|
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 August 15 2024 00:08 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2024 23:58 PremoBeats wrote:On August 14 2024 23:52 PoulsenB wrote:
Israel's goal of eradicating hamas completely is unrealistic. Even if they break the hamas as a functional organisation, a new one will take its place, especially after all the death and destruction they are currently inflicing on the Palestinians in Gaza.
I also find it interesting how one can consider Israeli civilian casualties to be so condemnable and at the same time consider Palestinian civilian casualties as justified. ` Well. Hamas attacked on October 7th and targeted civilians directly while the Palestinian casualties are collateral (still horrible, but there is a clear distinction... there can't be no justification for the Hamas targeting, while there can be for the collateral in Palestine). Further: I think no one here even made the notion that you put up for discussion. If it was open war and the civilians of Israel would be collateral, one would need to accept that. But they were not collateral.. to kill them was the goal. It was the most effective attack against Israeli military targets in decades and most of the civilian casualties (unclear how many were actually killed by Israel) were from a party that they didn't expect to be at their LZ. It's not any less reasonable to argue that the Israeli civilians killed on Oct 7 were collateral damage than the ~15,000 children Israel has killed.
So what if the party wasn't expected to be there? Eyewitnesses (of a peace festival) reported targeted/intentional attacks on civilians. There is nothing collateral about this, not even in the most mental gymnastic pro Hamas perspective.
300 soldiers to 1,2k-1,4k is an abyssmal Soldier-Civilian-Ratio even if it was collateral (1:2,6 to 3,6)
So
This was aired first on Kan11 like the guy from your link explains. The video was part of Eretz Nehederet, which is a... satirical comedy show. They took it down after receiving criticism. No idea how your two other sources arrive at the idea that it was posted by The Civic Front (perhaps they reposted it because they thought it would aid their cause, who knows), but its satiric nature is obvious.
Do you think that the several clips from my video seem so obviously over the top satirical?
|
Northern Ireland27206 Posts
On August 15 2024 01:23 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2024 00:25 PoulsenB wrote:On August 15 2024 00:08 GreenHorizons wrote:On August 14 2024 23:58 PremoBeats wrote:On August 14 2024 23:52 PoulsenB wrote:
Israel's goal of eradicating hamas completely is unrealistic. Even if they break the hamas as a functional organisation, a new one will take its place, especially after all the death and destruction they are currently inflicing on the Palestinians in Gaza.
I also find it interesting how one can consider Israeli civilian casualties to be so condemnable and at the same time consider Palestinian civilian casualties as justified. ` Well. Hamas attacked on October 7th and targeted civilians directly while the Palestinian casualties are collateral (still horrible, but there is a clear distinction... there can't be no justification for the Hamas targeting, while there can be for the collateral in Palestine). Further: I think no one here even made the notion that you put up for discussion. If it was open war and the civilians of Israel would be collateral, one would need to accept that. But they were not collateral.. to kill them was the goal. It was the most effective attack against Israeli military targets in decades and most of the civilian casualties (unclear how many were actually killed by Israel) were from a party that they didn't expect to be at their LZ. It's not any less reasonable to argue that the Israeli civilians killed on Oct 7 were collateral damage than the ~15,000 children Israel has killed. I would also add that knowingly bombing civilian targets because they allegedly house hamas fighters hardly counts as collateral, in the 'accidental death' sense. At this point its recognized that collateral is a euphemism that doesn't mean 'accidental death'. It means they happened to be there when other people were getting killed and its just too hard not to brutally murder innocent civilians so we won't bother with that whole thing. PR speak pioneered by the west, because frankly Arabs would proudly display all their civilian casualties. There's no actual difference in how war is carried out by different peoples, just a difference in how we speak about it. Israel is just as capable of mass torture, randomly and indiscriminately killing civilians, and generally acting like a bunch of horrible, hellbound cunts as America is, as the Arabs are and as anyone else at war is.
It’s a term that for me appears to have multiple meanings in different contexts.
As someone who as a youngling was in protests against the Iraq War, certainly not a conflict I ever particularly supported, so to clarify I’m not trying to apply a favourable lens.
In terms of how it was carried out, flawed as all wars will invariably be. In that conflict at least in how it was communicated to the populace, the likes of the British and American forces tended to use ‘collateral damage’ to refer to actual accidental civilian deaths. Of course, doesn’t mean there weren’t atrocities perpetrated in that ill-advised war:
In a crude sense the current Israeli interpretation of collateral damage is ‘the civilians we have to get through to hit our targets’
This isn’t to paint the ‘coalition of the willing’ as saints, but there’s a pretty clear divergence in how that terminology is being employed in this conflict.
It’s morphed from non-combatants caught in the crossfire to something akin to ‘acceptable civilian sacrifice’ and it’s pretty bloody gross
|
On August 15 2024 01:48 PremoBeats wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2024 00:08 GreenHorizons wrote:On August 14 2024 23:58 PremoBeats wrote:On August 14 2024 23:52 PoulsenB wrote:
Israel's goal of eradicating hamas completely is unrealistic. Even if they break the hamas as a functional organisation, a new one will take its place, especially after all the death and destruction they are currently inflicing on the Palestinians in Gaza.
I also find it interesting how one can consider Israeli civilian casualties to be so condemnable and at the same time consider Palestinian civilian casualties as justified. ` Well. Hamas attacked on October 7th and targeted civilians directly while the Palestinian casualties are collateral (still horrible, but there is a clear distinction... there can't be no justification for the Hamas targeting, while there can be for the collateral in Palestine). Further: I think no one here even made the notion that you put up for discussion. If it was open war and the civilians of Israel would be collateral, one would need to accept that. But they were not collateral.. to kill them was the goal. It was the most effective attack against Israeli military targets in decades and most of the civilian casualties (unclear how many were actually killed by Israel) were from a party that they didn't expect to be at their LZ. It's not any less reasonable to argue that the Israeli civilians killed on Oct 7 were collateral damage than the ~15,000 children Israel has killed. So what if the party wasn't expected to be there? Eyewitnesses (of a peace festival) reported targeted/intentional attacks on civilians. There is nothing collateral about this, not even in the most mental gymnastic pro Hamas perspective. 300 soldiers to 1,2k-1,4k is an abyssmal Soldier-Civilian-Ratio even if it was collateral (1:2,6 to 3,6) So This was aired first on Kan11 like the guy from your link explains. The video was part of Eretz Nehederet, which is a... satirical comedy show. They took it down after receiving criticism. No idea how your two other sources arrive at the idea that it was posted by The Civic Front (perhaps they reposted it because they thought it would aid their cause, who knows), but its satiric nature is obvious. Do you think that the several clips from my video seem so obviously over the top satirical?
I can't find the notion that it was posted by Eretz Nehederet anywhere, everyone seems in agreement that it was the Civil Front. Here's another one:
https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2023/11/27/fact-check-did-israeli-children-really-sing-about-annihilating-everyone-in-gaza
By the way Eretz Nehederet is also pro-Israel, and is the group that posted this shit
Hard to believe they would then turn and do "satire" of the far right groups of Israel, which, by the way, what's the satire? It's a group of children singing about annihilating Gaza, where's the part where we understand it's bad? Look at the comments under the articles, the far right people are in agreement with it, they're not like "Well obviously this is satire we are not like this".
|
"Collateral" is a completely inappropriate term in the case of an aggressive war. This entire war has been avoidable for the last 9-10 months, thus the civilian casualties can't reasonably be counted as "collateral". The implication of "collateral" is that the deaths can't be reasonably avoided, but that argument fails because this war of aggression is entirely avoidable with a long term ceasefire. Hamas poses no realistic threat, otherwise 95% of the war wouldn't have taken place entirely in Gaza. Even Iran and Hezbollah can't pose a threat despite the IDF being tangled up in this war of aggression. The warmonger and mass murderer Netanyahu must go.
|
On August 14 2024 23:52 PoulsenB wrote:
I also find it interesting how one can consider Israeli civilian casualties to be so condemnable and at the same time consider Palestinian civilian casualties as justified.
All war comes down to inflicting collective responsibility on others while claiming it must never be inflicted on you and yours.
