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.
this is sad man. and this shows you how useless the Canadian Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau is.
Canada has a history of brilliantly smart PMs. This guy is useless and was a factor in my decision to leave Canada. I suggest Israelis also prepare to leave Israel before things go sideways. Pragmatism will avoid disaster.
This woman should consider designating herself and her family refugees and move somewhere other than Gaza and Canada. This is sad and pathetic.
On November 08 2023 18:51 Magic Powers wrote: The people who are arguing in favor of the invasion and occupation of Gaza don't understand the political ramifications. They have a childish view similar to that of people supporting Putin/Russia in the other war that's currently going on. The Gazan people may not fully support Hamas, but neither do they support Israel. If Israel occupies the land for any period and aims towards elections, those elections could very easily go wrong for Israel and they'd have to withdraw their troops regardless, with a more angry and more powerful Gaza than before. That outcome would render the whole invasion and occupation futile. This means Israel has to force a pro-Israel outcome, which is that Gazans cannot be allowed to maintain an anti-Israel stance under any circumstances. And that's why the occupation will be indefinite and no free and fair elections will be held. Perhaps unfree and unfair.
The reason why Israel has such a tough task is because many Palestinians rightfully oppose Israel over the fact that they're being oppressed both in the West bank and in Gaza, and now Israel is making it even worse with the bombardment of Gaza. The following occupation will not make Gazans any happier. It's tough being occupied by any force, even a benevolent one, but it's worse when that force is your sworn enemy. It can't result in better relations unless Israel plans to install a puppet government in Gaza.
It stands to reason that the goal of the occupation of Gaza would be the same as the goal of the occupation of the West Bank, which means, ethnic cleansing, settlements, kill a few Palestinians from time to time as long as you don't make headlines so that it can be described as a breach of ceasefire when they fight back.
In the context of such a project an occupation makes a ton of sense.
Furthermore, as Drone has correctly pointed out, criticism of Israel has already increased manifold. Support was initially heavily in favor of Israel, but many of the supporters have done a one-eighty over the last few weeks. There's only one direction for this trend, the criticism will grow, support will further decline. Gazans and generally most Palestinians are also likely to become firmly united against Israel, more than they already were to begin with. Such unity could very well lead to them rallying behind a single radical party to the heavy detriment of peace negotiations, and it'll make it impossible for Israel to maneuver out of the situation untarnished. As they continue down this road, it'll only get worse each day for both sides. Israel could end up politically stranded and the conflict could become eternal, or even escalate. Countries like Egypt would also face huge pressure to end relations with Israel.
I think Netanjahu needs to be stopped, but who can accomplish that? Israel is currently under martial law, is that correct? Who has the power to oust him?
I'd also like to address the claims by some people of Hamas exaggerating the death count: Hamas fighters only make up a small portion of Gazan people. There's no chance that the numbers can be exaggerated to such a degree that the conclusion changes. Lets assume 1/4 or even 1/2 of the reported civilian deaths are actually Hamas fighters - that would change nothing. Reported deaths are 1400 for Israel (no longer increasing) and 10 000 for Gaza (rapidly increasing).
The brutality of the IDF is disproportional no matter how we slice it. So even if we have a stone-cold argument of utility over an emotional one of the morality of killing, it's clear that the level of death and destruction is too much regardless of false reports.
On November 08 2023 07:02 Liquid`Drone wrote: I'm not actually saying that people are claiming Palestinian civilians are worth less than Israeli civilians. I'm saying the support of attacking Gaza to oust Hamas on the grounds of saving civilian lives is inconsistent with the belief that both are worth equally much, because even accepting the inevitability of Hamas kililng Israeli civilians, there's nothing indicating that they would kill more Israeli civilians than what is being killed as consequence of the current retaliatory attack on Gaza. (Whether this is because Hamas uses civilians as human shields or because Israel is too careless with their attacks is irrelevant to this particular discussion - the civilians would not die if Israel did not attack).
