Who Killed Hannibal

Hamas did, they strap them to bombs and use them as meat shields.

I don't know if you're a bot, a liar, or ignorant, but please don't post your conspiracy BS here. Even if every victim were, as you lie, strapped to bombs and used as meat shields, it doesn't change the fact that the IDF fired upon them regardless;14000 of them were children. That is genocide.

I'm so sorry that the terrorists you support are losing a war that they started!

Hmm.. you say genocide, and yet you support Hamas genocidal actions? If anyone here is a bot, it's you. You're too far gone with brainwashing propaganda.

I see a familiar pattern with your standard go-to for your replies. "You're wrong because brainwashing propaganda.'

Ironic, being that on another meme your simultaneously claiming the CIA did 9/11 in order to provide the US an excuse to invade Afghanistan in order to gain access to its valuable dried fig, raisins, walnuts, and pistachios exports, while acting oblivious to the fact that Hamas is a Netanyahu/Likud proxy and Oct 7th was an Israeli false flag.

Egypt warned the Israeli government of the impending attack a week prior, and Israeli government was aware of it an entire year before it happened. And in response, the IDF was asleep, the Iron Dome was shut off, and Netanyahu's phone was off the hook as he was taking a nap. Literally.

Not like this was the first time, the attack on the USS Liberty and the Lavon Affair are earlier Israeli false flags, and let's not forget the Lebanese Civil War that Israel started because making enemies of its Muslim neighbors wasn't enough, they had to go at Christians as well.

The difference between a terrorist attack and genocide is the power balance involved. A terrorist organization like Hamas, similar to the Provo IRA in Northern Ireland, has no real (no legitimate) power compared to the occupying nation (Israel in the former, Great Britain in the latter) and therefore their terrorist acts cannot be considered genocide--it's mass murder, to be certain, but in retaliation for oppression; as JFK is purported to have said, "Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." That is in no way an endorsement of the murders, just an admission of their inevitability in a state of oppression. Genocide, on the other hand, is a systemic (usually government sanctioned) attempt to remove a people from a land, not just through murder, war, and starvation, but displacement, turning them into a diaspora (a people scattered across nations, as the Jewish people were for centuries); whether Hamas would want to commit genocide is irrelevant, they do not have the means to do so; the power dynamic in the region is too heavily weighted on Israel's side. The Israeli government DOES have the means, and their actions prove that to be their will; as to who fired the first volley, prior to the attack, the Israeli government had already been engaging in forced evictions of Palestinians, giving their homes to Israeli (and Jewish diaspora) settlers, an attempt to displace the Palestinian population. They see all Palestinians as a threat, not just Hamas, and over 40000 Palestinians are dead because a handful of them killed less than 1200--a grotesque loss of life amplified by a grossly disproportionate response, similar to our own war on terror, the longest armed conflict in US history.

But to be fair, none of that is even the point; again, even if Hamas (a small percentage of the Palestinians in Gaza) were trying to commit a genocide, even if Hamas were using human shields, the Israeli government is still responsible for the deaths of 14,000 children, and that is indefensible.

Israel may be killing people right now, but Hamas started all of it. They launched terrorist attacks and held a genocide, so Israel went to war with them. Now, they're losing a war which they started themselves. And as for you saying that Israel is illegally occupying and oppressing those territories, look back at the Six-Day's War. A ton of Arabic nation (among who the Palestinian people joined in) attacked Israel, but were pushed back. In the end, Israel captured Gaza, West Bank, Golan Heights, and the Sinai Peninsula. If the Arabic nations never invaded, this wouldn't be such a big of a problem today.

This goes back way farther than the 6 days war. Look up the Nakba 1948, for one, but it goes all the way back to the fall of the Ottoman empire in around 1922, when the British and French divied up the land after promising the Palestinians their own land for helping to fight the Ottomans. They eventually gave the land to the Jewish diaspora to form Israel, who proceeded to forcibly remove the Palestinian settlers (the Nakba). Yet again, none of this excuses terrorist attacks or the murder of 14000+ children today.

The British had a land treaty with Palestine before Israel. If the Palestinians accepted the offer, not only they would have their own country but a nation bigger than Israel.

Not really. The British made promises to the Palestinians, the Jewish people, and the French for the land. In the end, a lot of the blame for the last century of conflict can be placed on the British government.

Whatever, the British are the most to blame for this Middle Eastern mess, hopefully we can at least agree on this together