|
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 March 05 2024 21:52 Ryzel wrote:
Nebuchad, I don’t think you’re going far enough in your attempts to be empathetic to how radicalization develops in the average youthful Gazan. Children can’t just jump from *see family members get killed by people (Hamas or IDF)* to *it’s all Israel’s fault this is happening* without some sort of education on what Israel is. It’s very easy to imagine a hypothetical of picking up that child, transplanting them to Israel for example, getting adopted by a family there, giving them an education with their slant / spin, and getting that Gazan to believe the killings are motivated by aggressive Muslim religious fundamentalists, resulting in them being radicalized against Hamas.
The who, what, why, and how of oppression isn’t baked into the human psyche; only the raw emotions felt are. The ones trusted with / in charge of explaining how the world works hold ultimate formative power over youth.
Okay, I don't have a clear picture of how this works here, you're right about that. But it seems to me that living in palestinian society and interacting with other Palestinians, all of that with the threat of the IDF looming, would be quite enough to get you from point A to point B. So that can be described as an "education" in a sense but I don't think that's quite what you meant.
I don't interact with a ton of Palestinians but the main one that comes to mind doesn't live in Palestine, and she's out as a trans girl, so I don't think you can say that she's a product of Hamas education. Yet when she talks about Israel it doesn't sound very different. That's just one person but I'm not under the impression that there is a large shift in beliefs between palestinian refugees and Palestinians in Gaza on the topic.
|
|
|
If we are comparing Hamas with crime now, how about that. Hamas is the dangerous extremist criminal that has taking hostages in a building. You argument is now, that the police should bomb the whole building, and kill everyone inside, because the hostages have not dealth with the armed criminals themselves and some of them are even sympathetic to their cause. It's war, what you gonna do, not bomb the building?
|
|
|
"Children are dying of starvation in northern Gaza, the World Health Organization (WHO) chief says."
This can only keep getting worse. It's time that everyone who opposes a ceasefire gets publicly shamed. There are far too many lives at stake on top of the already gigantic pile of bodies.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-68471572
|
On March 05 2024 23:35 JimmiC wrote:
I’ve spent a lot of time thinking on why of all the “oppression” in the world, and sadly there is basically unlimited cases, (a few that come to mind, Rohingya Muslims, Tibetan’s, Kurds, Uighurs, Crimean Tatar and on and on) did this one come to the top of the “leftists” list. Post Oct 7th it makes sense because it the “hottest” but it was there before. Why is this?
Rhetorical question? Isn't the answer just "US/Western involvement"?
It makes sense to an extent too, because in theory there is more potential to change things through more local action.
Makes arguably less sense when you're pro-Russia in the other thread though.
|
On March 05 2024 17:31 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On March 05 2024 15:23 Cerebrate1 wrote:On March 05 2024 14:38 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 05 2024 13:54 Cerebrate1 wrote:On March 04 2024 17:06 Nebuchad wrote:
There's also no indication of what was so wrong with GH's post specifically, as the post doesn't seem to address his point in any real fashion. I apologize that my post wasn't as clear and direct as I usually am. I did type that one off rather quickly as I had somewhere to be. To clarify: he seemed to suggest that Hamas was not responsible for radicalizing Gazans (hopefully I don't have to post antisemitic pages in childrens school books or show clips of school plays where Palestinian children act out shooting Israelis to demonstrate the inaccuracy of this idea.) He said that it was actually Israeli oppression that causes this radicalization. To this I replied by pointing out that Israel has had very limited involvement in Gaza and thus little opportunity to cause any of the various problems Gazans have faced in the past couple decades. In fact, even Hamas itself doesn't even claim Israeli oppression of Gaza as cacus belli for the various wars it has entered into. Their claimed goal for Oct 7 was to "stop Israeli aggression at Al Asqa Mosque [in Jerusalem]" (which thousands of Muslims have prayed at in peace before and after Oct 7 btw). Their brigades for Oct 7 were also named after that mosque. If Gazans were so oppressed by Israel directly, why do they constantly feel the need to point to things outside of Gaza as justification for their actions? Wouldn't it be more compelling to say "Israel is currently doing X bad thing to us Gazans, so we need to stop them"? I'm saying Israel has a lot better odds at reducing the radicalization of Palestinians by focusing on not brutally subjugating them and/or illegally occupying their land. It's just straight up dehumanizing to pretend that the open air prison of Gaza was autonomy in any meaningful sense of the word. It's part of why it's preposterous to think Israel has a plan for "the day after" that isn't brutally subjugating Palestinians. As we see from Cerebrate here, people can easily rationalize such barbarity and even laude it. I don't see any "barbarity" I'm "lauding" in my actual post you are responding to, but maybe you were reading a different article and then just switched tabs and got mixed up. Feel free to directly quote a line I said otherwise if you disagree. I'm pointing out that "occupying" is not the clear cut source of this conflict that you make it out to be. We have a two decades expiriment of two groups of Palestinians to pull conclusions from. The West Bank is the place that Israel has been sticking around to do all those bad things you are probably imagining, yet zero wars have been fought there since 1967. All the wars (and the death and destruction that resulted) have been started by the people who have no settlers living next door and who already have back all the land they theoretically want. And they specifically started having those wars after Israel pulled out. That you "don't see" it is part of the point (and disingenuous imo).
