|
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 October 09 2023 07:05 KwarK wrote:
I don’t believe Israel will destroy Gaza because I don’t believe that Israel would willfully kill a million children in vengeance. And in a decade this will happen again. And again. And again.
Israel generally doesn't even let the dust settle before immediately killing 100+ people and leveling a few buildings in retaliation.
In this instance, they are carefully, slowly, going through all the official motions to declare war and prepare for war. They are dotting every i and crossing every t. This level of restraint, in my eyes, indicates an extreme reckoning is coming. I basically view the destruction of Gaza as a foregone conclusion. Israel does not want Gaza to exist. Israel now has entirely sufficient political/sociological cover to absolutely rain hell on Gaza. They will not have another chance like this for at least 50 years. This is their chance and they will 100% take it.
What I expect is for them to declare ahead of time the fact that they are going to march from north to south and that anyone who they find 72 hours after their announcement will be killed. They'll let Egypt decide if they open their door when Gaza knocks.
|
I mean.
Israel has been absolutely shitting on palestinians and their most basic rights without even discussing the peace process for the last couple of decades. The palestinian question hasn’t even been on the political radar in the last few elections because israeli felt safe since they built their wall.
Meanwhile, they have kept colonizing more and more land, and electing far right, pro-colony governments.
I think there is a point where oppressed people will do anything, and I mean, anything, to fight for their rights. The Hamas is despicable, that war is atrocious, but I blame Israel 175% for what’s happening. What have they been thinking for 20 years? That they can keep stealing land and absolutely shitting on a whole people forever because they have a wall and a lot of technology?
By the way. The US and Europe are totally guilty too. Because our governments really coukd have done something if they weren’t terrified of the pro israel lobbies. Israel should have been a pariah state long ago, but go count of a right filled with anti muslim racism and a left too busy not to alienate their jewish electors not to ever do anything about the actions of the Israeli.
|
On October 09 2023 08:22 Mohdoo wrote:
What I expect is for them to declare ahead of time the fact that they are going to march from north to south and that anyone who they find 72 hours after their announcement will be killed. This is way too extreme, they won't do that. Nobody will allow/approve killing 2 million people like that.
|
On October 09 2023 08:28 ZeroByte13 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2023 08:22 Mohdoo wrote:
What I expect is for them to declare ahead of time the fact that they are going to march from north to south and that anyone who they find 72 hours after their announcement will be killed. This is way too extreme, they won't do that. Nobody will allow/approve killing 2 million people like that.
Yeah i don’t know wtf he is talking about. Makes no sense.
|
I've always thought the "war of occupation" framing is the easiest way to understand the overall conflict. You've got an occupying power and an occupied population, some fraction of which are violent radicals prepared to kill (and die) in order to end the occupation. There's no good way to prosecute a war of occupation – take a light hand and the violent radicals are free to perpetrate mass casualty events, take a heavy hand and you convince more and more of the occupied population to become violent radicals. Obviously there's going to be similarities and differences between Israel occupying Palestine and, say, the United States occupying Vietnam (or any of the thousands of wars of occupation throughout history), and those specifics matter, but there's common dynamics that are hard to escape. (For a more specific historical analogy: it's a common leftist talking point to draw analogy between modern Israel and Manifest Destiny-era United States. Within that analogy, maybe a good point of comparison here would be the Dakota War of 1862.)
There's a specific dynamic in Palestine that I'm not aware of in other historical wars of occupation: in recent years there was a sort of equilibrium struck, between Netenyahu on the one side and Hamas on the other. Both sides would throw out an attack from time to time, which would provoke a response of some kind, and then there would be... well... not peace exactly, but quiet, at least. The Hamas attacks spur scared Israelis to support far-right governments who will "keep them safe," while the IDF attacks would radicalize more Palestinians to see Hamas as justified, or at least the lesser evil. Overall, the attacks from each side were relatively small-scale, power was solidified on both sides of the line, and the equilibrium was relatively stable.
That's over. I can't see how anybody could repair that equilibrium now. First of all this is obviously a collossal failure of those far-right Israeli governments to "keep them safe;" meanwhile I have to assume anybody that can be identified as any part of the Hamas organization, at any level, will be dead inside of a week. That doesn't mean violent radicals won't exist, or even that Hamas won't exist, but it does mean things are going to be different.
Different how? No idea. I've seen more than one hysterical pro-Israel take online along the lines of "That's it, the IDF needs to genocide the Palestinians now. They deserve it after this." And I'm genuinely scared that might be the outcome. But even those hysterical takes don't actually phrase it like that. I think the last one I saw said something like "flatten the Gaza Strip." The fact that they need to euphemize it like that, even with emotions high, makes me doubt even those folks actually have the stomach to watch an entire population, men, women and children, get killed, mass graves dug, filled in, and paved over with shopping malls. I certainly hope they don't.
