Excerpts w/emphasis added:

“Since we already encircled the northern part of Gaza in the past nine or 10 months, what we should do is the following thing to tell all the 300,000 residents [that the UN estimates is 400,000] who still live in the northern part of Gaza that they have to leave this area and they should be given 10 days to leave through safe corridors that Israel will provide.

“And after that time, all this area will become to be a military zone. And all the Hamas people will still, though, whether some of them are fighters, some of them are civilians… will have two choices either to surrender or to starve.”

Eiland wants Israel to seal the areas once the evacuation corridors are closed. Anyone left behind would be treated as an enemy combatant. The area would be under siege, with the army blocking all supplies of food, water or other necessities of life from going in.

It is not clear whether the IDF has adopted the Generals’ Plan in part or in full, but the circumstantial evidence of what is being done in Gaza suggests it is at the very least a strong influence on the tactics being used against the population. The BBC submitted a list of questions to the IDF, which were not answered.

The ultra-nationalist extremists in Benjamin Netanyahu’s cabinet want to replace Palestinians in northern Gaza with Jewish settlers. Among many statements he’s made on the subject, the finance minister Bezalel Smotrich has said “Our heroic fighters and soldiers are destroying the evil of Hamas, and we will occupy the Gaza Strip… to tell the truth, where there is no settlement, there is no security.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -205 hours ago

    Better summary: The IDF is making efforts to get civilian out of a combat area. Hamas is trying to keep them there as human shields.

    The ominous sounding “General’s Plan” is to cut an enemy force from supplies. Which is a valid and legal military strategy, and one that’s used in basically every war. Note the key part of the plan to move civilians from the area so it’s only enemy forces that are cut off from supply.

    And we really don’t know if that strategy is even being employed. Israel nearly always warns civilians to leave areas where there are significant combat operations planned. Why would this particular warning indicate anything beyond that? There’s a lot of civilians there, and there’s Hamas there. All we know is that the IDF wants to attack Hamas in some way without there being civilians in the area.

    So it’s just a rumour the BBC is spreading in this article in an effort to appear “balanced”. If they simply reported the facts that the IDF is trying to get civilians out of a combat area, it might sound like they’re saying that the IDF is doing something good. Can’t have that! Gotta put something in there for the ghouls that are still upset that the Gaza famine they were hoping for didn’t actually happen.

    Really it may not even be feasible to cut the enemy off from supply in an urban combat scenario. We really don’t know how much food Hamas have stockpiled (while also pushing claims that Israel was trying to starve Palestinians). But it’s understandable that a military might try to think of ways to accomplish this given the whole “cut the enemy off from supplies” is basically the default strategy in any military operation.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    2922 hours ago

    If the world continues to do nothing, we will have to tell our children what Palestine was. The IDF can and, if uninterrupted, will literally slaughter the entirety of Gaza.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    3824 hours ago

    Fucked up and stunningly pathetic that acts of genocide are treated as “controversial”, what is there controversy over?

    Israel is commiting a genocide, the evidence is horrifically clear. There is zero controversy over this among serious people.

    • @McDropout
      link
      English
      63 hours ago

      It‘s white people committing the crimes so they‘re up for debate.

      White people are the most moral people on earth :)

      • @Aceticon
        link
        English
        4
        edit-2
        2 hours ago

        The last White Colonialist Nation in the World, no less.

        No wonder countries like the US, Germany and Britain love them and send them weapons “to defend themselves from the savages”.

    • Andy
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1723 hours ago

      Agreed.

      This plan is forced displacement, ethnic cleansing, and annexation via mass extermination.

      This is horrifying. And it cuts both ways: these generals are drowning what is left of Israel’s credibility, international goodwill, and social fabric. They’re killing two countries.

  • @mlg
    link
    English
    2023 hours ago

    Those who never left and watched their fellow Gazans get shot and bombed in the “safe” corridors will probably not choose to move. And of course the IDF doesn’t accept surrenders considering they shot their own hostages.

    Imagine your final ethical dilemma in life is to choose whether to die of starvation or see how far you can run from a hailstorm of AGMs, Shelling, Missiles, and gunfire.

