NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.
On October 16 2023 06:11 Elroi wrote: Hamas are the scum of the earth. They are the same as IS. Whatever you think about the greater conflict and its possible solutions, that should be indisputable. You really can't compare what they did in their absurd killing spree with women attacking patriarchy ffs. Look at shit like this (Clip from CNN): + Show Spoiler +
Clip from CNN
When was the last time dying rape victims were paraded through Tel Aviv to the acclaim of the general population btw?
It's a systemic comparison, not an ethical one or whatever you're trying to say I'm not even quite sure. I'm trying to illustrate that surrendering to a social hierarchy where you're inferior isn't exactly "having agency", unless we're trying to make a mockery of the notion.
The key premise in your comparison seems to be that Israel’s ultimate goal for the Palestinians is complete subjugation of the population and treating as second-class citizens, as opposed to something like disarming hostile agents and removing threats to the state. Do you have evidence that this is Israel’s current policy?
I believe we can agree that removing Hamas would be helpful if your goal is disarming hostile agents and removing threats to the State. It is demonstrable that Netanyahu has not prioritized this, he has in fact often propped up Hamas, and it has been reported that he is talking to Likud about how the existence of Hamas is helpful to those who have the goal of keeping Palestine (namely in the West Bank) from establishing a state.
More generally the policy of West Bank settlements, and the violence associated with it, fully supported by the government, literally can't be understood as anything else than a dispossession of land from Palestinians in favor of Israelis. There is no framework other than the establishment of a social hierarchy in which this action makes sense. You don't take people's land for yourself because you're just about to grant them human rights.
If you were made into the leader of Hamas tomorrow, what could you do to stop the Palestinians from dying?
52% of Palestinians are under 18. They can have their water and electricity cut off at will. Hamas commits acts of terror which embolden Western Media and the IDF. The PLO spends more time in its non-violent protest being asked to condemn Hamas. School, Hospitals and News Stations are regularly destroyed by Israeli missles. What do you want Palestinians to do?
To flip your statistic: 48% of Palestinians are over 18. That's over a million fully grown adults capable of making decisions.
Here is how I would answer my question. If I was made leader of Hamas today, I could save the most of my people by releasing all hostages and putting all terrorists involved in the October 7 attack on trial. I would show that I run a real respectable country that happens to have terrorists (who we deal with), rather than a terrorist state. Israel would no longer have casus belli and the US would pressure it to end the conflict if I could show this was a legitimate good will effort.
Sounds like a pretty simple end to the conflict right (at least the current fighting)? No moral ambiguity. Terrorists lose, everyone else wins.
That is, what should happen to solve the conflict is simple. We are merely stuck on the how.
The current Hamas leaders aren't doing that, so they are clearly the bad guys because they are the best ones who can end the bloodshed. But is anyone pressuring them to do it? If all of the Palestinians in Gaza demanded that they did that, would it affect their decision? Could some lieutenant kill the leader, take over, and free the hostages?
Why is it, in your opinion, that Palestine initiated an attack? You do understand that the deplorable conditions Palestinians are suffering under are not new and not a result of October 7th right?
Islamist terrorists have agency. No one forced them to burn and behead infants and rape and kill. There is no justification for that. Why did hundreds of Arabs in Sweden, a country with free health care, free education (where you get payed to go to University) and one of the most solid welfare states in the world, choose to fight for the IS, murder and torture people indiscriminately?
To be clear, the beheaded infants story was never proven (didn't stop everyone spreading it like wildfire) but we do have recorded proof of the IDF assaulting, raping, arresting and murdering Palestinian civilians. Not only are you ignorning the multiple war crimes Israel is committing, sounds like you're implying Islamist Terrorism is far more pronounced within the Palestinian population than is the reality.
I can't speak to what happened in Sweden, but if people are murdering civilians, that's fucked up point blank. Propaganda is a disgusting evil tool, and everyone group clawing at power and influence uses it to horrific effect, Islamists are no different.
