Jump to content

Israel


SmokeyBear1861

Recommended Posts

26 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

These numbers are actually horrifying. 
 

Over half have a positive view of Hamas. Only half are willing to say that Hamas needs to stop trying to completely destroy Israel. In an election, Hamas would win even though a plurality wants neither. 
 

In nearly any parliamentary system a 34 percent result is a win and you get the first chance to form a government. In 1933, that happened in Germany when the NDSAP won 33 percent.

There are a lot of people getting salty when I point out that the genocidal extremists who quote Protocols of the Elders of Zion and promise to fight corruption poll remarkably similarly to some earlier genocidal extremists who quoted the Protocols of the Elders of Zion and promised to fight corruption. 

Twisting in the wind like this still doesn’t equate the 2+ million people in Gaza to Hamas.  This doesn’t justify collective punishment. It doesn’t justify the open air prison of 2 million.  It doesn’t justify shutting off water or electricity to 2 million.

Blurring the lines between Hamas and Gazans only serve to support Bibi and the Likud party. 

Maybe it is time for you to drop another strawman or more atrocity propaganda.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, GW Hayduke said:

Twisting in the wind like this still doesn’t equate the 2+ million people in Gaza to Hamas.  This doesn’t justify collective punishment. It doesn’t justify the open air prison of 2 million.  It doesn’t justify shutting off water or electricity to 2 million.

Blurring the lines between Hamas and Gazans only serve to support Bibi and the Likud party. 

Maybe it is time for you to drop another strawman or more atrocity propaganda.

Bigger threat to the existence of the modern state of Israel: Palestinians or Israeli politics?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, GW Hayduke said:

Twisting in the wind like this still doesn’t equate the 2+ million people in Gaza to Hamas.  This doesn’t justify collective punishment. It doesn’t justify the open air prison of 2 million.  It doesn’t justify shutting off water or electricity to 2 million.

Blurring the lines between Hamas and Gazans only serve to support Bibi and the Likud party. 

Maybe it is time for you to drop another strawman or more atrocity propaganda.

A forensic pathologist’s report is not atrocity propaganda, as much as you want it to be. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, GW Hayduke said:

Twisting in the wind like this still doesn’t equate the 2+ million people in Gaza to Hamas.  This doesn’t justify collective punishment. It doesn’t justify the open air prison of 2 million.  It doesn’t justify shutting off water or electricity to 2 million.

Blurring the lines between Hamas and Gazans only serve to support Bibi and the Likud party. 

 


I disagree.  1) Gaza is home to Hamas  2) Hamas attacked Israel  3) In my view, self-defense is a universal fundamental right. Every creature, when attacked, does everything it can to defend itself and defeat the attacker  4) Once attacked, Israel has the moral, fundamental-law-of-the-universe to respond and, in fact, the moral duty to do so 5) Knowing this to be the case, Gazans face one of two choices. Either they can house Hamas and expect Israel to try to destroy Hamas  or they can vote/kick Hamas out.  They have had since 2006 to do so and have not, knowing that Israel cannot allow itself to be attacked without attacking back.  It's a pity. It's a human tragedy.  But in terms of moral justification, your argument does not hold water. 

It's probably true that blurring the lines between Hamas and Gazans favors Bibi and the  Likud party but it could also be true that this is what the fundamentalist freaks in Hamas want ... some sort of apocalyptic scene that forces Israel to REALLY defend itself. Hezbollah is getting stronger, too. It's very, very sad.  

I remember something that Dr. James Roach, longtime professor of history at UT, once said. It was at the end of the semester and when summing things up he asked, rhetorically, "Can Israel hold out forever?  You never know but given demographic trends I think it's unlikely."  That was in 1986. 

Imagine hating a whole group of people so much that you're willing to kill them all over a difference in belief over a mythical sky creature. 



 

Edited by Horn Under a Bad Sign
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RomaVicta said:

I've largely disengaged from this thread, so forgive me if I'm misreading things.

I see repetition of the Hamas atrocities or added details about them. This is newsworthy, but is it relevant to the fate of civilians in GAZA? Is the idea that should the right combination of ghoulish cruelty shown by the (seems to me) universally condemned Hamas attack will lead to a, "Well, there it is. That's really bad. Kill them all," moment?

I also don't object to the newsworthiness of other theories regarding the explosion near the Gaza hospital. In fact, those firmly of the belief that the Israelis are not culpable should be pleased with each theory that is later debunked. It strengthens their case. I also see this discussion as irrelelevant to the fate of the civilians in Gaza.

I have no idea what the solution is, nor do I think my lack of solution is relevant to the fate of civilians in Gaza. Why should they pay for lack of imagination on my own and others' parts? Why should they pay for the intransigence of various politcal and state entities?

I will take the stand that I don't want the US backing either side militarily. The plea that Israel must survive sounds kind of absurd when they have a conventional military poised to do whatever they want to Gaza. The question of right to exist does not concern Israel in this moment. It's an old tune that is no longer applicable no matter how moving its melody.

We shouldn't be aiding either Israel or Hamas in this conflict. We've likely sacrificed our key value as a detached broker in the conflict. I would support humanitarion aid for non combatants wherever they are. I would abandon the idea of sending a fucking carrier group to that coast as a show of force against mighty Gaza. 

