Jump to content

Israel


SmokeyBear1861

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, InkaUtexas said:

What about ASW Surveillance? We still have PBY's with dudes with binoculars up there? 

I don't know if ASW surveilance of those Dolphin class by NATO countries strengthens or weakens my argument?, I will leave the reader to reach their own conclusion.

I will also leave you guys the question if snorkling by U-boats, and their 99% surface crusising, weakens or strengthens my argument?

Dunno you tell me. I am criticizing your logical argument guys sheesh.

Edited by linux
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, linux said:

I don't know if ASW surveilance of those Dolphin class by NATO countries strengthens or weakens my argument?, I will leave the reader to reach their own conclusion.

I will also leave you guys the question if snorkling by U-boats, and their 99% surface crusising, weakens or strengthens my argument?

Dunno you tell me. I am criticizing your logical argument guys sheesh.

There’s not an argument. There’s a conspiracy theory. As I said, it’s easy to see the waters you’re swimming in with this. InfoWars. Extreme anti-semites. 

https://www.infowars.com/posts/samson-option-mark-levin-urges-israel-to-consider-firing-off-entire-nuclear-arsenal-if-threatened/

 

Quote

The Samson Option, which Mark Levin and Ben Shapiro are so eager to threaten, is Israel’s threat to wipe out the entire planet if their 75-year-old Zionist project — which they chose to place in Palestine surrounded by their blood enemies — goes south. 

 

 

https://www.adl.org/resources/blog/anti-semite-ken-okeefe-us-speaking-tour
 

Quote

He added, “They even abduct, torture, have sex with and ritually sacrifice young children.” He also promoted the conspiracy theory that Israel would take the “Samson option,” and exterminate the world “if it feels that its existence is threatened.”

Nick Fucking Fuentes and groypers. 
 

 So yeah, you’re actually way beyond Q-Anon with this shit. Horseshoe effect in action. 

Edited by 956 Worldwide
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, you and Nick Fuentes agree that an op-ed by an LSU communications professor and some speculative quotes by a historian are evidence of a Jewish plot to destroy the world or at least much of Europe if Israel is about to lose a war, thanks for the concise summary of how blood libel-type shit gets injected into the discourse. 

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

Cute prissy slap fight taking place here. Every country with nuke capabilities has a variety of contingency plans to use those weapons within the scope and to the extent that their deployment capabilities allow. Arguing otherwise is pure delusion. Even more delusional is the so-called rules-based international order that ostriches when it comes to enforcing nuclear non-proliferation interests consistently. 

Edited by Anastasis
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ima make a grilled-cheese, brb. But before I do that, I want to say thanks be to Israeli Christian Arab gods make a grilled cheese. One thing we can all agree on is a grolled cheese is not possible without the intervention of some maniacal mf-er in the sky. > iPhones, amiriight? Praise allah/christ..They (ugh) will fix this.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Frito pie and texmex cheese enchiladas are basically the same dish. Also tamales with chili and cheese topping. 

Burnt it. Still pretty good. ...didn't have any butter, Intertrons said mayonnaise. (That's the actual spelling. mayonnaise.) worked. Ate that shit like a boss. 

 

Spoiler

Boss. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Anastasis said:

I don’t think that I need any notes on the flavor profiles involved from a poster that can’t make a grilled cheese without burning it. 

Where do I go from here? You can't make a grilled cheese, you can't life. 

Take me, jebus. I'm ready. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Tamale chili pie is perhaps more distinct because of the tamale pork filling and the soft corn masa situation. You’d be better off arguing that angle. 

You're entitled to your opinion. 

I'm just saying that doesn't seem like an enchilada.

I'm happy to war about it...I don't wanna, but I've got big goddamned guns and I know what an enchilada is.

Stop fucking about. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Nivek said:

This is a lot of bullshit in that post, but let's take a stab at it.  