That you can't provide evidence for your claims, even when asked for them point blank, indicates which one of us is being disingenuous.
It also reflects poorly on the prospects of Israel's "day after" plan.
Feel free to clarify how this conclusion you keep proclaiming is drawn in any way from what either of us is saying.
You arguing Gaza before Oct 7 was "all the things people claim will solve all the problems" indicates to me that we're observing different realities.
Please note that I did not say that Israel pulling out of Gaza in 2006 actually solved all the problems. Quite the opposite. I clearly indicated that it ended poorly for all involved. What I said was that Gazans got all the things that people claim will solve the problems.
It's a poignant historical fact that demostrates that removing all settlements, pulling back to 1967 borders, and handing Palestinians complete control of their territory does not magically create peace in the Middle East if Palestinian radicalism is not first dealt with. In fact, it just makes the violence more deadly.
To be clear, I am not saying that they should never get a state. But it has to be done in the right way and at the right time to make a better future, not a worse one.
The closest useful analog I can think of at the moment would be when xDaunt and others argued that racism wasn't a significant problem in the US after/because Obama was elected. It's rooted in a dehumanizing paternalism meant to protect a society built on subjugation and dismiss the barbaric consequences of such a society as the fault of those it oppresses while being ostensibly oblivious to their oppression.
Infantilizing Palestinians and claiming they have no agency when they control land, millions of people, and billions of dollars of aid for anything they ask for, is rooted in a dehuminizing paternalism meant to protect a society built on subjugation and dismiss the barbaric consequences of such a society as the fault of some outside force, while being ostensibly oblivious to it's actual results.
|
On March 06 2024 09:58 Turbovolver wrote:Show nested quote +On March 05 2024 23:35 JimmiC wrote:
I’ve spent a lot of time thinking on why of all the “oppression” in the world, and sadly there is basically unlimited cases, (a few that come to mind, Rohingya Muslims, Tibetan’s, Kurds, Uighurs, Crimean Tatar and on and on) did this one come to the top of the “leftists” list. Post Oct 7th it makes sense because it the “hottest” but it was there before. Why is this? Rhetorical question? Isn't the answer just "US/Western involvement"? It makes sense to an extent too, because in theory there is more potential to change things through more local action. Makes arguably less sense when you're pro-Russia in the other thread though.
The real answer is that it's geopolitically relevant. Or more specifically, there are powerful geopolitical forces influencing both sides of the conflict.
Israel is a key US ally in a region where real friends are hard for to find.
Palestine itself isn't geopolitically important, but it was the pet project of the people with all the oil for a long time. Even as that faded, it became seen as a way for Russia, China, etc to weaken the US indirectly by hitting it's ally.
Similarly, Ukraine gets so much attention because helping it hurts another major geopolitical player (Russia). So countries that oppose Russia support Ukraine.
Tibet and the Uyghurs actually have gotten some media attention for the same reason. That is, helping them hurts China (another major player with geopolitical opponents). China just had/s those situations clamped down so effectively, it's hard to really contest them.