We play this wrong. We stick with cheap theater for the excitable crowd back home. I'm an American and look to American concerns and reputation. I'm moved by the horror of the Hamas attack. I'm not moved to support an exagerrated military response that will bring horrors to a new set of civilians that are no less important to me than Israeli ones.

Israel is not a state in our union. I don't feel like an attack on them is an attack on us. This is action between two foreign parties.

Did you think that each fake theory of how Trump had the election stolen from him was good because it was just another chance to debunk it? This is a real question.  I am having a hard time thinking of a time that letting fake theories circulate is a good thing for debate. 
 

It’s how disinformation works, you flood the zone with so much that the actual truth gets lost. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Horn Under a Bad Sign said:

I disagree.  1) Gaza is home to Hamas  2) Hamas attacked Israel  3) In my view, self-defense is a universal fundamental right. Every creature, when attacked, does everything it can to defend itself and defeat the attacker  4) Once attacked, Israel has the moral, fundamental-law-of-the-universe to respond and, in fact, the moral duty to do so 5) Knowing this to be the case, Gazans face one of two choices. Either they can house Hamas and expect Israel to try to destroy Hamas  or they can vote/kick Hamas out.  They have had since 2006 to do so and have not, knowing that Israel cannot allow itself to be attacked without attacking back.  It's a pity. It's a human tragedy.  But in terms of moral justification, your argument does not hold water. 

It's probably true that blurring the lines between Hamas and Gazans favors Bibi and the  Likud party but it could also be true that this is what the fundamentalist freaks in Hamas want ... some sort of apocalyptic scene that forces Israel to REALLY defend itself. Hezbollah is getting stronger, too. It's very, very sad.  

I remember something that Dr. James Roach, longtime professor of history at UT, once said. It was at the end of the semester and when summing things up he asked, rhetorically, "Can Israel hold out forever?  You never know but given demographic trends I think it's unlikely."  That was in 1986. 

Imagine hating a whole group of people so much that you're willing to kill them all over a difference in belief over a mythical sky creature. 

Nor does Israel's treatment of ordinary Palestinians given the overwhelming disparity in power.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about we look at recent polling of Israelis, and y'all tell me what it says about their sentiments regarding peace, principles of democracy, and occupation? Also, compare their results to what we've discussed on this thread regarding potential solutions.

 

"These numbers are actually horrifying."

https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/israeli-polls-regarding-peace-with-the-palestinians

image.thumb.png.52e2c44f4a56fad8a4b0e3e11cb16b35.png

Almost getting to that threshold of people in a parliamentary system where people fundamentally do not agree with the principles of democracy.

 

image.thumb.png.3c71ae53e132f1ead918709bb95351fc.png

Totally muddled response.

 

image.thumb.png.ae184641bbb2701851a273a36e9b36fa.png

Large majority of Israeli Jews don't want a two-state solution by Arabs do. What?!? I was told Palestinians wouldn't support it!

 

image.thumb.png.20b881f53c7da7be96c7727ae8054a7b.png

Interesting wording here in that it assumes all of the current internationally recognized boundaries, plus the West Bank and Gaza, are all considered "the Land of Israel."

 

https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/opinions-of-israeli-jews-and-israeli-palestinian-arabs-toward-each-other

image.thumb.png.dc9da156a37e9e5d9dd2c59ef9473167.png

Also, it's interesting to note that Arabs living in Israel are consistently more optimistic about the prospects for peace. Is there some sort of misunderstanding?

 

image.thumb.png.1ad3a8f3d9f287c9f3d8facd57f77796.png

Maybe Jewish opinions of Arabs are totally wrong.

 

image.thumb.png.64f491737c17a936a32841181789b942.png

It seems Jewish opinions of Arabs are consistently more negative than vice versa.

 

image.thumb.png.72b0f0c0337ed5b81df20fdb5dc944ad.png

The majority of Jews prefer segregation.

 

image.thumb.png.e4cf28d776396cd71f012ecf644a5e1c.png

More Jews than not don't want to learn about historical and cultural Arab content.

 

image.thumb.png.6f79f3702251d367abf7a50c6059ccba.png

Arabs are scared to go into Jewish areas while Jews either suspect Arabs or consider them enemies.

 

 

Maybe we should consider not blaming the Palestinians for everything.

Edited by bolverk
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

I meant the threat ordinary Palestinians pose versus the anti-democratic trends in Israeli politics, but if you want to do Hamas v. Likud, be my guest.

Ordinary Palestinians don’t pose a threat to Israel. Hamas poses a threat to Israel.  
 

The Likud party also pose a threat to Israel by propping up Hamas, promoting propaganda that dehumanizes the entire Palestinian population, and pushing the blockade and settlements.  

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, GW Hayduke said:

Ordinary Palestinians don’t pose a threat to Israel. Hamas poses a threat to Israel.  
 

The Likud party also pose a threat to Israel by propping up Hamas, promoting propaganda that dehumanizes the entire Palestinian population, and pushing the blockade and settlements.  

It's almost like political expediency gets in the way of peace in the Middle East.

