|
NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. |
On December 09 2023 21:02 Magic Powers wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2023 19:43 GreenHorizons wrote:
“Israel has the right to defend itself in compliance with international law, including international humanitarian law..."
Sometimes US politicians/officials think they are being so clever and then someone goes and asks the obvious question and it becomes abundantly obvious how full of shit they are. For that particular refrain it's been "So, are they doing that?" then you see them dissemble and pettifog into oblivion. I think Biden is genuinely trying to make a positive difference, as his tone has shifted from staunch support to calls for moderation, but more concretely his hands seem to be tied because it's so difficult to find words of criticism for Israel that cannot be falsely construed as support for terrorist groups. Just take a look at this: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/nov/30/joe-biden-israel-gaza-ceasefire-politics" “Hamas unleashed a terrorist attack because they fear nothing more than Israelis and Palestinians living side by side in peace,” the US president’s X account said on Tuesday. “To continue down the path of terror, violence, killing, and war is to give Hamas what they seek. We can’t do that.” Some on the right accused Biden of drawing moral equivalence between Hamas’s terrorist attack and Israel’s bombing campaign. Tom Cotton, a military veteran and Republican senator for Arkansas, tweeted: “It took Biden only a few weeks after the worst massacre of Jews since the Holocaust to turn on Israel and compare Israel’s actions to terror.” " His words were interpreted as "comparing Israel's actions to terror". No, he didn't. But also, yes it is terror. But that's not something Biden can say explicitly, even if he were to believe it. And he didn't even say it. But it's so easy to misconstrue his words. He more or less has to walk a tight rope, and if he can't speak the truth as he sees it, then how can he force change?
Some journalist I'm not familiar with made some points I agree with on this recently. Basically, Gaza is Biden's version of Trump's "I could shoot someone on 5th ave".
Here is a little test of this point: Remember when Donald Trump said, “I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot someone and I wouldn’t lose voters”? That was interpreted by those of us who dislike Trump as a shocking statement about his hypnotized fan base—a group of voters so worshipful and in thrall to his cult of personality that they would not even reassess their support if their candidate killed someone. What a pathetic, brainwashed crew! We tut-tutted in disgust.
Joe Biden has directly facilitated, and is continuing to facilitate, the violent deaths of tens of thousands of civilians in Gaza. These deaths, or most of them at least, would not have occurred without Joe Biden’s direct support, both politically, diplomatically, and in the form of arms and military aid. It has, for the past two months, been fully within Joe Biden’s power to bring this slaughter to an end. Israel’s political and military leaders, from Netanyahu on down, have publicly acknowledged the absolute necessity of U.S. support for Israel’s ability to continue carrying out its brutal bombing campaign in Gaza. The Biden administration may not shrug or plead ignorance or claim that they are not responsible. Their leverage over Israel’s actions is, in practical terms, absolute. Joe Biden bears responsibility for what is happening, and what continues to happen every day there. It is a policy choice. It is, on balance, his preference. When American diplomats say that they wish that fewer civilians were being killed, it means nothing; unstated is the fact that the civilian death toll has not yet risen to the level that would make the US government decide that things had gone too far. What has happened so far in Gaza is, in the judgment of Joe Biden, acceptable. Though it is difficult now to keep a daily tally of deaths, we know that thousands of Palestinian children have been killed by Israel so far.
If you are opposed to a president who shoots one person in the middle of Fifth Avenue, how do you feel about a president who facilitates the violent deaths of six or eight or ten thousand children? I imagine that such a line of children would stretch for miles up Fifth Avenue. Joe Biden could calmly walk down each block, shooting one child after another in the head, his body count far exceeding Trump’s little daydream. This is a grotesque vision to imagine. But it is, effectively, what Joe Biden has done with his policy choices. Thousands of dead children—crushed, maimed, blown up with bombs that we provided. Joe Biden did that. He did not have to shoot anyone on Fifth Avenue. The deaths are his just the same. Whenever you hear people talk about how politically difficult the situation in the Middle East is, how difficult a position Biden has been placed in, ask yourself: Is Joe Biden in a more difficult position than a five year old child who has just had a 2000-pound bomb dropped on her head? Would telling our political ally that it must stop bombing civilians require more courage than it takes for an exhausted doctor in a hospital in Gaza to amputate the limbs of screaming children with no anesthetic? No? Then we are seeing an awful example of political cowardice in action. To make excuses for it is an insult to all of those dead kids. And all of those who die each day that this goes on.
Source
|
United States42512 Posts
GH, not everyone sees it the way you do. Trump’s statement was a literal objective statement. You saying that Biden’s actions make you feel like he feels a certain way is not comparable.
|
On December 10 2023 03:08 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2023 02:23 Mohdoo wrote:On December 09 2023 11:55 WombaT wrote:On December 08 2023 13:16 Cerebrate1 wrote:On December 08 2023 11:31 WombaT wrote:On December 08 2023 09:47 Cerebrate1 wrote:On December 08 2023 07:30 WombaT wrote:On December 08 2023 05:27 JimmiC wrote:On December 08 2023 05:20 Nebuchad wrote:On December 08 2023 05:02 JimmiC wrote:
[quote]
No I do not think that ethnostate who runs a apartheid and wants ethnic cleansing and genocide would be stopped by people like me. I believe a state like that, that had the means (power) and opportunity would just do it, see Russia.