How do wars of occupation end? Sometimes, with expelling the occupier (here, that might mean something like a "2-state solution"). Hard to imagine that happening in the near term. Sometimes they end with incorporation of the occupied population into the political systems of the occupier. Hard to imagine that, too, considering Israel doesn't actually *want* to turn all Palestinians into Israeli citizens with, you know, votes and property rights and such. If they didn't want that before, why would this change their mind?
Like I said, I'm scared that "kill them all" is the ending this tends toward, but I think it's more likely it doesn't end anything at all, not any time soon anyway. The equilibrium is dead, and we'll just have to see what kind of escalations we're in for.
|
Good posts on this page so far, thanks
|
United States41960 Posts
On October 09 2023 08:22 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2023 07:05 KwarK wrote:
I don’t believe Israel will destroy Gaza because I don’t believe that Israel would willfully kill a million children in vengeance. And in a decade this will happen again. And again. And again. Israel generally doesn't even let the dust settle before immediately killing 100+ people and leveling a few buildings in retaliation. In this instance, they are carefully, slowly, going through all the official motions to declare war and prepare for war. They are dotting every i and crossing every t. This level of restraint, in my eyes, indicates an extreme reckoning is coming. I basically view the destruction of Gaza as a foregone conclusion. Israel does not want Gaza to exist. Israel now has entirely sufficient political/sociological cover to absolutely rain hell on Gaza. They will not have another chance like this for at least 50 years. This is their chance and they will 100% take it. What I expect is for them to declare ahead of time the fact that they are going to march from north to south and that anyone who they find 72 hours after their announcement will be killed. They'll let Egypt decide if they open their door when Gaza knocks.
There are a million children there. No amount of paperwork will get them to “let’s just kill those children”, nor should it.
|
Northern Ireland23765 Posts
On October 09 2023 08:27 Biff The Understudy wrote:
I mean.
Israel has been absolutely shitting on palestinians and their most basic rights without even discussing the peace process for the last couple of decades. The palestinian question hasn’t even been on the political radar in the last few elections because israeli felt safe since they built their wall.
Meanwhile, they have kept colonizing more and more land, and electing far right, pro-colony governments.
I think there is a point where oppressed people will do anything, and I mean, anything, to fight for their rights. The Hamas is despicable, that war is atrocious, but I blame Israel 175% for what’s happening. What have they been thinking for 20 years? That they can keep stealing land and absolutely shitting on a whole people forever because they have a wall and a lot of technology?
By the way. The US and Europe are totally guilty too. Because our governments really coukd have done something if they weren’t terrified of the pro israel lobbies. Israel should have been a pariah state long ago, but go count of a right filled with anti muslim racism and a left too busy not to alienate their jewish electors not to ever do anything about the actions of the Israeli.
Not even the bare fucking minimum, which IMO would be insufficient anyway but upholding Israel to halt the expansion of antagonistic settlements, which hell they agreed to do at one stage. Never mind anything as radical as pressuring a rolling back in the process, there’s been little at a nation-state level to even stop Israel (and the associated Palestinian reaction) making it actively worse.
It’s not quite on the scale remotely, people who live here are deluded as to quite how bad our Troubles were, but the contrast in the US’ role here, and how they approach the Israeli-Palestine couldn’t be more stark.
And now we’re at a point where I share Kwark’s pessimism that this train isn’t going anywhere pleasant, every conceivable station that was a possibility to change the destination of this journey, the decision was made not to disembark
|
Northern Ireland23765 Posts
On October 09 2023 08:28 ZeroByte13 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2023 08:22 Mohdoo wrote:
What I expect is for them to declare ahead of time the fact that they are going to march from north to south and that anyone who they find 72 hours after their announcement will be killed. This is way too extreme, they won't do that. Nobody will allow/approve killing 2 million people like that.
Yeah that would be a bit extreme to say the least, but it could be a brutal retaliation indeed.
On the flip side, as I don’t think anybody believes there won’t be further blood shed so let’s discount that, best case scenario is their intelligence and military are in planning overdrive to take out those responsible, recover hostages and their other likely goals while strenuously trying to avoid civilian casualties
|
On October 09 2023 03:19 JimmiC wrote:You use some EVEN IF’s but that he and likely you think Hamas are some sort of leftist freedom fighters because they are against the “capitalists” in Israel is pretty easy to see, and it could not be s’more wrong. Hamas is further right than a basically any group and they only allow one perspective. Your reading comprehension for your favourites and people you do not like leaves a lot to be desired. QUOTE] On May 19 2021 17:48 Liquid`Drone wrote:Show nested quote +On May 19 2021 17:24 Nebuchad wrote:
There is one cool thing about the Israel-Palestine conflict, and it's that the discourse has shifted dramatically. Last time this happened we had the discussion online and there were people making solid arguments on both sides, we had a little battle on the marketplace of ideas, and the people on the side of Palestine won that battle.
Which means that this time, support for Palestine is overwhelming in leftist places online. So, what can I say, when you're dealing with honest people who have a common goal, debate works, sort of. Leftist online places are set to raise more for Palestine than they did for Mermaids when Glinner decided to direct his constant transphobia at them. Especially Vaush has had a very successful stream, 250k+ in 24 hours.