Edited by David Dennison
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Horn Under a Bad Sign said:


I disagree.  1) Gaza is home to Hamas  2) Hamas attacked Israel  3) In my view, self-defense is a universal fundamental right. Every creature, when attacked, does everything it can to defend itself and defeat the attacker  4) Once attacked, Israel has the moral, fundamental-law-of-the-universe to respond and, in fact, the moral duty to do so 5) Knowing this to be the case, Gazans face one of two choices. Either they can house Hamas and expect Israel to try to destroy Hamas  or they can vote/kick Hamas out.  They have had since 2006 to do so and have not, knowing that Israel cannot allow itself to be attacked without attacking back.  It's a pity. It's a human tragedy.  But in terms of moral justification, your argument does not hold water. 

It's probably true that blurring the lines between Hamas and Gazans favors Bibi and the  Likud party but it could also be true that this is what the fundamentalist freaks in Hamas want ... some sort of apocalyptic scene that forces Israel to REALLY defend itself. Hezbollah is getting stronger, too. It's very, very sad.  

I remember something that Dr. James Roach, longtime professor of history at UT, once said. It was at the end of the semester and when summing things up he asked, rhetorically, "Can Israel hold out forever?  You never know but given demographic trends I think it's unlikely."  That was in 1986. 

Imagine hating a whole group of people so much that you're willing to kill them all over a difference in belief over a mythical sky creature. 



 

 

I agree with your five points, but how do you expect normal Gazans to accomplish this alone under the conditions that Gaza is (and has been) under? Has any opposition to Hamas been supported by Hamas's enemies? If not, why? If so, what the fuck have they been doing?

That's not a rhetorical question, either. I frankly do not know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, bolverk said:

How about we look at recent polling of Israeli Jews (80% of Israel's population) and y'all tell me what it says about their sentiments regarding peace, principles of democracy, and the occupation? Also, compare their results to what we've discussed on this thread regarding potential solutions.

 

"These numbers are actually horrifying."

https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/israeli-polls-regarding-peace-with-the-palestinians

image.thumb.png.52e2c44f4a56fad8a4b0e3e11cb16b35.png

Almost getting to that threshold of people in a parliamentary system where people fundamentally do not agree with the principles of democracy.

 

image.thumb.png.3c71ae53e132f1ead918709bb95351fc.png

Totally muddled response.

 

image.thumb.png.ae184641bbb2701851a273a36e9b36fa.png

Large majority of Israeli Jews don't want a two-state solution by Arabs do. What?!? I was told Palestinians wouldn't support it!

 

image.thumb.png.20b881f53c7da7be96c7727ae8054a7b.png

Interesting wording here in that it assumes all of the current internationally recognized boundaries, plus the West Bank and Gaza, are all considered "the Land of Israel."

 

https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/opinions-of-israeli-jews-and-israeli-palestinian-arabs-toward-each-other

image.thumb.png.dc9da156a37e9e5d9dd2c59ef9473167.png

Also, it's interesting to note that Arabs living in Israel are consistently more optimistic about the prospects for peace. Is there some sort of misunderstanding?

 

image.thumb.png.1ad3a8f3d9f287c9f3d8facd57f77796.png

Maybe Jewish opinions of Arabs are totally wrong.

 

image.thumb.png.64f491737c17a936a32841181789b942.png

It seems Jewish opinions of Arabs are consistently more negative than vice versa.

 

image.thumb.png.72b0f0c0337ed5b81df20fdb5dc944ad.png

The majority of Jews prefer segregation.

 

image.thumb.png.e4cf28d776396cd71f012ecf644a5e1c.png

More Jews than not don't want to learn about historical and cultural Arab content.

 

image.thumb.png.6f79f3702251d367abf7a50c6059ccba.png

Arabs are scared to go into Jewish areas while Jews either suspect Arabs or consider them enemies.

 

 

Maybe we should consider not blaming the Palestinians for everything.

A lot of these numbers are super shitty and clearly point to the damage done across a society when extremist elements are fostered for political expediency. We’ve seen that playbook here and all over and Israel is not immune.  A lot of people have pointed out that Bibi belongs to the wave of new authoritarians that manage to keep winning elections by manipulating institutions, he reminds me very much of Orban and Likud of Fidesz. There remains a large delta between the ideology and actions of Hamas and Likud. 
 

And it’s very possible that October 7 will actually lead to enough momentum to oust him. It is possible to believe Bibi is super shitty and that Israel has a right and duty to go after Hamas. 
 

One flag, in this context “Israeli Arabs” are Arabs with Israeli citizenship and not broader Palestinians living in West Bank or Gaza. You may know that it’s just not entirely clear from how the data is presented. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, 956 Worldwide said:

A lot of these numbers are super shitty and clearly point to the damage done across a society when extremist elements are fostered for political expediency. We’ve seen that playbook here and all over and Israel is not immune.  A lot of people have pointed out that Bibi belongs to the wave of new authoritarians that manage to keep winning elections by manipulating institutions, he reminds me very much of Orban and Likud of Fidesz. There remains a large delta between the ideology and actions of Hamas and Likud. 
 

And it’s very possible that October 7 will actually lead to enough momentum to oust him. It is possible to believe Bibi is super shitty and that Israel has a right and duty to go after Hamas. 
 