Sadly hypocrisy is our natural condition.
|
On August 15 2024 02:01 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2024 01:48 PremoBeats wrote:On August 15 2024 00:08 GreenHorizons wrote:On August 14 2024 23:58 PremoBeats wrote:On August 14 2024 23:52 PoulsenB wrote:
Israel's goal of eradicating hamas completely is unrealistic. Even if they break the hamas as a functional organisation, a new one will take its place, especially after all the death and destruction they are currently inflicing on the Palestinians in Gaza.
I also find it interesting how one can consider Israeli civilian casualties to be so condemnable and at the same time consider Palestinian civilian casualties as justified. ` Well. Hamas attacked on October 7th and targeted civilians directly while the Palestinian casualties are collateral (still horrible, but there is a clear distinction... there can't be no justification for the Hamas targeting, while there can be for the collateral in Palestine). Further: I think no one here even made the notion that you put up for discussion. If it was open war and the civilians of Israel would be collateral, one would need to accept that. But they were not collateral.. to kill them was the goal. It was the most effective attack against Israeli military targets in decades and most of the civilian casualties (unclear how many were actually killed by Israel) were from a party that they didn't expect to be at their LZ. It's not any less reasonable to argue that the Israeli civilians killed on Oct 7 were collateral damage than the ~15,000 children Israel has killed. So what if the party wasn't expected to be there? Eyewitnesses (of a peace festival) reported targeted/intentional attacks on civilians. There is nothing collateral about this, not even in the most mental gymnastic pro Hamas perspective. 300 soldiers to 1,2k-1,4k is an abyssmal Soldier-Civilian-Ratio even if it was collateral (1:2,6 to 3,6) So This was aired first on Kan11 like the guy from your link explains. The video was part of Eretz Nehederet, which is a... satirical comedy show. They took it down after receiving criticism. No idea how your two other sources arrive at the idea that it was posted by The Civic Front (perhaps they reposted it because they thought it would aid their cause, who knows), but its satiric nature is obvious. Do you think that the several clips from my video seem so obviously over the top satirical? I can't find the notion that it was posted by Eretz Nehederet anywhere, everyone seems in agreement that it was the Civil Front. Here's another one: https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2023/11/27/fact-check-did-israeli-children-really-sing-about-annihilating-everyone-in-gazaBy the way Eretz Nehederet is also pro-Israel, and is the group that posted this shit Hard to believe they would then turn and do "satire" of the far right groups of Israel, which, by the way, what's the satire? It's a group of children singing about annihilating Gaza, where's the part where we understand it's bad? Look at the comments under the articles, the far right people are in agreement with it, they're not like "Well obviously this is satire we are not like this".
The guy says it in the link you posted. But yeah.. I mean you found another over the top sketch they did.
But they always produce over the top stuff... not only pro-Israel:
https://www.timesofisrael.com/netanyahu-pans-satirical-tv-show-over-sketch-that-upset-holocaust-survivor/
Well, satire can be over-acting an issue, which is displayed in the link you posted.
But to come back to how we even got here: hate in children... Did you see the clips of kid's shows, boardgames and puzzles? The educational content? Physics being taught with slingshots shooting at "soldiers of the Zionist occupation"? Reading comprehensions glorifinyg terrorists who instigated massacres where children were killed? Math equations involving the counting of Martyrs?
Do you seriously believe that this is in any way comparable to how Israel educates their youth?
On August 15 2024 02:13 Magic Powers wrote:
"Collateral" is a completely inappropriate term in the case of an aggressive war. This entire war has been avoidable for the last 9-10 months, thus the civilian casualties can't reasonably be counted as "collateral". The implication of "collateral" is that the deaths can't be reasonably avoided, but that argument fails because this war of aggression is entirely avoidable with a long term ceasefire. Hamas poses no realistic threat, otherwise 95% of the war wouldn't have taken place entirely in Gaza. Even Iran and Hezbollah can't pose a threat despite the IDF being tangled up in this war of aggression. The warmonger and mass murderer Netanyahu must go.
Your solution is that Israel simply has to take the occassional murdering of their citizens, cause Hamas begs for a ceasefire the moment they realize how fucked they are?
So what if Hamas is no realistic threat... they attacked, now they will receive the consequences. Or the population will learn to get rid of the radical currents via a civil war and someone who can make lasting peace with Israel gets eleceted.
Either way, what kind of signal would it send to the other threats of Israel, when they won't even hit back the suppossedly weakest adversary.
|
No one in here agrees that Hamas should stay or hold any real power. The issues comes in with how we tackle the indoctrination of the Palestinian people. It's a very simple reality that treating someone as an enemy, as an other, will turn them into one. The Palestinian people don't currently have the luxury to recognize how atrocious Hamas is because the occupation already makes their lives miserable.
Therefore you either need to kill them all or stop making their lives hell, throw them a bone or two, because clearly a mere ceasefire while good at providing a cessation to the increased rate of slaughter, does not resolve the conflict long term.
|
Northern Ireland27206 Posts
On August 15 2024 04:44 PremoBeats wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2024 02:01 Nebuchad wrote:On August 15 2024 01:48 PremoBeats wrote:On August 15 2024 00:08 GreenHorizons wrote:On August 14 2024 23:58 PremoBeats wrote:On August 14 2024 23:52 PoulsenB wrote:
Israel's goal of eradicating hamas completely is unrealistic. Even if they break the hamas as a functional organisation, a new one will take its place, especially after all the death and destruction they are currently inflicing on the Palestinians in Gaza.
I also find it interesting how one can consider Israeli civilian casualties to be so condemnable and at the same time consider Palestinian civilian casualties as justified. ` Well. Hamas attacked on October 7th and targeted civilians directly while the Palestinian casualties are collateral (still horrible, but there is a clear distinction... there can't be no justification for the Hamas targeting, while there can be for the collateral in Palestine). Further: I think no one here even made the notion that you put up for discussion. If it was open war and the civilians of Israel would be collateral, one would need to accept that. But they were not collateral.. to kill them was the goal. It was the most effective attack against Israeli military targets in decades and most of the civilian casualties (unclear how many were actually killed by Israel) were from a party that they didn't expect to be at their LZ. It's not any less reasonable to argue that the Israeli civilians killed on Oct 7 were collateral damage than the ~15,000 children Israel has killed. So what if the party wasn't expected to be there? Eyewitnesses (of a peace festival) reported targeted/intentional attacks on civilians. There is nothing collateral about this, not even in the most mental gymnastic pro Hamas perspective. 300 soldiers to 1,2k-1,4k is an abyssmal Soldier-Civilian-Ratio even if it was collateral (1:2,6 to 3,6) So This was aired first on Kan11 like the guy from your link explains. The video was part of Eretz Nehederet, which is a... satirical comedy show. They took it down after receiving criticism. No idea how your two other sources arrive at the idea that it was posted by The Civic Front (perhaps they reposted it because they thought it would aid their cause, who knows), but its satiric nature is obvious. Do you think that the several clips from my video seem so obviously over the top satirical? I can't find the notion that it was posted by Eretz Nehederet anywhere, everyone seems in agreement that it was the Civil Front. Here's another one: https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2023/11/27/fact-check-did-israeli-children-really-sing-about-annihilating-everyone-in-gazaBy the way Eretz Nehederet is also pro-Israel, and is the group that posted this shit Hard to believe they would then turn and do "satire" of the far right groups of Israel, which, by the way, what's the satire? It's a group of children singing about annihilating Gaza, where's the part where we understand it's bad? Look at the comments under the articles, the far right people are in agreement with it, they're not like "Well obviously this is satire we are not like this". The guy says it in the link you posted. But yeah.. I mean you found another over the top sketch they did. But they always produce over the top stuff... not only pro-Israel: https://www.timesofisrael.com/netanyahu-pans-satirical-tv-show-over-sketch-that-upset-holocaust-survivor/Well, satire can be over-acting an issue, which is displayed in the link you posted. But to come back to how we even got here: hate in children... Did you see the clips of kid's shows, boardgames and puzzles? The educational content? Physics being taught with slingshots shooting at "soldiers of the Zionist occupation"? Reading comprehensions glorifinyg terrorists who instigated massacres where children were killed? Math equations involving the counting of Martyrs? Do you seriously believe that this is in any way comparable to how Israel educates their youth? Show nested quote +On August 15 2024 02:13 Magic Powers wrote:
"Collateral" is a completely inappropriate term in the case of an aggressive war. This entire war has been avoidable for the last 9-10 months, thus the civilian casualties can't reasonably be counted as "collateral". The implication of "collateral" is that the deaths can't be reasonably avoided, but that argument fails because this war of aggression is entirely avoidable with a long term ceasefire. Hamas poses no realistic threat, otherwise 95% of the war wouldn't have taken place entirely in Gaza. Even Iran and Hezbollah can't pose a threat despite the IDF being tangled up in this war of aggression. The warmonger and mass murderer Netanyahu must go. Your solution is that Israel simply has to take the occassional murdering of their citizens, cause Hamas begs for a ceasefire the moment they realize how fucked they are? So what if Hamas is no realistic threat... they attacked, now they will receive the consequences. Or the population will learn to get rid of the radical currents via a civil war and someone who can make lasting peace with Israel gets eleceted. Either way, what kind of signal would it send to the other threats of Israel, when they won't even hit back the suppossedly weakest adversary.
