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 10 2023 09:24 Djabanete wrote: 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 think... a substantial percentage of New Yorkers view the Israeli//middle east situation as potentially unsolvable. Whoever The prez and his advisors are at the time have at the minimum a minority contingent viewing the situation as unsolvable.
What happens then is you get a "ok guys let's just shuffle the deck chairs around the Titanic a bit here so we can placate the morons who believe in Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, and happy endings at movies".
Don't we have 2 groups of people claiming that their 2000+ year old books tell them Israel is "their land"? Isn't that why we're getting chants like 'From the River To the Sea Palestine Will Be Free"?
The problem looks unsolvable to me and so we're going to have people killing each other far into the future. Politicians would rather focus on issues where the voters can possibly view their work as successful.
Here is the brutal reality of setting foreign policy at the 6 minute mark.
you're deciding between the most horrible outcome and the 2nd most horrible outcome. this stuff doesn't inspire people to go out and vote for you even when you make great moves.
On December 10 2023 13:08 JimmiC wrote: I really don’t think it’s a big mover on the voting in the US, I would be shocked if it’s in the top 10 maybe even outside the top 20 by election time. It’s great that people here care, and some young people care, but they are notoriously low on the turnout as a group. If American lives are not at sale it’s not a big needle mover.
um...... Libertarian, that I donno, I am just astonished when my American friend tell me they should get a chance to make the country communist, these are FANNG software engineer with good .... IQ? and have no common sense, they think they can do better cause they are smatter, I no longer understand why I even escape China for this BS. People are down right stupid. xD
Exactly! Please stop being down right stupid and use your brain cells before posting your libertarian wisdoms outside of youtube comments section. This thread is about Palestine.
with the various misspellings and grammar errors in the PurE)Rabbit-SF's short post i wouldn't be running around complaining about stupid people. hey that's just me.
On December 11 2023 00:17 PurE)Rabbit-SF wrote: um...... Libertarian, that I donno, I am just astonished when my American friend tell me they should get a chance to make the country communist, these are FANNG software engineer with good .... IQ? and have no common sense, they think they can do better cause they are smatter, I no longer understand why I even escape China for this BS. People are down right stupid. xD
So the fact that young voters are more cognizant of these issues means less than you might expect to a US politician. As a result, US politicians are more likely to talk a lot about Israel//middle east issues while, in reality, doing nothing.
So I'm adding to JimmiC's point about how low down on the list middle east issues are to your typical American politician.
All Biden had to was instruct his UN delegate to vote Abstention, it's not like Israel was going to listen to the UN in any shape or form. Meanwhile Hamas leadership sits comfortably in Qatar still enjoying free PR victories thanks to Biden.
One has to wonder if his Catholic faith alongside his conservative policy advisor is the driving force behind his stubborn support for Israel. Much longer he will drive Trump right back to the White House...
On December 11 2023 03:08 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: All Biden had to was instruct his UN delegate to vote Abstention, it's not like Israel was going to listen to the UN in any shape or form. Meanwhile Hamas leadership sits comfortably in Qatar still enjoying free PR victories thanks to Biden.
One has to wonder if his Catholic faith alongside his conservative policy advisor is the driving force behind his stubborn support for Israel. Much longer he will drive Trump right back to the White House...
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!
Hamas is not necessary for being against Israel. You can dislike all of those things about Israel and it would still leave you with 0 reason to support a ceasefire.
In fact, Hamas being removed as a boogeyman would be profoundly good for Palestinians and would provide a much higher % chance for the things your listing to improve.
Imagine if Iran and Qatar used their power and influence to force Hamas to surrender, then worked with neighboring countries to replace Hamas with another government. Israel only has political cover for everything they are doing because Hamas handed them tons and tons of videos of themselves celebrating rape and murder. “Hamas is gone, so now you have no reason to be anywhere near Gaza” would be extremely significant.
If we know Hamas isn’t helping Palestinians, what incentive is there to keep Hamas around? What benefit does Hamas provide which another government can’t?