My point was that naive people like to promote fantasy solutions that are not grounded in reality and I pointed out that your ideas while nice, are flawed because they have been tried and rejected in favor of more violence, and thus not realistic to try again with the very same people who broke it and just launched a massive attack that killed several hundred people.  (I don't know the final numbers, and it is not relevant)  

Netanyahu is not an absolute psycho.  Asshole, OK, but he upheld the agreement of Oslo even though he didn't broker it or favor it.   He was also working on an agreement with the Saudis, so there is precedence for him working with others.  Now do Hamas and don't say Iran.  And before you try to weasel out of it, both were elected.    

History teaches us no such thing.  I already demonstrated that earlier in the thread.  I will just refer you to it for a lesson. Just because you hear some buzzword or phrase that others like to banter about doesn't mean it's true.  I suppose if you just ignore facts or are ignorant of history, then it might seem true. 

When did I absolve Israel of their bad actions?  Point to that post.   When did I ever say they didn't have blood on their hands?  Point to that post.  Since you declared this, you should have the receipts.  It should be easy to find.   Saying that both groups have blood on their hands is not false-equivocating, it is simply a statement of fact.  When I listed how the Palestinians have behaved and caused upheaval in Jordan and Lebanon, not one of you wanted to comment on that.  When I mentioned that Egypt bulldozes Palestinian homes, and asked why, none of you dared to respond or even confirm or deny it.  Why?  Because you act with dissonance.   I think you picked a side, got emotional, and take this personally.   

You are wishcasting now with the Texags and ahistorical comments.  

To Brisket you suggested you favor solutions that could work, even if unlikely.  I am a bit more grounded in reality it seems.  I mean, if we could invent a time-machine we could have another solution or two.  And with that time-machine, maybe if we brought vaccines and gave them to the Jews to distribute to the Germanic peoples they wouldn't have had a history of pogroms and then maybe a bit of gratitude to the Jews living there could have fostered and they could have lived in harmony and Adolph would have just been a middling painter who while not remembered, put a few pieces of art in some homes and offices for the future.  I mean, there is a shot right?  We should consider this right?  Just gotta get that first part finished.   What is your definition of unlikely?  Surely not the time machine plan.   Define it.  Just offer a new agreement like Oslo?  Hand Hamas over some more guns and ask them to police themselves?  It might work.  

Another difference between us is that you refuse to acknowledge the difference between the ruling parties, you attempt to false equivocate the actions and the governments of both the Palestinians and Israeli's.   You talk of diplomacy and recognition either not acknowledging that it was tried and how/why it failed.   And since you simply cannot make a real case, you try to shout down or ad hominem attack your way into pretending you are the reasonable one.    You toss around accusations because you have lost.  I doubt you even see the irony of demonizing a person online that you never met, but are free to project whatever bullshit you can concoct at that moment, in order to win, while talking about bias and people not being rational.

I think Brisket is generally a happier person but who got stuck in a rut due to the cycle of bad news, and lack of positive outlets (Texas football, Trumpism, Abbott, wars, kids growing up and leaving, losing a friend/poster).  While there are moments he has shared which are inspiring (Afghan foster family) there seems to be a slight loneliness lingering.  Maybe he needs a corvette or a young mistress.     

Dude you are out of your fucking mind. My solution was a suggestion of how to erode support for Hamas within Gazans and defeat them diplomatically. I didn't say it was very realistic, in fact, in discussing it with Brisket I literally said the direct opposite. I understand that it's incredibly unlikely for such a solution to be implemented at this point. I did say, however, that I do prefer a difficult solution to one that involves genocide. Holy shit, how crazy, fuck me right? Also, I should note that I never advocated for a diplomatic solution with Hamas, I suggested that the olive branch be extended to the people, in spite of and in defiance of Hamas, who doesn't want that any more than Netanyahu's government does. I understand that you are incredibly horny to conflate all Gazans with Hamas, like some of the people that have brayed for blood in the DT thread, but....you know. Stop it.

