|
NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. |
Northern Ireland25239 Posts
On May 19 2025 21:47 Jankisa wrote:
It's crazy to me that Israel had huge protests over Netanyahu's corruption and his meddling with the judicial system and then Oct 7th happens, it goes on for an amount of time that no one really thought was necessary or possible and no one is organizing mass protests to have him step down or at least hold elections.
It's even crazier that there are still normal, rational people who are ready to defend what Israel's doing in Gaza now with "Hamas is not defeated" and "hostages are still there" when there is a lot of reporting that he's not even interested in getting the hostages out and he said point blank that the war won't stop when hostages are released.
There's a 100 people, most of them women and children, dying each day so this piece of shit can stay in power and most Israeli's don't bat an eye, and worse, a lot of Israel supporters in the west are still regurgitating propaganda about how it's all super necessary for Israel's security...
It’s an odd phenomenon to me, where some crisis can bail out an embattled leader. If I have misgivings in regular times, if anything those would intensify, rather than dissipate.
Unless a leader has some specific skillset for said crisis, or a crisis is so big that normal service is paused for a period.
But a Charles de Gaulle, a Churchill type he really ain’t. Someone like Zelensky, elections would be nice but I think most accept a temporary cessation as reasonable given that conflict.
It feels to me the stated goals of eradicating Hamas and securing the release of hostages are almost antithetical to one another. If I’m in Hamas, why would I do the latter if the former is in play?
I mean, yeah I can understand the desire to accomplish both of those things, I just struggle to see how you can actualise it.
I think the scenarios are much less comparable and analogous than many over here do, so I’ll add that caveat. But there were transitional off-ramps, the possibility of genuine concessions that the British state were able to dangle at groups like the IRA over here. Which is much less of a dynamic in this conflict.
Hamas aren’t exactly a bunch of upstanding lads. But if you’re going to try and wipe them out regardless of hostage return, what’s the incentive to do that?
As an aside it may be a case of being careful what one wishes for. Netanyahu may be turfed out and replaced by something better, but it’s not exactly off the table that it could be even more hardline.
|
On May 19 2025 21:47 Jankisa wrote:
It's crazy to me that Israel had huge protests over Netanyahu's corruption and his meddling with the judicial system and then Oct 7th happens, it goes on for an amount of time that no one really thought was necessary or possible and no one is organizing mass protests to have him step down or at least hold elections.
It's even crazier that there are still normal, rational people who are ready to defend what Israel's doing in Gaza now with "Hamas is not defeated" and "hostages are still there" when there is a lot of reporting that he's not even interested in getting the hostages out and he said point blank that the war won't stop when hostages are released.
There's a 100 people, most of them women and children, dying each day so this piece of shit can stay in power and most Israeli's don't bat an eye, and worse, a lot of Israel supporters in the west are still regurgitating propaganda about how it's all super necessary for Israel's security...
There have been protests pretty much straight through. I've occasionally even posted the links to stories about it. No sure what new sources you are checking because it has been top stories often on many different outlets.
Edit: here is some sources, some older, if I didn't hit your source of choice I'm sure you can find some there as well.
https://www.npr.org/2025/03/25/nx-s1-5339490/israel-protests-netanyahu-hostages-gaza-war
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/9/6/mapping-israeli-protests-since-october-7
https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/09/01/world/israel-hamas-gaza-war
|
|
|
On May 20 2025 01:51 pmp10 wrote:A small Gaza news missed recently: Afrter weeks of blockade Israel will allow some food to be delivered. The place was slowly heading for a famine so I guess even Bibi had to cave to international pressure. Timing is also interesting as the upcoming IDF offensive and occupation are also supposed to start any day now.
I would say it was already in famine status. Deaths from it was starting to spiral out of control though.
|
Northern Ireland25239 Posts
Netanyahu vows to ‘take control’ of Gaza as UK, France and Canada threaten action against Israel - The Guardian
Netanyahu responded to the message, saying Israel will continue to defend itself until total victory was achieved. “The leaders in London, Ottawa and Paris are offering a huge prize for the genocidal attack on Israel on October 7 while inviting more such atrocities,” Netanyahu said.