Another detail that might be responsible for our disagreement is the specifics of what Hamas did, what the videos contain, and how verified the videos are. Are you familiar with the specifics of the sexual violence committed by Hamas, the videos showing it, and the fact that Hamas themselves shared the videos and celebrated them? If not, it is possible my description of how big of a deal Hamas is for Israel's justification of their Gaza assault.
The specifics of what Hamas did, and the fact that Hamas has indicated again in the last week that they will repeat October 7, basically give Israel a free pass from the US's perspective. It is such a uniquely grotesque situation. Hamas being removed by Iran and Qatar would flip the optics of the situation on its head. I understand some folks are cynical and insist Israel would operate 100% identically even without October 7, but whether you believe that or not, you all must agree the optics of October 7 gave Israel significant freedom to do what they are currently doing. Removing Hamas would of course significantly reduce that. I think it would wipe it out entirely.
"Hamas is gone, now you can stop. There will be no more October 7 attacks. We need a ceasefire" would go a long way.
And the fact remains: Hamas does not provide a unique benefit. There is nothing Hamas is doing to help Palestinians You could replace Hamas with a banana and come out ahead.
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!
Hamas is not necessary for being against Israel. You can dislike all of those things about Israel and it would still leave you with 0 reason to support a ceasefire.
In fact, Hamas being removed as a boogeyman would be profoundly good for Palestinians and would provide a much higher % chance for the things your listing to improve.
Imagine if Iran and Qatar used their power and influence to force Hamas to surrender, then worked with neighboring countries to replace Hamas with another government. Israel only has political cover for everything they are doing because Hamas handed them tons and tons of videos of themselves celebrating rape and murder. “Hamas is gone, so now you have no reason to be anywhere near Gaza” would be extremely significant.
If we know Hamas isn’t helping Palestinians, what incentive is there to keep Hamas around? What benefit does Hamas provide which another government can’t?
The call for a cease fire has nothing to do with wanting to keep Hamas around, Its entirely about wanting to prevent further civilian casualties and the destruction of Palestinian homes, and communities.
Your talk about how things would be better without Hamas is an entirely separate point from the desire for a cease fire.
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!
Hamas is not necessary for being against Israel. You can dislike all of those things about Israel and it would still leave you with 0 reason to support a ceasefire.
In fact, Hamas being removed as a boogeyman would be profoundly good for Palestinians and would provide a much higher % chance for the things your listing to improve.
Imagine if Iran and Qatar used their power and influence to force Hamas to surrender, then worked with neighboring countries to replace Hamas with another government. Israel only has political cover for everything they are doing because Hamas handed them tons and tons of videos of themselves celebrating rape and murder. “Hamas is gone, so now you have no reason to be anywhere near Gaza” would be extremely significant.
If we know Hamas isn’t helping Palestinians, what incentive is there to keep Hamas around? What benefit does Hamas provide which another government can’t?
The call for a cease fire has nothing to do with wanting to keep Hamas around, Its entirely about wanting to prevent further civilian casualties and the destruction of Palestinian homes, and communities.
Your talk about how things would be better without Hamas is an entirely separate point from the desire for a cease fire.
A ceasefire allows Hamas to continue controlling land. Because of the videos I referred to in my previous post, you guys need to understand that simply isn't going to be allowed to happen. If you are familiar with the specifics of those videos, I think you understand why Hamas is of course never going to be allowed to stick around.
A ceasefire while Hamas retains land = impossible and never going to happen.
A ceasefire after Hamas is replaced with another government = extremely more likely to happen.
I am saying Hamas's position as Gaza's government inherently prevents a ceasefire.
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!
Hamas is not necessary for being against Israel. You can dislike all of those things about Israel and it would still leave you with 0 reason to support a ceasefire.
In fact, Hamas being removed as a boogeyman would be profoundly good for Palestinians and would provide a much higher % chance for the things your listing to improve.