Other wars between minor countries in the Middle East, or all the more so Africa, (Tigray, Uganda, Yemen, etc) will never receive anywhere near the international attention or support even though they are objectively more terrible humanitarian disasters than all the geopolitically relevant examples mentioned above.
|
Northern Ireland22955 Posts
I mean that’s part of it, in terms of a more grass roots sentiment, Western countries are intimately involved in ways with Israel, certainly Ukraine so there is more collective skin in the game, so to speak.
Add to that Israel in other ways is quite similar to a ‘Western’ nation culturally, Ukraine effectively is. Other countries in Eastern Europe have folks not just alive, but still relatively young who experienced Soviet life so of course Putin’s pseudo-revival will resonate somewhat more.
Folks only have so much bandwidth to give at the end of the day, and will likely pay more attention to things that either resonate in ways beyond pure human tragedy, or are easier to follow/get informed about.
Look I’d love to have the same debates on other topics but there’s a cultural wall one has to pass through to be informed in anything beyond a bullet points kind of level. There’s a linguistic barrier often, there’s a lack of understanding of other cultural or structural nuances.
As I freely admit I just don’t know enough to really feel all that comfortable engaging. Just taking me as an example, and I was relatively atypical in I’d read full newspapers, multiple ones daily from my mid teens. Built my familiarity with public figures in the UK, the daily goings-on and you get that intuitive sense of how publications tend to lean in how they report the news. Quickly repeated that process for US politics. Have a vague idea of wider European politics and media outlets, but less again. Less so again other Anglosphere countries like a Canada or a New Zealand/Australia.
By the time we’re talking China or Ugandan political issues well, for various aforementioned reasons it’s harder again to really be that informed at all. China is especially difficult as I find it hard to locate reportage that isn’t pretty obvious propaganda in either direction. It’s harder to talk directly to Chinese people in the way that say, we have Ukrainian and Russian folks giving us their experiences on TL etc.
I don’t think it’s apathy or anything just it’s quite difficult
|
On March 06 2024 14:13 WombaT wrote:
I mean that’s part of it, in terms of a more grass roots sentiment, Western countries are intimately involved in ways with Israel, certainly Ukraine so there is more collective skin in the game, so to speak.
Add to that Israel in other ways is quite similar to a ‘Western’ nation culturally, Ukraine effectively is. Other countries in Eastern Europe have folks not just alive, but still relatively young who experienced Soviet life so of course Putin’s pseudo-revival will resonate somewhat more.
Folks only have so much bandwidth to give at the end of the day, and will likely pay more attention to things that either resonate in ways beyond pure human tragedy, or are easier to follow/get informed about.
Look I’d love to have the same debates on other topics but there’s a cultural wall one has to pass through to be informed in anything beyond a bullet points kind of level. There’s a linguistic barrier often, there’s a lack of understanding of other cultural or structural nuances.
As I freely admit I just don’t know enough to really feel all that comfortable engaging. Just taking me as an example, and I was relatively atypical in I’d read full newspapers, multiple ones daily from my mid teens. Built my familiarity with public figures in the UK, the daily goings-on and you get that intuitive sense of how publications tend to lean in how they report the news. Quickly repeated that process for US politics. Have a vague idea of wider European politics and media outlets, but less again. Less so again other Anglosphere countries like a Canada or a New Zealand/Australia.
By the time we’re talking China or Ugandan political issues well, for various aforementioned reasons it’s harder again to really be that informed at all. China is especially difficult as I find it hard to locate reportage that isn’t pretty obvious propaganda in either direction. It’s harder to talk directly to Chinese people in the way that say, we have Ukrainian and Russian folks giving us their experiences on TL etc.
I don’t think it’s apathy or anything just it’s quite difficult
I don't really think it's that hard to get informed about the latest war in Sudan or the repression of the Rohingya, as examples. There's a fairly clear line in the sand with good guys and bad guys. But other than humanitarian aid being sent there, the "levers" that the West has to pull in order to get people to stop are very limited. Sudan, for instance, barely has an economy to start with, so sanctions are far more likely to lead to mass famine (which seems inevitable in any case) than any change in either side's policy. Meanwhile sanctions on Myanmar are pointless unless you convince China and India, the major economic powers in the region, to join the sanctions, something they seem absolutely uninterested in. What is clear is that while we could maybe get our governments to do more, even our governments have limited power there.