Will charity solve the occupation, no it won't obviously. But it still signals that we have a pretty large voice, and that's cool. Other cracks start to form with larger protests all over the world, less pro-Israel propaganda in the media than usual (I have no explanation for that one but 1) hey, cool, I'll take it, and 2) there is still some dumb shit going around.
Imo one of the more important rhetorical battles to fight is the battle against the idea that it's complicated. One side has almost all of the power and chooses to oppress the other, openly using terrorism and openly supporting ethnic cleansing. Don't be on that side. Some things are complicated, others are not. The continued settlements is not complicated - they're abhorrent and so is supporting them. Amusingly, I've yet to see anyone defend this practice, even guys that are solidly on the side of Israel. They seem to conveniently ignore that this is the piece of aggression and argue that 'Israel has the right to defend itself' - but I haven't actually seen anyone in this thread or the USPol thread before the discussion moved defend the continued settlement policy. However, while people seem to be able to agree that Israel's settlement policy should end, figuring out where to revert back to is complicated. 1967 borders are two generations ago. We might agree that what happened in 1947-48 was a crime against the Palestinian people, but it's not like it's easy to revert that now. The question of 'who should live where' is complicated, even if we recognize that Israel is the main culprit in the conflict and even if we regard Hamas as freedom fighters more than as terrorists.
I'm a bit late to the party, but the thread is moving fast. This would be an interesting debate if Palestine was up for discussing peace whatsoever. Israel did go out several times and offered peace with the inclusion of "returning occupied territories". Where exactly the border of those territories would go is something they could have debated had Hamas had any intentions other than exterminating all Jews from the area. This is why people who agree that the settlement policy is horrible still have trouble weighing too much fault on Israel.
To draw parallels, it's a bit like if Russia today went "aight, Ukraine, we want peace, and we'll return all of your territories", and Ukraine just went "nah, we refuse. We won't stop until every Russian is dead". It would suddenly flip the conflict to be a lot more sympathetic to Russia
|
United States41960 Posts
To expand on what Wombat was saying, the US Irish lobby acted as a strong check on the worst impulses of the British in Northern Ireland, though their active arming of the IRA didn’t exactly help matters. Whenever the UK wanted to do something particularly stupid and escalatory in response to an IRA provocation the President would yank their leash. And ultimately we’re now at a point where the violence is behind us. That’s not to say everything is solved, far from it, particularly with Brexit fucking things up, but basically nobody is going “some car bombs would really make things better here”. The US and EU were instrumental in achieving that.
Due to the reversal of the roles the US Israel lobby has played the opposite role with the Middle East.
|
On October 09 2023 08:22 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2023 07:05 KwarK wrote:
I don’t believe Israel will destroy Gaza because I don’t believe that Israel would willfully kill a million children in vengeance. And in a decade this will happen again. And again. And again. Israel generally doesn't even let the dust settle before immediately killing 100+ people and leveling a few buildings in retaliation. In this instance, they are carefully, slowly, going through all the official motions to declare war and prepare for war. They are dotting every i and crossing every t. This level of restraint, in my eyes, indicates an extreme reckoning is coming. I basically view the destruction of Gaza as a foregone conclusion. Israel does not want Gaza to exist. Israel now has entirely sufficient political/sociological cover to absolutely rain hell on Gaza. They will not have another chance like this for at least 50 years. This is their chance and they will 100% take it. What I expect is for them to declare ahead of time the fact that they are going to march from north to south and that anyone who they find 72 hours after their announcement will be killed. They'll let Egypt decide if they open their door when Gaza knocks.
Lol, no. Israel has world sympathy for sure right now, but that would stop really quickly at the massacre of 2 million people.
Everything else you said is right tho, and I suspect Palestine as a state is going to cease to exist in a short amount of time. But that doesn't mean all of its inhabitants is going to disappear
|
United States41960 Posts
On October 09 2023 09:02 Excludos wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2023 03:19 JimmiC wrote:You use some EVEN IF’s but that he and likely you think Hamas are some sort of leftist freedom fighters because they are against the “capitalists” in Israel is pretty easy to see, and it could not be s’more wrong. Hamas is further right than a basically any group and they only allow one perspective. Your reading comprehension for your favourites and people you do not like leaves a lot to be desired. QUOTE] On May 19 2021 17:48 Liquid`Drone wrote:On May 19 2021 17:24 Nebuchad wrote:
There is one cool thing about the Israel-Palestine conflict, and it's that the discourse has shifted dramatically. Last time this happened we had the discussion online and there were people making solid arguments on both sides, we had a little battle on the marketplace of ideas, and the people on the side of Palestine won that battle.
Which means that this time, support for Palestine is overwhelming in leftist places online. So, what can I say, when you're dealing with honest people who have a common goal, debate works, sort of. Leftist online places are set to raise more for Palestine than they did for Mermaids when Glinner decided to direct his constant transphobia at them. Especially Vaush has had a very successful stream, 250k+ in 24 hours.