Imagine if Iran and Qatar used their power and influence to force Hamas to surrender, then worked with neighboring countries to replace Hamas with another government. Israel only has political cover for everything they are doing because Hamas handed them tons and tons of videos of themselves celebrating rape and murder. “Hamas is gone, so now you have no reason to be anywhere near Gaza” would be extremely significant.
If we know Hamas isn’t helping Palestinians, what incentive is there to keep Hamas around? What benefit does Hamas provide which another government can’t?
The call for a cease fire has nothing to do with wanting to keep Hamas around, Its entirely about wanting to prevent further civilian casualties and the destruction of Palestinian homes, and communities.
Your talk about how things would be better without Hamas is an entirely separate point from the desire for a cease fire.
A ceasefire allows Hamas to continue controlling land. Because of the videos I referred to in my previous post, you guys need to understand that simply isn't going to be allowed to happen. If you are familiar with the specifics of those videos, I think you understand why Hamas is of course never going to be allowed to stick around.
A ceasefire while Hamas retains land = impossible and never going to happen.
A ceasefire after Hamas is replaced with another government = extremely more likely to happen.
I am saying Hamas's position as Gaza's government inherently prevents a ceasefire.
Trying to understand your reasoning, I don't disagree that Hamas is problematic and needs to go, but why are you so certain that Hamas being eradicated would actually lead to a ceasefire given that the conflict predates Hamas' existence by decades or the fact that conflict exists in WB without Hamas being there, unless by ceasefire you mean specifically a return to the status quo including additional settlements and raids.
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!
Hamas is not necessary for being against Israel. You can dislike all of those things about Israel and it would still leave you with 0 reason to support a ceasefire.
In fact, Hamas being removed as a boogeyman would be profoundly good for Palestinians and would provide a much higher % chance for the things your listing to improve.
Imagine if Iran and Qatar used their power and influence to force Hamas to surrender, then worked with neighboring countries to replace Hamas with another government. Israel only has political cover for everything they are doing because Hamas handed them tons and tons of videos of themselves celebrating rape and murder. “Hamas is gone, so now you have no reason to be anywhere near Gaza” would be extremely significant.
If we know Hamas isn’t helping Palestinians, what incentive is there to keep Hamas around? What benefit does Hamas provide which another government can’t?
The call for a cease fire has nothing to do with wanting to keep Hamas around, Its entirely about wanting to prevent further civilian casualties and the destruction of Palestinian homes, and communities.
Your talk about how things would be better without Hamas is an entirely separate point from the desire for a cease fire.
A ceasefire allows Hamas to continue controlling land. Because of the videos I referred to in my previous post, you guys need to understand that simply isn't going to be allowed to happen. If you are familiar with the specifics of those videos, I think you understand why Hamas is of course never going to be allowed to stick around.
A ceasefire while Hamas retains land = impossible and never going to happen.
A ceasefire after Hamas is replaced with another government = extremely more likely to happen.
I am saying Hamas's position as Gaza's government inherently prevents a ceasefire.
Trying to understand your reasoning, I don't disagree that Hamas is problematic and needs to go, but why are you so certain that Hamas being eradicated would actually lead to a ceasefire given that the conflict predates Hamas' existence by decades or the fact that conflict exists in WB without Hamas being there, unless by ceasefire you mean specifically a return to the status quo including additional settlements and raids.
I am saying the videos Hamas posted celebrating the extreme levels of cruelty provide Israel with an infinite bucket of justification that will keep the US on their side so long as Hamas is an issue.
Consider the lives of Palestinians and the significant shift in their lifestyle and quality of life between October 6 and today. Even in a worst case scenario where Hamas being removed does nothing except roll back time to October 6 with all the issues associated with it, it would be an absolutely gigantic reduction in Palestinian suffering. It isn't reasonable to say that wouldn't represent an enormous improvement. It feels like you are saying October 6 was equivalent to today and that they may as well stay the path if Hamas surrendering just means going back to October 6. I feel like many people here have described a great deal of increase in Palestinian suffering since October 7. If we assume all of them are correct, it feels reasonable to say anything that brings us back to October 6 from the current situation is an enormous humanitarian relief for Palestinians. Do you not agree?