I think it's entirely reasonable for Israel to value Israeli civilians more than they value Palestinian civilians (although I might disagree with the ratio), but I don't. I mean, I actually genuinely do not think Norwegians are inherently more valuable than people from Yemen, but I still got way more emotionally affected by July 22nd than I get by reading about the war in Yemen, even though the death toll is like 2000 times higher. So again, while I actually think a position of pacifism could have been a fantastic response to this, it wasn't one I expected, I understand that it wouldn't have been politically feasible, and I think you can argue that a military response was justified. But even accepting that, this doesn't mean 'all palestinian civilian deaths are inevitable and nothing Israel does can be subject to critique because ultimately their hand is forced by Hamas', I think that's genuinely an insane position to take. There's a reason why they were seemingly strong armed into at least allowing some food and water to flow into the Gaza strip, and why they didn't actually invade 24 hours after issuing the command to leave within 24 hours.
It's not inconsistent with the belief that Israeli and Palestinian lives are equal. As you correctly point out many more Palestinians than Israeli's die in these conflicts. Leaving Hamas in charge of Gaza will lead to other similar conflicts. Destroying Hamas' operational capabilities and removing them from governing Gaza stops that. Saving many more Palestinian than Israeli lives.
This feels like a bizarre circular logic, like hey we’re just killing loads of you now but it’s actually a good thing as it’ll prevent us doing so later.
There's nothing circular about it. If you divide the conflict in two time periods, one before Hamas took over Gaza (59 years) and one after (16 years), the conflict has become significantly more deadly in the second time period. Deaths after Hamas took over were already approaching half of the amount of deaths compared to the time period before Hamas took over. That does not include the current war. Hamas has made the conflict more deadly. Taking them out makes it less so. A disproportionate amount of the deaths are Palestinians so a reduction will disproportionately benefit Palestinians.
My main problem with this period, is it’s just ‘destroy Hamas’, with some rather alarming rhetoric coming from prominent figures in the Israeli state.
There is zero carrot accompanying a rather large and painful looking stick.
I’m still not exactly in favour of the massive amounts of collateral damage, but putting that aside, then what?
It’s not as if we’re hearing much in the vein of ‘we shall destroy Hamas and then work to build relations with the Palestinians freed from their shackle’, even rhetorically never mind any kind of anything in terms of policy. If anything Israel is doubling down on things like settlements so what is any post-Hamas scenario going to look like if not just as bleak for Gazans?
And yes there is the realpolitik that even if such thing was considered a good idea in terms of a longer term plan, now is not exactly a good time to propose it when a good chunk of your population is baying for blood.
There's much of what you're saying that I agree with. People like Netanyahu, Smotrich and Gvir are terrible and there is no solution when they stay in power. Luckily Israel is a democracy. The coalition before the current one included the Arab joint list for the first time. Additionally, from the polls I've seen, Israels citizens hold the current government responsible for the attacks and the right wing parties are polling poorly. With some luck we'll see a much better coalition after the war ends.
I also agree that a carrot is essential to solve the conflict in the long term. Even in the absence of one I think violence will decrease and that ending the rule of Hamas in Gaza is a net positive. The West Bank is much more peaceful and economically stable after all but that situation is not acceptable for numerous reasons. It's worrisome that Israel has not really given any information on their plans after the fighting ends. As you point out this should come out sooner rather than later to give civilians in Gaza perspective.
On November 07 2023 19:22 pmp10 wrote: New Gaza occupation plan is practically announced.
According to a senior adviser to Netanyahu it does not necessarily mean an occupation:
Mark Regev, a senior adviser to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, told CNN’s Christiane Amanpour on Tuesday that Israel's post-war plan is not an "ongoing occupation" of Gaza. ""I think you could expect something more fluid, something more flexible where we can move in and move out as need be to deal with the security situation," he said. "We're not talking about any sort of ongoing occupation of the Gaza strip.""
Asked about Netanyahu’s comments on ABC News on Monday that Israel will have the "overall security responsibility" in Gaza for an "indefinite period" after the war ends, Regev said: "We have to distinguish between a security presence and political control."
"When this is over and we have defeated Hamas, it is crucial that there won’t be a resurgent terrorist element, a resurgent Hamas. There is no point doing this and just going back to square one," Regev told CNN.
