I’m more than happy to explain my actual views to anyone genuinely interested in hearing what I actually think about the subject - rather than what OP wants you to think I believe. I know my reply was intentionally provocative, but I stand by everything I said. You only need to compare the length of OP’s moderation history to mine to see who’s really acting in bad faith here.

Here's my responses to that thread for further context.

I’m not sure “human shield” is the correct term here. That implies using the civilian population to deter your enemy from shooting at you - which has been Hamas’ strategy from the beginning. It would make zero sense for the IDF to do that, since it wouldn’t deter anyone.

EDIT: It may be more accurate to categorize this as using a protected person to perform military duties, which is also prohibited under international humanitarian law - but it’s a different category of war crime.

Human shield is defined under Geneva Conventions as “utilizing the presence of a civilian or other protected person to render certain points, areas or military forces immune from military operations”

I’m not here to deny the atrocities committed by the IDF - I’m simply questioning the legitimacy of the term in this specific context, while somewhat provocatively trying to highlight the fact that accusing Israel of using human shields is a bit like accusing Ukraine of killing civilians. While both may be technically true, it still paints a somewhat dishonest picture of the actual reality - which, in this case, is that using human shields is Hamas’ number one tactic, and no intellectually honest person can seriously claim otherwise.

when they tie Palestinians to the front of their vehicles, I think we can say they’re using literal human shields.

That would absolutely count as using them as human shields. However, the example used in the article, in my opinion, doesn’t. What they’re doing is still just as immoral and still a war crime, but I don’t think it qualifies as an example of using someone as a human shield.

This has nothing to do with defending the IDF - don’t be ridiculous.

Am I being pedantic? Yeah. But that still doesn’t change the fact that what I’m saying has nothing to do with defending the IDF. I have no dog in that fight. I’m not rooting for either side in this conflict - I’m only rooting for the civilian population suffering on both sides.

... And the mod of unpopularopinion banned me. I can only guess he is a another genocide apologist.

Yes, that's the only reason you got banned. You got me.

It's not the purity tests, taking things out of context, hostility, or trollish behavior.

It's not the condescending comments.

It's not the smear campaign you're STILL going on about while taking things out of context to "prove" your point.

It's not the fact that you intentionally re-posted a removed comment that violated the rules.

It's not the fact that I explicitly said that this is a no-politics community and was only allowing the post to remain up because it was about political discussions in general. And you decided to bring explicit politics into it.

It's not the fact that your have a LONG history of bad-faith behavior and derailing conversations with your shtick.

No. It can't possibly be any of that. It must be because I'm a genocide apologist, bootlicking Nazi. That's clearly the only rational conclusion to be drawn here.

You fucking caught me.

/s

YDI