One flag, in this context “Israeli Arabs” are Arabs with Israeli citizenship and not broader Palestinians living in West Bank or Gaza. You may know that it’s just not entirely clear from how the data is presented. 

 

Agreed on all counts, and yes, I'm very aware of your final point. Also, maybe, we can consider in light of what the occupation has done to foster destructive sentiments within Gaza and the West Bank and what might actually be possible in a more just situation.

And to those who point out that ordinary Gazans have a responsibility to oust Hamas with no means (or unspecified ones), I'd argue that Israelis have that responsibility too -- except the latter do have the means to do so at the ballot box.

I'd also like to highlight this piece by Roger Cohen about peace advocates on both sides appearing in today's NYTimes because it's important to recognize and support their efforts.

No paywall link: https://archive.ph/U52pF

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, bolverk said:

 

Agreed on all counts, and yes, I'm very aware of your final point. Also, maybe, we can consider in light of what the occupation has done to foster destructive sentiments within Gaza and the West Bank and what might actually be possible in a more just situation.

And to those who point out that ordinary Gazans have a responsibility to oust Hamas with no means (or unspecified ones), I'd argue that Israelis have that responsibility too -- except the latter do have the means to do so at the ballot box.

I'd also like to highlight this piece by Roger Cohen about peace advocates on both sides appearing in today's NYTimes because it's important to recognize and support their efforts.

No paywall link: https://archive.ph/U52pF

I don’t think that it’s fair in all cases to demand that people overthrow their authoritarian or extremists rulers, it isn’t always possible. It probably is not in Gaza. I also don’t think it’s helpful to downplay what is clearly pretty significant support for authoritarian regimes in Gaza or elsewhere, like Russia or Turkey. It absolutely exists. 
 

And I also don’t think that “they didn’t vote for Hamas” means that a fairly large scale operation to defeat Hamas is unjustifiable. You end up with an absurd position where the only morally acceptable wars are when you’re fighting against a democratic government with the support of irs people but the democratic governments are not allowed to hit back. 

Edited by 956 Worldwide
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

I don’t think that it’s fair in all cases to demand that people overthrow their authoritarian or extremists rulers, it isn’t always possible. It probably is not in Gaza. I also don’t think it’s helpful to downplay what is clearly pretty significant support for authoritarian regimes in Gaza or elsewhere, like Russia or Turkey. It absolutely exists. 
 

And I also don’t think that “they didn’t vote for Hamas” means that a fairly large scale operation to defeat Hamas is unjustifiable. You end up with an absurd position where the only morally acceptable wars are when you’re fighting against a democratic government with the support of irs people but the democratic governments are not allowed to hit back. 

 

And, again, as I asked on the previous page, what support have opposition forces within Gaza, both political and military, been receiving from Hamas's enemies? It's an honest question because I'm not sure it *is* realistic without getting that support. If they have been, maybe it should be increased.

I know that Fatah lost to Hamas some 15 years ago in what was basically a civil war in Gaza. Do they even have a presence in Gaza now? If so, why haven't they been getting assistance?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, bolverk said:

 

And, again, as I asked on the previous page, what support have opposition forces within Gaza, both political and military, been receiving from Hamas's enemies? It's an honest question because I'm not sure it *is* realistic without getting that support. If they have been, maybe it should be increased.

I know that Fatah lost to Hamas some 15 years ago in what was basically a civil war in Gaza. Do they even have a presence in Gaza now? If so, why haven't they been getting assistance?

As far as I know, none really. Hamas has sort of an uneasy truce with actors like the IJP so long as they remember Israel is the current enemy. And as terrible as they are, Farah doesn’t want to have a big civil war, nor has Israel.

It is a good counter factual, if Israel doesn’t get rid of Hamas then who does? These groups don’t just slink away or disappear and an internal Palestine civil war would probably be worse for Palestinians than an Israeli operation.  You can look at Lebanon and Syria to see how that goes. 

“Be nice and they’ll just become nice or go away” Is magical thinking. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

As far as I know, none really. Hamas has sort of an uneasy truce with actors like the IJP so long as they remember Israel is the current enemy. And as terrible as they are, Farah doesn’t want to have a big civil war, nor has Israel.

It is a good counter factual, if Israel doesn’t get rid of Hamas then who does? These groups don’t just slink away or disappear and an internal Palestine civil war would probably be worse for Palestinians than an Israeli operation.  You can look at Lebanon and Syria to see how that goes. 

“Be nice and they’ll just become nice or go away” Is magical thinking. 

Yeah, I'm trying to be realistic in my thinking here. Hamas has got to go, but we insist Gazans do it themselves without any outside support. So, then, Israel has to be the "bad guys" and do it themselves, causing all kinds of uproar, but then we also know that Bibi et al have been supporting Hamas all this time to keep Fatah from being a viable counterbalance within Gaza.

So, if we (the collective voice of peace, democracy, and moderation) aren't supporting the only known group that might have sway, aren't we then setting up the Gazan public for failure? It's kind of a Catch-22, don't you think?

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I used to visit a British Pro Israeli blog more than a decade ago, they seemed to be militant secularists that absolutely loathed the global left for siding with the Palestinians. I went back there recently due to the crisis and almost all the users I vaguely remember were gone, maybe one left. They were all replaced with at least 50% pro MAGA, Bibi, Modhi, et al aka the fascist axis. Suffice to say the quality dropped.