"There will have to be an Israeli security presence, but that doesn’t mean Israel is re-occupying Gaza, that doesn’t mean that Israel is there to govern the Gazans," he continued.
"On the contrary, we are interested in establishing new frameworks, where the Gazans can rule themselves, where there can be international support for the reconstruction of Gaza. Hopefully, we can bring in countries – Arab countries as well – for a reconstruction of a demilitarized, post-Hamas Gaza," he said
Obviously it's not their dream scenario. Nobody wants to own, what they are about to break. The problem is that they will never agree to serious autonomy (that's what keeping security responsibility means) and so they will have a very hard time finding anyone else to step-in.
Long term occupation is a risk for sure but not a given. Many of the measures that apply in the West Bank also applied to Arabs in Israel for years. They actively participate in society now. Incremental improvement is possible even if incredibly hard.
An article from the BBC about a call Israel made to a Palestinian doctor warning about airstrikes in Gaza. It gives a good insight into how it works. I've only copied the first few paragraphs from the article. The rest can be found with the link.
It was Thursday 19 October at about 06:30, and Israel had been bombing Gaza for 12 days straight.
He'd been in his third-floor, three-bedroom flat in al-Zahra, a middle-class area in the north of the Gaza Strip. Until now, it had been largely untouched by air strikes.
He'd heard a rising clamour outside. People were screaming. "You need to escape," somebody in the street shouted, "because they will bomb the towers".
As he left his building and crossed the road, looking for a safe place, his phone lit up.
It was a call from a private number.
"I'm speaking with you from Israeli intelligence," a man said down the line, according to Mahmoud.
That call would last more than an hour - and it would be the most terrifying call of his life.
On November 08 2023 18:51 Magic Powers wrote: The people who are arguing in favor of the invasion and occupation of Gaza don't understand the political ramifications. They have a childish view similar to that of people supporting Putin/Russia in the other war that's currently going on. The Gazan people may not fully support Hamas, but neither do they support Israel. If Israel occupies the land for any period and aims towards elections, those elections could very easily go wrong for Israel and they'd have to withdraw their troops regardless, with a more angry and more powerful Gaza than before. That outcome would render the whole invasion and occupation futile. This means Israel has to force a pro-Israel outcome, which is that Gazans cannot be allowed to maintain an anti-Israel stance under any circumstances. And that's why the occupation will be indefinite and no free and fair elections will be held. Perhaps unfree and unfair.
The reason why Israel has such a tough task is because many Palestinians rightfully oppose Israel over the fact that they're being oppressed both in the West bank and in Gaza, and now Israel is making it even worse with the bombardment of Gaza. The following occupation will not make Gazans any happier. It's tough being occupied by any force, even a benevolent one, but it's worse when that force is your sworn enemy. It can't result in better relations unless Israel plans to install a puppet government in Gaza.
It stands to reason that the goal of the occupation of Gaza would be the same as the goal of the occupation of the West Bank, which means, ethnic cleansing, settlements, kill a few Palestinians from time to time as long as you don't make headlines so that it can be described as a breach of ceasefire when they fight back.
In the context of such a project an occupation makes a ton of sense.
That is the beauty of a conspiracy theory, everything stands to reason it is right and if something does not it must be a lie.
I think you're misusing "conspiracy theory" in this context, the term means "an explanation for an event or situation that asserts the existence of a conspiracy by powerful and sinister groups, often political in motivation, when other explanations are more probable." It doesn't mean "something that someone I don't like said and that I want to discredit".
On November 08 2023 22:20 JimmyJRaynor wrote: this is sad man. and this shows you how useless the Canadian Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau is. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rxSZ0B9wRPY
Canada has a history of brilliantly smart PMs. This guy is useless and was a factor in my decision to leave Canada. I suggest Israelis also prepare to leave Israel before things go sideways. Pragmatism will avoid disaster.
This woman should consider designating herself and her family refugees and move somewhere other than Gaza and Canada. This is sad and pathetic.