Will charity solve the occupation, no it won't obviously. But it still signals that we have a pretty large voice, and that's cool. Other cracks start to form with larger protests all over the world, less pro-Israel propaganda in the media than usual (I have no explanation for that one but 1) hey, cool, I'll take it, and 2) there is still some dumb shit going around.
Imo one of the more important rhetorical battles to fight is the battle against the idea that it's complicated. One side has almost all of the power and chooses to oppress the other, openly using terrorism and openly supporting ethnic cleansing. Don't be on that side. Some things are complicated, others are not. The continued settlements is not complicated - they're abhorrent and so is supporting them. Amusingly, I've yet to see anyone defend this practice, even guys that are solidly on the side of Israel. They seem to conveniently ignore that this is the piece of aggression and argue that 'Israel has the right to defend itself' - but I haven't actually seen anyone in this thread or the USPol thread before the discussion moved defend the continued settlement policy. However, while people seem to be able to agree that Israel's settlement policy should end, figuring out where to revert back to is complicated. 1967 borders are two generations ago. We might agree that what happened in 1947-48 was a crime against the Palestinian people, but it's not like it's easy to revert that now. The question of 'who should live where' is complicated, even if we recognize that Israel is the main culprit in the conflict and even if we regard Hamas as freedom fighters more than as terrorists. I'm a bit late to the party, but the thread is moving fast. This would be an interesting debate if Palestine was up for discussing peace whatsoever. Israel did go out several times and offered peace with the inclusion of "returning occupied territories". Where exactly the border of those territories would go is something they could have debated had Hamas had any intentions other than exterminating all Jews from the area. This is why people who agree that the settlement policy is horrible still have trouble weighing too much fault on Israel. To draw parallels, it's a bit like if Russia today went "aight, Ukraine, we want peace, and we'll return all of your territories", and Ukraine just went "nah, we refuse. We won't stop until every Russian is dead". It would suddenly flip the conflict to be a lot more sympathetic to Russia
Who speaks for Palestine in that hypothetical where Palestine keeps fighting? Most Palestinians in Gaza weren’t yet born when a two state solution was last on the table. Hamas <> Palestinians. It’s a failed state filled with children run by warlords funded and armed by outsiders. The Israeli people and the Palestinians share a common enemy in Hamas, though they might not realize it. Just as Russians and Ukrainians have a common enemy in Putin.
|
On October 09 2023 09:09 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2023 09:02 Excludos wrote:On October 09 2023 03:19 JimmiC wrote:You use some EVEN IF’s but that he and likely you think Hamas are some sort of leftist freedom fighters because they are against the “capitalists” in Israel is pretty easy to see, and it could not be s’more wrong. Hamas is further right than a basically any group and they only allow one perspective. Your reading comprehension for your favourites and people you do not like leaves a lot to be desired. QUOTE] On May 19 2021 17:48 Liquid`Drone wrote:On May 19 2021 17:24 Nebuchad wrote:
There is one cool thing about the Israel-Palestine conflict, and it's that the discourse has shifted dramatically. Last time this happened we had the discussion online and there were people making solid arguments on both sides, we had a little battle on the marketplace of ideas, and the people on the side of Palestine won that battle.
Which means that this time, support for Palestine is overwhelming in leftist places online. So, what can I say, when you're dealing with honest people who have a common goal, debate works, sort of. Leftist online places are set to raise more for Palestine than they did for Mermaids when Glinner decided to direct his constant transphobia at them. Especially Vaush has had a very successful stream, 250k+ in 24 hours.
Will charity solve the occupation, no it won't obviously. But it still signals that we have a pretty large voice, and that's cool. Other cracks start to form with larger protests all over the world, less pro-Israel propaganda in the media than usual (I have no explanation for that one but 1) hey, cool, I'll take it, and 2) there is still some dumb shit going around.
Imo one of the more important rhetorical battles to fight is the battle against the idea that it's complicated. One side has almost all of the power and chooses to oppress the other, openly using terrorism and openly supporting ethnic cleansing. Don't be on that side. Some things are complicated, others are not. The continued settlements is not complicated - they're abhorrent and so is supporting them. Amusingly, I've yet to see anyone defend this practice, even guys that are solidly on the side of Israel. They seem to conveniently ignore that this is the piece of aggression and argue that 'Israel has the right to defend itself' - but I haven't actually seen anyone in this thread or the USPol thread before the discussion moved defend the continued settlement policy. However, while people seem to be able to agree that Israel's settlement policy should end, figuring out where to revert back to is complicated. 1967 borders are two generations ago. We might agree that what happened in 1947-48 was a crime against the Palestinian people, but it's not like it's easy to revert that now. The question of 'who should live where' is complicated, even if we recognize that Israel is the main culprit in the conflict and even if we regard Hamas as freedom fighters more than as terrorists. I'm a bit late to the party, but the thread is moving fast. This would be an interesting debate if Palestine was up for discussing peace whatsoever. Israel did go out several times and offered peace with the inclusion of "returning occupied territories". Where exactly the border of those territories would go is something they could have debated had Hamas had any intentions other than exterminating all Jews from the area. This is why people who agree that the settlement policy is horrible still have trouble weighing too much fault on Israel. To draw parallels, it's a bit like if Russia today went "aight, Ukraine, we want peace, and we'll return all of your territories", and Ukraine just went "nah, we refuse. We won't stop until every Russian is dead". It would suddenly flip the conflict to be a lot more sympathetic to Russia Who speaks for Palestine in that hypothetical where Palestine keeps fighting? Most Palestinians in Gaza weren’t yet born when a two state solution was last on the table. Hamas <> Palestinians. It’s a failed state filled with children run by warlords funded and armed by outsiders. The Israeli people and the Palestinians share a common enemy in Hamas, though they might not realize it. Just as Russians and Ukrainians have a common enemy in Putin.
