
Israel live-tweets assault on Gaza - ChuckMcM
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/11/israel-live-tweets-assault-on-gaza-provides-video-of-assassination/
======
confluence
Holy shit! What the fuck are they doing? This is absolutely insane!

What better way to create more terrorists than by laughing in their faces,
publishing military operations on Twitter as if they were trivial events,
showing military kill strikes on YouTube and using game like graphics stating
their leaders have been "eliminated".

Do you want to enrage your enemy into more violence or do you want to win?

Do your military operations - kill terrorists or don't - protect your borders
or don't - I don't frankly give a damn.

But don't give the enemy more emotional ammunition than necessary, especially
since you know they will use this as perfect fodder to indoctrinate even more
people to their cause - especially children. This is the stuff they'll show
kids, stating "Look, do you see how they mock us! - This is why you must fight
and die!". You're just setting up the next wave of violence.

This is why the US military didn't release anything to do with Osama's
assassination, and buried him at sea - nothing to worship, nothing to point
to, nothing to show the people you want to brainwash - and say "Look how they
mock us!".

You don't poke a cornered enemy unnecessarily. The expected value of that is
negative.

It's not a fucking game.

~~~
gyardley
The Arab world is already awash in antisemitic propaganda. This Twitter
account isn't going to move the needle there.

No, this account is aimed at Americans. It shares short, simple, true
messages: Hamas is a terrorist organization, Hamas launches hundreds of
rockets into Israel, Israel is defending itself, and Israel is rather good at
defending itself. The messages are designed to be shared with friends, in
order to combat anti-Israeli attitudes. If you look at the IDF's blog
(<http://www.idfblog.com/>), they've even added some game mechanics to the mix
with their 'IDF Ranks'.

Personally, I think it's brilliant.

~~~
skrebbel
I doubt it'll work. Before this, I merely thought of the Israeli government as
a bunch of nazis who believe that driving people out of their homes is god's
work. Now, I also think they're barbarians.

~~~
xenophanes
And you believe posting anti-semitic remarks in public is appropriate.

We should care about your opinion why?

Flagged.

~~~
skrebbel
I'm curious, why do you equate "critical of the Israeli government" to
antisemitism? I have no problem with Jews at all. In fact, if you read
carefully, you'll see that the word Jew (or anything like it) does not appear
in my post.

~~~
gyardley
There are ways to be critical of the Israeli government without being
antisemitic. You could be critical of, say, something relating to unemployment
insurance.

But that's not what people are usually talking about when this argument comes
up - instead, they're criticizing Israel's right to exist or Israel's right to
defend itself (which amounts to the same thing). When they're not being so
explicit, they want Israel to embark on a policy which would lead to the end
of Israel (accepting indefensible borders, the 'right of return', etc.)

In short, they're making the 'anti-Zionism is not anti-Semitism' argument.
Personally, I think anti-Zionism is just the first type of antisemitism to try
and simultaneously deny it's antisemitic. Let me try to explain with an
analogy.

Let's say I was anti-France - that I believed French national identity was
somehow illegitimate, and that therefore France shouldn't be a country. Since
France shouldn't exist, France also isn't entitled to defend itself from
external attack. However, I have no problem with French people! Great wine,
great cheese - they just shouldn't be able to have a country. If a French
person objects, I'll just patiently remind him that I'm not anti- _French_ ,
I'm merely anti- _France_. Perhaps I'll criticize him a bit for
inappropriately throwing out the anti-French card.

Sound ridiculous? Well, that's exactly how it sounds to me when someone argues
that my people can't establish a state (in the same imperfect way most states
are established) and then can't defend our state from attack. Everyone else's
national self-determination is fine, but ours is somehow not.

So yes, when people make this sort of argument against Israel - a type of
argument they would never make against Sweden or France or Mexico - in that
case I do believe they're being more than a little biased against my people in
particular, and therefore antisemitic.

~~~
skrebbel
Hm. That's a very good point. But I believe that there's one hole in your
argument: it's that a country defending its right to exist means that it's
allowed to commit atrocities. I strongly believe that Isreal has a right to
defend itself. In fact, I think they have every right to do what this thread
was actually about: track down and assasinate a terrorist.

