|
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. |
Northern Ireland25618 Posts
On December 25 2023 05:18 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 24 2023 12:54 WombaT wrote:On December 24 2023 12:36 flashymarine wrote:
Can't argue the point so you resort to personal attacks. Classy. I mean one can argue the point, it’s just preposterous so why bother? I’m not a history expert by any means but did anything happen between 1948 and now, perhaps the establishment and solidification of a hypothetical state where Jews could emigrate to, in the vague vicinity that might account for some of the direction of travel? Or I mean if you’re posting some infographic at least give the source. Come on, Saudi Arabia, who loves all that Western money and is happy to shelve principles for it. ‘0 Jews since the Middle Ages’. Jordan? None? The UAE, none? Ridiculous. Kwark was absolutely correct to give you short shrift, if anything this wasn’t even worth engaging with whatsoever. It’s not from immigration though. I’ve posted extensively about the specific measures Arab nations used to punish Jews in other countries for the formation of Israel. Jews were targeted as a group for reasons completely unrelated to them. They were squeezed out of these nations very intentionally and for reasons purely related to their religious identity.
Right, fair I’m more quibbling some of those numbers and that infographic than a general phenomenon existing.
It’s a bit disingenuous to frame it as purely voluntary emigration, so apologies there, not a good post in that respect from me. Note to self - don’t post after a night out in a bar
Be it state-sanctioned/directed or something more organically localised, hostility to varying degrees undoubtedly did factor in. It would be dangerous to handwave historic/contemporary anti-Semitism in various locales
Happy various holidays period to one and all!
|
Pretty major kill. So far reports are stating he died of injuries sustained in Israeli airstrike in Syria. Now the question is how Iran will respond.
|
Hamas with a very rare PR disaster. They refuse to a ceasefire brokered by Egypt and Qatar. While also refusing to allow elections, which is odd seeing how the polling suggests they would win either way.
CAIRO, Dec 25 (Reuters) - Hamas and the allied Islamic Jihad have rejected an Egyptian proposal that they relinquish power in the Gaza Strip in return for a permanent ceasefire, two Egyptian security sources told Reuters on Monday.
Izzat al-Rishq, a member of Hamas' political bureau, later denied in a statement what the sources said about the talks, adding: "There can be no negotiations without a complete stop to the aggression."
"The Hamas leadership is aiming with all its might for a complete, not temporary, end to the aggression and massacres of our people," he said, referring to the more than 20,000 Palestinians killed during the 11-week war with Israel.
The Egyptian sources said that both Hamas and Islamic Jihad, which have been holding separate talks with Egyptian mediators in Cairo, had rejected offering any concessions beyond the possible release of more hostages seized on Oct. 7 when militants broke into southern Israel, killing 1,200 people.
Egypt proposed a "vision" rather than a concrete plan, also backed by Qatari mediators, that would involve a ceasefire in exchange for the release of more hostages, and lead to a broader agreement involving a permanent ceasefire along with an overhaul of leadership in Gaza, which is currently led by Hamas.
Egypt proposed elections while offering assurances to Hamas that its members would not be chased or prosecuted, but the Islamist group rejected any concessions other than hostage releases, the sources said. More than 100 hostages are still believed to be held in Gaza.
A Hamas official who recently visited Cairo had earlier declined to comment directly on specific offers of more temporary humanitarian truces and indicated the group's rejection by repeating its official stance.
"We also said (to Egyptian officials) that the aid for our people must keep going and must increase and it must reach all the population in the north and the south," the official said.
"After the aggression is stopped and the aid increased we are ready to discuss prisoner swaps," the official added.
ISLAMIC JIHAD
Islamic Jihad, which also holds hostages in custody in Gaza, has echoed that stance.
An Islamic Jihad delegation led by its leader Ziad al-Nakhala is currently in Cairo to exchange ideas with Egyptian officials over prisoner swap offers and other issues, but an official said the group had set an end to Israel's military offensive as a pre-condition for further negotiations.
Islamic Jihad insists, the official said, that any prisoner swap must be based on the principle of "all for all", meaning the release of all hostages held in Gaza by Hamas and Islamic Jihad in return for freeing all Palestinians jailed in Israel.
Before the war, there were 5,250 Palestinians in Israeli jails, but the number has now grown to around 10,000 as Israel has arrested thousands more in the West Bank and Gaza since Oct 7, according to the Palestinian Prisoners Association.