A reporter said something that wasn't true. It got debunked almost immediately. That fact is now being pushed mercilessly by pro-terrorists bot all across the net. So you can come in and say "nuh uh they never did that". Guess what. Your right.
But there are pictures of babies burned to death in their cribs. And stabbed. And that's true and . And there are MORE than 40 kids killed during the terrorists attack. Which conventionally gets discarded because "it's just a lie". So please stop with your false narrative as well.
True, at least 40 were murdered by Israel along the routes they designated as safe routes during the mass exodus of Palestinians.l from the North of Gaza to the South. How in the ever loving fuck am I Pro-Terrorist for actually recognizing the humanitarian disaster that's happening here? How am I pro-terrorist for calling Hamas agents terrorists. When Israel commits a war crime like unleashing White Phosphorus the reporters get cut off by the BBC, when Israel makes a false claim it gets parroted everywhere, including by President Biden to the point the damage is done. You're right though, it was debunked and it was a one-off incident, except the next day Ted Cruz reposts a video of Palestinian children in cages and says Israeli children are being held captive.
Hamas is a terrorist org that performed a coup. The Israeli government is a democratically elected recognized government. The difference is we pretend Israel isn't doing this shit daily. It's happening every fucking day, Hamas war crime or no. There is no argument here, you either support aparteid or you don't.
Because you discard the fact that one side kills babies in horrible ways with the thinnest premise ever and then immediately attacks the other side in the same sentence.
If you corrected the statement in a more sensible way it would be something like:
"To be clear they only stabbed or burned infants to death, not beheaded them which there is proof of. We also have recorded proof of the IDF assaulting, raping, arresting and murdering Palestinian civilians. Not only are you ignoring the multiple war crimes Israel is committing, sounds like you're implying Islamist Terrorism is far more pronounced within the Palestinian population than is the reality. Just because they are out on the street celebrating attacks doesn't mean they are all terrorists."
On October 16 2023 07:22 Elroi wrote: Most people in the intelligence community seem to think that was Hamas trying to scare their human shields from leaving their homes.
Do you have any proof of this? If so that's fucked up. Hamas is fucked up. We already knew that. But can you be honest about how fucked up Israel is? I somehow doubt that.
On October 16 2023 06:51 Cricketer12 wrote: I have no idea why, but why are we letting Egypt and Jordan speak for the Palestinians when they population en masse has been rather consistent on this
It feels like you are going way out of your way to say there are not religious components to the disagreement. Are you saying there is not a religious component to this?
On October 16 2023 06:51 Cricketer12 wrote: I have no idea why, but why are we letting Egypt and Jordan speak for the Palestinians when they population en masse has been rather consistent on this
It feels like you are going way out of your way to say there are not religious components to the disagreement. Are you saying there is not a religious component to this?
There is a religious component. I am suggesting it's not the most relevant/crucial aspect of it, though it certainly is a critical aspect for some groups like Hamas. Feel free to disagree if you think I'm overly downplaying it though.
On October 16 2023 06:51 Cricketer12 wrote: Hamas doesn't represent all of Gaza let alone all of the Palestine. They're terrorists. No one honestly trusted them. The West Bank doesn't even trust them.
Unfortunately for everyone involved, Hamas is the only organization at present that can be said to represent Gaza. They control the money, the guns, the hospitals, the education system. If Hamas decides that Gaza is going to war, Gaza goes to war. Unless and until the Palestinians or Israel are able to install a different form of government in Gaza, they are the representatives, like it or not.
The argument that Hamas isn't driven by religious fanaticism above all other motives is fairly new to me. I've never heard that claim before and I'd require something far more substantial than someone's opinion on the internet before I consider its validity.
