[bjourne]

"only"

Israel has killed babies with tear gas and maimed children with sponge-tipped bullets before. This will continue as there wont be any consequences at all for the sadists operating these guns. Previously they could at least be caught on film and the outcry would force some kind of investigation. Now there is not even that and no one will be held responsible for maiming children. This is precisely why the Israeli academy should be boycotted. Because it helps the Israeli regime develop these kind of extremely disturbing weapons.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/7/10/palestinian-baby-di... https://www.dci-palestine.org/sponge_tipped_bullet_fired_by_...

[FormerBandmate]

Tear gas and sponge-tipped bullets are used by police everywhere, including New Zealand of all places.

Al Jazeera is literally Qatari government propaganda and there’s substantial evidence that DCI Palestine is tied to terrorist groups (https://www.reuters.com/world/finnish-christian-charity-cuts...). Don’t let propagandists blow tragic accidents out of proportion to scapegoat the Jews

[teux]

It’s possible to be critical of Israel’s approach without being antisemitic, or as you put it, “scapegoating the Jews”.

Remote controlled munitions, “less than lethal” or not, are deeply concerning no matter who operates them.

On the topic of safety of LLMs, from the discussion of the study:

“In one report [25], over 13% of the cases resulted in moderate to severe injuries with surgical intervention being required in 8% of the cases and another 18% sustaining a traumatic brain injury. ”

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s41314-022-00045-0

Not something I’m keen to see used anywhere. Much less in a robotic deployment situation.

[aww_dang]

If killer robots are inevitable, it makes sense to start with less than lethal robots. Just change the weapons or ammo.

edit: Please don't read this as an endorsement of violence of any kind. Thanks.

[woodruffw]

What makes Israel somewhat unique is the readiness with which it deploys “less lethal” weapons. I don’t think New Zealand regularly tear gasses large areas under its control, or fires sponge-tipped bullets into crowds.

And, as a Jew: Israel is not “the Jews.” They’re a country, one that does not represent my interests, or the interests of millions of other Jews.

[_glass]

It does. Also New Zealand, the land of the Māori. You could construct here a narrative of "large areas under its control", i.e. European settlers vs. Māori. Israel is not a special country here.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/mar/03/this-is-a-mome...

[woodruffw]

What does? Are you saying that New Zealand regularly tear gasses the Māori? I’ve never heard that before.

I have no doubt whatsoever that New Zealand’s colonization was violent, inhumane, and broadly under-accounted for. This doesn’t somehow excuse Israel, which is unique by virtue of the recency of its founding and actions.

Besides, things don’t need to be special or unique to be wrong. Everything I’ve said would apply equally even if Israel does not stand out in its contemporary applications of violence (which it does), and still bears unique relevance by claiming to represent people like me (which it doesn’t) through blanket claims of antisemitism.

[weatherlite]

> which is unique by virtue of the recency of its founding and actions.

Israel's founding is 74 years now - that's not super recent. When does something like this becomes OK in your eyes? Or is simply exterminating 99% of the natives as was done in Australia, Canada, U.S and New Zealand what makes it OK? Not much of a problem if almost all of them are dead and the remains live in reservoirs right?

[ceejayoz]

> Tear gas and sponge-tipped bullets are used by police everywhere, including New Zealand of all places.

This is odd though, right? Using tear gas in war is a war crime, for almost a hundred years now. It's very strange that we permit its use on civilian populations.

[bluefirebrand]

If the Geneva convention wasn't a blanket ban on chemical weapons, tear gas wouldn't likely be covered by it.

Guessing at intent, because obviously I wasn't involved in writing it, It was written to be as blanket as possible to avoid future uses of mustard gas or anything remotely like it, and to avoid quibbles of "Well it's not Exactly mustard gas which is the only thing explicitly banned".

Not saying that using tear gas on civilians is awesome and we should tolerate it, but tear gas isn't really at that level.

Now I'm actually wondering if pepper spray would be considered a war crime too

[coredog64]

There’s an escalation risk in using tear gas and that’s why it’s a war crime.

[mechanical_bear]

It isn’t odd, you just don’t understand the motivation for inclusion on the banned list. It was outlawed due to the threat of miscalculation. Scenario: You see me launch tear gas, but think it’s mustard gas, you launch mustard gas in return.