Overnight into Monday, Gaza endured one of its deadliest nights in the 11-week-old war. Palestinian health officials said at least 70 people had been killed by an Israeli airstrike in the centre of the tiny, besieged Gaza Strip.
Source
|
|
|
On December 26 2023 01:53 JimmiC wrote:
It’s not that strange, many of the people in power there believe that democracy is weakness from the west. The people closest to god should rule and the rest of the people should accept it.
I’m probably wording this poorly, but they do not value democracy the way we do, so I don’t think it will even be like sham elections in Russia or wherever because they are not pretending their right to rule is the will of the people, it is the will of god.
This is correct. They (meaning many ME civies) see what they view as hypocrisy and double standards of democracies and therefore find it illegitimate. How accurate those claims are is a seperate discussion, but the essential view is Western Democracies claim moral high ground and free choice while acting in the opposite manner. I have 0 statistical evidence to base this on, purely based on personal observations so take this with a massive pile of salt.
|
|
|
I don't get this bit. Surely demanding a government change as a precondition for peace isn't some kind of 'show of good intentions' by an invading force, and a government refusing to resign in exchange for peace isn't some outrageous fail on their part? Like, I don't see anyone telling Zelensky to step down and let Putin decide who will rule Ukraine next, how exactly is this different.
|
|
|
On December 26 2023 10:38 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On December 26 2023 10:32 Salazarz wrote:
I don't get this bit. Surely demanding a government change as a precondition for peace isn't some kind of 'show of good intentions' by an invading force, and a government refusing to resign in exchange for peace isn't some outrageous fail on their part? Like, I don't see anyone telling Zelensky to step down and let Putin decide who will rule Ukraine next, how exactly is this different. People who believe Hamas is a terrorist organization set on the genocide of the country their at war with, are figuring that Israel is not going to accept those people running the country teaching the youth to hate and planning future attacks. It is a fool me once, kind of situation. The Ukrainian comparison is awful because it was not Zelensky who launched a genocidal terroristic attack to start the war. If Ukraine was far more powerful and had counter attacked Russia after their initial attack, rapes and murder, and was demanding Putin be removed it would be a better comparison.
Just to add to this, the Allies did effectively demand a change of government from Germany and Japan for them to stop fighting World War 2. (Actually they demanded unconditional surrender, which is even more than that.)
If a government cares more about the lives of the people it governs over it's political goals, accepting regime change is not a crazy result for the loser of a war.
Hamas will definitely not accept that because they have made very clear that they value their political goals over the lives of every man, woman, and child in Gaza (I believe they recently made a statement along the lines of "if every Palestinian died, but we destroyed Israel, we would make that trade"). However, Hamas' standards are far from the bar of defining reasonable demands or offers.
|
right, so they are not negotiating a cease fire, but a surrender. Which obviously Hamas is not going to say yes to.
|
The problem with this logic is that it's one-sided. While Hamas is obviously an unreasonable aggressor, so is the Israeli government. The demand is made both from and to unreasonable aggressors, and as impartial observers it's important to note that therefore the demand placed on Hamas is impossible.
|
On December 26 2023 14:32 Cerebrate1 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 26 2023 10:38 JimmiC wrote:On December 26 2023 10:32 Salazarz wrote:
I don't get this bit. Surely demanding a government change as a precondition for peace isn't some kind of 'show of good intentions' by an invading force, and a government refusing to resign in exchange for peace isn't some outrageous fail on their part? Like, I don't see anyone telling Zelensky to step down and let Putin decide who will rule Ukraine next, how exactly is this different. People who believe Hamas is a terrorist organization set on the genocide of the country their at war with, are figuring that Israel is not going to accept those people running the country teaching the youth to hate and planning future attacks. It is a fool me once, kind of situation. The Ukrainian comparison is awful because it was not Zelensky who launched a genocidal terroristic attack to start the war. If Ukraine was far more powerful and had counter attacked Russia after their initial attack, rapes and murder, and was demanding Putin be removed it would be a better comparison. Just to add to this, the Allies did effectively demand a change of government from Germany and Japan for them to stop fighting World War 2. (Actually they demanded unconditional surrender, which is even more than that.) If a government cares more about the lives of the people it governs over it's political goals, accepting regime change is not a crazy result for the loser of a war. Hamas will definitely not accept that because they have made very clear that they value their political goals over the lives of every man, woman, and child in Gaza (I believe they recently made a statement along the lines of "if every Palestinian died, but we destroyed Israel, we would make that trade"). However, Hamas' standards are far from the bar of defining reasonable demands or offers.