It would absolutely be stopped, though. When you analyze the situation of the Middle East, the fact that Israel has full US and western support is quite important, it's not something that they can just ignore. And they know that, btw, that's why so much of their propaganda is in english. For the record, Russia didn't "just do it" either. There were eight years between Crimea and the current war. My understanding is that one of the reasons why Putin launched it was that he thought it would be very easy and that the clean victory would help with his image within Russia, similarly to how the Chechnya campaign helped his image. I certainly think that there was a calculation there. You shouldn't conclude that because someone is engaged in an irrational far right campaign, it follows that they have no capacity to think tactically. I do not, I just completely disagree with you tactics. For a long time no one would have cared in the power positions in the west and US if the Israel had just annexed the land they won in the war and displaced the people. That is kinda how it worked for a long time. Now I do not think it is that different, we can piss and moan all we want about all sorts of things but it does not really change what the decision makers do and at the end of the day Israel is about the only consistent ally the west has in the middle east that is filled with countries full of autocratic leaders who want to destroy the west. Now if it would be unpopular in Israel, as long as its a democracy, that would matter because he would lose power. They’re not a particularly useful ally in any practical sense. Israel get a fuckton more mileage out of these alliances, especially with the US than the other way around. The wider West doesn’t really give much of a fuck if you’re an autocratic regime if you have something else that’s worth bartering. America gets a lot of value from Israel as an ally. 1. They are the most real ally they will ever have in that neighborhood. Israel has a lot of cultural and political similarities to the West. Other nearby "allies" are fair weather friends who would swap allegiance with China or the like if the wind changed. 2. Israel provides a lot of civilian tech similar to Taiwan (just more diverse). Tons of startups and innovation in Israel. They make all kinds of apps and things and lots of US tech companies have R&D centers (if not secondary HQs) in Israel. Intel microchips, PayPal, WhatsApp, cell phones, etc. Israel helps maintain the all too critical tech edge, and it preferentially partners with US companies very frequently. 3. Military intelligence. Israel happens to have some egg on their face right now w Oct 7, but Israel still has, bar none, the best intelligence over the Middle East of anyone. If the US wants to attack ISIS, prevent Asad from using chemical weapons, check in on Iran's next move, etc, you better bet they are consulting with Israel and hearing from some guy on the ground that can give a better inside scoop than a spy satellite. 4. Military tech. No one gets more practical tests of (or spends as much of GDP on R&D of) missile defenses than Israel. Considering the biggest actual threat left to Americans defensively is nuclear missiles, it's pretty nice to have Israel on your team when Russia subtly threatens nukes every other month. So too with other anti-terrorist technologies, since the US tends to face similar opponents. Not to mention all the other cool cutting edge stuff that comes out of Israel like cyberweapons, unmanned vehicles, and that Trophy system, which is why Israels tanks keep surviving antitank rockets that leveled Russias cavalry. A lot of those are developed in partnership with the US, so they never lose their edge. 5. Israel carries it's own weight. South Korea requires tons of US boots on the ground. Many NATO nations are complacent and slack on their own militaries. Other nations that allow US bases, require the US to station troops and supply them. Israel maintains it's own high grade military with lots of safe runway for the US to use if it wants, but also Israel will probably bomb the baddies themselves anyways. Even US financial aid largely goes straight back to US arms manufacturers, providing safe American jobs back home. There is not a long list of allies that are as strategically located and valuable for US geopolitical interests as Israel. If most of the benefits of alliance come from military advancement that you’re also happening to be funding to the tune of billions of dollars a year as an aside is that particularly advantageous to you? The US gives about 3 billion a year to Israel. That money has strings that basically mean that a lot has to be spent specifically on US weapons. So that part is kinda just a subsidy for US defense contractors. Besides for which, it comes with free testing, because Israel will almost certainly use that stuff in a war in short order, giving valuable feedback on the efficacy of those weapons in modern combat situations. Compare that to US spending in South Korea and Japan, and according to this article, between 2016 and 2019, the US spent an average of 4 billion a year in South Korea and 7 billion a year in Japan. And if America's enemies attack, that means American soldiers die over there, while in Israel, only Israelis are at risk. Meanwhile, Israel spends around 20 billion a year on military spending. That's getting a lot more stuff than that initial 3, and stuff that the US doesn't have to create infrastructure to build either. Some of which, America then gets to buy to have in their own arsenal (like the Iron Dome). Besides for which, most of the benefits I mentioned are things that can't just be bought. A safe base in a rough neighborhood. The ingenuity of the "Startup Nation" and the effort put in by people who feel that if they have an existential need to succeed. Arabic speakers and cultural understanding pulled from people who have immigrated there from basically every country in the Middle East. The intelligence sharing alone is pretty solid bang for your buck if and when America makes moves in the region (read: frequently) because it allows them to be more targeted and keep their people safer. Which of the various (ill-advised) forays from the West into the Middle East did Israel help out with? Probably all of them to one extent or another (although only someone with top security clearance will be able to tell you with exactly what and how). You may personally disagree with American policy in the region, but once it is what it is, it's certainly in their best interests to have solid intelligence and someone with shared interests right there. The US is literally allies with other countries in the region who barely shelve their anti-Israel sentiment for political expediency I'm not sure what you are saying with this line. Saudi Arabia, Egypt, UAE, and others have been working more with Israel on international projects, even as they spray the obligatory spit on Israel for domestic audiences. Turkey is another ball of wax, but Israel is far from the biggest issue with the Western alliance with them. Although I suppose Israel’s very existence is to some extent a destabilising influence in that region so that has to be taken into account in a valuation. Although also obviously that’s not really the fault of the current denizens of Israel. There’s definitely a weird pass people give Arab countries for hating Jews. It’s like it’s such a baseline assumption people pretend it’s some kind of natural, totally ok thing. When a government like Hamas does something antisemitic, we are assured most Palestinians are peaceful and just want a 2 state solution. Then polls indicate a huge majority of Palestinians want Israel wiped off the map and people shrug as if collective punishment is totally fine because of some kinda vague assertion of “ancestral land” or something similar. The end result is people trying to make “Jews shouldn’t live in the Middle East” some kind of core baseline assumption without it being challenged. Even if we assume the formation of Israel was morally improper, dissolving Israel is not a valid response to that assumption. Killing Israelis is not a valid response. In a more extreme example, if native Americans in the US suddenly decided Hamas has the right idea and started trying to kill as many people living in “ancestral lands” as possible, we’d all agree manifest destiny and everything associated with it was super awful. But we’d have an easy time saying “yeah but like, it’s not like we should just kill everyone currently living in Boston as some kind of balancing”. Based on the discussion I was previously having I feel this is pretty unfair really. My point was that Israel isn’t a particularly useful ally, I got some pushback there. One of which was that Israel provided useful intelligence. To which I responded that Israel providing useful intelligence is kind of a circular thing given that the need for such intelligence is kind of precipitated by their existence as a state. Not as any kind of value judgment just as an observation I’m not sure how the fuck it got to that perception of what I said
You mentioned Israel’s existence is fundamentally destabilizing. It is destabilizing because a large number of people who live near Israel want Israel to stop existing. And as you said, the current denizens of Israel aren’t responsible for that. When you review the list of people taken as hostages, it’s easy to conclude those people were not responsible for the formation of Israel. So that means these individuals are not the reason some of these people don’t want Israel to exist. But the toddlers were kidnapped despite this being obvious to the kidnappers.