That is the future of Israel. They reach this collective arrogance that they are superior (only democracy in the ME arrogance) and boom they get roasted by one man/ideology destroying their supreme court, all this talk of Bibi losing a future election is laughable, when have fascists ever voted rationally? And even if he did leave the theocracy voters remain.

Israel is orgasmic about its past military successes, they are blinded by it and think they can win anything, outlast anything, but they are literally falling on the same incompetent fascist idiocy, a fascist idiocy that lost WWII and is losing the Ukrainian war. 

Topple the Likud alliance and go back the Green Line and two state solution, that is the only hope, because now I worry more about Israeli nukes than Moscow nukes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Did you think that each fake theory of how Trump had the election stolen from him was good because it was just another chance to debunk it? This is a real question.  I am having a hard time thinking of a time that letting fake theories circulate is a good thing for debate. 
 

It’s how disinformation works, you flood the zone with so much that the actual truth gets lost. 

Disinformation is unavoidable. Refuting it is the only way to limit the damage. You're getting a bit shrill.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/20/2023 at 5:56 PM, Brian Fantana said:

I don't know why you guys keep hammering this as if everyone isn't aware and says Hamas has to go. I mean, I know why I just want to hear you say it.

Who should remove/deal with Hamas and how should it be done?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/20/2023 at 4:58 PM, MC Fresh Breath said:

I'll kind of do the same with your rant.  But I won't falsely imply bigotry.  Well, not yet.

Edit:

 

That's kind of it in a nutshell, isn't it?  You don't care because it is easier to "both sides" this thing. I'll lump you in wit h Brisket and 956 and move on. Lolz at an apartheid state committing genocide being little offenses though.

Another misrepresentation.  One side wants peace. the other does not.  I have never denied that Israel has done some fucked up things, or that individuals within the IDF have done some fucked up things.  I don't need list to understand that.   You however, have failed to acknowledge how the Palestinians got to this point, how they have continued to perpetuate a cycle of violence over a path to peace.   

Again, they murdered the king of Jordan, a PM of Jordan, started a Syrian Invasion of Jordan, and tried to overthrow the other King of Jordan, and were a catalyst for the Lebanese civil war.  Will you acknowledge this?  

If you acknowledge those things then ask yourself,  how does a nation, like Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, or Egypt, supposed to work with them, if this is how they treat their hosts (Jordan, Lebanon)?   How do you work with a people who are unwilling to work towards a peace agreement or path to normalcy, but actively undermine these efforts? This latest Hamas attack was timed to undermine Israeli-Saudi relations.  To provoke a bombing campaign against them while they hide amongst the populus.   This wasn't some fucking coincidence. 

What would you do?  Kill the belligerents?  Appease them?  Both?  Lay siege to the entire city until they capitulate or die?  What is you actual idea?  What will it take for Palestinians to stop the violence?   How would one achieve that in a realistic sense, not some bullshit fantasy?  How does this end?  Not just this new edition of a conflict but the whole fucking thing.   

 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

what is Plan Dalet? i have literally never heard of it and am seeing it referenced as an intentional ethnic cleansing of Arabs/Palestinians plan, from way back in 1948. i mean i checked the google machine and it...reads a lot like what's been happening in modern day Palestine, but i don't know any historical context or what may have preceeded it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, mchookem said:

what is Plan Dalet? i have literally never heard of it and am seeing it referenced as an intentional ethnic cleansing of Arabs/Palestinians plan, from way back in 1948. i mean i checked the google machine and it...reads a lot like what's been happening in modern day Palestine, but i don't know any historical context or what may have preceeded it. 

There’s a lot of historical debate of whether Plan Dalet was aimed at ethnic cleansing or not, that breaks down on the line you’d expect. 
 

But it is quite different from what’s happening today. It was a military plan with military objectives and not a massive social/political plan. The objectives were to secure the borders of the new state of Israel against attacks from surrounding states, take control of mandatory Palestine, and provide security to Jewish communities outside of those borders when British forces withdrew.  The second and third objectives are where the question of any ethnic cleansing intent arises. 
 

Israel’s recent policies in the West Bank have been carried out via mostly non-military means and Israel is in a different strategic environment and so there’s no current analogue. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Nivek said:

Another misrepresentation.  One side wants peace. the other does not.

You're claiming misrepresentation while literally doing that. The Israeli people want peace, Netanyahu and his government demonstrably do not.

I don't know why you continually demand perfect solutions from people who are simply advocating against genocide. I mean, again, I do, I just want to hear you say it.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Israel’s recent policies in the West Bank have been carried out via mostly non-military means and Israel is in a different strategic environment and so there’s no current analogue. 

This is just an extremely whitewashed way of saying that instead of using the IDF, they are simply supporting armed settler militias to carry out ethnic cleansing in the West Bank.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Foosters Tagging you because I don't know if you'll get a notification when I share your post here.

 

LinkedIn Issues Warning to Site Shaming Pro-Palestinian Sentiment
The site listed thousands of people and grouped them by their workplaces after they posted on the Israeli-Hamas conflict.