So Zelensky should tell Ukrainians to lay down their arms and surrender if he wants to prove that he cares about lives of his countrymen more than his own political goals, is that what you're saying?
From the perspective of a peoples that are being oppressed, surrendering and accepting a government change forced by an occupying force isn't a show of compassion, it's an admission of failure and a national humiliation. The idea that radical terrorism from Gaza would stop if the only change was that Hamas government stepped down is silly; their radicalization is fueled by the actions of Israel and forcing a government change wouldn't reduce radicalization, if anything it'd make Palestinians hate Israel even more. Terrorism in Palestine didn't begin with Hamas, and it certainly wouldn't end with it either unless other changes were made.
|
|
|
On December 26 2023 23:59 JimmiC wrote:
You guys realize this was Egypt and Qatars idea right? And Salazar stop with the Ukrainian comparison, unless you are now claiming Hamas is a legitimate government and not a terrorist organization. Your spewing of the Russian propaganda points is pretty disturbing.
It's kinda both.
|
|
|
On December 26 2023 21:32 Salazarz wrote:Show nested quote +On December 26 2023 14:32 Cerebrate1 wrote:On December 26 2023 10:38 JimmiC wrote:On December 26 2023 10:32 Salazarz wrote:
I don't get this bit. Surely demanding a government change as a precondition for peace isn't some kind of 'show of good intentions' by an invading force, and a government refusing to resign in exchange for peace isn't some outrageous fail on their part? Like, I don't see anyone telling Zelensky to step down and let Putin decide who will rule Ukraine next, how exactly is this different. People who believe Hamas is a terrorist organization set on the genocide of the country their at war with, are figuring that Israel is not going to accept those people running the country teaching the youth to hate and planning future attacks. It is a fool me once, kind of situation. The Ukrainian comparison is awful because it was not Zelensky who launched a genocidal terroristic attack to start the war. If Ukraine was far more powerful and had counter attacked Russia after their initial attack, rapes and murder, and was demanding Putin be removed it would be a better comparison. Just to add to this, the Allies did effectively demand a change of government from Germany and Japan for them to stop fighting World War 2. (Actually they demanded unconditional surrender, which is even more than that.) If a government cares more about the lives of the people it governs over it's political goals, accepting regime change is not a crazy result for the loser of a war. Hamas will definitely not accept that because they have made very clear that they value their political goals over the lives of every man, woman, and child in Gaza (I believe they recently made a statement along the lines of "if every Palestinian died, but we destroyed Israel, we would make that trade"). However, Hamas' standards are far from the bar of defining reasonable demands or offers. So Zelensky should tell Ukrainians to lay down their arms and surrender if he wants to prove that he cares about lives of his countrymen more than his own political goals, is that what you're saying? From the perspective of a peoples that are being oppressed, surrendering and accepting a government change forced by an occupying force isn't a show of compassion, it's an admission of failure and a national humiliation. The idea that radical terrorism from Gaza would stop if the only change was that Hamas government stepped down is silly; their radicalization is fueled by the actions of Israel and forcing a government change wouldn't reduce radicalization, if anything it'd make Palestinians hate Israel even more. Terrorism in Palestine didn't begin with Hamas, and it certainly wouldn't end with it either unless other changes were made.
The point is not to "prove you care about your people by surrendering," it's to actually do what's best for your people. In Ukraine's case, they can reasonably expect much better results by continuing the war than by surrendering at this point.
In an alternative scenario where Russia already had military control over 70% of Ukraine and it was pretty clear that they were going to take the rest by force in short order: it would be reasonable for Ukraine to surrender rather than fighting to the death of their last man. Obviously that would be a bad result for them. But it would be the better of the alternatives provided in that scenario.
There have been hundreds of governing organizations throughout history that have surrendered in the face of impending defeat. I hardly think that all of them were insane and making an irrational choice by surrendering. If you think fighting to the death is preferable, then you are a zealot (or at least you think Palestinians should be zealots) for your cause.