When Hamas decided to kidnap toddlers, and then keep them as hostages for a very long time, I view that as collective punishment. It is a perfect example of how the protocol of collective punishment towards Jews is still in full swing. And it can’t be labeled as unintentional crossfire or anything because of the logistics involved with keeping hostages and negotiating for their release.
|
On December 10 2023 03:00 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2023 02:42 Magic Powers wrote:On December 10 2023 02:23 Mohdoo wrote:On December 09 2023 11:55 WombaT wrote:On December 08 2023 13:16 Cerebrate1 wrote:On December 08 2023 11:31 WombaT wrote:On December 08 2023 09:47 Cerebrate1 wrote:On December 08 2023 07:30 WombaT wrote:On December 08 2023 05:27 JimmiC wrote:On December 08 2023 05:20 Nebuchad wrote:
[quote]
It would absolutely be stopped, though. When you analyze the situation of the Middle East, the fact that Israel has full US and western support is quite important, it's not something that they can just ignore. And they know that, btw, that's why so much of their propaganda is in english.
For the record, Russia didn't "just do it" either. There were eight years between Crimea and the current war. My understanding is that one of the reasons why Putin launched it was that he thought it would be very easy and that the clean victory would help with his image within Russia, similarly to how the Chechnya campaign helped his image. I certainly think that there was a calculation there. You shouldn't conclude that because someone is engaged in an irrational far right campaign, it follows that they have no capacity to think tactically. I do not, I just completely disagree with you tactics. For a long time no one would have cared in the power positions in the west and US if the Israel had just annexed the land they won in the war and displaced the people. That is kinda how it worked for a long time. Now I do not think it is that different, we can piss and moan all we want about all sorts of things but it does not really change what the decision makers do and at the end of the day Israel is about the only consistent ally the west has in the middle east that is filled with countries full of autocratic leaders who want to destroy the west. Now if it would be unpopular in Israel, as long as its a democracy, that would matter because he would lose power. They’re not a particularly useful ally in any practical sense. Israel get a fuckton more mileage out of these alliances, especially with the US than the other way around. The wider West doesn’t really give much of a fuck if you’re an autocratic regime if you have something else that’s worth bartering. America gets a lot of value from Israel as an ally. 1. They are the most real ally they will ever have in that neighborhood. Israel has a lot of cultural and political similarities to the West. Other nearby "allies" are fair weather friends who would swap allegiance with China or the like if the wind changed. 2. Israel provides a lot of civilian tech similar to Taiwan (just more diverse). Tons of startups and innovation in Israel. They make all kinds of apps and things and lots of US tech companies have R&D centers (if not secondary HQs) in Israel. Intel microchips, PayPal, WhatsApp, cell phones, etc. Israel helps maintain the all too critical tech edge, and it preferentially partners with US companies very frequently. 3. Military intelligence. Israel happens to have some egg on their face right now w Oct 7, but Israel still has, bar none, the best intelligence over the Middle East of anyone. If the US wants to attack ISIS, prevent Asad from using chemical weapons, check in on Iran's next move, etc, you better bet they are consulting with Israel and hearing from some guy on the ground that can give a better inside scoop than a spy satellite. 4. Military tech. No one gets more practical tests of (or spends as much of GDP on R&D of) missile defenses than Israel. Considering the biggest actual threat left to Americans defensively is nuclear missiles, it's pretty nice to have Israel on your team when Russia subtly threatens nukes every other month. So too with other anti-terrorist technologies, since the US tends to face similar opponents. Not to mention all the other cool cutting edge stuff that comes out of Israel like cyberweapons, unmanned vehicles, and that Trophy system, which is why Israels tanks keep surviving antitank rockets that leveled Russias cavalry. A lot of those are developed in partnership with the US, so they never lose their edge. 5. Israel carries it's own weight. South Korea requires tons of US boots on the ground. Many NATO nations are complacent and slack on their own militaries. Other nations that allow US bases, require the US to station troops and supply them. Israel maintains it's own high grade military with lots of safe runway for the US to use if it wants, but also Israel will probably bomb the baddies themselves anyways. Even US financial aid largely goes straight back to US arms manufacturers, providing safe American jobs back home. There is not a long list of allies that are as strategically located and valuable for US geopolitical interests as Israel. If most of the benefits of alliance come from military advancement that you’re also happening to be funding to the tune of billions of dollars a year as an aside is that particularly advantageous to you? The US gives about 3 billion a year to Israel. That money has strings that basically mean that a lot has to be spent specifically on US weapons. So that part is kinda just a subsidy for US defense contractors. Besides for which, it comes with free testing, because Israel will almost certainly use that stuff in a war in short order, giving valuable feedback on the efficacy of those weapons in modern combat situations. Compare that to US spending in South Korea and Japan, and according to this article, between 2016 and 2019, the US spent an average of 4 billion a year in South Korea and 7 billion a year in Japan. And if America's enemies attack, that means American soldiers die over there, while in Israel, only Israelis are at risk. Meanwhile, Israel spends around 20 billion a year on military spending. That's getting a lot more stuff than that initial 3, and stuff that the US doesn't have to create infrastructure to build either. Some of which, America then gets to buy to have in their own arsenal (like the Iron Dome). Besides for which, most of the benefits I mentioned are things that can't just be bought. A safe base in a rough neighborhood. The ingenuity of the "Startup Nation" and the effort put in by people who feel that if they have an existential need to succeed. Arabic speakers and cultural understanding pulled from people who have immigrated there from basically every country in the Middle East. The intelligence sharing alone is pretty solid bang for your buck if and when America makes moves in the region (read: frequently) because it allows them to be more targeted and keep their