I believe we can agree that removing Hamas would be helpful if your goal is disarming hostile agents and removing threats to the State. It is demonstrable that Netanyahu has not prioritized this, he has in fact often propped up Hamas, and it has been reported that he is talking to Likud about how the existence of Hamas is helpful to those who have the goal of keeping Palestine (namely in the West Bank) from establishing a state.
.
So this leads to the final point in my logic chain. Hamas and their violence are demonstrably bad for the Palestinian cause (in addition to peace in general obviously). Israel cannot give a hostile enemy freedom of militarization and significant chunks of their small peace of land and expect to exist for any amount of time. (If you had any doubt that Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran, etc would not complete absolute genocide if given an opening, Oct 7 should clarify that.)
If there are elements in Israel or elsewhere who don't want the conflict solved, they are the ones who profit from Hamas' violence. If Hamas stops attacking and becomes a reasonable partner in peace, more liberal parties will be elected in Israel and giving up land will be a more palatable suggestion for Israelis. And not just more palatable, more tenable, safe, and fair for all involved.
On October 16 2023 07:28 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote: Because you discard the fact that one side kills babies in horrible ways with the thinnest premise ever and then immediately attacks the other side in the same sentence.
One side kills babies in horrible ways. The other side also kills babies in horrible ways.
On October 16 2023 08:19 Magic Powers wrote: The argument that Hamas isn't driven by religious fanaticism above all other motives is fairly new to me. I've never heard that claim before and I'd require something far more substantial than someone's opinion on the internet before I consider its validity.
Oh that definitely plays a part, at least for the foot soldiers. The people on top are definitely driven by money and power like most corrupt leaders though. The fact that they are all millionaires or billionaires should attest to that.
While there are Muslim religious scriptures that support some of their goals, they are clearly cherry picked from hundreds of other things and focused on for political reasons. If you look closely at those political reasons, they align coincidentally closely to situations that allow the Hamas leaders to get rich and/or stay in power.
In the meantime, if your concern is that you feel religious fanatics do not have free will, I can assure you as someone who has interacted with very religious people of multiple faiths, that all but the most devout will bend or even brake their rules if it goes too far against their self interest.
I believe we can agree that removing Hamas would be helpful if your goal is disarming hostile agents and removing threats to the State. It is demonstrable that Netanyahu has not prioritized this, he has in fact often propped up Hamas, and it has been reported that he is talking to Likud about how the existence of Hamas is helpful to those who have the goal of keeping Palestine (namely in the West Bank) from establishing a state.
.
So this leads to the final point in my logic chain. Hamas and their violence are demonstrably bad for the Palestinian cause (in addition to peace in general obviously). Israel cannot give a hostile enemy freedom of militarization and significant chunks of their small peace of land and expect to exist for any amount of time. (If you had any doubt that Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran, etc would not complete absolute genocide if given an opening, Oct 7 should clarify that.)
If there are elements in Israel or elsewhere who don't want the conflict solved, they are the ones who profit from Hamas' violence. If Hamas stops attacking and becomes a reasonable partner in peace, more liberal parties will be elected in Israel and giving up land will be a more palatable suggestion for Israelis. And not just more palatable, more tenable, safe, and fair for all involved.
Israel could elect more liberal parties, or it could also not. This is a bit more convoluted but it circles back to Israel having agency.
I believe we can agree that removing Hamas would be helpful if your goal is disarming hostile agents and removing threats to the State. It is demonstrable that Netanyahu has not prioritized this, he has in fact often propped up Hamas, and it has been reported that he is talking to Likud about how the existence of Hamas is helpful to those who have the goal of keeping Palestine (namely in the West Bank) from establishing a state.
.
So this leads to the final point in my logic chain. Hamas and their violence are demonstrably bad for the Palestinian cause (in addition to peace in general obviously). Israel cannot give a hostile enemy freedom of militarization and significant chunks of their small peace of land and expect to exist for any amount of time. (If you had any doubt that Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran, etc would not complete absolute genocide if given an opening, Oct 7 should clarify that.)