Meanwhile, Europe was by far the biggest consumer of Russian gas, and we have centuries of history of going back and forth with Russia. It's a huge player on our continent and what they do influences us directly and we can influence them. So obviously Russia invading Ukraine is a big deal and followed more closely.
A similar situation is the case for Israel, although European influence is more limited, the US is the big power there.
This forum is dominated by Europeans and Americans. It isn't very surprising which conflicts get our attention.
|
On March 05 2024 23:45 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On March 05 2024 17:54 stilt wrote:On March 05 2024 11:27 JimmiC wrote:On March 05 2024 10:35 stilt wrote:On March 05 2024 06:43 JimmiC wrote:On March 05 2024 06:02 stilt wrote:On March 05 2024 05:01 JimmiC wrote:On March 05 2024 02:23 stilt wrote:On March 04 2024 06:34 JimmiC wrote:On March 04 2024 06:29 stilt wrote:
[quote]
It doesn't change the fact the famine is due to israeli blocus which include bombing and shoting at trucks while blocking it during inspection according to humanitarians which operate there.
Humanitarians which israeli successfully villified to the point the support from western country ceased.
There is only one responsible of this famine, negationism is bad.
Most of the aid is coming through Egypt and is being stopped because the Egyptians don't want to die or have their trucks destroyed by Hamas and the other gangs they control. Why do you keep ignoring the reality of the situation? All this info is everywhere including this thread. Israeli makes inspection on every trucks which goes on gaza including the ones which goes in Egypt, the fall of law and order is both due to starvation and what the what you call "war". The bombing and shooting by israeli force has been documented as well. Same as the cut of water since october. Multiples articles including ones I posted on this thread point those facts. Their sources being humanitarian from amnesty and wfn, a bit more serious than your "armed gangs suddently appear so no humanitarian can come". You have obvious ideological reasons to deny it, at least you deny it contrary to some who are already assuming it. I guess the truth is bothering you but really the "let's make people starve and then justify this by how they're acting while starved" is a nice raisonning for genocide. The famine didn't appear because of your armed gangs, it appeared because since 5 months there are not enough trucks.Those guardians, Associates Press and france24 links have been posted earlier. I agree with you that the over arching reason for the Famine is the war that Hamas, the government of Gaza, started with their heinous attack of Israeli citizens including women and children as well as the additional war crimes of taking hostages of Israeli citizens including women and children. But if were talking about why the trucks have slowed down to the point of famine, so short term reasons, it is not the Israeli inspections as those have happened the entire time, it is the unwillingness of the Egyptian trucks to currently enter. Nice, at least you agree there is a famine and during those times, do you agree this generates a collapse of the law and order ? Especially when the ever loving israelis would obviously kill any armed palestinian which could protect these convoys. Like any concentration camp, we have here the law of the strongest. Except your point is "the collapse of law and order" caused famine which caused "the collapse of law and order" and so on, in the end, that's all their faults, this loop doesn't work if you don't put a external cause to begin it like the israeli blocus. This article counters pretty much your loose interpretation and assessement on "it's not israelis inspections because they happened the entiere time" : https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20231222-gaza-bound-aid-trucks-endure-grueling-wait-at-borderIt was the situation in december by the way. Bombing trucks and inspection has considerably slowed the aid, it's pretty hard to deny it. Another proof come from this article that since the very beginning the aid has been reduced, it was during the time some were justifying the bombing of ambulances. https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2024/jan/19/us-food-medicine-aid-gaza-un-famine-warnings-israelSo, before the collapse of law and order the aid was severely hamped. The israeli attack on association and the suspension of funding which resulted of it is another aspect of the israeli blocus. Same goes for amnesty, here is a publication before the so called "stampede" or let's call it for what it was, the slaughter. https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2024/02/israel-defying-icj-ruling-to-prevent-genocide-by-failing-to-allow-adequate-humanitarian-aid-to-reach-gaza/As far as the north of situation in the north of gaza which is now unreachable, it is possible to circumvent the south and directly giving aid there if Israël opens his passage there but they prefer to hamper UN organization : https://www.voanews.com/a/why-isn-t-desperately-needed-aid-reaching-palestinians-in-gaza-/7499319.htmlSo no we disagree as you are denying facts. It is the armed Palestinians, better known as Hamas who is attacking the trucks. The collapse of law and order is directly due to the Hamas attack. These are not dumb people, they knew what was