Online posts asking to “#PrayForPalestine.” Entreaties for peace. Pleas to “Free Gaza.”

Over the last 10 days, a website called anti-israel-employees.com published more than 17,000 posts, which one of the people behind the site said had been taken mainly from LinkedIn. The site, which claimed to be a “global live feed of potentially supportive sentiments for terrorism among company employees,” listed thousands of people and grouped them by their workplaces, in an apparent attempt to shame them for their sentiments on the Israeli-Hamas conflict.

The website, which was taken offline for a day before being migrated to a new web address, named employees of major international corporations, including Amazon, Mastercard and Ernst & Young, and shared their profile photos, LinkedIn pages and posts.

Itai Liptz, a hedge fund manager who said he was one of the people behind the original site, said that its goal was to “expose people who supported Hamas publicly.”

“We wanted to have it documented and a record,” he said. “If I work in this company, but I see my friends on LinkedIn celebrating and praising Hamas, then I’m not feeling safe.”

But the site also highlighted posts from people who did not explicitly show support for Hamas, according to posts seen by The New York Times. Some people used hash tags like “#GazaUnderAttack” or sought to draw attention to the humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip. The site asked users to submit posts that they believed should be exposed, and included a numeric “hate score” for companies.

The site, which was created 10 days ago, comes amid a wider debate over online expression during a fraught international conflict. Similar lists have also been created to track college students who have spoken out in support of Palestinians, while Meta, the parent company of Instagram and Facebook, said it took down nearly 800,000 pieces of Hebrew and Arabic language content for violating its rules in the three days after the Hamas attacks on Oct. 7.

Some people who were highlighted on the site have already deleted their LinkedIn posts or their LinkedIn profiles. Mr. Liptz, who said he did not expect the site to become as popular as it did after spreading via WhatsApp groups, called the far-ranging capture of all pro-Palestinian sentiment a mistake.

“If somebody says ‘Free Palestine’ that is totally OK, and we shouldn’t put it on our website,” he said on Saturday. “We just want to make sure the filters are there because they have the right to say that.”

The site, however, was back online on Sunday at a new web address and still displayed the posts and names of people that Mr. Liptz had said would be removed. Now located at an Israel-specific domain, the site is being overseen by Guy Ophir, a lawyer in Israel, who said the team moved it to a new address after receiving a cease-and-desist letter from LinkedIn.

A spokesman for LinkedIn said the company determined that the site had used automated programs to extract content from the platform, a practice known as scraping, which is a violation of its rules. Mr. Liptz denied that his site extracted the LinkedIn information through scraping, while Mr. Ophir said he believed that LinkedIn was trying to infringe on his right to free speech.

“We are not going to remove the website,” he said. “We are willing to fight them here.”

The site has been a subject of discussion at Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, and LinkedIn, where employees have expressed concern about the chilling effect it could have on online speech.

“People are scraping pro-Palestine LinkedIn posts and adding them to a database of ‘terror supporters,’” one employee wrote last Wednesday in a note on an internal Meta message board that was seen by The Times.

Other Meta employees were in disbelief that expressing support for Palestine was equated with supporting terrorism.

“The lack of understanding,” a Meta employee wrote, “is beyond insensitive and cruel.”

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TexArcher said:

It is almost certainly true that the average Israeli and Palestinian civilian wants peace.

But, that is not true for the leaders of either group.

Netanyahu has maintained power for a very long time by being The One Who Keeps Israel Safe.  He needs Hamas.  And, Hamas needs Netanyahu and the blockade and mistreatment of Gaza.

If both sides started treating each other like human beings, people like Netanyahu and the leaders of Hamas would be out of business pretty quickly.

Hence, neither side lets that happen. 

Well said.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a good discussion to listen to if you're inclined and have the time. Understandable if not, it's fairly long. It features Zachary Foster, who is an anti-Zionist Jew with a Ph.D. in Palestinian History from Princeton.

They are reacting to a video by a Zionist YouTuber and he takes the time to refute a lot of the (frequently stereotypically racist anti-Arab) points he's making and provides a lot of historical context. It was interesting to me.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can not fucking believe that Netanyahu has been leader of Israel since I started paying attention (around 1996). After the assassination of Rabin Israel has essentially being governed by one man for 30 years and they never put 2 and 2 together that the symbiosis of dear leader and those who vote for him has led to this ticking timebomb. 

People that say this conflict is complicated has not been paying attention, it is extremely simple. Never ever ever put fascists in power (and yes that includes Hamas and Ariel Sharon)

Then the arrogance about democracy form the Israeli left just managed to piss people off in the west and it is no wonder that Israel lost Millenials and Gen Z. It was unheard of to ever see ANY push back, let alone massive free palestine protests in the US. 

Biden wishes it was that simple, but he needs to push for a cease fire, if Israel wants justice it has to be done withing a system of justice, but even their assasination squads are more humane than killing children and claiming it was collateral.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Brian Fantana said:

This is a good discussion to listen to if you're inclined and have the time. Understandable if not, it's fairly long. It features Zachary Foster, who is an anti-Zionist Jew with a Ph.D. in Palestinian History from Princeton.

