Hamas tells Gaza City residents to stay put after Israel orders evacuation

Translation: "If all the civilians leave, we won't be able to use them as human shields anymore."

Edit: It's also true that Israel has made it extraordinarily difficult to leave. They are not the good guys, here. But there are no good guys here except for the civilians, and we know Hamas is a terrorist organization that is perfectly willing to use them as human shields.

There's nowhere for them to go...
Gaza is one of the most densely populated areas in the world, and Israel just told them to fit in half as much space at a time when they have no fuel, water, or electricity.
It's fucking impossible. And if they actually move, the Palestinians are smart enough to know they will never be able to access that land again.
Hell, Hamas is the only ones with the resources to move
Yes, but that's only the convenient half for the pro-Israeli media.
The inconvenient other half is that they have blocked EVERY possible exit from Gaza, including telling the Egyptians to not allow anyone out.
So, no food, fuel, electricity, medicine, water, or shelters. One of the MOST densely populated regions in the whole world, and they were just expected to what? Walk down the strip to sit in the 'safe' bombed out rubble?
Would they be allowed a "right of return" afterwards?
No good options for those residents. So you can use this to rightfully condem Hamas because it suits their political objectives, but that doesn't change the fact about the rest of what I've laid out.
So what would you do? Stay in your home and risk death? Or become homeless and only have a marginally less chance of death?
- That’s exactly what I keep thinking about, to hell with what the controlling forces say, the two options in front of those residents aren’t really options. I can’t wrap my head around what that must be like.
- Question: is it actually true that Israel doesn't want Palestinians to leave via the southern border to Egypt? I've heard on the news twice (BBC Hardtalk and somewhere else I can't recall now) that the opposite is true. From what I've heard, Israel wants the Palestinians to leave, but Egypt does not want to allow them into their country because it would be a huge burden to feed, house, and police a million+ angry refugees.
  It also makes more sense from Israel's point of view to get the Palestinians out of Gaza. Israel's greatest danger is, and always has been, the opprobrium of the international community if they kill too many civilians. It would be a huge victory for Israel if the civilians all leave, which is why Hamas wants them to stay!
- The inconvenient other half is that they have blocked EVERY possible exit from Gaza, including telling the Egyptians to not allow anyone out.
  Er... that's not true. They were initially telling Palestinians to go to Egypt. Egypt does not want them in the Sinai and told Israel to provide safe passage through Israel.
In this case staying put will likely save more lives than trying to move 40k people per hour within 24 hours.
- Not even Hamas themselves are saying they were doing it in order to prevent loss of lives during the evacuation.
- 40k?
  It's 1.1 million people being told to leave their homes...
Israeli translation: if you don't get the fuck out so we can capture and resettle half your city we are more than happy, to commit mass murder instead.
- to commit mass murder instead.
  Mass murder like attacking a festival and killing 260+ people?
Translation this is your land we have nothing left to lose because of systematic destruction of our land and Culture.

Gaza is more densely populated than LA and they have no electricity, water, or fuel.

The only exit is thru Egypt, and Israel keeps blowing it up.

Even if the message got to everyone, there's no way people could do what Israel told them.

Israel knows this. They weren't trying to "help" by announcing they're going to flatten half of Gaza, they want to cause panic and riots.

In this specific case isreal asked residents of Gaza city, a subpart of the Gaza strip to move to a more southern position in the Gaza strip. Like asking people to move from Manhattan to Brooklyn because they are going to blow up Manhattan. People are capable of moving within the Gaza strip. That doesn't mean there will be housing for them however.
- That doesn’t mean there will be housing for them however.
  Or food... Or water...
  Or shelter for a few days from now when Israel starts bombing the southern half.
  All this is doing is motivating residents of Gaza to pick up arms against Israel.
  Which a cynic would say is exactly what Israel wants
- Like asking people to move from Manhattan to Brooklyn because they are going to blow up Manhattan
  Even if this analogy was representative, this would ALSO be a complete mess to try and do and that's in a city with working roads, fuel, transportation options, easy access to telecoms/information, and support personnel. Even with all that, it would not be possible to do in 24 hours.
  I don't think the analogy helped
- And then they bomb and target those places specifically. Israel is staging a genocide. This statements are just lip service to pretend that they are following some formalism of humanitarian law.