Maybe another thing I am missing: Do you see a path to Palestinian suffering being reduced while Hamas controls Gaza? I see that path as so wildly impossible that it is honestly confusing to me why anyone isn't yelling about Hamas's removal the same way I am. If we know with 100% certainty nothing is going to improve with Hamas around, couldn't you argue just rolling some other dice couldn't possibly be worse?
Hamas does not provide some kind of "bad cop" presence at the negotiating table to force Israel's hand or anything like that. The only concern for Israel is the US getting too much heat to allow Israel to continue their assault on Gaza. All that matters in this situation is optics. Hamas has absolutely zero ability to force anything. Do you not agree that Hamas being removed from power would enormously harm Israel's ability to say their assault on Gaza is reasonable?
On December 11 2023 05:54 Mohdoo wrote:Maybe another thing I am missing: Do you see a path to Palestinian suffering being reduced while Hamas controls Gaza? I see that path as so wildly impossible that it is honestly confusing to me why anyone isn't yelling about Hamas's removal the same way I am. If we know with 100% certainty nothing is going to improve with Hamas around, couldn't you argue just rolling some other dice couldn't possibly be worse?
I don't see a path to Palestinian suffering being reduced after Hamas has been removed either.
And I think that Palestinian suffering after Hamas is gone will actually be greater then while Hamas was in control, and not because of Hamas or whoever will replace them but because Gaza will be a smouldering pile of rubble that will not be supported in rebuilding after Israel is done with flattening it.
Israel is bombing Gaza back into the stone age, and the people will be worse for it. You say "why not roll some dice, its can't possible become worse" and I seriously question if the people in Gaza right now agree with you that life couldn't possibly be worse then it was before oct 7th.
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!
Hamas is not necessary for being against Israel. You can dislike all of those things about Israel and it would still leave you with 0 reason to support a ceasefire.
In fact, Hamas being removed as a boogeyman would be profoundly good for Palestinians and would provide a much higher % chance for the things your listing to improve.
Imagine if Iran and Qatar used their power and influence to force Hamas to surrender, then worked with neighboring countries to replace Hamas with another government. Israel only has political cover for everything they are doing because Hamas handed them tons and tons of videos of themselves celebrating rape and murder. “Hamas is gone, so now you have no reason to be anywhere near Gaza” would be extremely significant.
If we know Hamas isn’t helping Palestinians, what incentive is there to keep Hamas around? What benefit does Hamas provide which another government can’t?
The call for a cease fire has nothing to do with wanting to keep Hamas around, Its entirely about wanting to prevent further civilian casualties and the destruction of Palestinian homes, and communities.
Your talk about how things would be better without Hamas is an entirely separate point from the desire for a cease fire.
A ceasefire allows Hamas to continue controlling land. Because of the videos I referred to in my previous post, you guys need to understand that simply isn't going to be allowed to happen. If you are familiar with the specifics of those videos, I think you understand why Hamas is of course never going to be allowed to stick around.
A ceasefire while Hamas retains land = impossible and never going to happen.
A ceasefire after Hamas is replaced with another government = extremely more likely to happen.
I am saying Hamas's position as Gaza's government inherently prevents a ceasefire.
Trying to understand your reasoning, I don't disagree that Hamas is problematic and needs to go, but why are you so certain that Hamas being eradicated would actually lead to a ceasefire given that the conflict predates Hamas' existence by decades or the fact that conflict exists in WB without Hamas being there, unless by ceasefire you mean specifically a return to the status quo including additional settlements and raids.
I am saying the videos Hamas posted celebrating the extreme levels of cruelty provide Israel with an infinite bucket of justification that will keep the US on their side + Show Spoiler +
so long as Hamas is an issue.
