in their open air prison, because you imagine that they might take revenge when they get out.

      This is the exact argument that white people made to not free the enslaved people. The real solution is freedom for everyone, from the river to the sea.

      • OatChalice@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        Yes, and the assumptions that make up this artificial“it’s us against them”ultimatum tend to dissolve when placed under an empathetic lens.

        The political justification for the genocide of Palestine, much like that of US slavery, requires that people are dehumanized. It’s not genocide because they’re an existential threat, slavery isn’t a grievous violation of human rights because non-whites simply aren’t human in the same capacity, etc. These assumptions don’t hold up long if you perceive the “other” as motivated by a similar humanity to your own — everyone else is just trying to put food on the table and keep their family safe too.

        Of course, there are many bad-faith actors to be found. But my point is that, broadly speaking, we all need to chip away at toxic “us vs them” narratives from the bottom up

        • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          Fanon talks about how colonialism dehumanizes both the colonized and the colonizer. The colonized become less-than-human, but the colonizers become greater-than-human. That’s what the existential threat is, if Palestinians regain their humanity then Israelis have to become lowly humans again. It’s not just an “us vs them” narrative, it’s a structure of domination that makes Israelis superhuman.

          The de-colonial struggle shows the settler that no, actually, they aren’t superhuman. They bleed and die like the rest of us.

          • OatChalice@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 years ago

            This is an excellent point, thank you. I think this is a crucial and overlooked component to fascist movements and their appeal to the disenfranchised, like the amorphous concept of “great”-ness that the MAGA crowd espouses.

            I haven’t read Fanon, would you recommend a place to start?

            • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 years ago

              Black Skin, White Masks is where he talks about colonial dehumanization. While he’s talking in the context of Africa and France, it applies quite well to Israel and Palestine too.