coming back after what they did, and basically every country in the world would have responded with force. Yes they attacked ambulances, and it has been shown that Hamas used them to transport not just hostages but also fighters and weapons. Are you aware that because of that the war crime is Hamas and no Israel? You are not allowed to attack hospitals, schools, ambulances and so on, UNLESS they are using them for war. And of course I think more Aid should be going in, it is not like I think Israel is perfect, they are far from it, especially under current leadership. The big difference between me and you is that I don't think it is 100% Israeli's fault, I see Hamas as clearly much worse than Israel is a whole host of ways. Hamas literally wants as many Palestinians to suffer and die as possible as that helps their cause. Israelis are willing to have Palestinians die and suffer to destroy Hamas. I disagree with both approaches but it is also clear which one is worse and it is magnitudes worse. I mean Israel wants none of its people to die and suffer. And I'm just talking about in Gaza right now. Hamas wants to kill every Israeli, women and children not to mention all the religions too. Yes even the Muslims because they are collaborators. I suppose you're on the conservative spectrum, at least you disagree with them, I guess that's great. Your main point was the aid couldn't come because of armed gang and not from the israeli blocus. You now bring justification to it, that's shifting the point. The "hamas is attacking trucks fact" is not what is reported in those articles which state humanitarian/un sources. Maybe those mobs has hamas elements but you have to admit even if they weren't, the mobs will exist, whether they'll use rocks or anything, the condition induced by starvation create them anyway. For example the israeli shooting didn't mention hamas members in their report, just a threatening mob. At some point the chaos has to be too much for any social cohesion to remain including the one of the hamas units which will form bands whose only preocupation is to survive. As for the ambulances... https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/feb/10/im-so-scared-please-come-hind-rajab-six-found-dead-in-gaza-12-days-after-cry-for-helpThey weren't hamas member nor they were hostages but red crescent member trying to rescue a little girl who was obstructed by her family's bodies. All of them ended up being murdered by Tsahal. Apparently that's war and "war is horrible" sure but then it appears the targeting of ambulance is pretty common. The fact there is a fog of war doesn't help with no independant journalist around, who knows many stories and crimes aren't recorded ? Maybe none, surely a lot. When I brought the ambulance case, it was to show it was credible tsahal shooted/bombed aids trucks in the past as they have done it to ambulances including at the very-very-very least one free of hamas militants and hostages. The last point you're making is about the value of palestinian life by Hamas. I won't speculate too much on it, that might be true or not... It is definetly used for the hezbollah which according to a southern christian lebanese friend is bs. But as he hates israel anyway that's not the best source, that said, western sources about it might be biaised as well. And indeed, regardless of this particular case, this argument is too much used to justify crime or war as it implies "our enemy doesn't respect life so why should we do ?" To be honest, I have reasonned as such in the past and maybe I will do again in the future, doesn't change the fact it is something to avoid, like if you're using this kind of justification, that's very likely the cause or at least the way your cause is defended is wrong. Finally, about your statement about the degree of israel responsability as a whole, the subject has been debated over and over in this thread, I have already stated my views on previous point. But from a very practical point of view, the one which should bear the most responsibility of its action on a asymetric conflict between two parties is the one with overwhelming force as he is the one with the most options at its disposition. My perspective is not "conservative", maybe the issue is split along those lines where you are from. But the MAGA and MAGA influenced we have here are also anti Israel. Being against the Jews is common for both ends of the political spectrum. I guess centrist if you had to label it though I'm not sure the point. There are lots of reports of Hamas selling aid, I think it is a fairly safe conclusion that if they are selling the aid, they have most of the guns and power that many of the gangs are Hamas or Hamas controlled. Some also could be mobs of hungry people and the ones with guns then steal it from them? I'm not sure what your argument is about Hamas upping civilian casualties, since it is their strategy is that and where their bases are indicate that. They have also been vocal (and violent) about civilians not leaving the areas where their forces are fighting. Reports of them shooting people leaving and so on. It is not in any way disputed facts. If you want people to take the facts of say the shooting at the Aid truck, you have to take the facts about Hamas. You can form opinions from there but ignoring facts that don't fit your narrative makes your narrative not only inaccurate but also not at all convincing to