people safer. Which of the various (ill-advised) forays from the West into the Middle East did Israel help out with? Probably all of them to one extent or another (although only someone with top security clearance will be able to tell you with exactly what and how). You may personally disagree with American policy in the region, but once it is what it is, it's certainly in their best interests to have solid intelligence and someone with shared interests right there. The US is literally allies with other countries in the region who barely shelve their anti-Israel sentiment for political expediency I'm not sure what you are saying with this line. Saudi Arabia, Egypt, UAE, and others have been working more with Israel on international projects, even as they spray the obligatory spit on Israel for domestic audiences. Turkey is another ball of wax, but Israel is far from the biggest issue with the Western alliance with them. Although I suppose Israel’s very existence is to some extent a destabilising influence in that region so that has to be taken into account in a valuation. Although also obviously that’s not really the fault of the current denizens of Israel. There’s definitely a weird pass people give Arab countries for hating Jews. It’s like it’s such a baseline assumption people pretend it’s some kind of natural, totally ok thing. When a government like Hamas does something antisemitic, we are assured most Palestinians are peaceful and just want a 2 state solution. Then polls indicate a huge majority of Palestinians want Israel wiped off the map and people shrug as if collective punishment is totally fine because of some kinda vague assertion of “ancestral land” or something similar. The end result is people trying to make “Jews shouldn’t live in the Middle East” some kind of core baseline assumption without it being challenged. Even if we assume the formation of Israel was morally improper, dissolving Israel is not a valid response to that assumption. Killing Israelis is not a valid response. In a more extreme example, if native Americans in the US suddenly decided Hamas has the right idea and started trying to kill as many people living in “ancestral lands” as possible, we’d all agree manifest destiny and everything associated with it was super awful. But we’d have an easy time saying “yeah but like, it’s not like we should just kill everyone currently living in Boston as some kind of balancing”. I don't generally accuse people of strawmanning, but I'm making an exception for this. This is one of the best examples of a horribly misconstrued strawman I've read in a very long time. From a generalized and unsubstantiated statement of Arabs hating Jews to referring to Hamas and then broadly to Palestinians with no distinction to other Arabs and an especially confusing reference to claims of ancestral land. And no reference to people linking any of this together in the manner it's being presented. This is an absolutely mindblowingly terrible shitpost of yours, Mohdoo. I know you can do better, but you don't seem to be trying. I’m not gonna do the Arab dance with you because I’ve already shown Arab nations commonly identify themselves as a group when describing the Palestinian situation. https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/arab-states-say-palestinians-must-stay-their-land-war-escalates-2023-10-13/Show nested quote +
"This is the cause of all causes, the cause of all Arabs," Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi said on Thursday. "It is important that the (Palestinian) people remain steadfast and present on their land."
I’m not gonna pretend the term Arab is like describing South Americans as Mexicans or something lol I’ve also linked historical documentation the response to the formation of Israel from neighboring Arab nations previously. As a brief summary, collective punishment was widely utilized by Arab nations against Jews within their countries as a response to the formation of Israel. This collective punishment was grotesque and clearly extremely unethical. People generally excuse it as being a response to Israel. But collective punishment is not ethical. It is not reasonable to punish Jews in other countries for reasons pertaining to Israel. If you’re trying to say there is not a great deal of racism towards Jews in the Middle East, I’m not sure we are living in the same reality and perhaps it’s a topic you and I can’t productively discuss. We’ve also discussed recent polling in both West Bank and Gaza regarding Israel’s right to exist. It’s not a pretty situation. I am only referring to those polls in my description of Palestinian perspectives on Israel existing and Jews remaining alive. And the comparison to native Americans could only be regarded as invalid because Europeans were not living there coexisting previously. Jews and Arabs had lived in the Palestine’ish region for a long time. The borders and names have changed all over the place throughout history, but Jews hanging out around there and doing stuff was has been going on for a long time. The idea that Jews living there being some kind of abomination or violation of ancient, sacred rituals is just not real at all. The only way we could say native Americans have less of a right to mirror the actions of Hamas would be that they lost so long ago it expired or something. But the native Americans have way more moral high ground when compared to the Palestinians saying Israel shouldn’t exist. It a And yet none of us would say “yeah but they are mad for a REASON!!!” if they launched an attack on Boston, raped a ton of women, killed 1200 people, and held hostages, raping them and torturing them along the way, for months.
Nowhere does it say that "Arab nations" identify themselves as anything. One Arab president said something, Arab people weren't asked. Furthermore they're united behind their opposition to Israel, not their allegiance to Hamas. Hamas =/= Palestinians.
You've been putting in the lowest of efforts lately.
|
On December 10 2023 03:58 KwarK wrote:
GH, not everyone sees it the way you do. Trump’s statement was a literal objective statement. You saying that Biden’s actions make you feel like he feels a certain way is not comparable.
I don't mean it's like Biden said "I could aid and abet an ethnic cleansing campaign and not lose my supporters" it's like it because his supporters scoff at the idea that he should lose votes for aiding and abetting an ethnic cleansing campaign.
|
On December 10 2023 04:09 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2023 03:58 KwarK wrote:
GH, not everyone sees it the way you do. Trump’s statement was a literal objective statement. You saying that Biden’s actions make you feel like he feels a certain way is not comparable. I don't mean it's like Biden said "I could aid and abet an ethnic cleansing campaign and not lose my supporters" it's like it because his supporters scoff at the idea that he should lose votes for aiding and abetting an ethnic cleansing campaign.