Are they remotely offering that? I’m less sure about Canada or France but the current UK government is quite happy to bend over for Israel.
Smotrich, a far-right critic of any negotiated end to the war, defended Netanyahu’s decision to let in “basic” food aid, saying it would allow Israel to keep its military in Gaza for a campaign of destruction and displacement.
“Now we conquer, cleanse and stay – until Hamas is destroyed,” he told a news conference. “Along the way, what remains of the strip is also being wiped out.”
“As part of the war, the IDF is moving the population out of combat zones … The population will reach the south of the strip, and from there, with God’s help, move to third countries under President Trump’s plan.”
This isn’t some niche agitator, it’s the current finance minister.
Next set of elections Israelis have a pretty clear set of options, if they double down and choose to reinstate such figures it’s a pretty hard argument to make that a plurality isn’t OK with horrific actions.
|
On May 20 2025 10:56 WombaT wrote: Netanyahu vows to ‘take control’ of Gaza as UK, France and Canada threaten action against Israel - The GuardianShow nested quote + Netanyahu responded to the message, saying Israel will continue to defend itself until total victory was achieved. “The leaders in London, Ottawa and Paris are offering a huge prize for the genocidal attack on Israel on October 7 while inviting more such atrocities,” Netanyahu said. Are they remotely offering that? I’m less sure about Canada or France but the current UK government is quite happy to bend over for Israel. Show nested quote + Smotrich, a far-right critic of any negotiated end to the war, defended Netanyahu’s decision to let in “basic” food aid, saying it would allow Israel to keep its military in Gaza for a campaign of destruction and displacement.
“Now we conquer, cleanse and stay – until Hamas is destroyed,” he told a news conference. “Along the way, what remains of the strip is also being wiped out.”
“As part of the war, the IDF is moving the population out of combat zones … The population will reach the south of the strip, and from there, with God’s help, move to third countries under President Trump’s plan.” This isn’t some niche agitator, it’s the current finance minister. Next set of elections Israelis have a pretty clear set of options, if they double down and choose to reinstate such figures it’s a pretty hard argument to make that a plurality isn’t OK with horrific actions.
That joint letter threatening 'action' against Israel reminds me very much of Hans Blix in Team America: World Police.
"...Or we will be very angry at you, and we'll write a letter saying how angry we are."
Say, Kier, does this action involve halting the sale of the weapons they are using to destroy Gaza? Thought not.
|
Northern Ireland25239 Posts
On May 20 2025 11:27 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On May 20 2025 10:56 WombaT wrote: Netanyahu vows to ‘take control’ of Gaza as UK, France and Canada threaten action against Israel - The Guardian Netanyahu responded to the message, saying Israel will continue to defend itself until total victory was achieved. “The leaders in London, Ottawa and Paris are offering a huge prize for the genocidal attack on Israel on October 7 while inviting more such atrocities,” Netanyahu said. Are they remotely offering that? I’m less sure about Canada or France but the current UK government is quite happy to bend over for Israel. Smotrich, a far-right critic of any negotiated end to the war, defended Netanyahu’s decision to let in “basic” food aid, saying it would allow Israel to keep its military in Gaza for a campaign of destruction and displacement.
“Now we conquer, cleanse and stay – until Hamas is destroyed,” he told a news conference. “Along the way, what remains of the strip is also being wiped out.”
“As part of the war, the IDF is moving the population out of combat zones … The population will reach the south of the strip, and from there, with God’s help, move to third countries under President Trump’s plan.” This isn’t some niche agitator, it’s the current finance minister. Next set of elections Israelis have a pretty clear set of options, if they double down and choose to reinstate such figures it’s a pretty hard argument to make that a plurality isn’t OK with horrific actions. That joint letter threatening 'action' against Israel reminds me very much of Hans Blix in Team America: World Police. "...Or we will be very angry at you, and we'll write a letter saying how angry we are." Say, Kier, does this action involve halting the sale of the weapons they are using to destroy Gaza? Thought not.