I'm not sure what you think the life expectancy of the average Palestinian is, but the last time a Two-State solutions was offered was in 2014.
The rest is pretty on point
|
On October 09 2023 06:12 ChristianS wrote:
Kwark, I think you’re closer to right in this exchange and TLoA is absolutely doing the bait and switch “opposing Israel on anything means supporting a second Holocaust” trick that Israel defenders have always done.
You've got a good history of posting in good faith, so I want to return that good faith even while heavily disagreeing. The complaint is not that Kwark is not 100% pro Israel. You'll find very little pushback if you say that the Israeli settlements are wrong even from pro-Israel people.
In Kwark's response to this post
+ Show Spoiler +On October 08 2023 03:11 maybenexttime wrote:Show nested quote +On October 08 2023 02:17 Excludos wrote:On October 07 2023 22:09 Liquid`Drone wrote:
The framing that they just want to be left alone while continuing to encroach on palestinerne territory is absolutely ridiculous. It's insane how people are just willing to completely disregard context. That they are being attacked by rocket barrages and terrorism on the daily is seemingly unimportant. If Sweden did that to Norway, we'd be doing a lot more than Israel is in regards to counter-aggression. It's like if I keep punching you in the face, and you push me away, suddenly everyone around us goers "omfg how could you push?!". You answer with "I just want to be left alone!" and then people laugh and go "Shouldn't be pushing then!" If Palestine doesn't want Israel to keep pushing, then maybe they should seek peace? Or at the very least meet at the table. Israel doesn't want the occupied territories, and have numerous times claimed willingness to give them back He's talking about the illegal settlements, not the retaliatory attacks by Israel. But overall, I agree. While Israel is adding fuel to the fire by refusing to stop the illegal settlements, we can't overlook the context of this conflict. Namely, when the Arabs thought they had the upper hand, they tried to wipe Israel off the map on several occasions (the Palestinian Arabs were onboard). They chose violence over negotiated peace. On the other hand, once the situation shifted in favour of Israel, Israel was open to accepting several different peace proposals. Those were rejected by the Palestinians, who were unhappy with some of the terms. They were unwilling to accept that their negotiating position was getting progressively weaker, and they chose violence again. I think people siding with Palestine in this conflict are not holding Israel and Palestine to the same standard. If Israel acted the way the Arabs did, they would've wiped out the Palestinians a long time ago. @Drone I would hold off with such claims. The number of casualties on the Palestinian side come from the Palestinian officials, i.e. Hamas...
He says
On October 08 2023 03:16 KwarK wrote:
Wiping Israel off the map doesn’t necessarily mean killing every Israeli. The third Reich was wiped off of the map, for example. Israel is the state, not the people. They conflate the two deliberately.
He's trying to defend "wipe Israel off the map" as merely "remove the country, but totally keep the people".
It's bullshit and anyone who's been paying attention should know it. The Palestinians want an ethnic cleansing. The only thing preventing the ethnic cleansing is the power that the Israeli government has. If they ever lose a war or are otherwise dissolved, it will be an ethnic cleansing. The only question would be how many Israelis would escape versus how many would be part of the genocide. What country would take 7 million Jewish refugees because there is no way Palestinians would accept Jewish neighbors and allow them to live.
Here's a spokesman for Hamas talking to Al Jazeera today:
Osama Hamdan, senior spokesperson for Hamas, told Al Jazeera that the group was not attacking civilians even though the group’s own videos have shown its fighters taking elderly Israelis hostage during the fighting on Saturday.
Rights groups such as Amnesty International have also pointed out that Israeli civilians had been killed by Hamas.
But Hamdan insisted that the group was attacking only settlers living in illegal settlements, whom he described as legitimate targets.
“You have to differentiate between settlers and civilians. Settlers attacked Palestinians,” Hamdan said.
Asked whether civilians in southern Israel were also considered settlers, Hamdan said: “Everyone knows there are settlements there.”
“We are not targeting civilians on purpose. We have declared settlers are part of the occupation and part of the armed Israeli force. They are not civilians,” he added.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/10/8/what-is-the-group-hamas-a-simple-guide-tothe-palestinian-group
He's not saying that the elderly were unfortunate casualties of war or that mistakes were made. He says that the elderly are not "civilians", they are "settlers" and thus killing and kidnapping them is okay. This is a spokesman for the political leadership of Palestine. It also looks like a concert for peace is a legitimate target according to Palestinians.
