EPTBut apparently some of the rightwing influencers are starting to flirt with the idea of a two state solution, which means that this idea has a lot of traction in the young rightwinger demographic, and that's at least interesting. I know that Tucker was there for a while but Rogan just started, Theo Von too... We might end up in a situation in which the only people who are still on the side of Israel are the liberals. All of the elite will still be on their side of course so I don't know that this has the power to move much, but I at least want to see what develops there.
Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine - Page 393
| Forum Index > General Forum |
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. | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12449 Posts
But apparently some of the rightwing influencers are starting to flirt with the idea of a two state solution, which means that this idea has a lot of traction in the young rightwinger demographic, and that's at least interesting. I know that Tucker was there for a while but Rogan just started, Theo Von too... We might end up in a situation in which the only people who are still on the side of Israel are the liberals. All of the elite will still be on their side of course so I don't know that this has the power to move much, but I at least want to see what develops there. | ||
|
Sermokala
United States14107 Posts
Even if you did think that both parties were supporting genocide, the only logical and moral thing at that point is to vote for all the other issues on the decision. Unless you're delusional enough to think that the US can/should stop all genocides happening around the globe and should exert its influence in a neo-con style moral imperialism. It has always been the religious evangelists that have decided the support for isreal. Unless you have a plan to win elections without the massive, if dwindling, demographic its silly to act like liberals or conservatives have better paths to victory. | ||
|
Zambrah
United States7393 Posts
On April 11 2025 20:26 Nebuchad wrote: One thing that I thought might happen is liberals might remember that genocide is bad now that it's Trump supporting it instead of Biden, and as far as I can see not much has changed in that regard, so I was wrong. But apparently some of the rightwing influencers are starting to flirt with the idea of a two state solution, which means that this idea has a lot of traction in the young rightwinger demographic, and that's at least interesting. I know that Tucker was there for a while but Rogan just started, Theo Von too... We might end up in a situation in which the only people who are still on the side of Israel are the liberals. All of the elite will still be on their side of course so I don't know that this has the power to move much, but I at least want to see what develops there. It doesnt help when the leader of the mainstream element of the DNC is out there saying how his most important job is making sure the Democrats are pro-Israel, lol. Luckily him and the rest of the Democrats are unpopular and nobody likes their lame asses, so Im not sure how good at his most-important-job he is. Hes definitely not a very good senatorial leader. | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12449 Posts
On April 11 2025 23:25 Sermokala wrote: Liberals have always known that genocide is bad. They just don't believe that voteing for biden is voteing for genocide. No, I have talked to a bunch of liberals here and elsewhere that were very clearly siding with Israel, this isn't about voting for Harris. Like every normal person out there I do not care how people vote. | ||
|
mounteast02
24 Posts
On April 11 2025 23:25 Sermokala wrote: Liberals have always known that genocide is bad. They just don't believe that voteing for biden is voteing for genocide. Even if you did think that both parties were supporting genocide, the only logical and moral thing at that point is to vote for all the other issues on the decision. Unless you're delusional enough to think that the US can/should stop all genocides happening around the globe and should exert its influence in a neo-con style moral imperialism. It has always been the religious evangelists that have decided the support for isreal. Unless you have a plan to win elections without the massive, if dwindling, demographic its silly to act like liberals or conservatives have better paths to victory. I would like to response to the bold part. There is a huge difference between military intervention of event in a far away country versus withholding weapon shipment and intelligence sharing to a country to stop / impede its military action. | ||
KwarK
United States43953 Posts
On April 11 2025 23:51 Nebuchad wrote: No, I have talked to a bunch of liberals here and elsewhere that were very clearly siding with Israel, this isn't about voting for Harris. Like every normal person out there I do not care how people vote. Siding with Israel or siding against Hamas? | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15743 Posts
On April 12 2025 00:31 mounteast02 wrote: I would like to response to the bold part. There is a huge difference between military intervention of event in a far away country versus withholding weapon shipment and intelligence sharing to a country to stop / impede its military action. The US hasn't broken their relationship with Israel for the same reason the EU hasn't. And the same reason none of the blustering neighboring nations have lifted a finger to help Palestinians. No one is genuinely advocating for Palestinians and no one is genuinely willing to risk their lives for Palestinians. The Middle East is a vast, resource-rich, strategically important part of the world. Israel is extremely powerful relative to their neighbors in the area and the US has an enormous amount of incentive to maintain a good relationship. And they easily choose to do so because nothing bad happens when they do. They benefit and don't pay a price. What's not to love from the perspective of the US military? The dilemma is entirely made up because there are no examples of nations choosing differently. We literally see no one other than Iran lifting a finger for Palestinians. And even Iran is only willing to do symbolic things. Iran is not trying to actively prevent Israel from harming Palestinians. They allow it to go on day after day despite having a military they could deploy to do their best to prevent it. Palestinians are the greatest example of modern human suffering because they are so devoid of diplomatic power. With no one willing to help them, and plenty of people willing to support their adversaries, along with their deep commitment to continue to fight, its just perpetual suffering. People ought to focus on Iran's involvement to help contextualize the US's actions support of Israel. Iran is so distinguished as far and away Palestinians' greatest and most committed ally. And they do a tiny % of what they could do if they wanted to. If Iran is the best they've got, and Iran does almost nothing, and no one punishes the US for supporting Israel, of course the US will continue to maintain their relationship with a significant, powerful ally in the region. Look at all the aid going to Ukraine. Look at all the sanctions against Russia. Why do we not see the same aid for Palestinians and sanctions against Israel? When you answer that question, you realize its a fake dilemma. Palestinians are victims and need help. And every single nation has chosen not to help them. | ||