First off, I wouldn't call myself a supporter of Joe Biden, so let's get that out of the way. However, the question put before the voters won't be: should the US reprimand Israel, but ultimately still support them, or sanction them? None of the Republicans want to sanction Israel. Republicans, with Trump leading the charge, are cheerleading Israel's bombing campaign in Gaza. So it isn't really a fair question whether this is Biden's 5 Ave. moment. It's more like the US (and generally speaking, the West)'s 5th Avenue moment. We are collectively as the US and EU telling Israel that it is totally okay to bomb hundreds/thousands of children to death. Whether it's Joe Biden's tacit approval, Trump's gleeful approval or Sanchez's disapproval: not one finger is lifted by anyone to make Israel stop their attack.
|
I wouldn't drag the whole West into it. Most of the West is just watching and hoping the problem will fix itself. America is the only Western player who can "tell" Israel anything.
|
On December 10 2023 06:13 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2023 04:09 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 10 2023 03:58 KwarK wrote:
GH, not everyone sees it the way you do. Trump’s statement was a literal objective statement. You saying that Biden’s actions make you feel like he feels a certain way is not comparable. I don't mean it's like Biden said "I could aid and abet an ethnic cleansing campaign and not lose my supporters" it's like it because his supporters scoff at the idea that he should lose votes for aiding and abetting an ethnic cleansing campaign. First off, I wouldn't call myself a supporter of Joe Biden, so let's get that out of the way. However, the question put before the voters won't be: should the US reprimand Israel, but ultimately still support them, or sanction them? None of the Republicans want to sanction Israel. Republicans, with Trump leading the charge, are cheerleading Israel's bombing campaign in Gaza. So it isn't really a fair question whether this is Biden's 5 Ave. moment. It's more like the US (and generally speaking, the West)'s 5th Avenue moment. We are collectively as the US and EU telling Israel that it is totally okay to bomb hundreds/thousands of children to death. Whether it's Joe Biden's tacit approval, Trump's gleeful approval or Sanchez's disapproval: not one finger is lifted by anyone to make Israel stop their attack.
The part that people love to leave out of supporting Israel is that Israel is definitely entirely wiped out and all Israelis killed in the absence of support from the US. The only way to remove the silly “aiding and abetting ethnic cleansing” label is to provide zero support for Israel. Everyone understands that means Israel would no longer exist. It’s not something people haven’t considered. They are just open to the idea.
Hamas wants all Jews to be killed. Rather than neighboring nations calling for Hamas to lay down their weapons and surrender, they call for a ceasefire to allow Hamas to continue operating. We’ve seen clear as day it’s not like Hamas is some kind of military power preventing Israel from killing Palestinians. Israel has been slicing through Palestinian gravy seals like a hot knife through butter. Hamas surrendering would undoubtedly reduce Palestinian suffering. And yet that never seems to be the messaging we see out of groups that are supposedly sympathetic to Palestinians. For some reason everyone seems comfortable with “we will tirelessly strive to kill all Jews” continuing to exist. If we know Hamas is not providing protection to Palestinians, I wonder what incentive there is to not encourage Hamas to surrender.
|
On December 10 2023 06:37 Sent. wrote:
I wouldn't drag the whole West into it. Most of the West is just watching and hoping the problem will fix itself. America is the only Western player who can "tell" Israel anything.
Yeah, it's really sorta "who can 'tell' the US anything" because basically every other country on the planet supports a ceasefire and the US/Biden uniquely stands in the way of that. The UK being the next closest with their abstention on the resolution demanding a ceasefire that was cosponsored by over 100 other countries.
As the Secretary General of Amnesty International put it:
“By vetoing this resolution, the US has displayed a callous disregard for civilian suffering in the face of a staggering death toll, extensive destruction and an unprecedented humanitarian catastrophe happening in the occupied Gaza Strip.
“The US has brazenly wielded and weaponized its veto to strongarm the UN Security Council, further undermining its credibility and ability to live up to its mandate to maintain international peace and security.
“There can be no justification for continuing to block meaningful action by the UN Security Council to stop massive civilian bloodshed. The use of the veto is morally indefensible and a dereliction of the US duty to prevent atrocity crimes and uphold international law. “
“On top of blocking the adoption of a ceasefire that would end mass humanitarian suffering in Gaza, aid the return of hostages, and calm tension multiplying in the region, the US continues to transfer US-made munitions to the government of Israel that contribute to the decimation of entire families. “
“As the only state to veto, it’s clear the US stands isolated from much of world, and a large portion of its own population. It is displaying a complete absence of global leadership and failing to understand the historical significance of the moment.
“The US purports to champion a rules-based international order, however its brazen double standards and disregard for international law has repercussions that extend well beyond the horrific catastrophe in Gaza, weakening the already enfeebled international system for protecting civilians in conflict.
“As a movement of over 10 million people, we urge everyone across the world to act now and press their governments to show that international law exists to protect everyone by ending this carnage via an enduring ceasefire. Restoring humanity is a pre-requisite to lay the foundation for a future grounded in the rights of all, and end to apartheid, and justice and reparation for victims.”