people who are paying attention to the facts or do not already agree with you. The inspections are also required because of all the illegal weapons being shipped in. Is the military inspecting them being overly cautious to the point of negatively effecting the civilians. You bet they are. Would almost every military do this knowing that much of the aid ending up in the hands of their combatants, almost assuredly. Acting as if Israel is the only ones that have the power to stop this is simply wrong. Hamas could have simply ended this by, not starting it. But more than that they could have offered the Hostages back way earlier. Israel has a long history of paying huge prices for the release of hostages. We will never know if just giving them back would have been enough, I think it would have. But giving them back and the political wing disavowing the terrorist wing (rather than supporting it) and the terrorists leaving Gaza would have prevented all of this. Now of course the above is not going to happen, the same way Israel was not going to let a bunch of their innocents get killed and then taken hostage (and looking more and more like then killed anyway) and not respond. Civilians, in huge numbers were bound to die after Hamas did what it did. Not because Israel is extra evil and not only because of the power imbalance but because that is what happens in urban warfare. It comes across as against one ethnicity because only that ethnicity is there (why that is, is very complicated). There are lots of articles about that if you don't like this one. Like if the US waged war on North Korea they would kill almost all Koreans, but that wouldn't be because they want to genocide Koreans it would be because that is basically all that is there. Now if they were also killing all the Koreans in America, rounding them up in camps or shooting them in the streets it would be. None of that is happening here. https://foreignpolicy.com/2024/02/14/gaza-war-israel-civilian-deaths-urban-warfare-hamas/ I mean, most conservatives are pro israeli, fox news and their moms are supporting Israël while most evangelists are totally crazy about it. Anyway, back to the subject, you choose to ignore all the reports I showcased on how israeli is heavely limiting the aid according to un/ngo envoys. You choose to even ignore israeli reports about threatening mobs which don't mention Hamas. Just like you're ignoring this basic facts and reasonning : - There are enough aid since october 7th to begin with. - Famine will then come at there are no enough aid. - As famine come as there are not enough aids, collapse of law and order begin. In conclusion, this famine is not hamas induced. Other articles about collapse of law and order : https://www.wsj.com/world/middle-east/as-israel-drives-out-hamas-lawlessness-hampers-gaza-aid-efforts-2438be11And even when there weren't this collapse of law and order, there are evidence from your own us envoy in november than not all aid was stolen by hamas, maybe they did at some times but it isn't as generalised as you make to be. https://www.reuters.com/world/us-special-envoy-no-record-hamas-blocking-or-seizing-aid-2023-11-04/So that's a lot of denial from you. For the rest of your text, it's my fault, I shouldn't have moved the goal post about the israeli blocus which generates this famine. Vengeance is not an excuse, israeli are responsible of their actions, like when you induce a famine on 2.1 millions people, it's up to you and only you and for your lastest article, there are a lot of dubious stuffs on it imo but my only comment will be the coalition didn't create a blocus which put millions in starvation. All in all, your denial is weird. Like you're making an analogy about a near extermination case of the nk people by the us not being a genocide because they don't kill koreans within their territory. I suppose you want to point out wiping gazaans wouldn't be a genocide anyway because tsahal don't murder all israeli arabs. So all is good right ? Why are you afraid of denying this induced starvation despite the numerous proofs ? It is undisputable, I don't get it. Bringing all sort of justifications to something and then denying it in front of evidences, it doesn't make sense. I'm not denying any of the awful incidents you have posted, they happened. I'm explaining how they are terrible acts of a terrible war and basically why the war crimes were created. The issue is that for them to be war crimes both sides need to follow the rules and when one side does not, which is clearly Hamas who break basically every single one, it leads to the other side being able to target what they normally wouldn't. An example would be hospitals where in normal wars neither side is allowed to attack the other, but once one side sets up bases and stores weapons in them, they become a legitimate target as awful as that sounds. Most of the stuff you call genocidal is in reality just how awful war is, especially in a war where all the gloves are off because one side refuses to follow the rules allowing the other to do the same. I've said this who knows how many times but I think it is easier to be ragey than to think about what I'm actually saying. Israel is no genocidal, they are completely callous in their attempts to rid the world of Hamas. In my mind that is still really bad, that you all think that means I support the IDF because you don't think I hate them enough is pretty disturbing.