What's Canada's stance on what's going on? Because curiously enough Ireland manages to be both a country critical of Israel's actions and not being on the list of country that gets their hostages to leave.
On November 08 2023 18:51 Magic Powers wrote: The people who are arguing in favor of the invasion and occupation of Gaza don't understand the political ramifications. They have a childish view similar to that of people supporting Putin/Russia in the other war that's currently going on. The Gazan people may not fully support Hamas, but neither do they support Israel. If Israel occupies the land for any period and aims towards elections, those elections could very easily go wrong for Israel and they'd have to withdraw their troops regardless, with a more angry and more powerful Gaza than before. That outcome would render the whole invasion and occupation futile. This means Israel has to force a pro-Israel outcome, which is that Gazans cannot be allowed to maintain an anti-Israel stance under any circumstances. And that's why the occupation will be indefinite and no free and fair elections will be held. Perhaps unfree and unfair.
The reason why Israel has such a tough task is because many Palestinians rightfully oppose Israel over the fact that they're being oppressed both in the West bank and in Gaza, and now Israel is making it even worse with the bombardment of Gaza. The following occupation will not make Gazans any happier. It's tough being occupied by any force, even a benevolent one, but it's worse when that force is your sworn enemy. It can't result in better relations unless Israel plans to install a puppet government in Gaza.
It stands to reason that the goal of the occupation of Gaza would be the same as the goal of the occupation of the West Bank, which means, ethnic cleansing, settlements, kill a few Palestinians from time to time as long as you don't make headlines so that it can be described as a breach of ceasefire when they fight back.
In the context of such a project an occupation makes a ton of sense.
That is the beauty of a conspiracy theory, everything stands to reason it is right and if something does not it must be a lie.
I think you're misusing "conspiracy theory" in this context, the term means "an explanation for an event or situation that asserts the existence of a conspiracy by powerful and sinister groups, often political in motivation, when other explanations are more probable." It doesn't mean "something that someone I don't like said and that I want to discredit".
You are saying the government has a secret plan to ethnically cleanse, which they repeatedly deny. It does not matter that you think it’s true, heck it doesn’t matter if it is true. It is still a conspiracy theory. It is odd that people like you can not understand that.
The government of China denies that the Uyghur genocide is happening. Are we conspiracy theorists for not believing them?
On November 08 2023 18:51 Magic Powers wrote: The people who are arguing in favor of the invasion and occupation of Gaza don't understand the political ramifications. They have a childish view similar to that of people supporting Putin/Russia in the other war that's currently going on. The Gazan people may not fully support Hamas, but neither do they support Israel. If Israel occupies the land for any period and aims towards elections, those elections could very easily go wrong for Israel and they'd have to withdraw their troops regardless, with a more angry and more powerful Gaza than before. That outcome would render the whole invasion and occupation futile. This means Israel has to force a pro-Israel outcome, which is that Gazans cannot be allowed to maintain an anti-Israel stance under any circumstances. And that's why the occupation will be indefinite and no free and fair elections will be held. Perhaps unfree and unfair.
The reason why Israel has such a tough task is because many Palestinians rightfully oppose Israel over the fact that they're being oppressed both in the West bank and in Gaza, and now Israel is making it even worse with the bombardment of Gaza. The following occupation will not make Gazans any happier. It's tough being occupied by any force, even a benevolent one, but it's worse when that force is your sworn enemy. It can't result in better relations unless Israel plans to install a puppet government in Gaza.
It stands to reason that the goal of the occupation of Gaza would be the same as the goal of the occupation of the West Bank, which means, ethnic cleansing, settlements, kill a few Palestinians from time to time as long as you don't make headlines so that it can be described as a breach of ceasefire when they fight back.
In the context of such a project an occupation makes a ton of sense.
That is the beauty of a conspiracy theory, everything stands to reason it is right and if something does not it must be a lie.
I think you're misusing "conspiracy theory" in this context, the term means "an explanation for an event or situation that asserts the existence of a conspiracy by powerful and sinister groups, often political in motivation, when other explanations are more probable." It doesn't mean "something that someone I don't like said and that I want to discredit".