It would be laughable if not for the seriousness of the stakes.
You’ve got a Prime Minister who hasn’t blocked things like arms sales, who purged their own party of ‘anti-Semites’ like Jeremy Corbyn
But no apparently that’s not enough. What do we have to actively cheerlead the bombing of civilians or what? Fuck that noise.
I don’t even get why we tolerate it. Saudi Arabia is clearly shit as a state in many ways, but they’ve got shitloads of oil so it’s explicable in a transactional sense. I don’t LIKE it but I can understand it.
In positive news on this front the Co-op has basically gone full BDS so that’s something. In a wider sense having a biggish company that’s actually a co-operative in structure showing some backbone might be indicative of something.
|
08:22
BREAKING
Fletcher now says five trucks of aid went into Gaza on Monday, but repeats that it's a "drop in the ocean".
He says, although the aid lorries have crossed into Gaza, they are just on the other side of the border, and haven't even reached the communities yet.
Fletcher says the supplies on the trucks are "baby food and nutrition".
He fears that 14,000 babies will die in the next 48 hours if the supplies don't reach them.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cq8037dd3p9t
Looks like its fast approaching crunch time for the aid situation.
Israel is not going to come out of this looking great if 14,000 babies die just for Netenyahu's satisfaction.
|
Throwing around numbers like that is precisely why nobody is treating possibility of famine in Gaza seriously.
You can only cry wolf so many times before being ignored.
|
Northern Ireland25239 Posts
I mean aid hasn’t been getting through, it’s not an area that’s self-sufficient on food, eventually people will starve.
Perhaps those quoted figures are hyperbolic and exaggerated sure, but it’s not crying wolf if there is actually a wolf hanging around, the boy just said it’s a much bigger wolf than in actuality.
|
On May 20 2025 21:39 pmp10 wrote:
Throwing around numbers like that is precisely why nobody is treating possibility of famine in Gaza seriously.
You can only cry wolf so many times before being ignored.
It depends where he got the numbers from really.
Seems like a guy who's in a position to be able to give some kind of estimate, whether he should or not will become moot within the next couple of days I suppose.
|
Northern Ireland25239 Posts
|
Late and still doing nothing.
You actually want Israel to stop? suspend any aid immediately and start discussing sanctions.
|
On May 21 2025 00:01 Gorsameth wrote:
Late and still doing nothing.
You actually want Israel to stop? suspend any aid immediately and start discussing sanctions.
They aren't even stopping selling them the weapons they are using to destroy the place.
If someone is killing muslims in massive numbers, you'll find Labour either leading the charge or sitting there cheering them on.
|
Northern Ireland25239 Posts
On May 21 2025 00:01 Gorsameth wrote:
Late and still doing nothing.
You actually want Israel to stop? suspend any aid immediately and start discussing sanctions.
I mean I’d like to see it, I don’t think that’s happening anytime soon. I don’t think the wider populace would necessarily support that here. I think there’s something of a delicate threshold here. Reining in excesses of force I do think there’s majority support, punishing Israel more generally, less so. That appetite may yet build, if the baby steps prove ineffective.
In a hypothetical world where it did, I’m unsure how effective it would be so long as the US is so pro-Israel. I can absolutely see the US just doubling down on extra aid etc if some of us Euros did do that. I can just picture Trump going ‘Europe, sanctioning Israel can you believe that? It’s just so unbelievable.’ And doing some compensatory aid
Not a reason not to do it anyway. I think it’s worth doing regardless, I’m just unsure if it would actually be that effective so long as the States is the States.
|
Northern Ireland25239 Posts
On May 21 2025 00:39 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2025 00:01 Gorsameth wrote:
Late and still doing nothing.
You actually want Israel to stop? suspend any aid immediately and start discussing sanctions. They aren't even stopping selling them the weapons they are using to destroy the place. If someone is killing muslims in massive numbers, you'll find Labour either leading the charge or sitting there cheering them on.