As to your questions of will this actually be effective at deradicalizing the local population, that is really a question for Israel, not Hamas, and is a separate discussion. We can pivot to discussing most effective methods for that now if you'd like.
|
On December 27 2023 03:57 Cerebrate1 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 26 2023 21:32 Salazarz wrote:On December 26 2023 14:32 Cerebrate1 wrote:On December 26 2023 10:38 JimmiC wrote:On December 26 2023 10:32 Salazarz wrote:
I don't get this bit. Surely demanding a government change as a precondition for peace isn't some kind of 'show of good intentions' by an invading force, and a government refusing to resign in exchange for peace isn't some outrageous fail on their part? Like, I don't see anyone telling Zelensky to step down and let Putin decide who will rule Ukraine next, how exactly is this different. People who believe Hamas is a terrorist organization set on the genocide of the country their at war with, are figuring that Israel is not going to accept those people running the country teaching the youth to hate and planning future attacks. It is a fool me once, kind of situation. The Ukrainian comparison is awful because it was not Zelensky who launched a genocidal terroristic attack to start the war. If Ukraine was far more powerful and had counter attacked Russia after their initial attack, rapes and murder, and was demanding Putin be removed it would be a better comparison. Just to add to this, the Allies did effectively demand a change of government from Germany and Japan for them to stop fighting World War 2. (Actually they demanded unconditional surrender, which is even more than that.) If a government cares more about the lives of the people it governs over it's political goals, accepting regime change is not a crazy result for the loser of a war. Hamas will definitely not accept that because they have made very clear that they value their political goals over the lives of every man, woman, and child in Gaza (I believe they recently made a statement along the lines of "if every Palestinian died, but we destroyed Israel, we would make that trade"). However, Hamas' standards are far from the bar of defining reasonable demands or offers. So Zelensky should tell Ukrainians to lay down their arms and surrender if he wants to prove that he cares about lives of his countrymen more than his own political goals, is that what you're saying? From the perspective of a peoples that are being oppressed, surrendering and accepting a government change forced by an occupying force isn't a show of compassion, it's an admission of failure and a national humiliation. The idea that radical terrorism from Gaza would stop if the only change was that Hamas government stepped down is silly; their radicalization is fueled by the actions of Israel and forcing a government change wouldn't reduce radicalization, if anything it'd make Palestinians hate Israel even more. Terrorism in Palestine didn't begin with Hamas, and it certainly wouldn't end with it either unless other changes were made. The point is not to "prove you care about your people by surrendering," it's to actually do what's best for your people. In Ukraine's case, they can reasonably expect much better results by continuing the war than by surrendering at this point. In an alternative scenario where Russia already had military control over 70% of Ukraine and it was pretty clear that they were going to take the rest by force in short order: it would be reasonable for Ukraine to surrender rather than fighting to the death of their last man. Obviously that would be a bad result for them. But it would be the better of the alternatives provided in that scenario. There have been hundreds of governing organizations throughout history that have surrendered in the face of impending defeat. I hardly think that all of them were insane and making an irrational choice by surrendering. If you think fighting to the death is preferable, then you are a zealot (or at least you think Palestinians should be zealots) for your cause. As to your questions of will this actually be effective at deradicalizing the local population, that is really a question for Israel, not Hamas, and is a separate discussion. We can pivot to discussing most effective methods for that now if you'd like.
Deradicalization is very unlikely and radicalization is very likely as long as Israel shows aggression such as this. Meanwhile nobody seems to be asking the question on how to deradicalize the Israeli government.