That’s not how the conflict is going though, or indeed the past few decades of it?
Israel isn’t going to win hearts and minds, it knows this so it’s just bombing people into the ground. It’s happy doing this as a state. It’s happy incentivising and protecting settlers encroaching into the ever-decreasing amounts of land they’re ostensibly holding rights to.
Equally war doesn’t present many good options, so in that sense sure. But given the Israeli state is actively expanding its holdings simultaneously the idea that all of these events are purely defensive actions is completely untenable
|
On August 15 2024 05:04 Cricketer12 wrote:
No one in here agrees that Hamas should stay or hold any real power. The issues comes in with how we tackle the indoctrination of the Palestinian people. It's a very simple reality that treating someone as an enemy, as an other, will turn them into one. The Palestinian people don't currently have the luxury to recognize how atrocious Hamas is because the occupation already makes their lives miserable.
Therefore you either need to kill them all or stop making their lives hell, throw them a bone or two, because clearly a mere ceasefire while good at providing a cessation to the increased rate of slaughter, does not resolve the conflict long term.
Stop making their lives hell? Serious question: Have you ever been to the middle-east?
On August 15 2024 05:11 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2024 04:44 PremoBeats wrote:On August 15 2024 02:01 Nebuchad wrote:On August 15 2024 01:48 PremoBeats wrote:On August 15 2024 00:08 GreenHorizons wrote:On August 14 2024 23:58 PremoBeats wrote:On August 14 2024 23:52 PoulsenB wrote:
Israel's goal of eradicating hamas completely is unrealistic. Even if they break the hamas as a functional organisation, a new one will take its place, especially after all the death and destruction they are currently inflicing on the Palestinians in Gaza.
I also find it interesting how one can consider Israeli civilian casualties to be so condemnable and at the same time consider Palestinian civilian casualties as justified. ` Well. Hamas attacked on October 7th and targeted civilians directly while the Palestinian casualties are collateral (still horrible, but there is a clear distinction... there can't be no justification for the Hamas targeting, while there can be for the collateral in Palestine). Further: I think no one here even made the notion that you put up for discussion. If it was open war and the civilians of Israel would be collateral, one would need to accept that. But they were not collateral.. to kill them was the goal. It was the most effective attack against Israeli military targets in decades and most of the civilian casualties (unclear how many were actually killed by Israel) were from a party that they didn't expect to be at their LZ. It's not any less reasonable to argue that the Israeli civilians killed on Oct 7 were collateral damage than the ~15,000 children Israel has killed. So what if the party wasn't expected to be there? Eyewitnesses (of a peace festival) reported targeted/intentional attacks on civilians. There is nothing collateral about this, not even in the most mental gymnastic pro Hamas perspective. 300 soldiers to 1,2k-1,4k is an abyssmal Soldier-Civilian-Ratio even if it was collateral (1:2,6 to 3,6) So This was aired first on Kan11 like the guy from your link explains. The video was part of Eretz Nehederet, which is a... satirical comedy show. They took it down after receiving criticism. No idea how your two other sources arrive at the idea that it was posted by The Civic Front (perhaps they reposted it because they thought it would aid their cause, who knows), but its satiric nature is obvious. Do you think that the several clips from my video seem so obviously over the top satirical? I can't find the notion that it was posted by Eretz Nehederet anywhere, everyone seems in agreement that it was the Civil Front. Here's another one: https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2023/11/27/fact-check-did-israeli-children-really-sing-about-annihilating-everyone-in-gazaBy the way Eretz Nehederet is also pro-Israel, and is the group that posted this shit Hard to believe they would then turn and do "satire" of the far right groups of Israel, which, by the way, what's the satire? It's a group of children singing about annihilating Gaza, where's the part where we understand it's bad? Look at the comments under the articles, the far right people are in agreement with it, they're not like "Well obviously this is satire we are not like this". The guy says it in the link you posted. But yeah.. I mean you found another over the top sketch they did. But they always produce over the top stuff... not only pro-Israel: https://www.timesofisrael.com/netanyahu-pans-satirical-tv-show-over-sketch-that-upset-holocaust-survivor/Well, satire can be over-acting an issue, which is displayed in the link you posted. But to come back to how we even got here: hate in children... Did you see the clips of kid's shows, boardgames and puzzles? The educational content? Physics being taught with slingshots shooting at "soldiers of the Zionist occupation"? Reading comprehensions glorifinyg terrorists who instigated massacres where children were killed? Math equations involving the counting of Martyrs? Do you seriously believe that this is in any way comparable to how Israel educates their youth? On August 15 2024 02:13 Magic Powers wrote:
"Collateral" is a completely inappropriate term in the case of an aggressive war. This entire war has been avoidable for the last 9-10 months, thus the civilian casualties can't reasonably be counted as "collateral". The implication of "collateral" is that the deaths can't be reasonably avoided, but that argument fails because this war of aggression is entirely avoidable with a long term ceasefire. Hamas poses no realistic threat, otherwise 95% of the war wouldn't have taken place entirely in Gaza. Even Iran and Hezbollah can't pose a threat despite the IDF being tangled up in this war of aggression. The warmonger and mass murderer Netanyahu must go. Your solution is that Israel simply has to take the occassional murdering of their citizens, cause Hamas begs for a ceasefire the moment they realize how fucked they are? So what if Hamas is no realistic threat... they attacked, now they will receive the consequences. Or the population will learn to get rid of the radical currents via a civil war and someone who can make lasting peace with Israel gets eleceted. Either way, what kind of signal would it send to the other threats of Israel, when they won't even hit back the suppossedly weakest adversary. That’s not how the conflict is going though, or indeed the past few decades of it? Israel isn’t going to win hearts and minds, it knows this so it’s just bombing people into the ground. It’s happy doing this as a state. It’s happy incentivising and protecting settlers encroaching into the ever-decreasing amounts of land they’re ostensibly holding rights to. Equally war doesn’t present many good options, so in that sense sure. But given the Israeli state is actively expanding its holdings simultaneously the idea that all of these events are purely defensive actions is completely untenable
What do you mean that this is not how the conflict went?
I agree that some of the expansions are a provocation, but unlawful?
The Gaza strip was not recognized as part of any sovereign state prior to 67. The West Bank - looking at 67 - is more complex as Jordan had control over it, but mostly was occupying the region themselves and was not a sovereign. Thus legally, one can argue that Gaza and the West Bank are disputed, not occupied territories and settling there is justfiable, if only looking at 67.
The Golan Heights were Syrian territory before 67.
BUT: All three disputed regions have fallen under uti possidetis juris when Israel declared independence as this whole area was under British mandate.
So when these regions were taken by the Arab states after independence, Israel simply took them back a couple of decades later.