You are saying the government has a secret plan to ethnically cleanse, which they repeatedly deny. It does not matter that you think it’s true, heck it doesn’t matter if it is true. It is still a conspiracy theory. It is odd that people like you can not understand that.
The government of China denies that the Uyghur genocide is happening. Are we conspiracy theorists for not believing them?
No because there is actual proof of the camps. Stop being silly.
I see so the fact that the government denies it doesn't matter, so it's weird that you thought it mattered in the case of Israel.
As for actual proof of ethnic cleansing of Palestinians, this thread has had a bunch of it posted already. Your characterization of the plan as "secret" is a bit sus, people in key roles of the government of Israel, including Netanyahu, keep telling you again and again both in actions and in words that their plan is for all of Palestine to be annexed to Israel. Just about every human right organization ever has called what Israel is doing ethnic cleansing, including israeli human rights organizations like B'Tselem.
And when I and some others presented the evidence earlier in the thread, the contradictions that we got were, and I quote, "It's not ethnic cleansing because before we replaced the Palestinians with Jewish Israelis there were only Palestinians so it's not less ethnically diverse than before", "It's not ethnic cleansing because Bedouins have too many kids and they have to be kept out of land that isn't theirs", "It's not ethnic cleansing because you're an antisemite", "It's not ethnic cleansing because I don't know you'd have to ask them", and "It's not ethnic cleansing because after we chase the Palestinians from their homes, the homes are cheap and that's why settlers come".
On November 09 2023 01:07 JimmiC wrote: Isreal is a democratic country with a large Arab population none of which are in re-education camps.
Arab Israelis are also mistreated by Israel, but they aren't ethnically cleansed. Would that work on you for China? There are other ethnic groups in Inner Mongolia that aren't genocided, therefore the Uyghurs aren't genocided either?
On November 08 2023 18:51 Magic Powers wrote: The people who are arguing in favor of the invasion and occupation of Gaza don't understand the political ramifications. They have a childish view similar to that of people supporting Putin/Russia in the other war that's currently going on. The Gazan people may not fully support Hamas, but neither do they support Israel. If Israel occupies the land for any period and aims towards elections, those elections could very easily go wrong for Israel and they'd have to withdraw their troops regardless, with a more angry and more powerful Gaza than before. That outcome would render the whole invasion and occupation futile. This means Israel has to force a pro-Israel outcome, which is that Gazans cannot be allowed to maintain an anti-Israel stance under any circumstances. And that's why the occupation will be indefinite and no free and fair elections will be held. Perhaps unfree and unfair.
The reason why Israel has such a tough task is because many Palestinians rightfully oppose Israel over the fact that they're being oppressed both in the West bank and in Gaza, and now Israel is making it even worse with the bombardment of Gaza. The following occupation will not make Gazans any happier. It's tough being occupied by any force, even a benevolent one, but it's worse when that force is your sworn enemy. It can't result in better relations unless Israel plans to install a puppet government in Gaza.
It stands to reason that the goal of the occupation of Gaza would be the same as the goal of the occupation of the West Bank, which means, ethnic cleansing, settlements, kill a few Palestinians from time to time as long as you don't make headlines so that it can be described as a breach of ceasefire when they fight back.
In the context of such a project an occupation makes a ton of sense.
That is the beauty of a conspiracy theory, everything stands to reason it is right and if something does not it must be a lie.
I think you're misusing "conspiracy theory" in this context, the term means "an explanation for an event or situation that asserts the existence of a conspiracy by powerful and sinister groups, often political in motivation, when other explanations are more probable." It doesn't mean "something that someone I don't like said and that I want to discredit".
You are saying the government has a secret plan to ethnically cleanse, which they repeatedly deny. It does not matter that you think it’s true, heck it doesn’t matter if it is true. It is still a conspiracy theory. It is odd that people like you can not understand that.
The government of China denies that the Uyghur genocide is happening. Are we conspiracy theorists for not believing them?
No because there is actual proof of the camps. Stop being silly.