[mistermann]

> Don’t let propagandists blow tragic accidents out of proportion to scapegoat the Jews

Similarly, be careful that you don't let decades of propaganda bias you towards thinking that any criticism of Israel is anti-Semitism.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chilling_effect

If their actions and cause is just, I would think they would have no aversion to free and honest speech about it.

[saiya-jin]

I'll be polite and assume this is not an attempt to start some anti-semitic flamewar to diverge conversation from topic, but it sure looks like one.

Israel as a state would like to be seen as western democracy and approached accordingly, which brings inevitable requirements on the behavior of any such state. What they do, and how they do it often leaves a lot to desire, or even hold some basic human rights threshold.

There is a reason why West bank is for decades often called 'biggest concentration camp in the western world'. How they often shoot to kill civilians throwing rocks (or unarmed female journalists), how they use these 'non-lethal' weapons in a very lethal way against innocent bystanders, and yes including babies. How these crimes go completely utterly unpunished due to rampart camaraderie (I mean former/future PM is former spec-ops team leader, so lots of things get a pass)

[mechanical_bear]

“Sadists”? Please, can you sensationalize this more?

[sillystuff]

There is evidence that a not insignificant number of Israelis (European settlers) participating in the frequent state sponsored massacres of the indigenous Palestinian population are sadistic. E.g., The Israeli snipers wearing t-shirts during the Cast Lead massacre of Gaza civilians which pictured a pregnant women in the cross hairs of a rifle with the caption, "One shot two kills".

No. Israel is not unique in the horrors it inflicts upon innocent people. But, it is unique both in the recency of their colonialist project (the Palestinian's land was stolen from them, by the European settlers, within the lifetimes of some Palestinians), and in how Israel has weaponized historical European massacres of Jews to deflect criticism of its horrific practices. People should not give this a free pass.

It is not anti-Semitic to criticize, the state of Israel, the actions of its soldiers, its apartheid laws which grant rights to Jewish citizens that are not extended to non-jews (even the minority of Palestinians who did not flee their homes when the Jews forcibly were taking homes at gunpoint, and so are now considered Israeli citizens do not get the same rights as Jewish Israeli citizens), their extreme far-right government with theocratic influence which periodically engages in massacres of civilians, their racist Knesset (parliament) members who e.g., threatened one of the very few Palestinian-Israeli representatives with rape and murder for opposing their sadistic illegal (per international law) group punishment of Palestinian civilians. Remember when Netanyahu said, he was going to, "put the Palestinians on a diet"? This was a euphemism for Israel was going to starve them, since Israel controlls all borders into their open air prison-- sadistic?

Historically being horribly oppressed does not excuse horrible violent oppression of a population that had nothing to do with your own oppression. It would be like the Apache rounding up, at gunpoint, the Belgians into concentration camps, and settling into their former homes. Then, periodically engaging in massacres of unarmed Belgian civilians confined in the camps-- all the while referring to the historic massacres by the United States of Apache as an excuse for their violence against the Belgians (Yes, if it were Congolese, and not the Apache, they would have every justification to retaliate violently against Belgium, just as if world Jewry decided to retaliate against Germany, there would be justification, but to attack an innocent third party is simply not justifiable).

Only 10% of Israelis did not support Cast Lead, in a poll by Haaretz (an Israeli newspaper). So, sadly, it appears the massacres have the support of the vast majority of the settler population in spite of general knowledge of civilian (including child) casualties before the poll. Some might consider this sadistic too.

https://imeu.org/article/operation-cast-lead

https://www.deviantart.com/restorative/art/Israeli-Fashion-1...

https://www.haaretz.com/2009-01-15/ty-article/poll-shows-mos...

[weatherlite]

> E.g., The Israeli snipers wearing t-shirts during the Cast Lead massacre of Gaza civilians which pictured a pregnant women in the cross hairs of a rifle with the caption, "One shot two kills".

So this anecdote (one not large group of soldiers) proves somehow the majority of Israelis are sadists? That's not evidence, that's your opinion coupled with a nice story.

[sillystuff]

> Only 10% of Israelis did not support Cast Lead, in a poll by Haaretz (an Israeli newspaper). So, sadly, it appears the massacres have the support of the vast majority of the settler population in spite of general knowledge of civilian (including child) casualties before the poll. Some might consider this sadistic too.