Or would you argue that Ukraine is occupying Crimea when they retake it in a couple of years from Russia as well?
|
On August 15 2024 04:44 PremoBeats wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2024 02:01 Nebuchad wrote:On August 15 2024 01:48 PremoBeats wrote:On August 15 2024 00:08 GreenHorizons wrote:On August 14 2024 23:58 PremoBeats wrote:On August 14 2024 23:52 PoulsenB wrote:
Israel's goal of eradicating hamas completely is unrealistic. Even if they break the hamas as a functional organisation, a new one will take its place, especially after all the death and destruction they are currently inflicing on the Palestinians in Gaza.
I also find it interesting how one can consider Israeli civilian casualties to be so condemnable and at the same time consider Palestinian civilian casualties as justified. ` Well. Hamas attacked on October 7th and targeted civilians directly while the Palestinian casualties are collateral (still horrible, but there is a clear distinction... there can't be no justification for the Hamas targeting, while there can be for the collateral in Palestine). Further: I think no one here even made the notion that you put up for discussion. If it was open war and the civilians of Israel would be collateral, one would need to accept that. But they were not collateral.. to kill them was the goal. It was the most effective attack against Israeli military targets in decades and most of the civilian casualties (unclear how many were actually killed by Israel) were from a party that they didn't expect to be at their LZ. It's not any less reasonable to argue that the Israeli civilians killed on Oct 7 were collateral damage than the ~15,000 children Israel has killed. So what if the party wasn't expected to be there? Eyewitnesses (of a peace festival) reported targeted/intentional attacks on civilians. There is nothing collateral about this, not even in the most mental gymnastic pro Hamas perspective. 300 soldiers to 1,2k-1,4k is an abyssmal Soldier-Civilian-Ratio even if it was collateral (1:2,6 to 3,6) So This was aired first on Kan11 like the guy from your link explains. The video was part of Eretz Nehederet, which is a... satirical comedy show. They took it down after receiving criticism. No idea how your two other sources arrive at the idea that it was posted by The Civic Front (perhaps they reposted it because they thought it would aid their cause, who knows), but its satiric nature is obvious. Do you think that the several clips from my video seem so obviously over the top satirical? I can't find the notion that it was posted by Eretz Nehederet anywhere, everyone seems in agreement that it was the Civil Front. Here's another one: https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2023/11/27/fact-check-did-israeli-children-really-sing-about-annihilating-everyone-in-gazaBy the way Eretz Nehederet is also pro-Israel, and is the group that posted this shit Hard to believe they would then turn and do "satire" of the far right groups of Israel, which, by the way, what's the satire? It's a group of children singing about annihilating Gaza, where's the part where we understand it's bad? Look at the comments under the articles, the far right people are in agreement with it, they're not like "Well obviously this is satire we are not like this". The guy says it in the link you posted. But yeah.. I mean you found another over the top sketch they did. But they always produce over the top stuff... not only pro-Israel: https://www.timesofisrael.com/netanyahu-pans-satirical-tv-show-over-sketch-that-upset-holocaust-survivor/Well, satire can be over-acting an issue, which is displayed in the link you posted. But to come back to how we even got here: hate in children... Did you see the clips of kid's shows, boardgames and puzzles? The educational content? Physics being taught with slingshots shooting at "soldiers of the Zionist occupation"? Reading comprehensions glorifinyg terrorists who instigated massacres where children were killed? Math equations involving the counting of Martyrs? Do you seriously believe that this is in any way comparable to how Israel educates their youth?
But it doesn't say that in the link I posted, though, you're making that up. It just says it was posted by Kan, which is a news channel. It doesn't make any mention of satire or Eretz Nehederet. But also you thought it was satire before I posted the link, right? So why don't you just post where you heard that, cause I can't find it anywhere?
Yes I think it's easily comparable. In both cases you have educational systems that stem from a society that hates another group, and those educational systems exist to promote hatred of the competing group. It is extremely normal for groups that have been killing each other for 75 years to have educational systems like this. I can think it's not great but I'm also able to recognize that 1) This is extremely typical human behavior so it's not weird that they're doing it and it shouldn't lead me to conclusions about who to side with in a conflict and 2) It doesn't change the inherent narrative of the conflict, in which one side hates the other because they are victims of a violent Apartheid state on their own land and the other side hates the other because they're subhumans who can't be trusted with or deserve equal rights and should be chased off their land.
|
On August 15 2024 05:59 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2024 04:44 PremoBeats wrote:On August 15 2024 02:01 Nebuchad wrote:On August 15 2024 01:48 PremoBeats wrote:On August 15 2024 00:08 GreenHorizons wrote:On August 14 2024 23:58 PremoBeats wrote:On August 14 2024 23:52 PoulsenB wrote:
Israel's goal of eradicating hamas completely is unrealistic. Even if they break the hamas as a functional organisation, a new one will take its place, especially after all the death and destruction they are currently inflicing on the Palestinians in Gaza.
I also find it interesting how one can consider Israeli civilian casualties to be so condemnable and at the same time consider Palestinian civilian casualties as justified. ` Well. Hamas attacked on October 7th and targeted civilians directly while the Palestinian casualties are collateral (still horrible, but there is a clear distinction... there can't be no justification for the Hamas targeting, while there can be for the collateral in Palestine). Further: I think no one here even made the notion that you put up for discussion. If it was open war and the civilians of Israel would be collateral, one would need to accept that. But they were not collateral.. to kill them was the goal. It was the most effective attack against Israeli military targets in decades and most of the civilian casualties (unclear how many were actually killed by Israel) were from a party that they didn't expect to be at their LZ. It's not any less reasonable to argue that the Israeli civilians killed on Oct 7 were collateral damage than the ~15,000 children Israel has killed. So what if the party wasn't expected to be there? Eyewitnesses (of a peace festival) reported targeted/intentional attacks on civilians. There is nothing collateral about this, not even in the most mental gymnastic pro Hamas perspective. 300 soldiers to 1,2k-1,4k is an abyssmal Soldier-Civilian-Ratio even if it was collateral (1:2,6 to 3,6) So This was aired first on Kan11 like the guy from your link explains. The video was part of Eretz Nehederet, which is a... satirical comedy show. They took it down after receiving criticism. No idea how your two other sources arrive at the idea that it was posted by The Civic Front (perhaps they reposted it because they thought it would aid their cause, who knows), but its satiric nature is obvious. Do you think that the several clips from my video seem so obviously over the top satirical? I can't find the notion that it was posted by Eretz Nehederet anywhere, everyone seems in agreement that it was the Civil Front. Here's another one: https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2023/11/27/fact-check-did-israeli-children-really-sing-about-annihilating-everyone-in-gazaBy the way Eretz Nehederet is also pro-Israel, and is the group that posted this shit Hard to believe they would then turn and do "satire" of the far right groups of Israel, which, by the way, what's the satire? It's a group of children singing about annihilating Gaza, where's the part where we understand it's bad? Look at the comments under the articles, the far right people are in agreement with it, they're not like "Well obviously this is satire we are not like this". The guy says it in the link you posted. But yeah.. I mean you found another over the top sketch they did. But they always produce over the top stuff... not only pro-Israel: https://www.timesofisrael.com/netanyahu-pans-satirical-tv-show-over-sketch-that-upset-holocaust-survivor/Well, satire can be over-acting an issue, which is displayed in the link you posted. But to come back to how we even got here: hate in children... Did you see the clips of kid's shows, boardgames and puzzles? The educational content? Physics being taught with slingshots shooting at "soldiers of the Zionist occupation"? Reading comprehensions glorifinyg terrorists who instigated massacres where children were killed? Math equations involving the counting of Martyrs? Do you seriously believe that this is in any way comparable to how Israel educates their youth? But it doesn't say that in the link I posted, though, you're making that up. It just says it was posted by Kan, which is a news channel. It doesn't make any mention of satire or Eretz Nehederet. But also you thought it was satire before I posted the link, right? So why don't you just post where you heard that, cause I can't find it anywhere? Yes I think it's easily comparable. In both cases you have educational systems that stem from a society that hates another group, and those educational systems exist to promote hatred of the competing group. It is extremely normal for groups that have been killing each other for 75 years to have educational systems like this. I can think it's not great but I'm also able to recognize that 1) This is extremely typical human behavior so it's not weird that they're doing it and it shouldn't lead me to conclusions about who to side with in a conflict and 2) It doesn't change the inherent narrative of the conflict, in which one side hates the other because they are victims of a violent Apartheid state on their own land and the other side hates the other because they're subhumans who can't be trusted with or deserve equal rights and should be chased off their land.