If there are elements in Israel or elsewhere who don't want the conflict solved, they are the ones who profit from Hamas' violence. If Hamas stops attacking and becomes a reasonable partner in peace, more liberal parties will be elected in Israel and giving up land will be a more palatable suggestion for Israelis. And not just more palatable, more tenable, safe, and fair for all involved.
Israel could elect more liberal parties, or it could also not. This is a bit more convoluted but it circles back to Israel having agency.
No one questions whether Israel has agency. Their issue is they have no good options at the moment. If no one around them built their nation around the idea of killing Israelis, they would have options available that weren't all terrible.
The point I'm making is that no one seems to credit Gaza with having agency for some reason. And Gaza has a real clear cut good option in front of them right now. If the world just bothered pressuring Gaza to take their good option, it could actually solve the conflict.
I believe we can agree that removing Hamas would be helpful if your goal is disarming hostile agents and removing threats to the State. It is demonstrable that Netanyahu has not prioritized this, he has in fact often propped up Hamas, and it has been reported that he is talking to Likud about how the existence of Hamas is helpful to those who have the goal of keeping Palestine (namely in the West Bank) from establishing a state.
.
So this leads to the final point in my logic chain. Hamas and their violence are demonstrably bad for the Palestinian cause (in addition to peace in general obviously). Israel cannot give a hostile enemy freedom of militarization and significant chunks of their small peace of land and expect to exist for any amount of time. (If you had any doubt that Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran, etc would not complete absolute genocide if given an opening, Oct 7 should clarify that.)
If there are elements in Israel or elsewhere who don't want the conflict solved, they are the ones who profit from Hamas' violence. If Hamas stops attacking and becomes a reasonable partner in peace, more liberal parties will be elected in Israel and giving up land will be a more palatable suggestion for Israelis. And not just more palatable, more tenable, safe, and fair for all involved.
Israel could elect more liberal parties, or it could also not. This is a bit more convoluted but it circles back to Israel having agency.
No one questions whether Israel has agency. Their issue is they have no good options at the moment. If no one around them built their nation around the idea of killing Israelis, they would have options available that weren't all terrible.
The point I'm making is that no one seems to credit Gaza with having agency for some reason. And Gaza has a real clear cut good option in front of them right now. If the world just bothered pressuring Gaza to take their good option, it could actually solve the conflict.
But that's what I was answering. In the scenario that you have created to show that Gaza has agency, it is still Israel that has agency, not Gaza.
i'm glad we've got some top knowledgeable Mississauga experts on the internet.
Somehow, I managed to survive 20 years in the dangerous streets of Mississauga. Just call me Jim "Danger" Raynor. "Danger" is my middle name.
87% of Mississauga have a religious affiliation. Not many atheists in Mississauga. Mississauga's murder rates and crime rates are super low.
The biggest single issue Mississauga residents are concerned about is school teachers getting too involved in the "sex education" area of their children's lives. Mississauga residents want teachers to stick to math and science and english lit.
This twitter guy who has 1.3 million followers doesn't know what he is talking about. Sure, Mississsauga has 75,000 Muslims... the city has a population of 830,000.
I believe we can agree that removing Hamas would be helpful if your goal is disarming hostile agents and removing threats to the State. It is demonstrable that Netanyahu has not prioritized this, he has in fact often propped up Hamas, and it has been reported that he is talking to Likud about how the existence of Hamas is helpful to those who have the goal of keeping Palestine (namely in the West Bank) from establishing a state.
.
So this leads to the final point in my logic chain. Hamas and their violence are demonstrably bad for the Palestinian cause (in addition to peace in general obviously). Israel cannot give a hostile enemy freedom of militarization and significant chunks of their small peace of land and expect to exist for any amount of time. (If you had any doubt that Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran, etc would not complete absolute genocide if given an opening, Oct 7 should clarify that.)