Consider the lives of Palestinians and the significant shift in their lifestyle and quality of life between October 6 and today. Even in a worst case scenario where Hamas being removed does nothing except roll back time to October 6 with all the issues associated with it, it would be an absolutely gigantic reduction in Palestinian suffering. It isn't reasonable to say that wouldn't represent an enormous improvement. It feels like you are saying October 6 was equivalent to today and that they may as well stay the path if Hamas surrendering just means going back to October 6. I feel like many people here have described a great deal of increase in Palestinian suffering since October 7. If we assume all of them are correct, it feels reasonable to say anything that brings us back to October 6 from the current situation is an enormous humanitarian relief for Palestinians. Do you not agree?
Maybe another thing I am missing: Do you see a path to Palestinian suffering being reduced while Hamas controls Gaza? I see that path as so wildly impossible that it is honestly confusing to me why anyone isn't yelling about Hamas's removal the same way I am. If we know with 100% certainty nothing is going to improve with Hamas around, couldn't you argue just rolling some other dice couldn't possibly be worse?
Hamas does not provide some kind of "bad cop" presence at the negotiating table to force Israel's hand or anything like that.
The only concern for Israel is the US getting too much heat to allow Israel to continue their assault on Gaza. + Show Spoiler +
All that matters in this situation is optics. Hamas has absolutely zero ability to force anything. Do you not agree that Hamas being removed from power would enormously harm Israel's ability to say their assault on Gaza is reasonable?
You said it yourself, it's not infinite and political pressure on Biden/Democrats is pretty much all that could stop Israel's massacring of Palestinians in an ongoing ethnic cleansing campaign.
The question is what people have done, are doing, and will do with that knowledge.
On December 11 2023 05:54 Mohdoo wrote:Maybe another thing I am missing: Do you see a path to Palestinian suffering being reduced while Hamas controls Gaza? I see that path as so wildly impossible that it is honestly confusing to me why anyone isn't yelling about Hamas's removal the same way I am. If we know with 100% certainty nothing is going to improve with Hamas around, couldn't you argue just rolling some other dice couldn't possibly be worse?
I don't see a path to Palestinian suffering being reduced after Hamas has been removed either.
And I think that Palestinian suffering after Hamas is gone will actually be greater then while Hamas was in control, and not because of Hamas or whoever will replace them but because Gaza will be a smouldering pile of rubble that will not be supported in rebuilding after Israel is done with flattening it.
Israel is bombing Gaza back into the stone age, and the people will be worse for it. You say "why not roll some dice, its can't possible become worse" and I seriously question if the people in Gaza right now agree with you that life couldn't possibly be worse then it was before oct 7th.
To your question Mohdoo, I would agree with this sentiment. Yes, absolutely what has happened in Gaza post Oct. 7 is terrible, but let's not allow it to fool us into thinking things were fine or even tolerable pre Oct 6th.
From what I have observed, a removal of Hamas would still lead to Palestinian suffering as Israel enroaches on more land and eventually takes it all.
I would agree Hamas' continued existance does not improve life in Palestine or Israel, however positive change will not occur by Hamas' eradication alone, massive change needs to happen within Israel itself as well.
So yes, absolutely let's remove Hamas, but let's also prove to the Palestinians life will improve if they do.
On December 10 2023 04:09 GreenHorizons wrote: [quote] 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!
Hamas is not necessary for being against Israel. You can dislike all of those things about Israel and it would still leave you with 0 reason to support a ceasefire.
In fact, Hamas being removed as a boogeyman would be profoundly good for Palestinians and would provide a much higher % chance for the things your listing to improve.
Imagine if Iran and Qatar used their power and influence to force Hamas to surrender, then worked with neighboring countries to replace Hamas with another government. Israel only has political cover for everything they are doing because Hamas handed them tons and tons of videos of themselves celebrating rape and murder. “Hamas is gone, so now you have no reason to be anywhere near Gaza” would be extremely significant.
If we know Hamas isn’t helping Palestinians, what incentive is there to keep Hamas around? What benefit does Hamas provide which another government can’t?