Also, Netanyahu absolutely is a right-wing psycho, as is his cabinet full of far-right, religious extremist, ultranationalist bloodthirsty freaks like Itamar Ben-Gvir. Since you just love bringing up the Oslo accords, and subsequently placing 100% of the blame on Palestinians (like you do with everything else), why don't you talk about how the aforemention literal current natsec minister for Israel was among a group of far-right extremist Israelis that threatened the life of, and subsequently assassinated their own PM for signing the accords in the first place. Why don't you talk about how the failure of the accords was almost certainly mostly related to the continued [illegal] expansion into the West Bank, the fact that there were MAJOR sticking points that were left entirely unresolved or ignored by the time it came to sign them, among other things.

The "tried and rejected many times" narrative that you and others try to push in this thread is a fucking reductionist, ahistorical canard that has been discussed and debunked many times over the past decades, but it just keeps coming up because the freak show that is Western media won't stop shoveling it and other bullshit down our throats. You're welcome to watch the video I linked earlier to learn why I say that.

You really need to stop demanding solutions from people you are discussing this situation with on a fucking sports message board. You can stop being a debate pervert for one day, I promise you it will feel good. Half of this post is just literal fucking word salad and I can't figure out what you're trying to say or trying to get me to say. It's like having a flashback to trying to have a conversation with the OP of this thread.

It's incredibly cute and slightly pathetic that you're literally trying to claim victory as if this is some kind of game to you. Be better than that, again, this isn't a debatelord space.

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

7 hours ago, Brian Fantana said:

Dude you are out of your fucking mind. My solution was a suggestion of how to erode support for Hamas within Gazans and defeat them diplomatically. I didn't say it was very realistic, in fact, in discussing it with Brisket I literally said the direct opposite. I understand that it's incredibly unlikely for such a solution to be implemented at this point. I did say, however, that I do prefer a difficult solution to one that involves genocide. Holy shit, how crazy, fuck me right? Also, I should note that I never advocated for a diplomatic solution with Hamas, I suggested that the olive branch be extended to the people, in spite of and in defiance of Hamas, who doesn't want that any more than Netanyahu's government does. I understand that you are incredibly horny to conflate all Gazans with Hamas, like some of the people that have brayed for blood in the DT thread, but....you know. Stop it.

Also, Netanyahu absolutely is a right-wing psycho, as is his cabinet full of far-right, religious extremist, ultranationalist bloodthirsty freaks like Itamar Ben-Gvir. Since you just love bringing up the Oslo accords, and subsequently placing 100% of the blame on Palestinians (like you do with everything else), why don't you talk about how the aforemention literal current natsec minister for Israel was among a group of far-right extremist Israelis that threatened the life of, and subsequently assassinated their own PM for signing the accords in the first place. Why don't you talk about how the failure of the accords was almost certainly mostly related to the continued [illegal] expansion into the West Bank, the fact that there were MAJOR sticking points that were left entirely unresolved or ignored by the time it came to sign them, among other things.

The "tried and rejected many times" narrative that you and others try to push in this thread is a fucking reductionist, ahistorical canard that has been discussed and debunked many times over the past decades, but it just keeps coming up because the freak show that is Western media won't stop shoveling it and other bullshit down our throats. You're welcome to watch the video I linked earlier to learn why I say that.

You really need to stop demanding solutions from people you are discussing this situation with on a fucking sports message board. You can stop being a debate pervert for one day, I promise you it will feel good. Half of this post is just literal fucking word salad and I can't figure out what you're trying to say or trying to get me to say. It's like having a flashback to trying to have a conversation with the OP of this thread.

It's incredibly cute and slightly pathetic that you're literally trying to claim victory as if this is some kind of game to you. Be better than that, again, this isn't a debatelord space.

Let me translate this:

Insult.  I don't know what I am talking about.  Insult.  Evidence which is immaterial.  Big words.  Irrelevant statements trying to pivot away from your failure mixed with insults.