|
mounteast02
24 Posts
Is there any actual difference? What Hamas done is armed resistance against an illegal occupation. And for whatever war crime / atrocity / bad thing Hamas was accused of, the Israelis had done far worst, in a far bigger scale, so I don't think there is a moral high ground to support Israel against the palestinian. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15743 Posts
On April 12 2025 00:52 mounteast02 wrote: Is there any actual difference? What Hamas done is armed resistance against an illegal occupation. And for whatever war crime / atrocity / bad thing Hamas was accused of, the Israelis had done far worst, in a far bigger scale, so I don't think there is a moral high ground to support Israel against the palestinian. I don't think anyone is buying into the false argument of global political/military dynamics being morally motivated. Everyone here will agree with you when you say all the major world powers advocate for their own interests even if it means doing some less than moral things. WW2 was not fought for moral reasons. The cold war was not fought for moral reasons. If wars were fought for moral reasons, Iran would be actively at war with Israel. But wars are not fought for moral reasons. And so Iran is not at war with Israel. | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12449 Posts
I've seen both, but most of the time siding with Israel | ||
|
KwarK
United States43953 Posts
Yes. On April 12 2025 00:52 mounteast02 wrote: for whatever war crime / atrocity / bad thing Hamas was accused of This is a really weird way of describing them filming themselves killing babies. Like really weird. Like Hamas are definitely bad guys, you know that, right? Once you've got someone beating a baby to death with their bare hands in front of its mother we don't need to handwave about that stuff. On April 12 2025 00:52 mounteast02 wrote: support Israel against the palestinian Okay but the post that you're responding to was literally about not supporting Israel and the against part wasn't against Palestinians, it was against Hamas. So it's really weird that you read "you can be against Hamas without being for Israel" and concluded that really what was meant was supporting Israel and being against Palestinians in general. | ||
|
pmp10
3396 Posts
On April 11 2025 16:57 mounteast02 wrote: Specific for the palestine question, is there any possibility the genocide is going to stop during a theoretical Biden administration second term? No, but Biden or Harris would keep up more pretenses. They certainly wouldn't openly talk about ethnically cleansing Gaza. Whether that amounts to reducing the suffering or just extending it in time is another matter. | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12449 Posts
On April 12 2025 09:51 KwarK wrote: Okay but the post that you're responding to was literally about not supporting Israel and the against part wasn't against Palestinians, it was against Hamas. So it's really weird that you read "you can be against Hamas without being for Israel" and concluded that really what was meant was supporting Israel and being against Palestinians in general. I think you should support Israel though. See, a good analogy for what they're doing is that there's a truck with a Hamas guy and one child, and the Hamas guy is driving the truck, ready to plow it into a crowd, and Israel blows it up before it can reach the crowd. Israel is clearly the good guy in this analogy, so based on this I don't see why you wouldn't support them. | ||
|
Billyboy
1680 Posts
| ||
|
KwarK
United States43953 Posts
On April 12 2025 23:32 Nebuchad wrote: I think you should support Israel though. See, a good analogy for what they're doing is that there's a truck with a Hamas guy and one child, and the Hamas guy is driving the truck, ready to plow it into a crowd, and Israel blows it up before it can reach the crowd. Israel is clearly the good guy in this analogy, so based on this I don't see why you wouldn't support them. Well argued. | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12449 Posts
Thank you, wish I could say the same | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22288 Posts
On April 12 2025 23:32 Nebuchad wrote: Then they level the neighbourhood killing a whole bunch of people, shoot another random group of civilians and kill the medics arriving on the scene to help any casualties.I think you should support Israel though. See, a good analogy for what they're doing is that there's a truck with a Hamas guy and one child, and the Hamas guy is driving the truck, ready to plow it into a crowd, and Israel blows it up before it can reach the crowd. Israel is clearly the good guy in this analogy, so based on this I don't see why you wouldn't support them. And now they are no longer the good guy we should be supporting. | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12449 Posts
On April 12 2025 23:47 Gorsameth wrote: Then they level the neighbourhood killing a whole bunch of people, shoot another random group of civilians and kill the medics arriving on the scene to help any casualties. And now they are no longer the good guy we should be supporting. Correct, yes. | ||
|
KwarK
United States43953 Posts
On April 12 2025 23:47 Gorsameth wrote: Then they level the neighbourhood killing a whole bunch of people, shoot another random group of civilians and kill the medics arriving on the scene to help any casualties. And now they are no longer the good guy we should be supporting. Wasn't this the starting point. That you can be against Hamas terrorism without automatically concluding that whoever is shooting at the terrorists is by definition a good guy. | ||
|
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom9840 Posts
On April 12 2025 09:51 KwarK wrote: This is a really weird way of describing them filming themselves killing babies. Like really weird. Like Hamas are definitely bad guys, you know that, right? Once you've got someone beating a baby to death with their bare hands in front of its mother we don't need to handwave about that stuff. You realise Israel are far, far worse than this, right? Killing thousands of babies in airstrikes and with rockets is NOT more civilised that beating one to death in the front its mother. I mean we're talking about the extremes of human depravity either way, but one is much, much worse and it isn't the emotional sounding example. | ||
| ||
