←back to thread

Reflections on Palantir

(nabeelqu.substack.com)
479 points freditup | 4 comments | 16 Oct 24 02:18 UTC | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
ak_111 ◴[16 Oct 24 22:35 UTC] No.41864546[source]▶
Note that Palantir's moral stature isn't as grey or debatable as made in the article, it is basically clearly complicit in the genocide in Gaza.

In other words, if you read the article I would add one more bucket to the three categories the author provided to classify palantir's work - genocide assistance.

from https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/us-jd-vance-peter-thiel-f...

""" Not only did it provide information to the US military during the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, but over the past 10 months in particular, Palantir has provided AI-powered military and surveillance technology support to the Israelis in its war on Gaza.

It has, in the words of Palantir's co-founder Alex Karp, been involved in "crucial operations in Israel".

Palantir says it offers defence technologies that are “mission-tested capabilities, forged in the field” to deliver “a tactical edge - by land, air, sea and space”.

These capabilities include supplying Israel’s military and intelligence agencies with the data to fire missiles at specific targets in Gaza - be it inside homes or in moving vehicles. """

replies(7): >>41864914 #>>41864998 #>>41865059 #>>41865219 #>>41865493 #>>41868070 #>>41869144 #
samatman[dead post] ◴[16 Oct 24 23:40 UTC] No.41864998[source]▶
[flagged]
monkaiju ◴[17 Oct 24 04:32 UTC] No.41866436[source]▶
If you think the goal of defeating Hamas justifies this amount of civilian killing yiu have no moral basis to argue with.
replies(1): >>41866569 #
ArtixFox ◴[17 Oct 24 05:03 UTC] No.41866569[source]▶
What is the other solution?

create a separate state for palestine under the control of hamas would only legitimise them, allow them to easily get more weapons and go on another oct 7, which will again lead to the bombings currently happening.

Bombing them to death would lead to deaths of many, many women and children cuz gaza is 75% children.

You cannot have peace with hamas, only ceasefire, and even then they havnt stopped launching homemade missiles.

The most sane solution is defeating hamas, establishing a third party control over it to stabilise the region and then return it to democracy, but israel is too trigger happy to do any progress on this field and hamas wants all of israel.

You cannot have peace on the land without destroying hamas. Not even for moral reasons. Maybe there is another solution in ur mind?

replies(1): >>41868773 #
yoz ◴[17 Oct 24 11:54 UTC] No.41868773[source]▶
My solution, if I was in charge of Israel, would simply be to NOT order the army to destroy most of Gaza and kill tens of thousands of people, and to instead just focus on preventing incursions into Israel. I would also focus on stopping Hamas missiles by using the hugely effective anti-missile system that, conveniently, already exists.

I realise that this is not a perfect solution to the Israel/Palestine problem. It has many flaws in the long term and ignores a bunch of pressing issues. But it does have the benefit of not killing tens of thousands of people, and in that way is a hell of a lot better than the bloodthirsty rampage currently happening.

replies(2): >>41870517 #>>41870857 #
ArtixFox ◴[17 Oct 24 15:57 UTC] No.41870857{3}[source]▶
sooo prolong the problem so that when you are dead, your descendants have to deal with it and you will be free of the responsibility? Do we forgive oct 7? what precedent would it set for other groups? that you can just go kill and rape people and there will be no response?
replies(1): >>41871032 #
1. int_19h ◴[17 Oct 24 16:15 UTC] No.41871032{4}[source]▶
Self-defense is supposed to be proportional. If you're killing 30x as many people in "response", and most of them weren't in any way involved in the original attack, that's not justifiable.
replies(1): >>41873319 #
2. ArtixFox ◴[17 Oct 24 20:17 UTC] No.41873319[source]▶
Self defense is not seen based on how many skulls you collected. Hamas needs to go and that's how Israel will do it's self defense.

Proportionality has nothing to do with self defense.

Hamas the org was involved, and the other ones too, they are the target.

But I do agree that Israel's policies regarding air strikes are fucked up

replies(1): >>41880686 #
3. int_19h ◴[18 Oct 24 16:06 UTC] No.41880686[source]▶
Proportionality is what makes self-defense defense, and not an excuse to kill people.

The vast majority of the people who are killed in those strikes are not Hamas.

replies(1): >>41887522 #
4. ArtixFox ◴[19 Oct 24 13:00 UTC] No.41887522{3}[source]▶
No? In india 2019, there was a terrorist attack where the jihadist organisation jaish-e-mohammad blew up a bus carrying soldiers via ramming a car filled with IEDs into the bus killing 40 people. In response, india did the balakot airstrikes, killing ~300 terrorists in a training camp [identified via the number of phones that were working in the area that was bombed.]

300 is clearly a bigger number than 40, so was the attack wrong? india used it as an excuse to kill more people than what should be considered a good proportional response!

Since that attack[and other operations], JeM and others became fairly inactive and terrorist attacks have gone down by an insane number, what used to be a daily occurrence and a reason to not attend local festival celebrations due to threat of bombs is now a rarity.

Proportionality has nothing to do with defence. Why on earth would u kill only a few terrorists as a response? Israels actions are fucked up but proportionality does not apply to defence. If a state is retaliating to a threat, why would it leave the threat alive, which would only cost lives of more of its people?

Israel's airstrike policy is bad and roof knocking is not enough, the way israel conducts war is wrong and there needs to be intervention that is able to chain israel while eliminating hamas, demilitarising palestinian jihadist groups and stabilising the region.

But proportionality has nothing to do with defence. you can be disproportional if that means the threat ceases to exist.