Quite the retort you had. 

------------------------------

This is kind of amusing to me, otherwise I wouldn't participate.   Yet, I am not the one hurling insults and claiming others who disagree with me must be bigoted.  You are the one who stated what Israel was doing was wrong, IIRC called it genocide (it is not) and blamed them for being equally bad.  You falsely equivocate two groups because it is easy, lazy thinking.  And when pressed, you simply refuse to acknowledge the facts and go back to insults and misrepresentations.  Yes, Rabin was murdered by extremists within the Israeli society.  But Netanyahu honored the agreement.  Then what happened? (you don't want to answer this because you know it weakens your hope for a new treaty). 

This is a discussion board, one centered around politics.  That you cannot participate like an adult is really a reflection of your own shortcomings, not mine.  I asked you questions based on your statements.  I am in no position to demand anything from you.  You were under no obligation to answer or reply, but you did.  You were the one who claimed to have a solution but it was really just wishful thinking.  A nice sentiment really.  But one unburdened by the complexities of reality.   Much like how Chainsaw thinks I should receive repatriation of my ancestral lands.  

The world would be better off if we could just lock up the members of Hamas and the Lukid party in a room together give them a bunch of knives and seal the doors off and surround it in 20 feet of concrete.  But since that isn't going to happen it is little more than fantasy.   It is a less nice sentiment, better than the current situation, but also unburdened by reality.  

You might have been better off just saying "this sucks, I hate the loss of life and harm that is coming to people due to the actions of the militants.  I wish there were a simple solution to resolve it, but I fear we will be seeing this play out again and again in my lifetime."   Everyone would agree with that sentiment (well most of us would).  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, chainsaw said:

How are you defining genocide?

The deliberate killing of a large number of people from a particular nation or ethnic group with the aim of destroying that nation or group.  

Varint:

Genocide is defined in § 1091 and includes violent attacks with the specific intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group. There is Federal jurisdiction if the offense is committed within the United States.

Apply this term too broadly and it becomes meaningless.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

"It is important to also recognize the attacks by Hamas did not happen in a vacuum.

The Palestinian people have been subjected to 56 years of suffocating occupation.

They have seen their land steadily devoured by settlements and plagued by violence; their economy stifled; their people displaced and their homes demolished. Their hopes for a political solution to their plight have been vanishing.

But the grievances of the Palestinian people cannot justify the appalling attacks by Hamas. And those appalling attacks cannot justify the collective punishment of the Palestinian people."

Israel kicked out the UN over a milquetoast statement by the secretary general, we are back to Bibi running his fascist campaign of lil old Israel, she needs me to defend her!

Honestly I don't care, delay the assault until next year, it is not like Bibi was not going to weasel his way out of this, and if he wants to delay it is good for civilians.

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

1 hour ago, Nivek said:

The deliberate killing of a large number of people from a particular nation or ethnic group with the aim of destroying that nation or group.  

Varint:

Genocide is defined in § 1091 and includes violent attacks with the specific intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group. There is Federal jurisdiction if the offense is committed within the United States.

Apply this term too broadly and it becomes meaningless.   

Where is this section 1091 coming from?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Nivek said:

Source.  This seems largely consistent with the UN's definition.    

Does that help?  I didn't want to paraphrase.  

Here we go:

Quote

In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

  •     Killing members of the group;
  •     Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
  •     Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
  •     Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
  •     Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

I presume you're disputing whether Israel has the "intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group."

Or are you also disputing whether the enumerated acts have been committed?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, kevwun said:

I have it on good authority that Israel has a secret fleet of subs equipped with catapults.  We're fucked.

They did royally fuckup season 8 with the long night, I sometimes wish I was never as influential as I am, I should have never recommened and D&D should have never read my post about catapults.

Am I wrong and out of touch? no, it is the writers that are wrong.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

Here we go:

I presume you're disputing whether Israel has the "intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group."

Or are you also disputing whether the enumerated acts have been committed?