I've already posted the decline in numbers of Jewish People in every other Mideast country. Every last one experienced an ethnic cleansing. People don't just up and move for the fun of it. They were forced out. Or if you want a non-Jewish example, you can look at what's happening to Christians in Egypt for another example. Church bombings, kidnapped women forced to marry Muslims, and plenty of killings. Fanatical Muslims will not live peacefully side by side with anyone else and there are way too many fanatical Muslims in the middle east.
Being anti Israel is indeed taking a pro-genocide stance. However, I'll admit that most western people don't realize that's what they're actually supporting by being anti Israel. Most people are ignorant. And no, that doesn't mean you need to endorse everything the Israeli government does in order to be anti-genocide. However, you do need to support the right of Israel to exist and be against anyone who denies that right.
Or if you think I'm wrong, let's try to answer a question, what is the scenario where the Israeli government is dissolved and we don't have an ethnic cleansing?
|
United States41960 Posts
On October 09 2023 09:30 RenSC2 wrote:
Or if you think I'm wrong, let's try to answer a question, what is the scenario where the Israeli government is dissolved and we don't have an ethnic cleansing?
Thanks for asking the question of what could be imagined other than genocide, though I see you couldn’t help accusing me of being pro genocide on the way there. I’m not, but presumably you just couldn’t help yourself.
Something akin to the end of apartheid rule in South Africa or power sharing agreements in NI.
Though again, I’m not advocating for the dissolution of Israel. I’m arguing for asking people what they mean before calling them Nazis. If they respond that they think it’s a great idea to kill all the Jews then you can call them Nazis. Just stop for a second and check first. Especially if it would be out of character for someone who doesn’t normally call for a Holocaust to suddenly be calling for one out of the blue. There’s probably been a misunderstanding.
One thing to keep in mind is that people who criticize specific Israeli actions regarding pushing people out of their homes or killing civilians are likely against those things in general. Therefore they’re probably not advocating that anyone gets kicked out of their home or murdered. It wouldn’t make sense for someone to be so upset about displacements that they wanted to displace the entire population of Israel and so that’s probably not their viewpoint. They’re probably arguing that nobody should have their homes destroyed, not that Israelis should have their homes destroyed instead of Palestinians. If in doubt though, just ask.
|
On October 09 2023 08:28 ZeroByte13 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2023 08:22 Mohdoo wrote:
What I expect is for them to declare ahead of time the fact that they are going to march from north to south and that anyone who they find 72 hours after their announcement will be killed. This is way too extreme, they won't do me that. Nobody will allow/approve killing 2 million people like that.
Israel can point to this event and ask “ok so I should let these people just kinda keep doing this? This land needs to be cleared out from terrorists. If you insist there are innocent people among them, open the gates and let them leave. But we are officially evicting this entire stretch of land”
There are plenty of situations and adaptations to where no one dies. But I just can’t imagine Israel allowing Gaza to continue in its current form. This situation will be entirely eliminated through some mechanism, and soon. Only question is what Israel does.
The elephant in the room has always been the fact that Muslim nations are choosing for this situation to continue because they are deciding having a terrorist state embedded within Israel in the form of Gaza is a net positive. Since optics and politics will prevent Israel from turning the whole city to glass, they have no incentive to do what is needed to relocate the inhabitants.
If Israel issues an eviction notice, and it’s clear they are being serious, you guys don’t think Muslim nations would open their doors?