Some things to consider:

Check out some maps of Israel-Palestine over time and tell me whether fleeing Palestinians will ever get their homes back
Gaza has no bomb shelters. The best they have are their own homes, and hospitals -- which are already overrun with local populations, let alone migrant populations, and are being targeted by Israeli air strikes
Israel is using white phosphorous against a territory which, if considered a country on its own, would be the third-most densely populated in the world
Supplies of food, water, electricity, and fuel have been cut off, so people who leave their local support systems have no chance of acquiring vital supplies
There is no exit. Sea has a permanent blockade. The only airport has been a crater since 2001. There are two ground crossings (Israel and Egypt), and the Egyptian one has been repeatedly closed due to Israeli missile strikes -- after Israel advised civilians to go there.
Israel is already targeting evacuating convoys
Earlier this year, displacement from the war in Sudan was repeatedly called a "crisis" by relief orgs when it reached a displacement of 1 million people in a country of 45 million, one month after fighting began. We're talking about 1 million in a territory of 2.3 million, in 24 hours

Check out some maps of Israel-Palestine over time and tell me whether fleeing Palestinians will ever get their homes back
Did you notice how the Gazan border in 1967 was the SE as it was in 2005? What did the map look like in 1990? Is the reason you didn't include that map is that it would have shown a return of land in the Gaza strip done so without a war by Israel to demonstrate that peace based on the 1967 borders could function. I also noticed your maps ignored the Sinai, another example of where Israel has shown a willingness to give up land for peace.
If there was a realistic shot that return land won in warfare would lead to lasting peace, Israel would do so.
- I know we're all fighting but I think this guy has a point.
  I'm pretty sure Israel and Palestine were closer to peace in 94 than they ever have been but then Zionists assassinated Rabin.
  ~~After that~~ Actually kinda the whole time the US and UK refused to work with Hamas and in 97 they declared Hamas a terrorist organization.
- Idk, the chemical weapons and internal whistle blowing dont agree with your guess.

Boy, the AI was drinking when it made that summary.

I was reading through it carefully for the issues till I got to the bit where it was explaining unrelated headlines. After that it started to spit out... whatever this was:
The draw on Wednesday night ended a long stretch without a winner of the top prize and brought news media to Midway Market and Liquor in Frazier Park, a community of 2,600 residents about 75 miles north of Los Angeles.
I saw the worst summary I've ever seen on a post about a Firefox bug getting fixed recently after 22 years. The summary was like "the day after Firefox launched, this big got fixed!" And it had 10 upvotes

Who the hell is still defending Israel after this declaration to eradicate Palestinians in Gaza?

I'm not sure it is reasonable to "defend" either side at this point. There are radical and moderate, innocent and guilty, peaceful and violent, reasonable and unreasonable people in both Palestine and Israel, and peace proposals have been made and rejected many times. I doubt many people outside of the situation have unlimited support for either side since both sides have committed atrocities.
I would guess that most observers realize that decades of alternating peace and war in Israel have shown that no lasting peace is possible until one side leaves.
After watching this conflict for 40 years, I have empathy fatigue. I don't really care who wins anymore, but this region has been a powder keg for too long. I also don't care whose "fault" it is anymore. All parties have to leave that behind and get to practical solutions. 75 years of unresolved active conflict is just too long.
Israel is too powerful. It will not be moved or defeated, and another all-out war by another coalition of Arab states will hurt the Palestinians as much as the Israelis. Nor will Israel ever allow the "right-of-return" of millions of Palestinians to Israel proper because then the Jews would be demographically overwhelmed. Therefore, the most practical, peaceful and humane, if not the most just or fair, solution is for most Palestinians to be properly re-settled outside of Israel, far from the Israeli border, where they can start new lives.
- I think your sentiment is specifically against arabs. Would you be suggesting people like ukrainians to abandon their country to end the war that another, larger country started?
if your government invade and kill civilians in any country that have a strong army you gonna have a bad time. how do you think Canada would answer this?
and the USA? the Germans?
- Imagine a country has blockaded all of your borders. No one can leave, your power plants cant import fuel, not even humanitarian aid is allowed in, and people are dying as a result. You want them to just wait for a slow death?
People who think that eradication of Israel is worse.