They are reacting to a video by a Zionist YouTuber and he takes the time to refute a lot of the (frequently stereotypically racist anti-Arab) points he's making and provides a lot of historical context. It was interesting to me.

That original video from travelingisrael that they're responding to was previously posted somewhere up-thread, I think.

Edited by bolverk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

A ceasefire takes two sides, by definition. Is there any indication at all that Hamas wants one?

Hamas is now in the stage of temporary cease fire at all costs, they are even releasing hostages without condition.

I am not naive, I know who they are this would only be temporary for a few years, but the cycle HAS to descalate, that is the north star, Israel has ruled out dealing it like they dealt with black september, meaning they do not want to expend the resources to do this with as minimal collateral as possible. They want the war and civilian casualties be damned, they just don't want to be blamed for it which is fucking ridiculous.

Israel made peace with Egypt immediately after the YKP war. Had they predictably turned to bloodlust it would have never happened.

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Yeah, I don’t think that continuing to shoot rockets and holding 196/200 hostages gets to count as anything close to pursuing a ceasefire at all costs. 

Ceasefire at all costs means no ground invasion of Gaza.

A full ceasefire is no rocket launches and hostages released.

They are using the full ceasefire carrot to negotiate the non invasion of Gaza.

Israel is not really interested.

Edited by linux
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, bolverk said:

That original video from Zachary Foster that they're responding to was previously posted somewhere up-thread, I think.

that original video was fucking insane. every time he mentions an instance of Arabs rejecting a deal, he conveniently omits like the most important details, almost as if he has an agenda (to portray the Arabs as irrational anti-semites)

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, linux said:

Ceasefire at all costs means no ground invasion of Gaza.

A full ceasefire is no rocket launches and hostages released.

They are using the full ceasefire carrot to negotiate the non invasion of Gaza.

Israel is not really interested.

This seems like a lot of projection especially considering that they had a ceasefire and non-invasion of Gaza as recently as October 6 and decided to start a war. 
 

Breaking a ceasefire just long enough to murder 1000 plus people and kidnap a bunch more, then asking for it back?

Animated GIF

Edited by 956 Worldwide
  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are there a lot of you that think a two state solution is actually reasonable? 

To me the fundamental question is, do you believe Israel has a right to exist as a country of Jews, or do you feel like the displacement of Palestinians to form the state of Israel is a modern act of colonization that someday needs to be rectified? As the radical left says, "decolonization is not a metaphor."

Everything we've been doing for almost 90 years feels like a dance pretending like these two fundamentally disparate views don't exist, and that there's some kind of middle ground that can be broached between them. Which I do not believe.

I don't think Arabs in general (add in non secular Iranians, Turks, and Pakistanis), and Palestinians specifically, are actually going to be satisfied over the long term until Israel ceases to exist. Voices urging violence, jihad, and martyrdom will always have an audience. It doesn't have to be a majority. It simply has to be enough to cause chaos. 

This doesn't even touch on the yearning for a new Caliphate, and the impotence of the Islamic world in the face of Western dominance, that's no where more exemplified than the existence of Israel. It's like a modern day successful Crusade executed by the Jews. 

Israel, on the other hand, has no chance to ever be a true democracy because their priority is to remain a Jewish state, not to have truly free elections. 

When Jewish people say, "Never again" I don't ever believe they're actually saying we need to make sure genocide on the level of the holocaust never happens again. I believe they're saying they're never again going meekly into the ovens and gas chambers. 

I have never believed a true peace in the area is possible. Maybe if Arabs wanted to allow Palestinians into their country to assimilate, but neither Palestinian leaders nor Arab rulers want that even a little bit. And I don't blame them. But as long as the Palestinian people exist as a cultural entity, and as long as Israel continues to insist they have the right to control the land they do as a Jewish state, I feel like there will be continued ongoing conflict on one level or another.

To me the negotiations for a two state solution have been a farce to keep the violence from becoming worse. And the cycles of violence ebb and flow depending on how hopeful the unrealistic negotiations have been. But I am of the cynical opinion that a two state solution is no solution for Israel, and only creates a future greater existential crisis in the future, rather than lessens it. 

But I'd like to hear from people more hopeful than me on either the Israeli, Palestinian, or a more allegedly neutral side that just wants peace in our lifetime, as it were. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

This seems like a lot of projection especially considering that they had a ceasefire and non-invasion of Gaza as recently as October 6 and decided to start a war. 
 

Breaking a ceasefire just long enough to murder 1000 plus people and kidnap a bunch more, then asking for it back?

Animated GIF

There was a ceasefire, but so did Egypt/Syria/Israel on 6 of October 1973 they still got ONE peace deal.

To understand why all of this happened in Oct 7 2023 is simple, very very simple, neither side wanted peace, the population did, and they population was tricked into thinking that Bibi could give them peace, or that Hamas could give them peace, but at the end of the day it was a lie, the next Likud strongman will promise the same and we are back to square one.

Israel wants WB land, had the status quo been perpetuated for 100 years they were happy stealing WB land. This bias for underestimating their opponent and wanting the status quo is actively selecting to continue the violence.

Hamas wants war in the long run, obviously this is actively selecting to continue the violence.

It was inevitable.