|
On October 09 2023 09:30 RenSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2023 06:12 ChristianS wrote:
Kwark, I think you’re closer to right in this exchange and TLoA is absolutely doing the bait and switch “opposing Israel on anything means supporting a second Holocaust” trick that Israel defenders have always done. You've got a good history of posting in good faith, so I want to return that good faith even while heavily disagreeing. The complaint is not that Kwark is not 100% pro Israel. You'll find very little pushback if you say that the Israeli settlements are wrong even from pro-Israel people. In Kwark's response to this post + Show Spoiler +On October 08 2023 03:11 maybenexttime wrote:Show nested quote +On October 08 2023 02:17 Excludos wrote:On October 07 2023 22:09 Liquid`Drone wrote:
The framing that they just want to be left alone while continuing to encroach on palestinerne territory is absolutely ridiculous. It's insane how people are just willing to completely disregard context. That they are being attacked by rocket barrages and terrorism on the daily is seemingly unimportant. If Sweden did that to Norway, we'd be doing a lot more than Israel is in regards to counter-aggression. It's like if I keep punching you in the face, and you push me away, suddenly everyone around us goers "omfg how could you push?!". You answer with "I just want to be left alone!" and then people laugh and go "Shouldn't be pushing then!" If Palestine doesn't want Israel to keep pushing, then maybe they should seek peace? Or at the very least meet at the table. Israel doesn't want the occupied territories, and have numerous times claimed willingness to give them back He's talking about the illegal settlements, not the retaliatory attacks by Israel. But overall, I agree. While Israel is adding fuel to the fire by refusing to stop the illegal settlements, we can't overlook the context of this conflict. Namely, when the Arabs thought they had the upper hand, they tried to wipe Israel off the map on several occasions (the Palestinian Arabs were onboard). They chose violence over negotiated peace. On the other hand, once the situation shifted in favour of Israel, Israel was open to accepting several different peace proposals. Those were rejected by the Palestinians, who were unhappy with some of the terms. They were unwilling to accept that their negotiating position was getting progressively weaker, and they chose violence again. I think people siding with Palestine in this conflict are not holding Israel and Palestine to the same standard. If Israel acted the way the Arabs did, they would've wiped out the Palestinians a long time ago. @Drone I would hold off with such claims. The number of casualties on the Palestinian side come from the Palestinian officials, i.e. Hamas... He says Show nested quote +On October 08 2023 03:16 KwarK wrote:
Wiping Israel off the map doesn’t necessarily mean killing every Israeli. The third Reich was wiped off of the map, for example. Israel is the state, not the people. They conflate the two deliberately. He's trying to defend "wipe Israel off the map" as merely "remove the country, but totally keep the people". It's bullshit and anyone who's been paying attention should know it. The Palestinians want an ethnic cleansing. The only thing preventing the ethnic cleansing is the power that the Israeli government has. If they ever lose a war or are otherwise dissolved, it will be an ethnic cleansing. The only question would be how many Israelis would escape versus how many would be part of the genocide. What country would take 7 million Jewish refugees because there is no way Palestinians would accept Jewish neighbors and allow them to live. Here's a spokesman for Hamas talking to Al Jazeera today: Show nested quote +Osama Hamdan, senior spokesperson for Hamas, told Al Jazeera that the group was not attacking civilians even though the group’s own videos have shown its fighters taking elderly Israelis hostage during the fighting on Saturday.
Rights groups such as Amnesty International have also pointed out that Israeli civilians had been killed by Hamas.
But Hamdan insisted that the group was attacking only settlers living in illegal settlements, whom he described as legitimate targets.
“You have to differentiate between settlers and civilians. Settlers attacked Palestinians,” Hamdan said.
Asked whether civilians in southern Israel were also considered settlers, Hamdan said: “Everyone knows there are settlements there.”
“We are not targeting civilians on purpose. We have declared settlers are part of the occupation and part of the armed Israeli force. They are not civilians,” he added. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/10/8/what-is-the-group-hamas-a-simple-guide-tothe-palestinian-groupHe's not saying that the elderly were unfortunate casualties of war or that mistakes were made. He says that the elderly are not "civilians", they are "settlers" and thus killing and kidnapping them is okay. This is a spokesman for the political leadership of Palestine. It also looks like a concert for peace is a legitimate target according to Palestinians. I've already posted the decline in numbers of Jewish People in every other Mideast country. Every last one experienced an ethnic cleansing. People don't just up and move for the fun of it. They were forced out. Or if you want a non-Jewish example, you can look at what's happening to Christians in Egypt for another example. Church bombings, kidnapped women forced to marry Muslims, and plenty of killings. Fanatical Muslims will not live peacefully side by side with anyone else and there are way too many fanatical Muslims in the middle east. Being anti Israel is indeed taking a pro-genocide stance. However, I'll admit that most western people don't realize that's what they're actually supporting by being anti Israel. Most people are ignorant. And no, that doesn't mean you need to endorse everything the Israeli government does in order to be anti-genocide. However, you do need to support the right of Israel to exist and be against anyone who denies that right. Or if you think I'm wrong, let's try to answer a question, what is the scenario where the Israeli government is dissolved and we don't have an ethnic cleansing?
I mean, I guess the underlying question I'm not clear on is whether we're asking "what Kwark means by 'wipe Israel off the map' " or "what this or that Arab leader and/or Palestians generally means/meant by 'wipe Israel off the map' ". You have a lot more confidence than I do in asserting "what Palestinians want." That might just be me being ill-informed, I dunno.
But Kwark's specific post is pretty clear that he, at least, is clarifying that ending the current government of Israel does not inherently mean genocide/ethnic cleansing of Israelis. Maybe that's what Palestinians would want. I'm pretty sure that's what Hamas would want. But if, for instance, the international community decided "we're not going to allow an ethnostate to exist" and forced Israel to change their form of government away from one that explicitly, legally determines who is and isn't a Jew and differentiates legal rights accordingly, I don't think that wouldn't necessarily entail genociding Israelis.
You could claim that all those policies are necessary to preventing a genocide that would otherwise be inevitable. If so, you could assert "no, you're wrong, it's not possible to imagine ending the current Israeli state without an accompanying genocide of Israelis." But I just don't believe that, and I don't think you do either. Anyway it's clear Kwark doesn't, which is the disputed issue here.