www.amnesty.org
|
On December 10 2023 06:47 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2023 06:13 Acrofales wrote:On December 10 2023 04:09 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 10 2023 03:58 KwarK wrote:
GH, not everyone sees it the way you do. Trump’s statement was a literal objective statement. You saying that Biden’s actions make you feel like he feels a certain way is not comparable. I don't mean it's like Biden said "I could aid and abet an ethnic cleansing campaign and not lose my supporters" it's like it because his supporters scoff at the idea that he should lose votes for aiding and abetting an ethnic cleansing campaign. First off, I wouldn't call myself a supporter of Joe Biden, so let's get that out of the way. However, the question put before the voters won't be: should the US reprimand Israel, but ultimately still support them, or sanction them? None of the Republicans want to sanction Israel. Republicans, with Trump leading the charge, are cheerleading Israel's bombing campaign in Gaza. So it isn't really a fair question whether this is Biden's 5 Ave. moment. It's more like the US (and generally speaking, the West)'s 5th Avenue moment. We are collectively as the US and EU telling Israel that it is totally okay to bomb hundreds/thousands of children to death. Whether it's Joe Biden's tacit approval, Trump's gleeful approval or Sanchez's disapproval: not one finger is lifted by anyone to make Israel stop their attack. The part that people love to leave out of supporting Israel is that Israel is definitely entirely wiped out and all Israelis killed in the absence of support from the US. The only way to remove the silly “aiding and abetting ethnic cleansing” label is to provide zero support for Israel. Everyone understands that means Israel would no longer exist. It’s not something people haven’t considered. They are just open to the idea. Hamas wants all Jews to be killed. Rather than neighboring nations calling for Hamas to lay down their weapons and surrender, they call for a ceasefire to allow Hamas to continue operating. We’ve seen clear as day it’s not like Hamas is some kind of military power preventing Israel from killing Palestinians. Israel has been slicing through Palestinian gravy seals like a hot knife through butter. Hamas surrendering would undoubtedly reduce Palestinian suffering. And yet that never seems to be the messaging we see out of groups that are supposedly sympathetic to Palestinians. For some reason everyone seems comfortable with “we will tirelessly strive to kill all Jews” continuing to exist. If we know Hamas is not providing protection to Palestinians, I wonder what incentive there is to not encourage Hamas to surrender.
"Definitely entirely wiped out"? Says who? Any experts making that claim?
|
On December 10 2023 06:47 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2023 06:13 Acrofales wrote:On December 10 2023 04:09 GreenHorizons wrote:On December 10 2023 03:58 KwarK wrote:
GH, not everyone sees it the way you do. Trump’s statement was a literal objective statement. You saying that Biden’s actions make you feel like he feels a certain way is not comparable. I don't mean it's like Biden said "I could aid and abet an ethnic cleansing campaign and not lose my supporters" it's like it because his supporters scoff at the idea that he should lose votes for aiding and abetting an ethnic cleansing campaign. First off, I wouldn't call myself a supporter of Joe Biden, so let's get that out of the way. However, the question put before the voters won't be: should the US reprimand Israel, but ultimately still support them, or sanction them? None of the Republicans want to sanction Israel. Republicans, with Trump leading the charge, are cheerleading Israel's bombing campaign in Gaza. So it isn't really a fair question whether this is Biden's 5 Ave. moment. It's more like the US (and generally speaking, the West)'s 5th Avenue moment. We are collectively as the US and EU telling Israel that it is totally okay to bomb hundreds/thousands of children to death. Whether it's Joe Biden's tacit approval, Trump's gleeful approval or Sanchez's disapproval: not one finger is lifted by anyone to make Israel stop their attack. The part that people love to leave out of supporting Israel is that Israel is definitely entirely wiped out and all Israelis killed in the absence of support from the US. The only way to remove the silly “aiding and abetting ethnic cleansing” label is to provide zero support for Israel. Everyone understands that means Israel would no longer exist. It’s not something people haven’t considered. They are just open to the idea. Hamas wants all Jews to be killed. Rather than neighboring nations calling for Hamas to lay down their weapons and surrender, they call for a ceasefire to allow Hamas to continue operating. We’ve seen clear as day it’s not like Hamas is some kind of military power preventing Israel from killing Palestinians. Israel has been slicing through Palestinian gravy seals like a hot knife through butter. Hamas surrendering would undoubtedly reduce Palestinian suffering. And yet that never seems to be the messaging we see out of groups that are supposedly sympathetic to Palestinians. For some reason everyone seems comfortable with “we will tirelessly strive to kill all Jews” continuing to exist. If we know Hamas is not providing protection to Palestinians, I wonder what incentive there is to not encourage Hamas to surrender.
Yeah, everyone who isn't on board with killing tens of thousands of people and bombing hundreds of thousands of homes is actually just a terrorist and wishes for all Jews to die, and nothing else. There could be no other reason anyone might be opposed to indiscriminate bombings of a densely populated ghetto, and there's definitely no other reason anyone might want a ceasefire during a military operation that displaced millions of people and left them with no access to medicine, shelter, or food. If anyone is not happy with the situation they are definitely an antisemite and a monster!
|
On December 10 2023 06:58 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2023 06:37 Sent. wrote:
I wouldn't drag the whole West into it. Most of the West is just watching and hoping the problem will fix itself. America is the only Western player who can "tell" Israel anything. Yeah, it's really sorta "who can 'tell' the US anything" because basically every other country on the planet supports a ceasefire and the US/Biden uniquely stands in the way of that. The UK being the next closest with their abstention on the resolution demanding a ceasefire that was cosponsored by over 100 other countries.
+ Show Spoiler +the very important country of
On December 10 2023 08:12 Salazarz wrote:
Yeah, everyone who isn't on board with killing tens of thousands of people and bombing hundreds of thousands of homes is actually just a terrorist and wishes for all Jews to die, and nothing else. There could be no other reason anyone might be opposed to indiscriminate bombings of a densely populated ghetto, and there's definitely no other reason anyone might want a ceasefire during a military operation that displaced millions of people and left them with no access to medicine, shelter, or food. If anyone is not happy with the situation they are definitely an antisemite and a monster!
Hamas seems to be stealing the humanitarian aid Israel is sending in.
I've heard accusations that Israel is attempting total genocide in Gaza. However, the population of Gaza is skyrocketing... so Israel is failing pretty hard if that is what they are trying to do.
|
Mohdoo, two things.
First, to the extent that US aid is existentially necessary for Israel, the hope (for people saying US aid should be contingent on Israel respecting Palestinians’ human rights) is that Israel would, recognizing that existential necessity, start respecting Palestinians’ human rights and keep US aid, not that it would continue not doing so, lose US aid, and then get obliterated by enemies. The hope rests on Israel acting in rational self-interest.
Second, about the supposed double standard between people complaining about Israel and about Hamas: I mean, sure, there are antisemites, and that’s bad, but there’s also the matter of agency. American taxpayers are supplying the IDF (unless things have changed a lot recently?), so it makes sense for American taxpayers to speak up if they hate what the IDF is doing. The same taxpayers hopefully also hate what Hamas is doing, but they don’t have agency over it.