The call for a cease fire has nothing to do with wanting to keep Hamas around, Its entirely about wanting to prevent further civilian casualties and the destruction of Palestinian homes, and communities.
Your talk about how things would be better without Hamas is an entirely separate point from the desire for a cease fire.
A ceasefire allows Hamas to continue controlling land. Because of the videos I referred to in my previous post, you guys need to understand that simply isn't going to be allowed to happen. If you are familiar with the specifics of those videos, I think you understand why Hamas is of course never going to be allowed to stick around.
A ceasefire while Hamas retains land = impossible and never going to happen.
A ceasefire after Hamas is replaced with another government = extremely more likely to happen.
I am saying Hamas's position as Gaza's government inherently prevents a ceasefire.
Trying to understand your reasoning, I don't disagree that Hamas is problematic and needs to go, but why are you so certain that Hamas being eradicated would actually lead to a ceasefire given that the conflict predates Hamas' existence by decades or the fact that conflict exists in WB without Hamas being there, unless by ceasefire you mean specifically a return to the status quo including additional settlements and raids.
I am saying the videos Hamas posted celebrating the extreme levels of cruelty provide Israel with an infinite bucket of justification that will keep the US on their side + Show Spoiler +
so long as Hamas is an issue.
Consider the lives of Palestinians and the significant shift in their lifestyle and quality of life between October 6 and today. Even in a worst case scenario where Hamas being removed does nothing except roll back time to October 6 with all the issues associated with it, it would be an absolutely gigantic reduction in Palestinian suffering. It isn't reasonable to say that wouldn't represent an enormous improvement. It feels like you are saying October 6 was equivalent to today and that they may as well stay the path if Hamas surrendering just means going back to October 6. I feel like many people here have described a great deal of increase in Palestinian suffering since October 7. If we assume all of them are correct, it feels reasonable to say anything that brings us back to October 6 from the current situation is an enormous humanitarian relief for Palestinians. Do you not agree?
Maybe another thing I am missing: Do you see a path to Palestinian suffering being reduced while Hamas controls Gaza? I see that path as so wildly impossible that it is honestly confusing to me why anyone isn't yelling about Hamas's removal the same way I am. If we know with 100% certainty nothing is going to improve with Hamas around, couldn't you argue just rolling some other dice couldn't possibly be worse?
Hamas does not provide some kind of "bad cop" presence at the negotiating table to force Israel's hand or anything like that.
The only concern for Israel is the US getting too much heat to allow Israel to continue their assault on Gaza. + Show Spoiler +
All that matters in this situation is optics. Hamas has absolutely zero ability to force anything. Do you not agree that Hamas being removed from power would enormously harm Israel's ability to say their assault on Gaza is reasonable?
You said it yourself, it's not infinite and political pressure on Biden/Democrats is pretty much all that could stop Israel's massacring of Palestinians in an ongoing ethnic cleansing campaign.
The question is what people have done, are doing, and will do with that knowledge.
The US has been very clear it is infinite so long as Hamas is still around. It is not reasonable to assume the US will pump the breaks after the videos Hamas posted.
Do you view a benefit to Palestinians uniquely provided by Hamas? Do you view any incentive for Hamas to stick around purely from the perspective of Gaza residents?
Gorsameth is correct to point out the sheer level of destruction will make Gaza shitty regardless. But I am not even approaching this from an ethics perspective. Purely focusing on the interests of folks in Gaza, ignoring any of my ethical perspectives on Hamas, I truly see no parameter that is improved by Hamas rather than even nothing in its place.
Imagine if Iran and Qatar do a victory lap after forcing Hamas to surrender for the sake of preserving Palestinian lives. They could even frame Hamas in a positive light for "just being focused on the safety of Gaza". Even from a propaganda war perspective, it feels like Hamas is strictly superior. What am I missing?
On December 11 2023 05:54 Mohdoo wrote:Maybe another thing I am missing: Do you see a path to Palestinian suffering being reduced while Hamas controls Gaza? I see that path as so wildly impossible that it is honestly confusing to me why anyone isn't yelling about Hamas's removal the same way I am. If we know with 100% certainty nothing is going to improve with Hamas around, couldn't you argue just rolling some other dice couldn't possibly be worse?
