Israel's definition of a military asset is, as they phrase it:
intelligence gathering, planning attacks, command and control, and communications
yet they refuse to provide any concrete evidence that these buildings are being used for these things in a way that requires a strike on the building itself.
Strikes are unilateral, with ample time provided to evacuate (and move equipment) yet for some reason it's only ever the people leaving, as though no such critical military equipment exists.
Based on the IDF's hot take, it seems likely that if you have a Hamas member hiding under his bed and using his phone to talk about what targets to strike next, your otherwise completely fine apartment and office complex is fair game. (You're also fair game if you own a random home in the middle of the refugee camp that has zero Hamas members in it, but a lot of women and children, because if it happens while the Western media is sleeping, it's perfectly OK!)
Why aren't they providing phone conversations, demands that the equipment is shut off/destroyed? If they're using some sort of signal tracking, they would know if the shit comes back online. If they have no evidence they can reasonably share, they have no business striking these locations, when they still aren't getting many/any rocket batteries or munition stockpiles hosted in the city proper.
If they're SO CONCERNED about "Palestinian bodyshields," wouldn't Hamas moving the equipment to the tunnels, which Israel can safely bomb without crippling innocent Palestinians, be a
good thing?
It makes no sense.
The
mandate of Palestine wasn't established until 1922, and before that it was part of the Ottoman Empire.
This is what the real history of the area is.
View attachment 2172520
Your interpretation of the situation is gibberish, and you even contradict it yourself. If there's a "mandatory Palestine" in 1922, how is there no Palestine? The image you have posted to support this retarded idea is in fact asserting that the Palestinians have claimed "full independence" in 1995 for the first time ever, instead of being supported by British mandate.
This is why 1967 has dark spots that mysteriously correlate with full Gaza & the West Bank re-negotiated in 1967, and 1947 is all dark, which mysteriously correlates with the time when Israel was the second state and MP was given most of the land. Notice how the West Bank has even shrunk since 1967.
Here's an overlap of the Jazeera map and your so-called "real history" correlating by date, almost like they're depicting the exact same thing. As anyone with eyes can see, these mysterious dark spots and Palestine correlate directly:
Al Jazeera overestimates somewhat the land that Palestine controls 95-20XX IMO, but they are biased.