Yeah, I remember seeing the video a couple of months ago and it being affiliated with Eretz Nehederet (Kan11's satire show)... I disregarded it pretty quickly because it is so obviously over the top, that I never thought it might seriously be considered as legitimate. But if this is truly non satire it needs to be condemned from start to finish.
But are you not able to see that negative language and actual killing instructions as well as the praising of martyrs are different things? I simply want to know, because if you don't want to or can't see the difference this discussion is probably meaningless. Because even if we accept the narrative of the Apartheid state: do you really think Israelis want the Arab Palestinians dead the same way the Palestinians wish death upon the Israelis? Is this your honest opinion looking at the last years and further October 7th and the following war?
|
On August 15 2024 06:19 PremoBeats wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2024 05:59 Nebuchad wrote:On August 15 2024 04:44 PremoBeats wrote:On August 15 2024 02:01 Nebuchad wrote:On August 15 2024 01:48 PremoBeats wrote:On August 15 2024 00:08 GreenHorizons wrote:On August 14 2024 23:58 PremoBeats wrote:On August 14 2024 23:52 PoulsenB wrote:
Israel's goal of eradicating hamas completely is unrealistic. Even if they break the hamas as a functional organisation, a new one will take its place, especially after all the death and destruction they are currently inflicing on the Palestinians in Gaza.
I also find it interesting how one can consider Israeli civilian casualties to be so condemnable and at the same time consider Palestinian civilian casualties as justified. ` Well. Hamas attacked on October 7th and targeted civilians directly while the Palestinian casualties are collateral (still horrible, but there is a clear distinction... there can't be no justification for the Hamas targeting, while there can be for the collateral in Palestine). Further: I think no one here even made the notion that you put up for discussion. If it was open war and the civilians of Israel would be collateral, one would need to accept that. But they were not collateral.. to kill them was the goal. It was the most effective attack against Israeli military targets in decades and most of the civilian casualties (unclear how many were actually killed by Israel) were from a party that they didn't expect to be at their LZ. It's not any less reasonable to argue that the Israeli civilians killed on Oct 7 were collateral damage than the ~15,000 children Israel has killed. So what if the party wasn't expected to be there? Eyewitnesses (of a peace festival) reported targeted/intentional attacks on civilians. There is nothing collateral about this, not even in the most mental gymnastic pro Hamas perspective. 300 soldiers to 1,2k-1,4k is an abyssmal Soldier-Civilian-Ratio even if it was collateral (1:2,6 to 3,6) So This was aired first on Kan11 like the guy from your link explains. The video was part of Eretz Nehederet, which is a... satirical comedy show. They took it down after receiving criticism. No idea how your two other sources arrive at the idea that it was posted by The Civic Front (perhaps they reposted it because they thought it would aid their cause, who knows), but its satiric nature is obvious. Do you think that the several clips from my video seem so obviously over the top satirical? I can't find the notion that it was posted by Eretz Nehederet anywhere, everyone seems in agreement that it was the Civil Front. Here's another one: https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2023/11/27/fact-check-did-israeli-children-really-sing-about-annihilating-everyone-in-gazaBy the way Eretz Nehederet is also pro-Israel, and is the group that posted this shit Hard to believe they would then turn and do "satire" of the far right groups of Israel, which, by the way, what's the satire? It's a group of children singing about annihilating Gaza, where's the part where we understand it's bad? Look at the comments under the articles, the far right people are in agreement with it, they're not like "Well obviously this is satire we are not like this". The guy says it in the link you posted. But yeah.. I mean you found another over the top sketch they did. But they always produce over the top stuff... not only pro-Israel: https://www.timesofisrael.com/netanyahu-pans-satirical-tv-show-over-sketch-that-upset-holocaust-survivor/Well, satire can be over-acting an issue, which is displayed in the link you posted. But to come back to how we even got here: hate in children... Did you see the clips of kid's shows, boardgames and puzzles? The educational content? Physics being taught with slingshots shooting at "soldiers of the Zionist occupation"? Reading comprehensions glorifinyg terrorists who instigated massacres where children were killed? Math equations involving the counting of Martyrs? Do you seriously believe that this is in any way comparable to how Israel educates their youth? But it doesn't say that in the link I posted, though, you're making that up. It just says it was posted by Kan, which is a news channel. It doesn't make any mention of satire or Eretz Nehederet. But also you thought it was satire before I posted the link, right? So why don't you just post where you heard that, cause I can't find it anywhere? Yes I think it's easily comparable. In both cases you have educational systems that stem from a society that hates another group, and those educational systems exist to promote hatred of the competing group. It is extremely normal for groups that have been killing each other for 75 years to have educational systems like this. I can think it's not great but I'm also able to recognize that 1) This is extremely typical human behavior so it's not weird that they're doing it and it shouldn't lead me to conclusions about who to side with in a conflict and 2) It doesn't change the inherent narrative of the conflict, in which one side hates the other because they are victims of a violent Apartheid state on their own land and the other side hates the other because they're subhumans who can't be trusted with or deserve equal rights and should be chased off their land. Yeah, I remember seeing the video a couple of months ago and it being affiliated with Eretz Nehederet (Kan11's satire show)... I disregarded it pretty quickly because it is so obviously over the top, that I never thought it might seriously be considered as legitimate. But if this is truly non satire it needs to be condemned from start to finish. But are you not able to see that negative language and actual killing instructions as well as the praising of martyrs are different things? I simply want to know, because if you don't want to or can't see the difference this discussion is probably meaningless. Because even if we accept the narrative of the Apartheid state: do you really think Israelis want the Arab Palestinians dead the same way the Palestinians wish death upon the Israelis? Is this your honest opinion looking at the last years and further October 7th and the following war?
Doesn't it strike you as worthy of note that you saw a video that, until I can see proof of the contrary, was made by people who truly believed in it, and you thought "Oh that's clearly satire nobody in Israel thinks like that", but in truth, a decent amount of people do?
I think the levels of hatred are most likely similar, and I think if there's a difference between the two the difference is more likely to be that Israelis hate Palestinians more. In the rest of the world colonialism and racism have led to much larger levels of hatred than what came after them. But this is a special case, so it's harder to say.
And yes of course our discussion is meaningless. I'm mainly just debunking some stuff in case someone in the audience doesn't know the facts. I never thought I'd be able to influence your beliefs.
|
On August 15 2024 04:44 PremoBeats wrote:
Your solution is that Israel simply has to take the occassional murdering of their citizens, cause Hamas begs for a ceasefire the moment they realize how fucked they are?
So what if Hamas is no realistic threat... they attacked, now they will receive the consequences. Or the population will learn to get rid of the radical currents via a civil war and someone who can make lasting peace with Israel gets eleceted.
Either way, what kind of signal would it send to the other threats of Israel, when they won't even hit back the suppossedly weakest adversary.
I demand from Israel the exact same thing that I demand from Palestinians. They both need to stop attacking. Both. Not just one side, both sides. This is non-negotiable.
It is unacceptable that one side gets to play the victim when the other doesn't. Israel has played victim long enough and used it as justification for mass killing of civilians in Gaza, while continuously stealing land in the West bank. Palestinians have also committed atrocities expecting Israel not to retaliate when their elected leaders (Hamas in this case) invade Israel.
This needs to stop, but it needs to stop on both sides. It's unacceptable to put the blame squarely on one side when so clearly both sides are completely out of line.
This is the reason why the innocuous seeming question "Israel needs to tolerate the occasional murdering of their citizens?" is a very bad argument. You can apply the same reasoning to Palestinians who also need to tolerate the exact same thing. For what reason should Palestinians tolerate the mass murder of Palestinian citizens? Ask yourself why you're framing this question exclusively from one side. It's a very bad framing of this conflict. You have to ask yourself whether or not you hold a prejudice against Palestinians. I get the very clear impression that you do.