    Reminds me of the video of those 3 teenagers slowly walking amongst the rubble only for an entire guided rocket to be dropped on them. The one in the front miraculously survived the blast and kept walking for another few yards before he was bombed too.

      • Avid Amoeba
        link
        fedilink
        English
        7
        edit-2
        23 hours ago

        I know sarcasm but this might actually not be a bad idea. Throw a couple of paragraphs of historical facts in those stories for people to really get the context. Like how many articles and discussions state what happened on Oct 7 before they start talking about anything related afterwards. A brief list of major historical events along with some numbers on casualties.

        • @[email protected]OP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1623 hours ago

          I don’t think pretending October 7th is the start of history is fair, though. Any discussion of October 7th needs to explore why people might become so angry as to take the actions taken on that day. It didn’t happen in a vacuum; it takes a lot to make people do that to other people.

        • @Keeponstalin
          link
          English
          8
          edit-2
          22 hours ago

          The partition plan was deliberate tactic by Ben-Gurion to set a precedent for the Ethnic Cleansing needed to create the Settler Colonialist Ethnostate within Palestine.

          Partition

          The Zionist position changed in 1928, when the pragmatic Palestinian leaders agreed to the principle of parity in a rare moment in which clannish and religious differences were overcome for the sake of consensus. The Palestinian leaders feared that without parity the Zionists would gain control of the political system. The unexpected Palestinian agreement threw the Zionist leaders into temporary confusion. When they recovered, they sent a refusal to the British, but at the same time offered an alternative solution: the partitioning of Palestine into two political units.

          • Pg 132 of Ilan Pappe - A History of Modern Palestine

          On 31 August 1947, UNSCOP presented its recommendations to the UN General Assembly. Three of its members were allowed to put forward an alternative recommendation. The majority report advocated the partition of Palestine into two states, with an economic union. The designated Jewish state was to have most of the coastal area, western Galilee, and the Negev, and the rest was to become the Palestinian state. The minority report proposed a unitary state in Palestine based on the principle of democracy. It took considerable American Jewish lobbying and American diplomatic pressure, as well as a powerful speech by the Russian ambassador to the UN, to gain the necessary two-thirds majority in the Assembly for partition. Even though hardly any Palestinian or Arab diplomat made an effort to promote the alternative scheme, it won an equal number of supporters and detractors, showing that a considerable number of member states realized that imposing partition amounted to supporting one side and opposing the other.

          • Pg 181 of Ilan Pappe - A History of Modern Palestine
          Ben-Gurion Quotes

          “Every school child knows that there is no such thing in history as a final arrangement — not with regard to the regime, not with regard to borders, and not with regard to international agreements.” — Ben Gurion, War Diaries, 12/03/1947 following Israel’s “acceptance” of the U.N. Partition of 11/29/1947 (Simha Flapan, “Birth of Israel,” p.13)

          Partition: “after the formation of a large army in the wake of the establishment of the state, we will abolish partition and expand to the whole of Palestine “ — Ben Gurion, p.22 “The Birth of Israel, 1987” Simha Flapan.

          “The acceptance of partition does not commit us to renounce Transjordan. One does not demand from anybody to give up his vision. We shall accept a state in the boundaries fixed today — but the boundaries of Zionist aspirations are the concerns of the Jewish people and no external factor will be able to limit them.” P. 53, “The Birth of Israel, 1987” Simha Flapan

          https://www.progressiveisrael.org/ben-gurions-notorious-quotes-their-polemical-uses-abuses/

          Herzl himself explicitly considered Zionism a Settler Colonialist project, Setter Colonialism is always violent. The difficulty in creating a democratic Jewish state in an area inhabited by people who are not Jewish, is that enough Palestinian people need to be ‘Transferred’ to have a demographic majority that is Jewish. Ben-Gurion explicitly rejected Secular Bi-national state solutions in favor of partition.

          :::

          Quote

          Zionism’s aims in Palestine, its deeply-held conviction that the Land of Israel belonged exclusively to the Jewish people as a whole, and the idea of Palestine’s “civilizational barrenness" or “emptiness” against the background of European imperialist ideologies all converged in the logical conclusion that the native population should make way for thenewcomers.