You cannot deny, however, that Israel has been less than kind to the
Palestinian people in many instances. Is pointing that out antisemitic? No.
What about if it's pointed out in an absolutely tasteless way, for instance by
using a Nazi reference? Still not. It's tasteless, and I apologize, but it's
not denying Israel's right to exist or defend itself. I'm not convinced that
maintaining a situation that essentially boils down to having first-class and
second-class citizens is the only way to guarantee the continued existence of
Israel.

And, it's important that we're allowed to discuss this. If any criticism of
Israel's actions is called antisemitism, we're effectively censoring the
entire debate. Now I'll be the first to admit that arguing on the internet has
little direct value, but I daresay that the "antisemitism!!" gut reaction is
at least as harmful as people like me rudely denouncing the people running a
government in situation as complex as Israel's as "a bunch of Nazis".

~~~
xenophanes
Actually we can deny Israel has committed atrocities or done anything else bad
or worse than other countries. in fact it has not.

you're now making factual assertions, which are false, and which you have
never researched, you've only heard them from biased unscholarly sources like
CNN. and you just believed them, without adequate questioning of them.

is it a coincidence that you believe false factual statements condemning
israel, but not ones condemning france? or what?

and that you're so damn sure israel is guilty that you insist no one could
even dispute it, even though you're highly ignorant on the topic and do not
provide any factual arguments documenting any atrocities. (there are many
purported documentations of such things. i've seen them before. they are not
exactly high quality or persuasive. they only convince biased people or people
who don't look too closely.)

------
cup
An adaption from an earlier comment of mine:

Lets be frank, this was a targeted assassination by a nation state that
consistently tries to paint itself as a beacon of democracy in the region.

Say all you want about Ahmed Jabari but his modus operandi was a direct result
of a life of occupation and subjugation. You don't go into prison at the age
of 22 and come out 13 years later a happy individual. I mean it was only 6
years ago that Hamas was democratically elected in a process considered fair
and transparant, only for the elections to be found null and void by those
(US/Israel et al) outside of Gaza!

Edit: On a side note, I wonder whether many people know that Likud, the
Netanyahus political party, does not recognise Palestines right to exist!

~~~
philwelch
I find it very strange that people criticize Israel for assassinating
terrorist, but say nothing about Obama's kill list or drone strikes.

~~~
avolcano
Erm, I haven't seen this at all. In fact, most of the people I know who are
most critical of Israel are also critical of Obama's foreign policy (though
most begrudgingly voted for him anyways, because, y'know, Romney).

~~~
philwelch
> though most begrudgingly voted for him anyways

Is there anyone in Israel running for office on the platform of "let's not
assassinate terrorists"? Are these people under the illusion that they would
vote for such a person, or abstain from voting if no such candidate presented
themselves?

Once you vote for an assassin in your country, you lose the moral authority to
denounce another country's assassinations. Romney or not.

------
kibwen
I'm agape at such a bizarre use of social media. If I didn't know better, I'd
say this was satire. Hell, this image alone is Onion-worthy:
[http://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/war-
of...](http://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/war-of-
words-640x471.png)

Thing is, I can't pinpoint why, exactly, it feels so strange. Just... militant
combatants pledging mutual annihilation, living right alongside a photo of
your aunt's cat peering out of a shoebox. The dissonance is off the charts.

~~~
sharkweek
This whole social media being used in war strikes me as something right of of
a Vonnegut novel

------
ChuckMcM
I shared this because for me seems like a significant change on the force
multiplier of the Internet. How will it affect the thoughts and impressions of
folks who deal with this locally, or remotely? Will it inure us to violence or
create hypersensitivity? Out of control rumor mills or inability to cover up
anything. I don't know where this road leads but I'm not sure I even want to
know.

~~~
DanBC
Do you know _anyone_ who has changed their opinion about anything to do with
Israel?

These tweets just re-enforce people's existing opinion.