I don't see a path to Palestinian suffering being reduced after Hamas has been removed either.
And I think that Palestinian suffering after Hamas is gone will actually be greater then while Hamas was in control, and not because of Hamas or whoever will replace them but because Gaza will be a smouldering pile of rubble that will not be supported in rebuilding after Israel is done with flattening it.
Israel is bombing Gaza back into the stone age, and the people will be worse for it. You say "why not roll some dice, its can't possible become worse" and I seriously question if the people in Gaza right now agree with you that life couldn't possibly be worse then it was before oct 7th.
To your question Mohdoo, I would agree with this sentiment. Yes, absolutely what has happened in Gaza post Oct. 7 is terrible, but let's not allow it to fool us into thinking things were fine or even tolerable pre Oct 6th.
From what I have observed, a removal of Hamas would still lead to Palestinian suffering as Israel enroaches on more land and eventually takes it all.
I would agree Hamas' continued existance does not improve life in Palestine or Israel, however positive change will not occur by Hamas' eradication alone, massive change needs to happen within Israel itself as well.
So yes, absolutely let's remove Hamas, but let's also prove to the Palestinians life will improve if they do.
Sure, all of this is reasonable and I agree, but there's 1 small detail I am still not understanding.
It feels like based on your phrasing, you view Hamas surrendering as a non-zero bargaining chip and that Gaza would be losing something by making that concession. Maybe I am misreading, but you indicating it would need to be accompanied with some sort of concrete reduction in Israeli aggression leads me to believe Gaza would be losing something. But it also feels like you agree Hamas is strictly negative in all ways.
To be more direct: Why would a resident of Gaza not want Hamas to surrender prior to any concessions by Israel? Why would they want Hamas to stick around longer?
Purely from the perspective of "IDF killed" vs "Gaza killed", it feels like Gaza is incentivized to basically surrender in any possible way. Every day that goes by is 1000000x worse for Gaza than Israel. So in the absence of a benefit from Hamas, why is it not purely beneficial to Gaza for Hamas to surrender?
Am I misunderstanding? It feels like the gist of what you're saying is that it would need to be accompanied with something from Israel in order to be worthwhile. I'm not understanding why that is.
Palestinians are going to remember Israel's destruction of Gaza and killing of thousands (eventually perhaps tens of thousands) for a very long time. It will go down in their history books as the worst atrocity ever committed by a country against Palestinians. There will be nothing overshadowing it. Palestinians will remember it as proof that Israel is an unreasonable, extremely violent oppressor. I have a hard time believing Palestinians are going to thank Israel for this. I think it'll only strengthen their hatred.
In fact, Hamas being removed as a boogeyman would be profoundly good for Palestinians and would provide a much higher % chance for the things your listing to improve.
On December 11 2023 05:54 Mohdoo wrote:
Hamas does not provide some kind of "bad cop" presence at the negotiating table to force Israel's hand or anything like that. The only concern for Israel is the US getting too much heat to allow Israel to continue their assault on Gaza. All that matters in this situation is optics. Hamas has absolutely zero ability to force anything. Do you not agree that Hamas being removed from power would enormously harm Israel's ability to say their assault on Gaza is reasonable?
Issue with that, is that what Israel is currently doing has 0 chance of removing Hamas (excluding total wipeout of Gaza population), one doesnt get rid of radical organisation by radicalizing people even more.
Someone with family will probably rather think along the lines: peace is good, my family will be safer, kids will have better future, maybe Hamas is not the best.
Someone who lost their family to Israel army will be more like: where do I sign up?
In fact, Hamas being removed as a boogeyman would be profoundly good for Palestinians and would provide a much higher % chance for the things your listing to improve.