I don’t think it’s that crazy to wonder why US aid isn’t made contingent on Israel respecting Palestinians’ human rights. I think the answer is either that (a) US presidents tend to think the US electorate doesn’t care much about Palestinians or (b) US presidents tend to think that playing chicken with Israel would fundamentally worsen the US—Israel relationship even if the US won the game of chicken (that is, successfully strong-armed Israel into respecting Palestinians’ human rights by threatening to withhold aid). Maybe both are true.
|
|
|
On December 10 2023 09:24 Djabanete wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Mohdoo, two things.
First, to the extent that US aid is existentially necessary for Israel, the hope (for people saying US aid should be contingent on Israel respecting Palestinians’ human rights) is that Israel would, recognizing that existential necessity, start respecting Palestinians’ human rights and keep US aid, not that it would continue not doing so, lose US aid, and then get obliterated by enemies. The hope rests on Israel acting in rational self-interest. I don’t think it’s that crazy to wonder why US aid isn’t made contingent on Israel respecting Palestinians’ human rights. I think the answer is either that (a) US presidents tend to think the US electorate doesn’t care much about Palestinians or (b) US presidents tend to think that playing chicken with Israel would fundamentally worsen the US—Israel relationship even if the US won the game of chicken (that is, successfully strong-armed Israel into respecting Palestinians’ human rights by threatening to withhold aid). Maybe both are true.
I'm not getting into your other arguments, but I just want to address your point about "agency." 100's of millions of dollars of aid are given every year to the West Bank and Gaza from the US and the EU (besides for other contributions from the World Bank and individual countries ranging from Qatar to Germany to Japan). Much of that aid is given directly to the governing organizations of the Palestinians. In the West Bank, that means the PA. In Gaza, that means Hamas. Not all aid is given as cash of course, but local governments handle (or are at least involved in) distribution in any case. I've heard that in Gaza, "international aid food" often ends up in grocery stores with inflated prices. That money is also used to line distributors (Hamas) pockets. So most of us have tax dollars that are indeed funding Hamas.
All that to say, if your premise is that you have the right to criticize a government if and only if your tax dollars support them, only Americans can critique Israel, but basically every first world nation plus most the Arab ones should be critiquing Hamas. I don't necessarily disagree with this point by the way. It means the world does have significant leverage over Hamas that could be utilized. You can check out some of my earlier posts in this thread for ideas on how to do that to help solve the conflict.
|
On December 09 2023 11:55 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2023 13:16 Cerebrate1 wrote:On December 08 2023 11:31 WombaT wrote:On December 08 2023 09:47 Cerebrate1 wrote:On December 08 2023 07:30 WombaT wrote:On December 08 2023 05:27 JimmiC wrote:On December 08 2023 05:20 Nebuchad wrote:On December 08 2023 05:02 JimmiC wrote:On December 08 2023 04:58 Nebuchad wrote:On December 08 2023 04:54 JimmiC wrote:
[quote]
Which one? This one No I do not think that ethnostate who runs a apartheid and wants ethnic cleansing and genocide would be stopped by people like me. I believe a state like that, that had the means (power) and opportunity would just do it, see Russia. It would absolutely be stopped, though. When you analyze the situation of the Middle East, the fact that Israel has full US and western support is quite important, it's not something that they can just ignore. And they know that, btw, that's why so much of their propaganda is in english. For the record, Russia didn't "just do it" either. There were eight years between Crimea and the current war. My understanding is that one of the reasons why Putin launched it was that he thought it would be very easy and that the clean victory would help with his image within Russia, similarly to how the Chechnya campaign helped his image. I certainly think that there was a calculation there. You shouldn't conclude that because someone is engaged in an irrational far right campaign, it follows that they have no capacity to think tactically. I do not, I just completely disagree with you tactics. For a long time no one would have cared in the power positions in the west and US if the Israel had just annexed the land they won in the war and displaced the people. That is kinda how it worked for a long time. Now I do not think it is that different, we can piss and moan all we want about all sorts of things but it does not really change what the decision makers do and at the end of the day Israel is about the only consistent ally the west has in the middle east that is filled with countries full of autocratic leaders who want to destroy the west. Now if it would be unpopular in Israel, as long as its a democracy, that would matter because he would lose power. They’re not a particularly useful ally in any practical sense. Israel get a fuckton more mileage out of these alliances, especially with the US than the other way around. The wider West doesn’t really give much of a fuck if you’re an autocratic regime if you have something else that’s worth bartering. America gets a lot of value from Israel as an ally. 1. They are the most real ally they will ever have in that neighborhood. Israel has a lot of cultural and political similarities to the West. Other nearby "allies" are fair weather friends who would swap allegiance with China or the like if the wind changed. 2. Israel provides a lot of civilian tech similar to Taiwan (just more diverse). Tons of startups and innovation in Israel. They make all kinds of apps and things and lots of US tech companies have R&D centers (if not secondary HQs) in Israel. Intel microchips, PayPal, WhatsApp, cell phones, etc. Israel helps maintain the all too critical tech edge, and it preferentially partners with US companies very frequently. 3. Military intelligence. Israel happens to have some egg on their face right now w Oct 7, but Israel still has, bar none, the best intelligence over the Middle East of anyone. If the US wants to attack ISIS, prevent Asad from using chemical weapons, check in on Iran's next move, etc, you better bet they are consulting with Israel and hearing from some guy on the ground that can give a better inside scoop than a spy satellite. 