Two wrongs don't make a right. Never have, never will. Israel needs to instate a ceasefire, withdraw from Gaza, and continuously work on an improvement of the relations - just as much as Palestinians should. That means rebuilding Gaza, returning all stolen land and removing all barriers in the West bank, offering a state to Palestinians and continuing the negotiations until they have a state, and never invade Gaza again.
Palestinians in return need to make sure that their leadership will not engage in active warfare again. This may be difficult to accomplish, but it's difficult on both sides after all. Future bloodshed is expected and anyone arguing otherwise is strictly delusional, so the realistic goal must be to minimize the level of retaliation on both sides to the absolute necessary minimum while continuing to work on the relations.
This war is intolerable. Both Israel and Palestinians need to stop escalating. Israel has most recently escalated (and prolonged) this war, so right now it's on them to stop. They don't have a higher moral ground than Palestinians. Israel can't make any bigger demands than Palestinians, if anything in my impression after decades of warfare and oppression it's Palestinians who deserve more from Israel than the other way around considering the level of death, destruction, displacement and oppression that's been taking place.
I also want to address this question even though it wasn't directed at me:
On August 15 2024 06:19 PremoBeats wrote:
do you really think Israelis want the Arab Palestinians dead the same way the Palestinians wish death upon the Israelis? Is this your honest opinion looking at the last years and further October 7th and the following war?
We have sufficient evidence of plenty of Israelis wishing death upon Palestinians. They're not angels either. Furthermore, the current Israel administration is strictly against a Palestinian state while continuously stealing Palestinian land. If you think this doesn't matter in this conflict, in that case you need to strongly reconsider your position. It is preposterous to deny the impact this has on the mindset of Palestinians while they keep getting killed by the tens of thousands in airstrikes.
|
On August 14 2024 21:06 PremoBeats wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2024 20:37 Magic Powers wrote:
Almost 40 000 Palestinians died of completely natural causes ya'll. The death and destruction is Palestywood-productions. Who said something of 40k dying to natural causes? This is a war, of course there are casualties. This is horrible, but unavoidable, especially if you want to destroy Hamas and its structures completely. On top, it needs to be done in one of the most populated areas on this planet. If you compare casualties to other similar wars, the death count is incredibly low. Plus, we have all the evidence of the IDV using pamphlets, radio broadcasts, TV broadcasts and speaker transmissions warning civilians (which delayed their response and endangered its soldiers). We also have evidence of Hamas shooting at civilians who tried to flee. Show nested quote +On August 14 2024 20:37 Gahlo wrote:
Right, because a school has the structural integrity to withstand bombing to the same level as a "strategically important point target."
Yup, but it is intentional by Hamas. Cause you can tell that to the terrorists who shouldn't hide behind civilians and civilian infrastructure.
If the excuse for the mass civilian casualties is that Hamas is using them as human shields, and the fatality total has to be taken into account with how densely packed the region is, then where the fuck do you expect Hamas to fight from where it's "fair"? It's a prison city.
That would be like saying there was no/low civilian fatalities on 10/7 because the people that died were or were going to be IDF members due to mandatory inscription.
|
Any chance the Dems could stall out the current weapons shipment?
Also the number of civilian deaths is gonna be at least double the current confirmed number, Gaza has been obliterated and with constant forced movement and covering up atrocities by IDF.
|
On August 15 2024 09:33 Gahlo wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2024 21:06 PremoBeats wrote:On August 14 2024 20:37 Magic Powers wrote:
Almost 40 000 Palestinians died of completely natural causes ya'll. The death and destruction is Palestywood-productions. Who said something of 40k dying to natural causes? This is a war, of course there are casualties. This is horrible, but unavoidable, especially if you want to destroy Hamas and its structures completely. On top, it needs to be done in one of the most populated areas on this planet. If you compare casualties to other similar wars, the death count is incredibly low. Plus, we have all the evidence of the IDV using pamphlets, radio broadcasts, TV broadcasts and speaker transmissions warning civilians (which delayed their response and endangered its soldiers). We also have evidence of Hamas shooting at civilians who tried to flee. On August 14 2024 20:37 Gahlo wrote:
Right, because a school has the structural integrity to withstand bombing to the same level as a "strategically important point target."
Yup, but it is intentional by Hamas. Cause you can tell that to the terrorists who shouldn't hide behind civilians and civilian infrastructure. If the excuse for the mass civilian casualties is that Hamas is using them as human shields, and the fatality total has to be taken into account with how densely packed the region is, then where the fuck do you expect Hamas to fight from where it's "fair"? It's a prison city. That would be like saying there was no/low fatalities on 10/7 because the people that died were or were going to be IDF members due to mandatory inscription.
Prediction: the argument is going to circle back to "Hamas should surrender. All Palestinian deaths are on them".
Repeat from square one. It's a never-ending cycle of goalpost moving and ignoring the elephant in the room.
|
On August 15 2024 06:54 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2024 06:19 PremoBeats wrote:On August 15 2024 05:59 Nebuchad wrote:On August 15 2024 04:44 PremoBeats wrote:On August 15 2024 02:01 Nebuchad wrote:On August 15 2024 01:48 PremoBeats wrote:On August 15 2024 00:08 GreenHorizons wrote:On August 14 2024 23:58 PremoBeats wrote:On August 14 2024 23:52 PoulsenB wrote:
Israel's goal of eradicating hamas completely is unrealistic. Even if they break the hamas as a functional organisation, a new one will take its place, especially after all the death and destruction they are currently inflicing on the Palestinians in Gaza.
I also find it interesting how one can consider Israeli civilian casualties to be so condemnable and at the same time consider Palestinian civilian casualties as justified. ` Well. Hamas attacked on October 7th and targeted civilians directly while the Palestinian casualties are collateral (still horrible, but there is a clear distinction... there can't be no justification for the Hamas targeting, while there can be for the collateral in Palestine). Further: I think no one here even made the notion that you put up for discussion. If it was open war and the civilians of Israel would be collateral, one would need to accept that. But they were not collateral.. to kill them was the goal. It was the most effective attack against Israeli military targets in decades and most of the civilian casualties (unclear how many were actually killed by Israel) were from a party that they didn't expect to be at their LZ. It's not any less reasonable to argue that the Israeli civilians killed on Oct 7 were collateral damage than the ~15,000 children Israel has killed. So what if the party wasn't expected to be there? Eyewitnesses (of a peace festival) reported targeted/intentional attacks on civilians. There is nothing collateral about this, not even in the most mental gymnastic pro Hamas perspective. 300 soldiers to 1,2k-1,4k is an abyssmal Soldier-Civilian-Ratio even if it was collateral (1:2,6 to 3,6) So This was aired first on Kan11 like the guy from your link explains. The video was part of Eretz Nehederet, which is a... satirical comedy show. They took it down after receiving criticism. No idea how your two other sources arrive at the idea that it was posted by The Civic Front (perhaps they reposted it because they thought it would aid their cause, who knows), but its satiric nature is obvious. Do you think that the several clips from my video seem so obviously over the top satirical? I can't find the notion that it was posted by Eretz Nehederet anywhere, everyone seems in agreement that it was the Civil Front. Here's another one: https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2023/11/27/fact-check-did-israeli-children-really-sing-about-annihilating-everyone-in-gazaBy the way Eretz Nehederet is also pro-Israel, and is the group that posted this shit Hard to believe they would then turn and do "satire" of the far right groups of Israel, which, by the way, what's the satire? It's a group of children singing about annihilating Gaza, where's the part where we understand it's bad? Look at the comments under the articles, the far right people are in agreement with it, they're not like "Well obviously this is satire we are not like this". The guy says it in the link you posted. But yeah.. I mean you found another over the top sketch they did. But they always produce over the top stuff... not only pro-Israel: https://www.timesofisrael.com/netanyahu-pans-satirical-tv-show-over-sketch-that-upset-holocaust-survivor/Well, satire can be over-acting an issue, which is displayed in the link you posted. But to come back to how we even got here: hate in children... Did you see the clips of kid's shows, boardgames and puzzles? The educational content? Physics being taught with slingshots shooting at "soldiers of the Zionist occupation"? Reading comprehensions glorifinyg terrorists who instigated massacres where children were killed? Math equations involving the counting of Martyrs? Do you seriously believe that this is in any way comparable to how Israel educates their youth? But it doesn't say that in the link I posted, though, you're making that up. It just