Also, 'ELIMINATED' is a distasteful way of saying 'DEAD' or 'KILLED'.

~~~
ChuckMcM
Yes I do know people who have changed points of view. But I am more interested
in the way in which technology has changed the way all of the parties involved
are acting. During the Egypt uprising as part of the Arab spring there was a
tremendous backlash on Egypt for cutting off (or trying to) Internet access to
keep word of what was going on from getting out. I felt that was pretty
egregious, but I wouldn't feel bad if Twitter said "We don't want to enable
you to prosecute your war and advertise it on our service."

So I find myself internally at a conflicted point. Why was it 'bad' for Egypt
to do? Why wouldn't it be 'bad' for Twitter to do? (remember this is me asking
myself if I can deduce through introspection why I'm conflicted) I'm not on
either 'side' of the Palestinian conflict, but I am interested in trying to
reason about morality and the Internet's impact on it.

~~~
DanBC
I'm really sorry that I derailed your thread.

You make some interesting points, and they could have led to some useful
discussion.

I'll try (and I'll avoid the traditional flame-war aspects of the discussion.)

I think the difference may be the perceived power balances: in one situation
there is an oppressive regime censoring communications to hinder rebels who
are protesting against that oppressive regime. In the other situation there is
a network who would be asking some account holders not to make posts on their
network. Their servers, their rules.

We might dislike twitter for taking a stance, but it's not censorship.

~~~
ChuckMcM
No worries, it was destined to be de-railed.

I think you are correct about the power balances. People revolting in Egypt
don't have a 'voice' but the government does, similarly Israel has its own
'voice' in the form of television media, etc and doesn't "need" the
amplification that Twitter provides.

Its an interesting dichotomy that I'll have to think more about. Meanwhile
this whole thread has been modded into oblivion :-)

------
genuine
The scary thing is that I heard "some expert" recently on NPR that Iran does
more harm to us (e.g. 1979-1980 hostage crisis) when the Democrats are in
control, because usually the Democrats don't have the strong military stance
of the Republicans.

This could be extrapolated to "if Israel doesn't do this sort of thing, then
it will be a sign of weakness to the Palestinians, Iran, and others", however
I don't think that is true. There is a line between an aggressive posture and
just downright being awful, and they crossed it.

Also assassination is wrong no matter who it is done to. Geneva convention or
not, life is sacred and even those that have committed the utmost atrocities
deserve only to be separated from everyone else so they can do no more harm
and perhaps learn from their mistakes and repent. I know that I would be just
as angry as the Israelis or Palestinians if I had to experience what they
have, though.

~~~
xenophanes
What is awful?

Israel defends themselves -- not enough (if some Israeli innocents still get
murdered and Israel still attacked in the future, how can that be enough
defense?) -- and you call it "awful"? Explain yourself!

------
natex
From the Reuters article, "Panicking civilians ran for cover and the death
toll mounted quickly. Ten people including three children were killed, the
health ministry said, and about 40 were wounded. Also among the dead were an
11-month-old baby and a woman pregnant with twins."

------
davidkatz
This definitely has historical significance, and I find it fascinating. Thanks
for sharing! Generally, I believe that more direct channels between
governments and citizens will be a long term win for everyone.

------
sethbannon
Anyone else notice how the IDF has a verified account but "Alqassam Brigades"
does not?

~~~
davidkatz
I wonder how you would go about verifying an account for the Alqassam
Brigades.

------
chemcoder
I think israel war tactics are better. They are creating phobia amongst all
the Hamas leaders and members. They are deliberately showing their superior
discipline and power and challenging the indisciplined hamas members.

Good thing is they killed a well known military leader and a terrorist . Just
to send a message , I mean striking terror in the heart of enemy is the single
most accurate technique that has worked since the origin of war. I think those
who volunteer for Hamas now will think twice about it.

Frankly enforcing religion in military used to work when people fought with
knives and swords . Here most wars are won with discipline and intelligence .
No religion led military will ever win , they are just a bunch of monkeys
jumping here and there and are too emotional to think with their heads .

------
glomph
I really don't think an article like this belongs on this site. The only
discussion is going to be hate vs. hate. Nothing about innovation, technology,
start ups or anything close.

------
xenophanes
The best (relatively) short, online history of Israel:

<http://www.settingtheworldtorights.com/node/74>

------
gexla
Joke time

I wonder how many people who have followed IDF since this attack are
terrorists.

IDF Twitter status: Following @terrorist... with my laser! LMAO

They might as well setup a FourSquare account also. IDF is now mayor of
license plate xxxxx.

