Israel even has a brutal “procedure” called the Hannibal Directive, which essentially states that the IOF is to kill Israelis rather than “allow them to be kidnapped by enemy forces.” That day Israel preferred killing its own over letting them be taken hostage by Hamas. This should basically tell you everything you need to know about the IOF’s priorities—and yet this whole thing supposedly hinges on eradicating the “terrorist organization” that is Hamas and “protecting the civilians” that it would rather straight up murder than rescue.

These are all things the Israeli military does in plain light btw, but Hamas is immediately dubbed a terrorist organization for reacting to the provocations it has been subjected to for so long prior to the Oct. 7 attack. I feel like people who think the Hamas attack was unprovoked are pretty much synonymous with the people who don’t want Palestinians to resist, who want a ceasefire followed by a muted return to the status quo. If you’re claiming you want a ceasefire but you’re not simultaneously for total and complete Palestinian liberation, then I truly wonder what you’re advocating for.

I say all this because it has been Zionists’ (or genocide apologists’ in general) crutch for so long, but even notwithstanding that it’s insane how people still go back to Oct. 7 when around 1.1k people died as a result of that attack, whereas a rough estimate of 33k Palestinians (and counting) have been massacred as a result of months-long Israeli terror. And so Israeli forces, which have been slaughtering anywhere from Palestinian infants to the elderly, are simply defending themselves—but Hamas, which is essentially a resistance group against Israeli occupation, is a terrorist organization that must be condemned. This is definitely not a way for western countries to further their grip on resources in West Asia, as well as the stereotypes that Arabs are barbaric terrorists that shouldn’t be cared for.