By that definition, isn’t Hamas committing genocide on the Palestinians in Gaza?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

Here we go:

I presume you're disputing whether Israel has the "intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group."

Or are you also disputing whether the enumerated acts have been committed?

This is where I run into the issue where a broad interpretation can lead to this definition as becoming useless.  Germany invaded France and had intent to destroy part of a national group (French).  But what they did to the French is not the same as to what they did to the Roma or Jewish people.  What Pol Pot did to his own people was absolutely focused on intellectuals and was indeed genocidal.   I think this is why they intentionally left out political.   

So, no it do not think meets the qualifications.  Siege warfare but with supplies, warning civilians of an impending attack, these are not the acts of a genocidal campaign.    

But based on what the reporter wrote about the Israeli video of the attacks, those do seem to meet the criteria (expressed goal of murdering people just based on their religion or nationality.  However, I have not heard any other report which both confirms or denies the individual reporter's impression or the source material.   So I would refrain from using that label so flippantly, lest it lose its impact.

Of course, I may seem a bit hypocritical.  I call the B12 refs corrupt assholes and I believe they have marching orders or have personal grudges against select schools and definite bias.  There are many video recordings, images, and statistics to demonstrate this is not accidental.  So here I feel the term is warranted.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Brian Fantana said:

Dude you are out of your fucking mind. My solution was a suggestion of how to erode support for Hamas within Gazans and defeat them diplomatically. I didn't say it was very realistic, in fact, in discussing it with Brisket I literally said the direct opposite. I understand that it's incredibly unlikely for such a solution to be implemented at this point. I did say, however, that I do prefer a difficult solution to one that involves genocide. Holy shit, how crazy, fuck me right? Also, I should note that I never advocated for a diplomatic solution with Hamas, I suggested that the olive branch be extended to the people, in spite of and in defiance of Hamas, who doesn't want that any more than Netanyahu's government does. I understand that you are incredibly horny to conflate all Gazans with Hamas, like some of the people that have brayed for blood in the DT thread, but....you know. Stop it.

Also, Netanyahu absolutely is a right-wing psycho, as is his cabinet full of far-right, religious extremist, ultranationalist bloodthirsty freaks like Itamar Ben-Gvir. Since you just love bringing up the Oslo accords, and subsequently placing 100% of the blame on Palestinians (like you do with everything else), why don't you talk about how the aforemention literal current natsec minister for Israel was among a group of far-right extremist Israelis that threatened the life of, and subsequently assassinated their own PM for signing the accords in the first place. Why don't you talk about how the failure of the accords was almost certainly mostly related to the continued [illegal] expansion into the West Bank, the fact that there were MAJOR sticking points that were left entirely unresolved or ignored by the time it came to sign them, among other things.

The "tried and rejected many times" narrative that you and others try to push in this thread is a fucking reductionist, ahistorical canard that has been discussed and debunked many times over the past decades, but it just keeps coming up because the freak show that is Western media won't stop shoveling it and other bullshit down our throats. You're welcome to watch the video I linked earlier to learn why I say that.

You really need to stop demanding solutions from people you are discussing this situation with on a fucking sports message board. You can stop being a debate pervert for one day, I promise you it will feel good. Half of this post is just literal fucking word salad and I can't figure out what you're trying to say or trying to get me to say. It's like having a flashback to trying to have a conversation with the OP of this thread.

It's incredibly cute and slightly pathetic that you're literally trying to claim victory as if this is some kind of game to you. Be better than that, again, this isn't a debatelord space.

 

4 hours ago, Nivek said:

Let me translate this:

Insult.  I don't know what I am talking about.  Insult.  Evidence which is immaterial.  Big words.  Irrelevant statements trying to pivot away from your failure mixed with insults.

Quite the retort you had. 