says it was posted by Kan, which is a news channel. It doesn't make any mention of satire or Eretz Nehederet. But also you thought it was satire before I posted the link, right? So why don't you just post where you heard that, cause I can't find it anywhere? Yes I think it's easily comparable. In both cases you have educational systems that stem from a society that hates another group, and those educational systems exist to promote hatred of the competing group. It is extremely normal for groups that have been killing each other for 75 years to have educational systems like this. I can think it's not great but I'm also able to recognize that 1) This is extremely typical human behavior so it's not weird that they're doing it and it shouldn't lead me to conclusions about who to side with in a conflict and 2) It doesn't change the inherent narrative of the conflict, in which one side hates the other because they are victims of a violent Apartheid state on their own land and the other side hates the other because they're subhumans who can't be trusted with or deserve equal rights and should be chased off their land. Yeah, I remember seeing the video a couple of months ago and it being affiliated with Eretz Nehederet (Kan11's satire show)... I disregarded it pretty quickly because it is so obviously over the top, that I never thought it might seriously be considered as legitimate. But if this is truly non satire it needs to be condemned from start to finish. But are you not able to see that negative language and actual killing instructions as well as the praising of martyrs are different things? I simply want to know, because if you don't want to or can't see the difference this discussion is probably meaningless. Because even if we accept the narrative of the Apartheid state: do you really think Israelis want the Arab Palestinians dead the same way the Palestinians wish death upon the Israelis? Is this your honest opinion looking at the last years and further October 7th and the following war? Doesn't it strike you as worthy of note that you saw a video that, until I can see proof of the contrary, was made by people who truly believed in it, and you thought "Oh that's clearly satire nobody in Israel thinks like that", but in truth, a decent amount of people do? I think the levels of hatred are most likely similar, and I think if there's a difference between the two the difference is more likely to be that Israelis hate Palestinians more. In the rest of the world colonialism and racism have led to much larger levels of hatred than what came after them. But this is a special case, so it's harder to say. And yes of course our discussion is meaningless. I'm mainly just debunking some stuff in case someone in the audience doesn't know the facts. I never thought I'd be able to influence your beliefs.
It is completely fine to debunk stuff that isn't true (I think we all strive towards a "truer" form of living).
Yet I think that the debunking in the West nowadays mostly should be directed at all the clueless Free Palestine supporters that make comparisons to an Apartheid state, defend the barbaric actions of terrorists and cherish a way of life that is utterly incompatible with Western values. Many of these supporters are in complete denial in regards to all the effort Israel takes to minimize casualties in an utterly ungrateful war against terrorists in of the densly populated areas on this planet.
Seriously, it is beyond me how some can make accusation of a racially loaded Apartheid when the PA self-governs in the West Bank and Gaza has full autonomy under Hamas. Not only that, but Muslim Arabs penetrate every layer of Israel society from police over army to judges.
On August 15 2024 08:09 Magic Powers wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2024 04:44 PremoBeats wrote:
Your solution is that Israel simply has to take the occassional murdering of their citizens, cause Hamas begs for a ceasefire the moment they realize how fucked they are?
So what if Hamas is no realistic threat... they attacked, now they will receive the consequences. Or the population will learn to get rid of the radical currents via a civil war and someone who can make lasting peace with Israel gets eleceted.
Either way, what kind of signal would it send to the other threats of Israel, when they won't even hit back the suppossedly weakest adversary.
I demand from Israel the exact same thing that I demand from Palestinians. They both need to stop attacking. Both. Not just one side, both sides. This is non-negotiable. It is unacceptable that one side gets to play the victim when the other doesn't. Israel has played victim long enough and used it as justification for mass killing of civilians in Gaza, while continuously stealing land in the West bank. Palestinians have also committed atrocities expecting Israel not to retaliate when their elected leaders (Hamas in this case) invade Israel. This needs to stop, but it needs to stop on both sides. It's unacceptable to put the blame squarely on one side when so clearly both sides are completely out of line. This is the reason why the innocuous seeming question "Israel needs to tolerate the occasional murdering of their citizens?" is a very bad argument. You can apply the same reasoning to Palestinians who also need to tolerate the exact same thing. For what reason should Palestinians tolerate the mass murder of Palestinian citizens? Ask yourself why you're framing this question exclusively from one side. It's a very bad framing of this conflict. You have to ask yourself whether or not you hold a prejudice against Palestinians. I get the very clear impression that you do. Two wrongs don't make a right. Never have, never will. Israel needs to instate a ceasefire, withdraw from Gaza, and continuously work on an improvement of the relations - just as much as Palestinians should. That means rebuilding Gaza, returning all stolen land and removing all barriers in the West bank, offering a state to Palestinians and continuing the negotiations until they have a state, and never invade Gaza again. Palestinians in return need to make sure that their leadership will not engage in active warfare again. This may be difficult to accomplish, but it's difficult on both sides after all. Future bloodshed is expected and anyone arguing otherwise is strictly delusional, so the realistic goal must be to minimize the level of retaliation on both sides to the absolute necessary minimum while continuing to work on the relations. This war is intolerable. Both Israel and Palestinians need to stop escalating. Israel has most recently escalated (and prolonged) this war, so right now it's on them to stop. They don't have a higher moral ground than Palestinians. Israel can't make any bigger demands than Palestinians, if anything in my impression after decades of warfare and oppression it's Palestinians who deserve more from Israel than the other way around considering the level of death, destruction, displacement and oppression that's been taking place. I also want to address this question even though it wasn't directed at me: Show nested quote +On August 15 2024 06:19 PremoBeats wrote:
do you really think Israelis want the Arab Palestinians dead the same way the Palestinians wish death upon the Israelis? Is this your honest opinion looking at the last years and further October 7th and the following war? We have sufficient evidence of plenty of Israelis wishing death upon Palestinians. They're not angels either. Furthermore, the current Israel administration is strictly against a Palestinian state while continuously stealing Palestinian land. If you think this doesn't matter in this conflict, in that case you need to strongly reconsider your position. It is preposterous to deny the impact this has on the mindset of Palestinians while they keep getting killed by the tens of thousands in airstrikes.
Doesn't Palestine play the victim all the time? To a point that there has been a turning point in Western perception? And yes, Israel now is going forward with the aggression. But its civilians were attacked, so it is on them to decide when they have achieved their goal.
I agree on stopping the killings overall. But to imply that mass murder of civilians is a prime goal of Israel (not really sure if you do) is utterly absurd.
And no, I don't have any prejudices. I travelled the middle east from Syria over Jordan to the West Bank in 2009 and the people I met were utterly friendly and welcoming. No signs of civil war in Syria in everyday life weeks before it erupted. I think that the normal people are fed up with all the fighting, as they are always the ones suffering.
And the framing is not that one side should be free to murder innocent civilians. The framing is that one side is specifically targetting civilians with death, rape and taking them hostage, while on the other side you have collateral while freeing hostages or taking out terrorits that hide behind civilians and civil infrastructure. No other framing was put forth and I am happy to discuss where this framing is wrong.
And yes, when one side is engaging in the most horrific ways of terrorism - not warfare - that side is morally held more accountable and rightfully so. That should not divert from the wrongdoings of Israel, which also are there in numbers but to suggest that there is an even playing field when you have state sponsored terrorism and a whole educaional system that is financed by UNRWA which is raising children as martyrs and directly teaches them to kill jews while the other side is making more efforts than any waring faction ever did to lessen civil casualties while at the same time endangering their own troops is something I simply cannot wrap my head around.
I never said that this doesn't happen (of course there is extremism in Israel). But to suggest that there is no completely obvious assymetry in death threats, intention to harm life no matter military or civilian or overall rhetoric is not understandable to me. It is a hypothetical, but reverse the power levels and I bet you there'd be hardly any jew left in Israel or Palestine, because one side has more extreme and violent beliefs in the people that want to execute them.