I think your anger at Kwark (and maybe TLoA's anger at Kwark) is based on the idea that he's apologizing for/running interference for bloodthirsty Arab leaders that just want to kill every Jew. Which, I dunno, those people certainly exist. I don't *think* Kwark is trying to defend those people, although any time you argue even a nuanced pro-Palestinian or anti-Israel position you're at least giving those people some cover, right? I am too, whether I like it or not, any time I argue that Israel's moral position is compromised or that Palestinians' rights are being trampled on.
Like, would it help if Kwark explicitly said "I don't think Israelis should be genocided or ethnically cleansed, and I don't think any Palestinian or Arab leaders advocating that are on defensible moral ground"? I bet he'd do it, although I'm not sure if you'd believe him or not. Otherwise, I just don't think his intention is to empower those people (although he probably disagrees with you about how prevalent that opinion is, either among Palestinians or in the Arab world generally).
|
On October 09 2023 09:54 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2023 09:30 RenSC2 wrote:
Or if you think I'm wrong, let's try to answer a question, what is the scenario where the Israeli government is dissolved and we don't have an ethnic cleansing? Something akin to the end of apartheid rule in South Africa or power sharing agreements in NI.
I'm not as familiar with NI as I'd like, so I'll go with South Africa as one which I know a little bit about. Do you see any differences between the South African situation and the Israel/Palestine situation that could result in extremely different results despite the same actions?
Like, perhaps do you see a significant difference between Nelson Mandela and whoever the Palestinians have put in charge? Nelson Mandela, on trial where he would eventually be sentenced to life in prison, says this:
During my lifetime I have dedicated myself to this struggle of the African people. I have fought against white domination, and I have fought against black domination. I have cherished the ideal of a democratic and free society in which all persons live together in harmony and with equal opportunities. It is an ideal which I hope to live for and to achieve. But if needs be, it is an ideal for which I am prepared to die.
Nelson Mandela started out peacefully, did have a foray into more extreme methods and got prison time for it, and then came out promoting peace and reconciliation again. Even his more extreme methods involved "sabotage against property (designed to minimize risks of injury and death)".
When and where did he say it was okay to kill the elderly whites because they were settlers, not civilians? I think I missed that part of his life. When did he refuse to recognize the rights of whites to exist in South Africa? When did he launch a war to wipe out the whites in South Africa?
He as the leader, and the movement as a whole, was all about gaining equal rights.
The Palestinian movement, from the very beginning, has been about annihilating Israel. The rhetoric during the founding of Israel says it and the rhetoric now says it.
Who is the Palestinian comparable to Mandela? Who are the Palestinian people going to follow to peaceful equality?
|
Northern Ireland23765 Posts
On October 09 2023 10:42 RenSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2023 09:54 KwarK wrote:On October 09 2023 09:30 RenSC2 wrote:
Or if you think I'm wrong, let's try to answer a question, what is the scenario where the Israeli government is dissolved and we don't have an ethnic cleansing? Something akin to the end of apartheid rule in South Africa or power sharing agreements in NI. I'm not as familiar with NI as I'd like, so I'll go with South Africa as one which I know a little bit about. Do you see any differences between the South African situation and the Israel/Palestine situation that could result in extremely different results despite the same actions? Like, perhaps do you see a significant difference between Nelson Mandela and whoever the Palestinians have put in charge? Nelson Mandela, on trial where he would eventually be sentenced to life in prison, says this: Show nested quote +During my lifetime I have dedicated myself to this struggle of the African people. I have fought against white domination, and I have fought against black domination. I have cherished the ideal of a democratic and free society in which all persons live together in harmony and with equal opportunities. It is an ideal which I hope to live for and to achieve. But if needs be, it is an ideal for which I am prepared to die. Nelson Mandela started out peacefully, did have a foray into more extreme methods and got prison time for it, and then came out promoting peace and reconciliation again. Even his more extreme methods involved "sabotage against property (designed to minimize risks of injury and death)". When and where did he say it was okay to kill the elderly whites because they were settlers, not civilians? I think I missed that part of his life. When did he refuse to recognize the rights of whites to exist in South Africa? When did he launch a war to wipe out the whites in South Africa? He as the leader, and the movement as a whole, was all about gaining equal rights. The Palestinian movement, from the very beginning, has been about annihilating Israel. The rhetoric during the founding of Israel says it and the rhetoric now says it. Who is the Palestinian comparable to Mandela? Who are the Palestinian people going to follow to peaceful equality?
Nelson Mandela would very possibly have rotted in prison and never seen the end of Apartheid if the rest of the world, or at least eventually significant chunks of it hadn’t put pretty damn consistent pressure on the South African state.
I guess it’s rare one can directly compare equivalent scenarios, there ends up being as many differences as the similarity one zones in on.
But yes there is a rather more embedded, genuinely existential hatred amongst the Palestinian people, and indeed surrounding states for Israel that doesn’t have much direct parallel in other historic disputes around nationalism, or discriminatory regimes.
I think the frustration many, or well at least I feel is there’s no guarantee that any course of action ultimately diffuses that, but if there’s one that would guarantee it doesn’t dissipate, it’s the course of action that Israel has pursued for decades with very little meaningful international pushback.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