I see so the fact that the government denies it doesn't matter, so it's weird that you thought it mattered in the case of Israel.
As for actual proof of ethnic cleansing of Palestinians, this thread has had a bunch of it posted already. Your characterization of the plan as "secret" is a bit sus, people in key roles of the government of Israel, including Netanyahu, keep telling you again and again both in actions and in words that their plan is for all of Palestine to be annexed to Israel. Just about every human right organization ever has called what Israel is doing ethnic cleansing, including israeli human rights organizations like B'Tselem.
And when I and some others presented the evidence earlier in the thread, the contradictions that we got were, and I quote, "It's not ethnic cleansing because before we replaced the Palestinians with Jewish Israelis there were only Palestinians so it's not less ethnically diverse than before", "It's not ethnic cleansing because Bedouins have too many kids and they have to be kept out of land that isn't theirs", "It's not ethnic cleansing because you're an antisemite", "It's not ethnic cleansing because I don't know you'd have to ask them", and "It's not ethnic cleansing because after we chase the Palestinians from their homes, the homes are cheap and that's why settlers come".
I did not say those things so I’m not going to answer them as if I did. You never respond to actual things I say because that would be harder than straw man and pretending you have some morale Hugh ground. There is a reason that you and the far right agree on Isreal and it’s not because this time they are right.
You’ve been yelling about ethic cleansing since oct 7th, well Hamas was still in Isreal killing civilians on purpose. Trying their darnedest to ethnically cleanse Isreal. You are not a reasonable person who critically has looked at this situation at all. You have your biases which I hope are unconscious, and then find evidence to support your already made conclusion.
Actually I was yelling about ethnic cleansing in 2021, which I'm proud of. I was not correct about everything 2 years ago, it's good that I was correct about this.
Some of the explanations I wrote were direct quotes from you, and if you had a good answer to any of them it wouldn't bother you at all that you weren't the one who posted them, the reason why you're not answering is because there are no good answers.
A lot of the far right has sided with Israel because they see it as a representation of an ethnostate so they want it to succeed and be proof of concept for them. Netanyahu has had contact with far right representatives in Europe. Not that it matters obviously, because you can be against something for a good reason (ethnic cleansing is bad) or for bad reasons (Jews are bad and Israel is Jews).
On November 08 2023 19:48 Magic Powers wrote: I think this video is a must watch for people who want to understand the situation on the ground with the Gazan people and why a simplistic approach such as "invade and occupy" promises no predictive value regarding future tensions.
Popularity of Hamas and other groups/figures among Gazans is the main question being asked in the video.
I mean as someone from a region recently blighted by nationalistic conflict, it’s immeasurably better than it used to be but there’s still a hell of a lot of rancour and dysfunction carried from that, and we’re 25 years on from a settlement there.
And as much as some are strangely loath to admit, the Troubles as a conflict was absolutely small, small fry compared to other conflicts around the world.
Neither actors ever participated in any kind of pitched warfare, culturally the Irish and the British are basically the same with a few minor tweaks. Even at their most structurally disenfranchised Northern Irish Catholics could still live an existence broadly in line with anyone else in the Western world.
If we still have a lot of nationalist/religious resentment here in 2023 holding us back, what will Israeli attitudes be never mind a Gazan’s sentiments in this regard? Of course people shoved in a small strip of land with zero prospects that gets bombed to high heaven are going to gravitate to the Hamas types.
On November 08 2023 18:51 Magic Powers wrote: The people who are arguing in favor of the invasion and occupation of Gaza don't understand the political ramifications. They have a childish view similar to that of people supporting Putin/Russia in the other war that's currently going on. The Gazan people may not fully support Hamas, but neither do they support Israel. If Israel occupies the land for any period and aims towards elections, those elections could very easily go wrong for Israel and they'd have to withdraw their troops regardless, with a more angry and more powerful Gaza than before. That outcome would render the whole invasion and occupation futile. This means Israel has to force a pro-Israel outcome, which is that Gazans cannot be allowed to maintain an anti-Israel stance under any circumstances. And that's why the occupation will be indefinite and no free and fair elections will be held. Perhaps unfree and unfair.