Part of the reason I don’t think you’ll see real tight sanctions on Israel.
And probably ‘fairly’ too, although morally abhorrent to me.
You either arbitrarily single out Israel, or you go wholesale. Neither of which is particularly a goer politically.
Any harm reduction is good in my books. So there is that.
But as critical as I am of Israel, I don’t think I could support sweeping sanctions while we’re still selling shitloads of arms to Saudi Arabia, for example. It would be grotesquely hypocritical.
Don’t get me wrong, I’d still take it as a win, I just don’t think it’s happening.
|
Can someone help me understand how a voter in a western Democracy that voted for the people aiding and abetting the genocide of Palestinians considers their role any less condemnable than they do a Russian soldier's role in Ukraine?
|
On May 21 2025 02:04 GreenHorizons wrote:
Can someone help me understand how a voter in a western Democracy that voted for the people aiding and abetting the genocide of Palestinians considers their role any less condemnable than they do a Russian soldier's role in Ukraine?
The two things aren't equivalent.
Its pretty much as simple as that.
Killing someone by shooting them is not the same as supporting someone who watched somebody kill someone and didn't say anything.
We're dealing with different types of 'morally reprehensible' here, one of which is a little more defensible than the other.
|
On May 21 2025 02:06 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2025 02:04 GreenHorizons wrote:
Can someone help me understand how a voter in a western Democracy that voted for the people aiding and abetting the genocide of Palestinians considers their role any less condemnable than they do a Russian soldier's role in Ukraine? The two things aren't equivalent. Its pretty much as simple as that.
They don't have to be to be comparably condemnable. But how do you mean?
Update for your edit: Killing someone by shooting them is not the same as supporting someone who watched somebody kill someone and didn't say anything.
We're dealing with different types of 'morally reprehensible' here, one of which is a little more defensible than the other. Plenty of Russian soldiers in Ukraine aren't shooting anyone. (EDIT: Plenty didn't really "decide to join" in the colloquial sense either).
This reasoning would make the Westerners that voted for the people aiding and abetting genocide more condemnable than a reluctant Putin voter then though right?
|
On May 21 2025 02:11 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On May 21 2025 02:06 Jockmcplop wrote:On May 21 2025 02:04 GreenHorizons wrote:
Can someone help me understand how a voter in a western Democracy that voted for the people aiding and abetting the genocide of Palestinians considers their role any less condemnable than they do a Russian soldier's role in Ukraine? The two things aren't equivalent. Its pretty much as simple as that. They don't have to be to be comparably condemnable. But how do you mean?
Okay...
There's a few arguments I feel I could use to defend my actions if I were to, say, vote for Labour in the UK.
As an individual, I could have priorities and aims that have nothing to do with anyone overseas, I simply need to ensure that domestic governance is of a certain standard. I would argue that no matter who I vote for in the UK, we will end up with a government which aids and abets the genocide in Gaza. These arguments would take the form of a personal, individual morality which I personally take responsible for, based on things like
a) How much effect can my government even have on israel? The amount of aid they actually get from the UK is pretty small, withdrawing it would not even have the tiniest effect on what is going on.
b) If one were to believe their manifesto promises, you could easily assume that Labour want what is best for the poor and suffering people in our own country, and that this is stuff they can genuinely have a massive say in, therefore decisions should be weighted towards what the people of our country desperately need right now.
c) I can use my status as a voter of x party to try and affect the policies and actions of x party going forward by corresponding with electing officials and lobbying, to ensure they know that x policy goes against my morals and it may have consequences in terms of future votes.
These are not necessarily arguments i would use, but they are arguments I could use in that situation.
When you decide to join the army, you outsource your moral code to the government, and take on their morals as your own. You become a 'point and kill' weapon, where someone else does the pointing.
Obviously then if the Russian government is acting in a morally condemnable way, then so are you by the very definition of condemnable. There is no defending your actions without defending the Russian government in every decision they make, because their morality is your morality in a very real way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