If there are elements in Israel or elsewhere who don't want the conflict solved, they are the ones who profit from Hamas' violence. If Hamas stops attacking and becomes a reasonable partner in peace, more liberal parties will be elected in Israel and giving up land will be a more palatable suggestion for Israelis. And not just more palatable, more tenable, safe, and fair for all involved.
Israel could elect more liberal parties, or it could also not. This is a bit more convoluted but it circles back to Israel having agency.
No one questions whether Israel has agency. Their issue is they have no good options at the moment. If no one around them built their nation around the idea of killing Israelis, they would have options available that weren't all terrible.
The point I'm making is that no one seems to credit Gaza with having agency for some reason. And Gaza has a real clear cut good option in front of them right now. If the world just bothered pressuring Gaza to take their good option, it could actually solve the conflict.
But that's what I was answering. In the scenario that you have created to show that Gaza has agency, it is still Israel that has agency, not Gaza.
That's not true. At least not the way you seem to mean it. It is not reasonable or ethical to expect Israel to lower their defenses while there is a terrorist state in their backyard. They have currently have no reasonable options at all.
ZeroByte13 asked the question earlier what Israel should do in it's current predicament.
On October 13 2023 19:17 ZeroByte13 wrote: @Nebuchad What would be your suggestion on how Israel should react to this recent attack? Not going into history, just here and now. This attack happened, Israel needs to react/retaliate. What would be a proper meaningful retaliation in your opinion?
Everyone agrees that this is terrible, few to no people suggested what exactly should be done instead. "something but not this" doesn't count, of course.
Zero people in this thread were able to give a serious answer to his question. Because there are no reasonable courses of action for Israel at this juncture that won't lead to deaths of civilians on one side or the other.
Hamas however does have a very reasonable, very ethical option available to them right now (free all captives and put all terrorists on trial). IF Hamas takes that option, THEN there will be new options for Israel that they don't currently have. Better options.
All that said, I'm confused and concerned that you are so reticent to "pressure Hamas to stop being violent." Is there even a downside to my proposal? Do you not believe that Hamas being less violent would be a good thing?
On October 16 2023 10:49 JimmyJRaynor wrote: Sure, Mississsauga has 75,000 Muslims... the city has a population of 830,000.
You know that's very high right? 10% of a city's population being Muslim when below 5% are Muslim country-wide is quite significant. Only 13% being non-religious is also small considering about 35% of Canada's population does not declare any religious affiliation.
From those numbers alone it looks like some sort of religious center of the country.
On October 16 2023 11:45 Cerebrate1 wrote: That's not true. At least not the way you seem to mean it. It is not reasonable or ethical to expect Israel to lower their defenses while there is a terrorist state in their backyard. They have currently have no reasonable options at all.
Isn't the reason for that though that Israel is effectively occupying former Palestinian territory?
I think that if you were to say split Austria into 3 parts and give the big and best chunk of it to the new state comprising of Romani people the Austrians would not be very happy about it.
Just curious if anyone ever brought this up, Putin visits China for Winter Games, week after he goes back to Russia he invades Ukraine. Syrian President got brought over / visits China for Asia Game, days after he goes back Hamas attacks Israel. Coincidence? Maybe not....... maybe, as we are arguing over about morale and right or wrong. Perhaps someone just wants instability in the whole world..........
On October 16 2023 13:18 PurE)Rabbit-SF wrote: Just curious if anyone ever brought this up, Putin visits China for Winter Games, week after he goes back to Russia he invades Ukraine. Syrian President got brought over / visits China for Asia Game, days after he goes back Hamas attacks Israel. Coincidence? Maybe not....... maybe, as we are arguing over about morale and right or wrong. Perhaps someone just wants instability in the whole world..........
Right now China is in some really deep shit internally. The only reason they could have for throwing the world into chaos would be to divert attention away from themselves.
Edit:
There more be a bit more to it actually. It seems that China will try and do what they can to destroy the image of US as a world leader.
EPT