Hamas does not provide some kind of "bad cop" presence at the negotiating table to force Israel's hand or anything like that. The only concern for Israel is the US getting too much heat to allow Israel to continue their assault on Gaza. All that matters in this situation is optics. Hamas has absolutely zero ability to force anything. Do you not agree that Hamas being removed from power would enormously harm Israel's ability to say their assault on Gaza is reasonable?
Issue with that, is that what Israel is currently doing has 0 chance of removing Hamas (excluding total wipeout of Gaza population), one doesnt get rid of radical organisation by radicalizing people even more.
Someone with family will probably rather think along the lines: peace is good, my family will be safer, kids will have better future, maybe Hamas is not the best.
Someone who lost their family to Israel army will be more like: where do I sign up?
The goal was never to eliminate Hamas such that 0 people identify with the organization or ideology: that’s permanent and forever. Still plenty of nazis in the world etc
Similar to Nazi germany, it isn’t necessary to make sure all people with those thoughts no longer breathe. Germany has had plenty of Nazis running around ever since ww2 but it’s not an issue because they don’t control land and they don’t have any real ability to conduct military strikes.
I want to be abundantly clear that the whole idea of erasing the ideology entirely is not a real goal of anyone. It’s not feasible or reasonable. And it’s not necessary. It is 1000000% totally possible and realistic for Israel to remove Hamas as a governing body of Gaza by preventing them from being able to operate anywhere. The issue is that Hamas controls land.
Please note that it’s annoying and cumbersome to specify this detail every time I post. I don’t mean you’re annoying me in any way, but specifying I am not going to go to this length to specify this in the future. I think all subsequent mentions of wiping out Hamas or whatever mean this instead. I will try to remember to say “Hamas land = 0” in the future, but if I forget, just assume I mean “removed from power” or something along those lines.
If we still have this many flat earth folks, what hope do we have of wiping out any ideology? xd
In fact, Hamas being removed as a boogeyman would be profoundly good for Palestinians and would provide a much higher % chance for the things your listing to improve.
On December 11 2023 05:54 Mohdoo wrote:
Hamas does not provide some kind of "bad cop" presence at the negotiating table to force Israel's hand or anything like that. The only concern for Israel is the US getting too much heat to allow Israel to continue their assault on Gaza. All that matters in this situation is optics. Hamas has absolutely zero ability to force anything. Do you not agree that Hamas being removed from power would enormously harm Israel's ability to say their assault on Gaza is reasonable?
Issue with that, is that what Israel is currently doing has 0 chance of removing Hamas (excluding total wipeout of Gaza population), one doesnt get rid of radical organisation by radicalizing people even more.
Someone with family will probably rather think along the lines: peace is good, my family will be safer, kids will have better future, maybe Hamas is not the best.
Someone who lost their family to Israel army will be more like: where do I sign up?
The goal was never to eliminate Hamas such that 0 people identify with the organization or ideology: that’s permanent and forever. Still plenty of nazis in the world etc
Similar to Nazi germany, it isn’t necessary to make sure all people with those thoughts no longer breathe. Germany has had plenty of Nazis running around ever since ww2 but it’s not an issue because they don’t control land and they don’t have any real ability to conduct military strikes.
I want to be abundantly clear that the whole idea of erasing the ideology entirely is not a real goal of anyone. It’s not feasible or reasonable. And it’s not necessary. It is 1000000% totally possible and realistic for Israel to remove Hamas as a governing body of Gaza by preventing them from being able to operate anywhere. The issue is that Hamas controls land.
Please note that it’s annoying and cumbersome to specify this detail every time I post. I don’t mean you’re annoying me in any way, but specifying I am not going to go to this length to specify this in the future. I think all subsequent mentions of wiping out Hamas or whatever mean this instead. I will try to remember to say “Hamas land = 0” in the future, but if I forget, just assume I mean “removed from power” or something along those lines.
If we still have this many flat earth folks, what hope do we have of wiping out any ideology? xd
When you consider Palestine specifically, what do you reckon is the factor that makes it so that such a large percentage of the population is willing to join a terrorist group that is so nazi-like?
EPT