The reason why Israel has such a tough task is because many Palestinians rightfully oppose Israel over the fact that they're being oppressed both in the West bank and in Gaza, and now Israel is making it even worse with the bombardment of Gaza. The following occupation will not make Gazans any happier. It's tough being occupied by any force, even a benevolent one, but it's worse when that force is your sworn enemy. It can't result in better relations unless Israel plans to install a puppet government in Gaza.
It stands to reason that the goal of the occupation of Gaza would be the same as the goal of the occupation of the West Bank, which means, ethnic cleansing, settlements, kill a few Palestinians from time to time as long as you don't make headlines so that it can be described as a breach of ceasefire when they fight back.
In the context of such a project an occupation makes a ton of sense.
That is the beauty of a conspiracy theory, everything stands to reason it is right and if something does not it must be a lie.
I think you're misusing "conspiracy theory" in this context, the term means "an explanation for an event or situation that asserts the existence of a conspiracy by powerful and sinister groups, often political in motivation, when other explanations are more probable." It doesn't mean "something that someone I don't like said and that I want to discredit".
You are saying the government has a secret plan to ethnically cleanse, which they repeatedly deny. It does not matter that you think it’s true, heck it doesn’t matter if it is true. It is still a conspiracy theory. It is odd that people like you can not understand that.
People like who exactly?
It’s hardly a conspiracy theory to observe what’s been happening for decades and is likely to continue. It’s calling a spade a spade
On November 09 2023 00:20 RvB wrote: An article from the BBC about a call Israel made to a Palestinian doctor warning about airstrikes in Gaza. It gives a good insight into how it works. I've only copied the first few paragraphs from the article. The rest can be found with the link.
It was Thursday 19 October at about 06:30, and Israel had been bombing Gaza for 12 days straight.
He'd been in his third-floor, three-bedroom flat in al-Zahra, a middle-class area in the north of the Gaza Strip. Until now, it had been largely untouched by air strikes.
He'd heard a rising clamour outside. People were screaming. "You need to escape," somebody in the street shouted, "because they will bomb the towers".
As he left his building and crossed the road, looking for a safe place, his phone lit up.
It was a call from a private number.
"I'm speaking with you from Israeli intelligence," a man said down the line, according to Mahmoud.
That call would last more than an hour - and it would be the most terrifying call of his life.
This is such a weird interaction. What's the point of destroying those buildings after allowing their inhabitants to evacuate? Is this about destroying combat equipment potentially stored in the buildings? You can't expect to kill your enemies like this so I can't come up with any other rational explanation.
I don't really understand how one can call Israel's ethnic cleansing a conspiracy theory - it's pretty out in the open. Hard to hide arming settlers and bulldozing houses.
Just the first google search for some of B'Tselem's articles on it give a bunch, covering both removal of Palestinians from East Jerusalem (with their homes being given to Jewish settlers) and armed harassment followed by (government approved) demolition of Palestinian communities in the West Bank.
And here's a nice choice passage from the second article:
For decades, the Israeli authorities have been implementing a policy aimed at driving out scores of communities, that are home to thousands of Palestinians. They have made living conditions miserable and intolerable with a view to establishing facts on the ground and taking over these areas.
The conclusion there is pretty clear - it's ethnic cleansing. It's not a conspiracy, it's not some new thing, it's out in the open and has been for decades. It's part of the reason Gaza is what it is today. It's been a policy of many of the Israeli governments since (and as part of) the country's inception. And it's still happening, to this very month.
All of these "totally not antisemitic" protests that just so happen to take place outside a synagogue sure are coincidental. It is a very interesting way to express dissatisfaction with the Israeli government rather than Jewish people as a whole.
On November 09 2023 01:42 Mohdoo wrote: All of these "totally not antisemitic" protests that just so happen to take place outside a synagogue sure are coincidental. It is a very interesting way to express dissatisfaction with the Israeli government rather than Jewish people as a whole.
Why does Israel exist and why does it have essentially unwavering support from the big players in the West?
34607
6581
198
EPT