------------------------------

This is kind of amusing to me, otherwise I wouldn't participate.   Yet, I am not the one hurling insults and claiming others who disagree with me must be bigoted.  You are the one who stated what Israel was doing was wrong, IIRC called it genocide (it is not) and blamed them for being equally bad.  You falsely equivocate two groups because it is easy, lazy thinking.  And when pressed, you simply refuse to acknowledge the facts and go back to insults and misrepresentations.  Yes, Rabin was murdered by extremists within the Israeli society.  But Netanyahu honored the agreement.  Then what happened? (you don't want to answer this because you know it weakens your hope for a new treaty). 

This is a discussion board, one centered around politics.  That you cannot participate like an adult is really a reflection of your own shortcomings, not mine.  I asked you questions based on your statements.  I am in no position to demand anything from you.  You were under no obligation to answer or reply, but you did.  You were the one who claimed to have a solution but it was really just wishful thinking.  A nice sentiment really.  But one unburdened by the complexities of reality.   Much like how Chainsaw thinks I should receive repatriation of my ancestral lands.  

The world would be better off if we could just lock up the members of Hamas and the Lukid party in a room together give them a bunch of knives and seal the doors off and surround it in 20 feet of concrete.  But since that isn't going to happen it is little more than fantasy.   It is a less nice sentiment, better than the current situation, but also unburdened by reality.  

You might have been better off just saying "this sucks, I hate the loss of life and harm that is coming to people due to the actions of the militants.  I wish there were a simple solution to resolve it, but I fear we will be seeing this play out again and again in my lifetime."   Everyone would agree with that sentiment (well most of us would).  

 

 

4 hours ago, chainsaw said:

How are you defining genocide?

Y'all should get a room and fuck.

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

11 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

I think you understand the difference between sending humanitarian aid and sending billions and weapons.

The statement was to show that the US, as well as Arab states provide aid. 

And yes I do. Rafah should be open. Israel should not hit it. 

What is your point? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, InkaUtexas said:

The statement was to show that the US, as well as Arab states provide aid. 

And yes I do. Rafah should be open. Israel should not hit it. 

What is your point? 

For reference:

I condemn Hamas, and the US is not knowingly or intentionally providing money or weapons to Hamas.

I condemn genocide, but the US is funding a hostile occupying force that, by definition, is engaged in genocide (unless you believe they are somehow unaware or unintentionally killing a certain group people who had been corralled into a tiny strip of land on the basis of their race).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, chainsaw said:

For reference:

I condemn Hamas, and the US is not knowingly or intentionally providing money or weapons to Hamas.

I condemn genocide, but the US is funding a hostile occupying force that, by definition, is engaged in genocide (unless you believe they are somehow unaware or unintentionally killing a certain group people who had been corralled into a tiny strip of land on the basis of their race).

Question- you call Israel an “occupying force”. Please describe the geography of the land they are occupying, its borders and such. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, chainsaw said:

Are you asking this question in good faith?

I’m trying to figure out what you think Israel is occupying. Are you saying it is occupying the Gaza Strip?

The West Bank?

Or are you saying that Israel is occupying the territory that my map calls “Israel”?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, statsman said:

I’m trying to figure out what you think Israel is occupying. Are you saying it is occupying the Gaza Strip?

The West Bank?

Or are you saying that Israel is occupying the territory that my map calls “Israel”?

So you are or aren't asking in good faith?

I'll be charitable for now and assume that you are asking in good faith.

My answer in two parts.

First, my opinion doesn't matter so much. All of the varying borders were controversial at the time of their respective establishments and I won't begrudge anyone who believes, and can prove, that their ancestral home was taken when those borders were established.

Second, even if are talking about the West Bank, there are settlements within it that are illegal, and the restrictions applicable to Palestinian residents within it, pretty fairly fit the definition of hostile occupation.

I'm aware that some people believe simply acknowledging these facts is akin to denying Israel's right to exist. That is, in my view, a bad faith interpretation (a strawman argument).