And we have not even discussed how they put like 80% of the IDF to defend settlers in the east.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, SL Xpress said:

Are there a lot of you that think a two state solution is actually reasonable? 

Right now yes, if Israel does not invade Gaza there is a sliver of hope see the YKP war as historical reference

To me the fundamental question is, do you believe Israel has a right to exist as a country of Jews, or do you feel like the displacement of Palestinians to form the state of Israel is a modern act of colonization that someday needs to be rectified? As the radical left says, "decolonization is not a metaphor."

There should be compensation at the minimum.

 

Israel, on the other hand, has no chance to ever be a true democracy because their priority is to remain a Jewish state, not to have truly free elections. 

It is so fucking ridiculous, but the secular jews are also victims of the theocracy, we will see how they handle things going forward and if they go back to voting for Bibi et al.

When Jewish people say, "Never again" I don't ever believe they're actually saying we need to make sure genocide on the level of the holocaust never happens again. I believe they're saying they're never again going meekly into the ovens and gas chambers. 

Reminds me of this

In 2003, a military historian, Martin van Creveld, thought that the Al-Aqsa Intifada then in progress threatened Israel's existence.[37] Van Creveld was quoted in David Hirst's The Gun and the Olive Branch (2003) as saying:

We possess several hundred atomic warheads and rockets and can launch them at targets in all directions, perhaps even at Rome. Most European capitals are targets for our air force. Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: 'Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother.' I consider it all hopeless at this point. We shall have to try to prevent things from coming to that, if at all possible. Our armed forces, however, are not the thirtieth strongest in the world, but rather the second or third. We have the capability to take the world down with us. And I can assure you that that will happen before Israel goes under.[38]

However, according to Brig. Gen. Yitzhak Yaakov, who was the mastermind behind the "Samson Option", it was unlikely Israel could have even targeted Europe, as Israel did not yet have other measures like bombs or missiles to carry the nuclear payload.[39]

They have hundreds of nuclear weapons, in subs, their target is not Iran, but the rest of the world, us. Never again is a threat.

 

Are there a lot of you that think a two state solution is actually reasonable? 

Right now yes, if Israel does not invade Gaza there is a sliver of hope see the YKP war as historical reference

To me the fundamental question is, do you believe Israel has a right to exist as a country of Jews, or do you feel like the displacement of Palestinians to form the state of Israel is a modern act of colonization that someday needs to be rectified? As the radical left says, "decolonization is not a metaphor."

There should be compensation at the minimum.

 

Israel, on the other hand, has no chance to ever be a true democracy because their priority is to remain a Jewish state, not to have truly free elections. 

It is so fucking ridiculous, but the secular jews are also victims of the theocracy, we will see how they handle things going forward and if they go back to voting for Bibi et al.

When Jewish people say, "Never again" I don't ever believe they're actually saying we need to make sure genocide on the level of the holocaust never happens again. I believe they're saying they're never again going meekly into the ovens and gas chambers. 

Reminds me of this

In 2003, a military historian, Martin van Creveld, thought that the Al-Aqsa Intifada then in progress threatened Israel's existence.[37] Van Creveld was quoted in David Hirst's The Gun and the Olive Branch (2003) as saying:

We possess several hundred atomic warheads and rockets and can launch them at targets in all directions, perhaps even at Rome. Most European capitals are targets for our air force. Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: 'Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother.' I consider it all hopeless at this point. We shall have to try to prevent things from coming to that, if at all possible. Our armed forces, however, are not the thirtieth strongest in the world, but rather the second or third. We have the capability to take the world down with us. And I can assure you that that will happen before Israel goes under.[38]

However, according to Brig. Gen. Yitzhak Yaakov, who was the mastermind behind the "Samson Option", it was unlikely Israel could have even targeted Europe, as Israel did not yet have other measures like bombs or missiles to carry the nuclear payload.[39]

They have hundreds of nuclear weapons, in subs, their target is not Iran, but the rest of the world, us. Never again is a threat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, 956 Worldwide said:

There’s a lot of historical debate of whether Plan Dalet was aimed at ethnic cleansing or not, that breaks down on the line you’d expect. 
 

But it is quite different from what’s happening today. It was a military plan with military objectives and not a massive social/political plan. The objectives were to secure the borders of the new state of Israel against attacks from surrounding states, take control of mandatory Palestine, and provide security to Jewish communities outside of those borders when British forces withdrew.  The second and third objectives are where the question of any ethnic cleansing intent arises. 
 

Israel’s recent policies in the West Bank have been carried out via mostly non-military means and Israel is in a different strategic environment and so there’s no current analogue. 

thanks for some background. i was thinking how you counter the argument that from it's inception Israel's plan was to eliminate Palestinians by force. 

i mean i'm not saying i necessarily want to make that argument, but just reading up on it and trying to understand what the intent was behind it. on the surface it does read that way, but i suppose it's rather...'nuanced'. 🤔

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, SL Xpress said:

So your personal view is that if Israel/third parties compensate Palestinians for their displacement that should be enough that they ignore their claims on their ancestral land? And you think that would realistically happen?

With sufficient money this singular issue is moot, if given a choice between 1 million dollars and a parcel of land I think this is resolvable.

Note the hundreds of billions spent on defense.

The small minority that wants to return should then be allowed to return.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...