4. Military tech. No one gets more practical tests of (or spends as much of GDP on R&D of) missile defenses than Israel. Considering the biggest actual threat left to Americans defensively is nuclear missiles, it's pretty nice to have Israel on your team when Russia subtly threatens nukes every other month. So too with other anti-terrorist technologies, since the US tends to face similar opponents. Not to mention all the other cool cutting edge stuff that comes out of Israel like cyberweapons, unmanned vehicles, and that Trophy system, which is why Israels tanks keep surviving antitank rockets that leveled Russias cavalry. A lot of those are developed in partnership with the US, so they never lose their edge. 5. Israel carries it's own weight. South Korea requires tons of US boots on the ground. Many NATO nations are complacent and slack on their own militaries. Other nations that allow US bases, require the US to station troops and supply them. Israel maintains it's own high grade military with lots of safe runway for the US to use if it wants, but also Israel will probably bomb the baddies themselves anyways. Even US financial aid largely goes straight back to US arms manufacturers, providing safe American jobs back home. There is not a long list of allies that are as strategically located and valuable for US geopolitical interests as Israel. If most of the benefits of alliance come from military advancement that you’re also happening to be funding to the tune of billions of dollars a year as an aside is that particularly advantageous to you? The US gives about 3 billion a year to Israel. That money has strings that basically mean that a lot has to be spent specifically on US weapons. So that part is kinda just a subsidy for US defense contractors. Besides for which, it comes with free testing, because Israel will almost certainly use that stuff in a war in short order, giving valuable feedback on the efficacy of those weapons in modern combat situations. Compare that to US spending in South Korea and Japan, and according to this article, between 2016 and 2019, the US spent an average of 4 billion a year in South Korea and 7 billion a year in Japan. And if America's enemies attack, that means American soldiers die over there, while in Israel, only Israelis are at risk. Meanwhile, Israel spends around 20 billion a year on military spending. That's getting a lot more stuff than that initial 3, and stuff that the US doesn't have to create infrastructure to build either. Some of which, America then gets to buy to have in their own arsenal (like the Iron Dome). Besides for which, most of the benefits I mentioned are things that can't just be bought. A safe base in a rough neighborhood. The ingenuity of the "Startup Nation" and the effort put in by people who feel that if they have an existential need to succeed. Arabic speakers and cultural understanding pulled from people who have immigrated there from basically every country in the Middle East. The intelligence sharing alone is pretty solid bang for your buck if and when America makes moves in the region (read: frequently) because it allows them to be more targeted and keep their people safer. Which of the various (ill-advised) forays from the West into the Middle East did Israel help out with? Probably all of them to one extent or another (although only someone with top security clearance will be able to tell you with exactly what and how). You may personally disagree with American policy in the region, but once it is what it is, it's certainly in their best interests to have solid intelligence and someone with shared interests right there. The US is literally allies with other countries in the region who barely shelve their anti-Israel sentiment for political expediency I'm not sure what you are saying with this line. Saudi Arabia, Egypt, UAE, and others have been working more with Israel on international projects, even as they spray the obligatory spit on Israel for domestic audiences. Turkey is another ball of wax, but Israel is far from the biggest issue with the Western alliance with them. A fine response, with some information that was honestly news to me and has somewhat shifted some of my perspectives. Thanks for taking the time, what this thread is for in an ideal world.
Thanks!
Although I suppose Israel’s very existence is to some extent a destabilising influence in that region so that has to be taken into account in a valuation. Although also obviously that’s not really the fault of the current denizens of Israel.
In addition I don’t think these previous points preclude alliance, merely that IMO it’s not one of mutual transactional gains. There are other considerations and motivations that are entirely legitimate too.
One rather close to one’s heart is Northern Ireland, and the US batted pretty hard for resolution there, but really in terms of their practical interests and whatnot it was by the by either way what was going on here
One could similarly argue that Taiwan's very existence is a destabilizing influence in South East Asia or that Ukraine's very existence is a destabilizing influence in Eastern Europe. If we just let them fall, we could also be absolved of those conflicts (while actually opening the floodgates to more serious conflicts).
The US likes to have friends to keep regional bullies in check. China and Russia are scarier bullies than Iran and it's proxies (Hezbollah, Houthis, Syria). That's why NATO and the US's new coalition of nations around China are much larger networks of alliances. It could be that Israel plus some moderately friendly Arab nations are sufficient to curb Iran's imperial ambitions.
On December 10 2023 03:08 WombaT wrote:
My point was that Israel isn’t a particularly useful ally, I got some pushback there. One of which was that Israel provided useful intelligence. To which I responded that Israel providing useful intelligence is kind of a circular thing given that the need for such intelligence is kind of precipitated by their existence as a state. Not as any kind of value judgment just as an observation
I didn't realize that this was one of your points. I really don't think much of the intelligence used by the US has to do with keeping Israel around. America's participation in wars in the Middle East just more recently have included: the Gulf War, the Iraq War, invasion of Afghanistan, participation in the Syrian Civil War, and helping to eliminate ISIS. None of those had to do with Israel's existence, but Israeli intelligence almost certainly played a part in American planning for all of them (to varying degrees). There are a lot of problems in the Middle East and most of them aren't directly related to Israel. Therefore, having a close ally, with his nose always to the ground, is helpful for managing all the other conflicts.
|
I don't understand the combination of these two ideas:
1) Israel's intelligence failed before October 7.
2) Israel's intelligence is essential to the US.
|
On December 10 2023 19:39 Magic Powers wrote:
I don't understand the combination of these two ideas:
1) Israel's intelligence failed before October 7.
2) Israel's intelligence is essential to the US.
That’s an easy one. The first is poor threat assessment. Their intelligence did indeed have warnings, but underestimated the threat and continued to focus on the West Bank. The second is the ability of Israeli technology and human assets to provide information, which is still quite good.
It’s kind of like how the US received warnings about 9/11, but overlooked it. You’d still respect their satellite tech and various other forms of intelligence gathering.
|
I will say the notion that intelligence has to be infallible to be useful or essential is a weird one.
This is the real world, nothing is perfect.
|
I wouldn't describe the colossal failure of intelligence allowing for October 7 to happen as "not being infallibe". I think it's one of the worst of all the intelligence failures in all of history. Only an absolute idiot would think Hamas was targeting peace and only an absolute idiot would think Hamas didn't have the capacity to at least cause some damage in Israel. Sorry, not sorry. I do not consider this a matter of debate, it's fairly obvious that only idiots would think this was an acceptable failure. If anyone feels offended, good.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