There is no problem with Israel (or whatever you want to call it) existing; the problem lies with where and how it has been implemented. I believe those problems are solvable, peacefully, and I condemn all hostilities and intimidation tactics that claim to be undertaken in the name of liberation or security.

Which brings me back to the point I was originally making about how I don't support my tax dollars being used to subsidize acts of terror (if the tax dollars are somehow provided to Hamas) nor do I support them being used to pay for a genocide campaign. We had been discussing whether Israel's actions in Gaza fit the definition of genocide.

We will have to agree to disagree about Israel's intentions being "political" but at least I understand where he's coming from.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It’s a hard one to unravel, even for us graduates of the University of Comancheria at Austin. 
 
I grieve for the Palestinians. It is a real humanitarian crisis. I don’t expect Israel to relieve the crisis. Hamas has taken a couple hundred hostages, civilians, children, to keep the IDF from storming in, and that is an effective tactic (do you grieve for the hostages?). Letting Gaza stew in famine and disease is the only counter tactic Israel has. Taking care of Israelis is Israel’s job. Taking care of Gazans is Hamas’ job. 
 
I don’t blame the allies for the humanitarian disaster in 1945 Germany; I blame the Nazis for starting the war they could not win, and fighting so cruelly. 
 
I don’t blame the US for the humanitarian disaster in 1945 Japan, not even Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I blame Imperial Japan, for starting a fight they could never win, and fighting so cruelly. 
 
I don’t blame the north (counter to how I was raised in Georgia) for the humanitarian disaster in 1863 Savannah and Atlanta. I blame the CSA for starting a war it could never win. 
 
I don’t blame Israel for the humanitarian disaster in Gaza. I blame Hamas, for starting a war it can’t win, and fighting so cruelly. 

Edited by statsman
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a Jew, I’m obviously sensitive to stuff like this and not at all coming from a place of neutrality, but can anyone explain how ripping photos of Israeli hostages from public areas advances the cause? Can anyone explain how breaking the windows of local Jewish owned businesses advances the cause? Can anyone explain how trapping Jewish American college students inside a library while banging on the doors and taunting them advances the cause?

I think Putin is a monster and I think Ukraine is 100% in the right in that battle, but if I stumbled upon a display of missing Russian citizens I wouldn’t think in a million years to deface it or try to tear it down. Why the hell do so many unaffiliated third parties feel it is acceptable in this case?

There’s one time-tested answer that comes to mind, but I’ve been assured that can’t be the case so I guess we’ll never know.

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

i've been kind of wondering/watching for any violence or clashes here in Denver, as there is a pretty large Jewish population here. combine that with a significant immigrant population in Aurora, lots of which seem to be from the ME or Africa...i was initially worried there would be some conflicts here. but so far it's been pretty peaceful, some protests on campuses and such but i haven't heard about anything turning violent, or even destructive like vandalism, than goodness. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Chuckie Finster said:

As a Jew, I’m obviously sensitive to stuff like this and not at all coming from a place of neutrality, but can anyone explain how ripping photos of Israeli hostages from public areas advances the cause? Can anyone explain how breaking the windows of local Jewish owned businesses advances the cause? Can anyone explain how trapping Jewish American college students inside a library while banging on the doors and taunting them advances the cause?

I think Putin is a monster and I think Ukraine is 100% in the right in that battle, but if I stumbled upon a display of missing Russian citizens I wouldn’t think in a million years to deface it or try to tear it down. Why the hell do so many unaffiliated third parties feel it is acceptable in this case?

There’s one time-tested answer that comes to mind, but I’ve been assured that can’t be the case so I guess we’ll never know.

Ironically it has been the more reasonable side preventing the hostages from being killed.

Biden has thrown a lot of strategic cold water on the invasion

Bibi wants to delay the day of reckoning for as long as possible

Pro-Palestinian voices have wanted to prevent a humanitarian tragedy from happening, even if bombings are still killing children.

 

Compare this to Oct 8 when Israel essentially declared the hostages dead and the bloodlust was running high. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...