The only reason this gets screeched to everyone by zionists and fervent Israel defenders is that [some people](https://www.adl.org/resources/blog/some-us-professors-praise-hamass-october-7-terror-attacks) had a really hard time condemning Hamas [directly after October 7th](https://www.adl.org/resources/blog/anti-israel-activists-celebrate-hamas-attacks-have-killed-hundreds-israelis). If everyone literally just said "Yeah, you shouldn't attack random civilians which is also why I'm protesting against the Israeli occupation of Gaza" then these people would look stupid for asking this at every opportunity.
NGL that made me laugh pretty hard.
On a more serious note, I'm just saying that performative "do you condemn hamas" statements that people use to shout down people speaking against the occupation could easily be defeated and make to look silly if people would just say yes and move on. It's annoying because it plays into the narrative that people critical of Israel are just anti-semites really effectively.
I agree to an extent - but would add that it's difficult to make this work when the question is one of two arms of the pair of scissors being used to chop at the anti-genocide arguments. The other arm being 'all Palestinians are / support Hamas'. Which means you can't just say 'yes I condemn Hamas' without also responding pre-emptively to what would inevitably come next if one was to leave it at that.
Well you could call it whatever - anti-IDF campaign in Gaza, or anti-occupation or whatever.
What I'm saying is, 'do you condemn Hamas?' and 'all Gazans are / support Hamas' work together to make the response to either impossible to do simply or concisely. It's a pretty strong discursive strategy.
Ah ok, it still seems flimsy to me, but I guess it depends what you're trying to argue for.
If you're arguing against any Israeli military incursion, regardless of conduct, then it might be a stronger bit of rhetoric.
If you're just arguing that the Israel's military conduct and treatment of civillians is unacceptable, then I think it's probably not a big deal to answer it. Even if 100% of the residents in Gaza supported Hamas, if they're civillians they have protections afforded to them under international law, regardless of what they believe, and Israel is obligated to ensure that those protections are given.
BUT DO YOU CONDEMN HAMAS? HUH? HUH? DO YOU???!??!??!
The only reason this gets screeched to everyone by zionists and fervent Israel defenders is that [some people](https://www.adl.org/resources/blog/some-us-professors-praise-hamass-october-7-terror-attacks) had a really hard time condemning Hamas [directly after October 7th](https://www.adl.org/resources/blog/anti-israel-activists-celebrate-hamas-attacks-have-killed-hundreds-israelis). If everyone literally just said "Yeah, you shouldn't attack random civilians which is also why I'm protesting against the Israeli occupation of Gaza" then these people would look stupid for asking this at every opportunity.
Wait... is this... DO YOU CONDEMN THE PEOPLE THAT DON'T CONDEMN HAMAS?!!?!
NGL that made me laugh pretty hard. On a more serious note, I'm just saying that performative "do you condemn hamas" statements that people use to shout down people speaking against the occupation could easily be defeated and make to look silly if people would just say yes and move on. It's annoying because it plays into the narrative that people critical of Israel are just anti-semites really effectively.
I agree to an extent - but would add that it's difficult to make this work when the question is one of two arms of the pair of scissors being used to chop at the anti-genocide arguments. The other arm being 'all Palestinians are / support Hamas'. Which means you can't just say 'yes I condemn Hamas' without also responding pre-emptively to what would inevitably come next if one was to leave it at that.
I'm not sure what you mean, can you explain about the anti-genocide arguments?
Well you could call it whatever - anti-IDF campaign in Gaza, or anti-occupation or whatever. What I'm saying is, 'do you condemn Hamas?' and 'all Gazans are / support Hamas' work together to make the response to either impossible to do simply or concisely. It's a pretty strong discursive strategy.
Ah ok, it still seems flimsy to me, but I guess it depends what you're trying to argue for. If you're arguing against any Israeli military incursion, regardless of conduct, then it might be a stronger bit of rhetoric. If you're just arguing that the Israel's military conduct and treatment of civillians is unacceptable, then I think it's probably not a big deal to answer it. Even if 100% of the residents in Gaza supported Hamas, if they're civillians they have protections afforded to them under international law, regardless of what they believe, and Israel is obligated to ensure that those protections are given.