Between both sides, are there any military lor political leaders that care about Palestinian civilian lives in war? This whole thing is fucked.

When arned people ask you to not leave it’s called a hostage situation. The mean age in Gaza is 18 years old so we’re talking about kids and parents being told by men with guns to not leave.

When armed people ask you to leave it’s called an illegal invasion. The mean age in Gaza is 18 years old so we’re talking about kids and parents being told by men with guns to abandon their homes forever.
- fuck hamas and fuck the idf, but this comment and the one you replied to are quite reductive
- no, it's war. you can't attack another country and claim it's illegal when they cross the borders after you

No. They want the people to stay not because they want to use the Palestinians as human shields. The Palestinians, women and children, were already there and they are bombed anyway. They are no such thing as 'Palestinian human shields' in the Israel government dictionary. So it doesn't make sense Hamas wants them to stay just to be human shields.

They are many reasons. One of the main reason, I think because once the Palestinians leave the place, they'll never get it back. They'll be no more Palestinians' Gaza Strip. Israel is going to make a stern example of the Palestinians for humiliating them. They'll never be allowed to come back.

Here is an post (translated to English using Google Translate) that I got from a very popular Israeli Telegram channel that can summarise the sentiment of what should be done.

Am; Lek: The Israeli response should include the expulsion of Arab settlements (in the Gaza Strip and Judea and Samaria), and resettlement by Israelis. And not just bombing offices and eliminating terrorists.

In detail:

The situation in the country is very disturbing, it seems that the Israeli response is going to be: again bombings of offices, banks, warehouses, etc. in Gaza + several assassinations (perhaps even senior officials) + maybe also a ground entry into Gaza to hit other targets, etc., and finally exit back. And maybe there was a deal at the end of releasing prisoners in exchange for releasing terrorists, and maybe not.

This is dangerous for Israel and a historical miss:

This will end the campaign that Hamas and all the other enemies around realize that it is possible to harm Israel even with crimes against humanity, and even come out with a "profit".
Therefore, this will cause more such actions against Israel (and in the future we will also get used to it, just as we got used to terrorist attacks in Israel, just as we got used to rockets from the Gaza Strip, etc.).
There is no revenge for Arab violence.
There is a historic opportunity here to turn the situation around, and for Israel to leave in a much stronger state than it entered, and to avoid deaths, etc. in the future. In the future it will be difficult to get legitimacy from the world again.
This action (especially if it includes ground entry) could cost Israel a heavy price, and in vain.
If IDF are also released from terrorists, then this will cause more and more acts of terrorism against Israel (also because it shows that the action against Israel pays off. And also releases more terrorists who continue to harm Israel. By the way, this event is also because of the Shalit deal freedmen)
Defining a goal such as "destroying Hamas" is a non-measurable and not so realistic goal: even if 90% of the Hamas terrorists are eliminated, the rest can rise through the ranks, and new recruits can also join. And there is no "victory picture" and no clear evidence of who won the battle (just as it is not clear who won in any of the previous rounds in Gaza)

What, for example, should be the Israeli response:

To carry out an action of deporting Arab villages (for example deporting the residents of Hawara to Sinai) to declare that every murdered Israeli will be deported to a village or neighborhood in an Arab city, and henceforth this is Israel's war policy. You can even call these settlements after the names of the murdered. That both illustrates the revenge, and will also help the housing crisis and the financing of the war... For example - if Israel evicts dozens of Arab villages, and sells to the Israelis (at a "price for a settler?") 100,000 houses + land at an average price of NIS 500,000, this is 50 billion NIS in revenue (it is possible to transfer part of the amount to the owners of the land if they vacate willingly and were not involved in terrorist activity against Israel)
Deport the residents of Gaza to Sinai (it is possible without land entry, for example, open the crossing to Sinai, ensure that there is no water, etc. in Gaza, and start bombing from north to south, and smuggle the Arab population to Sinai. You can even declare that this is the goal. You can also declare that every Arab who rescues prisoners Jews/bringing bodies of terrorists, etc., can enter Israel and obtain citizenship). It is even possible to imply that Israel is going to bomb the Gaza Strip with a nuclear bomb, also to scare and drive away the residents of Gaza. Another advantage: if the most militant side of the government demands it, and there are discussions about whether Israel is going to use nuclear weapons, and at the end of the Israeli action there will be "only" a "disengagement 2" plan in which all the residents of Gaza are deported to Sinai, it will not seem so extreme...

Advantages:

Only a loss of territory is a loss as far as the Arabs are concerned, and therefore they will not want to initiate any more such actions - if they knew that for every Israeli killed they lose territory. By the way, in Israel's wars, the Arabs refer to the war of liberation and the six-day war as their loss - because they lost territory in those wars, compared to the Yohak war, for example, even though Egypt lost, they refer to it as a victory, because there was no Israeli occupation of territory.
Revenge for the murderous act.
Even before the last action, we got used to there being terrorist incidents against Jews every day, and sometimes also seriously wounded and murdered. In this way, it is finally possible to get rid of the nests of murders such as Hvara who are swallowed up inside Israel, and this will save a lot of deaths and security resources in the future.
There is now a short window of opportunity to do this: also in terms of the legitimacy of the action, in Israel and in the world.
If the result of the war is that the Gaza Strip is emptied by the West, and they begin to establish an Israeli city there, and in addition, in Judea and Samaria only Ramallah and Taiba remain Arab, and all the rest become Israeli settlements, no one will argue who won and who lost the battle.

good luck!

( Dan Assolin )

I wouldn't be surprised if they want them to die to create bad press against Israel.
Both sites are completely fucked up in the head when it comes to valuing civilian lives in this conflict.

Crucial missing context: Israel bombed the way out when people tried to take it.

Israeli tactics to steal lands.

This is the best summary I could come up with:

Hamas has called on Palestinians to stay in their homes after Israel issued sweeping evacuation orders for almost half of Gaza’s more than 2.3 million people ahead of an expected ground offensive.

The Hamas authority for refugee affairs today told residents in the north of the territory to “remain steadfast in your homes and to stand firm in the face of this disgusting psychological war waged by the occupation”.

The UN humanitarian office (OCHA) said early on Friday that more than 400,000 people had already fled their homes in the Gaza Strip and 23 aid workers had been killed since the start of Israeli retaliatory strikes in response to the Hamas attack on Saturday.

A jury has convicted one Colorado police officer and acquitted another for the 2019 homicide of Elijah McClain, a 23-year-old whose death at the hands of law enforcement while walking home sparked international outrage and years of protests.

A Guardian investigation has found that a growing number of countries are passing anti-protest laws as part of a playbook of tactics to intimidate people peacefully raising the alarm about the climate.

The draw on Wednesday night ended a long stretch without a winner of the top prize and brought news media to Midway Market and Liquor in Frazier Park, a community of 2,600 residents about 75 miles north of Los Angeles.

The original article contains 954 words, the summary contains 224 words. Saved 77%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!