|
On December 27 2023 04:58 Magic Powers wrote:Show nested quote +On December 27 2023 03:57 Cerebrate1 wrote:On December 26 2023 21:32 Salazarz wrote:On December 26 2023 14:32 Cerebrate1 wrote:On December 26 2023 10:38 JimmiC wrote:On December 26 2023 10:32 Salazarz wrote:
I don't get this bit. Surely demanding a government change as a precondition for peace isn't some kind of 'show of good intentions' by an invading force, and a government refusing to resign in exchange for peace isn't some outrageous fail on their part? Like, I don't see anyone telling Zelensky to step down and let Putin decide who will rule Ukraine next, how exactly is this different. People who believe Hamas is a terrorist organization set on the genocide of the country their at war with, are figuring that Israel is not going to accept those people running the country teaching the youth to hate and planning future attacks. It is a fool me once, kind of situation. The Ukrainian comparison is awful because it was not Zelensky who launched a genocidal terroristic attack to start the war. If Ukraine was far more powerful and had counter attacked Russia after their initial attack, rapes and murder, and was demanding Putin be removed it would be a better comparison. Just to add to this, the Allies did effectively demand a change of government from Germany and Japan for them to stop fighting World War 2. (Actually they demanded unconditional surrender, which is even more than that.) If a government cares more about the lives of the people it governs over it's political goals, accepting regime change is not a crazy result for the loser of a war. Hamas will definitely not accept that because they have made very clear that they value their political goals over the lives of every man, woman, and child in Gaza (I believe they recently made a statement along the lines of "if every Palestinian died, but we destroyed Israel, we would make that trade"). However, Hamas' standards are far from the bar of defining reasonable demands or offers. So Zelensky should tell Ukrainians to lay down their arms and surrender if he wants to prove that he cares about lives of his countrymen more than his own political goals, is that what you're saying? From the perspective of a peoples that are being oppressed, surrendering and accepting a government change forced by an occupying force isn't a show of compassion, it's an admission of failure and a national humiliation. The idea that radical terrorism from Gaza would stop if the only change was that Hamas government stepped down is silly; their radicalization is fueled by the actions of Israel and forcing a government change wouldn't reduce radicalization, if anything it'd make Palestinians hate Israel even more. Terrorism in Palestine didn't begin with Hamas, and it certainly wouldn't end with it either unless other changes were made. The point is not to "prove you care about your people by surrendering," it's to actually do what's best for your people. In Ukraine's case, they can reasonably expect much better results by continuing the war than by surrendering at this point. In an alternative scenario where Russia already had military control over 70% of Ukraine and it was pretty clear that they were going to take the rest by force in short order: it would be reasonable for Ukraine to surrender rather than fighting to the death of their last man. Obviously that would be a bad result for them. But it would be the better of the alternatives provided in that scenario. There have been hundreds of governing organizations throughout history that have surrendered in the face of impending defeat. I hardly think that all of them were insane and making an irrational choice by surrendering. If you think fighting to the death is preferable, then you are a zealot (or at least you think Palestinians should be zealots) for your cause. As to your questions of will this actually be effective at deradicalizing the local population, that is really a question for Israel, not Hamas, and is a separate discussion. We can pivot to discussing most effective methods for that now if you'd like. Deradicalization is very unlikely and radicalization is very likely as long as Israel shows aggression such as this. Meanwhile nobody seems to be asking the question on how to deradicalize the Israeli government.
The "rules based order" solution would be to orchestrate global sanctions for their clearly illegal occupation and systemic abuse of Palestinians.
Problem with that being the US decided the "rules" don't apply to Israel (or the US) and none of their Western allies will hold either of them accountable to their own purported "rules based" system.
|
On December 25 2023 19:05 Magic Powers wrote:Show nested quote +On December 25 2023 13:18 flashymarine wrote:On December 25 2023 02:42 Magic Powers wrote:On December 24 2023 23:07 flashymarine wrote:On December 24 2023 19:12 Magic Powers wrote:
Just because you don't agree with the use of the term "ethnic cleansing" doesn't mean it doesn't fit the bill. People like to argue that it's not Israel's intent, or that the outcome proves that it's not ethnic cleansing. That's not how it works. Murder for example is always murder whether it was intended or not. Likewise shooting at someone with a gun is lethal force whether it results in death or not. Ethnic cleansing: Rendering an area ethnically homogeneous by using force or intimidation to remove from a given area persons of another ethnic or religious groupYou keep claiming that Israel is committing ethnic cleansing. If that were true you would have expected either the Arab population of Israel to have decreased or the population of Palestine to have decreased significantly. Neither of these things happened. We've been through this argument front to back in this thread. You should read it instead of acting like you're presenting a novel argument. You're not. Cite where I claimed it was a novel argument. It wasn't me who brought up ethnic cleansing. When someone is going to falsely claim Israel is committing ethnic cleansing I am well within my rights to push back. If you don't want to keep going down this path then stop claiming it. I am not going to let antisemitic lies go unchallenged. Sigh. Now we're back at completely unfounded accusations of anti-semitism. You really should read the thread for the better of everyone, including yourself. Do yourself and us a favor and don't waste your time and ours repeating ad nauseum all the things that everyone in this thread has already gone over at least once.
Interesting that when people falsely claim ethnic cleansing you don't chastise them for bringing up things this thread has already gone over. But when someone responds to it then suddenly you claim that the time for discussion is over.
Also it is not an unfounded accusation of antisemitism. It can be painful to acknowledge the history of antisemitism so it is easy to deny its existence. If you would like to educate yourself you can start with a certain Austrian born politician from the 1930s.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