          The idea that the Palestinian Arabs must find a place for themselves elsewhere was articulated early on. Indeed, the founder of the movement, Theodor Herzl, provided an early reference to transfer even before he formally outlined his theory of Zionist rebirth in his Judenstat.

          An 1895 entry in his diary provides in embryonic form many of the elements that were to be demonstrated repeatedly in the Zionist quest for solutions to the “Arab problem ”-the idea of dealing with state governments over the heads of the indigenous population, Jewish acquisition of property that would be inalienable, “Hebrew Land" and “Hebrew Labor,” and the removal of the native population.

          Settlements, Occupation, and Apartheid

          Israel justifies the settlements and military bases in the West Bank in the name of Security. However, the reality of the settlements on-the-ground has been the cause of violent resistance and a significant obstacle to peace, as it has been for decades.

          This type of settlement, where the native population gets ‘Transferred’ to make room for the settlers, is a long standing practice.

          The mass ethnic cleansing campaign of 1948:

          Further, declassified Israeli documents show that the Occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip were deliberately planned before being executed in 1967:

          Visualizing the Ethnic Cleansing

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -1021 hours ago

            You mean the re-settlement project. The UN mandated Israel’s existence and despite this mandate, Arabs committed the first of a seemingly never-ending series of terrorist acts by attacking a bus Nov 30th, 1947.

            It’s been perpetual ‘refusing to learn the lesson’ since. All that BS copy pasta that says nothing to refute what I stated… Can you reference a conflict which doesn’t have an ‘instigated by radical Islamists’ precursor? Has any land been confiscated beyond the green line that wasn’t because terrorists or their supporting nations FAFO?

            • @sorval_the_eeter
              link
              English
              4
              edit-2
              4 hours ago

              And why did they attack that bus in 1947? What prceeded that? You dont know or dont care to know. Irguin did plenty of terrorist bombings before that ,could it have been that maybe? Or some other attricty? Or are we pretending this all started on Nov 30 1947?

              “Jewish militants bombed the police headquarters in Haifa on September 29, 1947, resulting in the deaths of four British policemen, four Arab policemen, and two Arab civilians.”

              The king david hotel Jewish extremist terrorist bombing was July 1946, in case you didnt know.

              And feast your eyes on this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_insurgency_in_Mandatory_Palestine

              So you’re just wrong.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                -44 hours ago

                Yes, we are. That bus bombing is first record of violence in response to the UN mandate. Ball is in your court to find an earlier tu quoque otherwise Israel might not look like the bad-guy and we can’t have that!

            • @Keeponstalin
              link
              English
              321 hours ago

              It directly does, you just don’t read it

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                -718 hours ago

                No, it doesn’t. Arabs refused both plans and so the UN chose the one at least one ‘side’ wanted. The ‘plan’ BS is just an excuse. Palestinians would have been pissy regardless. Had the UN chose the other option nothing would have changed historically.

                I notice you haven’t found a copypasta for land taken that wasn’t in response to a precursor attack so where would the borders be had there never been any attacks on Israel? My guess: right where the UN said they should be…

                • @Keeponstalin
                  link
                  English
                  318 hours ago

                  The first two paragraphs I quoted under Partition prove you wrong.

    • Avid Amoeba
      link
      fedilink
      English
      16
      edit-2
      23 hours ago

      Wow this tool does not look great, it highlights “surrender or starve” and “great force” as misleading information when they’re direct quotes.

      The rest of the “analysis” isn’t much better. It seems like someone has let an LLM do things it can’t.

      • Andy
        link
        fedilink
        English
        1123 hours ago

        This tool is like a piece of dark comedy.

        It’s like someone made a robot of Jonathan Greenblatt.

        Beep! Booop! This article is describing direct genocidal intent expressed by Israeli commanders! Calculating false information… 100%: if this information were true, it would mean Israel is committing genocide, which cannot be. Calculating bias: 100%: a reasonable observer would conclude Israel is the aggressor and Palestinian civilians are clearly their victims, which is an uncomplicated premise and cannot be! Antisemitism confirmed! (Initiating drone strike…)

        • @Keeponstalin
          link
          English
          622 hours ago

          Reading through the ‘detailed analysis’ is hilariously bad