On August 15 2024 09:33 Gahlo wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2024 21:06 PremoBeats wrote:On August 14 2024 20:37 Magic Powers wrote:
Almost 40 000 Palestinians died of completely natural causes ya'll. The death and destruction is Palestywood-productions. Who said something of 40k dying to natural causes? This is a war, of course there are casualties. This is horrible, but unavoidable, especially if you want to destroy Hamas and its structures completely. On top, it needs to be done in one of the most populated areas on this planet. If you compare casualties to other similar wars, the death count is incredibly low. Plus, we have all the evidence of the IDV using pamphlets, radio broadcasts, TV broadcasts and speaker transmissions warning civilians (which delayed their response and endangered its soldiers). We also have evidence of Hamas shooting at civilians who tried to flee. On August 14 2024 20:37 Gahlo wrote:
Right, because a school has the structural integrity to withstand bombing to the same level as a "strategically important point target."
Yup, but it is intentional by Hamas. Cause you can tell that to the terrorists who shouldn't hide behind civilians and civilian infrastructure. If the excuse for the mass civilian casualties is that Hamas is using them as human shields, and the fatality total has to be taken into account with how densely packed the region is, then where the fuck do you expect Hamas to fight from where it's "fair"? It's a prison city. That would be like saying there was no/low civilian fatalities on 10/7 because the people that died were or were going to be IDF members due to mandatory inscription.
So are there no other places in Gaza where Hamas could put up operating bases? It needs to be atop schools, Mosques and hospitals? Does all of Gaza consist only of important civilian infrastructure? Are there no other buildings that they could occupy, which would have greatly decreased the suffering and humanitarian emergencies in all of the fighting as well as lessened the casualty rates? Are you not aware that Hamas is blocking peace corridors? Shooting fleeing civilians? Raiding international aid? Misusing funds? This is their business. And every dead civilian is important to this cause.
Thus you might direct your question at fighters that were also batteling in densly populated areas without the tactics that Hamas deploys.
|
|
|
"Doesn't Palestine play the victim all the time? To a point that there has been a turning point in Western perception? And yes, Israel now is going forward with the aggression. But its civilians were attacked, so it is on them to decide when they have achieved their goal."
Palestinians ARE victims, they're not playing victim. Just like Israelis WERE victims when Hamas attacked. How is that so hard to understand?
Prior to October 7 Palestinian civilians were attacked, too. Does that not count? Do only Israeli lives count? What's the matter with this double standard all the time?
You DO have prejudices, otherwise you wouldn't be judging the actions of Israel's administration as any less than those of Hamas. Clearly you put more weight onto Hamas' actions even though they can't possibly be any more accountable than Netanyahu and the IDF. Do you really want to make the argument that killing tens of thousands of Palestinians is not in the same ballpark as killing over one thousand Israelis? And that has been going on throughout the decades before October 7. Palestinians have always had to endure far more deaths than Israel, and yet somehow we're supposed to think only Israelis are victims? How does that work?
"I agree on stopping the killings overall. But to imply that mass murder of civilians is a prime goal of Israel (not really sure if you do) is utterly absurd."
I don't believe that Israelis at large want that, but neither do I believe that Palestinians at large want the same in return either. I believe that Palestinians have not been given any good options for many generations so they chose Hamas, but then Hamas turned into a monstrosity that Palestinians can no longer control and neither can Israel. They're not even democratic, Hamas removed all opposition. And if all Palestinians fully supported Hamas, then all Palestinians would have JOINED Hamas. Is that not glaringly obvious?
Are all Israelis evil just because Netanyahu is evil? They VOTED for him!
"And yes, when one side is engaging in the most horrific ways of terrorism - not warfare - that side is morally held more accountable and rightfully so."
I am holding Hamas accountable. Everyone here is. That is not the point of debate. The point is that Israel should be held equally accountable because they should not be given special privileges. The amount of evil that's been committed (and continues to be) by Israel's administration is out of this world. They've killed so many (mostly innocent) people, destroyed so many homes, cleansed so much of the West bank, imprisoned so many Palestinians in their own territory, abducted and tortured many Palestinians, withheld massive amounts of aid from the entire Palestinian population, attempted to dismantle the most important human rights organization for Palestinians, etc.
Do you think that's not extremely evil? Do you really think we shouldn't be criticizing Israel as harshly as Hamas?
|
Palestinians ARE victims, they're not playing victim. Just like Israelis WERE victims when Hamas attacked. How is that so hard to understand?
Prior to October 7 Palestinian civilians were attacked, too. Does that not count? Do only Israeli lives count? What's the matter with this double standard all the time?
I simply said it the way I did, because of this comment of yours:
"It is unacceptable that one side gets to play the victim when the other doesn't"
You DO have prejudices, otherwise you wouldn't be judging the actions of Israel's administration as any less than those of Hamas. Clearly you put more weight onto Hamas' actions even though they can't possibly be any more accountable than Netanyahu and the IDF. Do you really want to make the argument that killing tens of thousands of Palestinians is not in the same ballpark as killing over one thousand Israelis? And that has been going on throughout the decades before October 7. Palestinians have always had to endure far more deaths than Israel, and yet somehow we're supposed to think only Israelis are victims? How does that work?
Wait, what? I wouldn't judge the actions of the Israeli government in comparison to specifically targeting civilians with murder, rape and taking hostages less if I didn't have prejudices? What do prejudices have to with making the statement that war and terrorism are different things and have to be judged differently? That doesn't make any sense.
Or are you saying that specifically targeting civilians in an act of terror is comparable to waging war? Just making sure, because that would be a very hard argument to make.
I never said that only one side is a victim, but I can make it clear: Both sides have loses and are victims, but every conflict that escalated with thousands of dead in the past 10 years that I can think of was because there were either rockets shot out of Gaza, invasions of Israel or attacks on Israel or its citizens in some form or way.
"I agree on stopping the killings overall. But to imply that mass murder of civilians is a prime goal of Israel (not really sure if you do) is utterly absurd."
I don't believe that Israelis at large want that, but neither do I believe that Palestinians at large want the same in return either. I believe that Palestinians have not been given any good options for many generations so they chose Hamas, but then Hamas turned into a monstrosity that Palestinians can no longer control and neither can Israel. They're not even democratic, Hamas removed all opposition. And if all Palestinians fully supported Hamas, then all Palestinians would have JOINED Hamas. Is that not glaringly obvious?
Are all Israelis evil just because Netanyahu is evil? They VOTED for him!
"And yes, when one side is engaging in the most horrific ways of terrorism - not warfare - that side is morally held more accountable and rightfully so."
I am holding Hamas accountable. Everyone here is. That is not the point of debate. The point is that Israel should be held equally accountable because they should not be given special privileges. The amount of evil that's been committed (and continues to be) by Israel's administration is out of this world. They've killed so many (mostly innocent) people, destroyed so many homes, cleansed so much of the West bank, imprisoned so many Palestinians in their own territory, abducted and tortured many Palestinians, withheld massive amounts of aid from the entire Palestinian population, attempted to dismantle the most important human rights organization for Palestinians, etc.
Do you think that's not extremely evil? Do you really think we shouldn't be criticizing Israel as harshly as Hamas?
Well, why did Israel dismantle the most important human rights organization? Why did it withhold aid? Why did it kill so many innocent people? You are asking these questions as if they happen in a vacuum.
Ask yourself, what the accute pressure of Hamas was for attacking, except hatred and terrorism as well as the annihilation of Israel?
The partition was on the table several times in the past.
Israel does not want this war. They are at peace with nearly every Muslim country they were at war with in 1948.
And again: Israel should be held accountable for all war crimes and breaking of conventions or rulings that occured. That is not the issue. The issue is that I will always ( and I think everyone should) criticize the deliberate murder, rape and hostage taking of civilians always more than understandable actions that aim at a terror organization and also (unfortunately) affect civilians. These are completely different issues, even if absolute numbers are out of hand because of the specific context of the conflict.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