Of course you do as you're denying a blocus which is actively starving more than two millions in spite of all the proofs compiled.
And israel-palestinian colonization bring more attention because it is a colonial conflict between colonized and a western power. If that's so irrelevant to you, why are you constantly denying basic facts largely reported by the press, UN and ngo like the israeli blocus inducing famine ?
|
@Cerebrate1: The fact that you keep repeating that Gaza was given 'full control of their territory' is honestly infuriating. It's a tiny strip of land that is entirely incapable of self-sufficiency, and Israel has demolished the only airport they had and prevents any air or sea access to the Strip; their land borders are also controlled by foreign powers. They are and always have been completely at the mercy of Israel; there's a reason Gaza has been called the biggest open air prison in the world.
|
On March 06 2024 01:54 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On March 05 2024 15:01 Cerebrate1 wrote:On March 04 2024 16:03 Acrofales wrote:On March 04 2024 13:36 Cerebrate1 wrote:On March 04 2024 12:38 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 04 2024 12:12 Cerebrate1 wrote:On March 04 2024 05:39 Gorsameth wrote:On March 04 2024 04:20 JimmiC wrote:On March 04 2024 02:49 Gorsameth wrote:On March 04 2024 02:07 JimmiC wrote:
Do people here think the Israelis wanting a list of the names of the hostages that are still alive as unreasonable? If so why? A very reasonable demand, but also understandable why Hamas doesn't want to give that if the news is, as somewhat expected I believe, bad. Because the possibility of the missing hostages being alive is a serious bargaining ship. So why your earlier completely negative comment about Israel when it is your opinion that Israel is asking for something reasonable and Hamas wants to negotiate in bad faith because the truth is bad for them? Israel has made it very clear the only acceptable outcome of this conflict is the complete destruction of Hamas. Its an understandable position from the point of Israel but you can't have a negotiation with an opponent when your position is that no matter what, they have to die. And yes Hamas wants to kill Israel but that isn't their position in these negotiations, they will settle for Israel withdrawing for now. Israel has made it clear they won't settle for anything less. Nothing Hamas can do, outside of shooting themselves in the head, is going to get Israel to stop. Hamas has basically no agency in whether or not a cease fire happens, if we assume that "shoot yourself" is not a reasonable demand to make of someone. I want this war to end, I want the Palestinian people to stop being stuck in the middle of a warzone and getting slaughtered while their houses and infrastructure are bombed and their land is taken from them. And that is 100% on Israel, because they know that if they let up now and allow a cease fire there is going to be tremendous pressure on them to keep that cease fire going and not assault Rafah. Their only concern is kicking out Hamas and they don't care that they have to demolish a city filled to bursting with refugees that they (Israel) themselves drove there when they destroyed the rest of Gaza. To come back to your question. No Israel is not being reasonable. Yes asking for the hostage names is reasonable, but I highly highly doubt that that is all Israel is demanding in exchange for a cease fire because, again, they have made it very clear publicly that they will not stop until Hamas is gone. Destruction of an organization is not the same thing as the death of all of it's members. When Germany and Japan surrendered in WW2, the vast majority of participating members of their regimes were not executed. However their organizations were dismantled and replaced (with organizations that served their people better in the long run.) That's what Israel wants to do. Dismantle and replace Hamas with a government that won't continue to radicalize it's population and constantly start up pointless brutal wars. Hamas has to be more radical than the Nazis and Imperial Japan to not see surrender as an option. The belief that the government of Hamas is what "radicalized the population" and not Israel's illegal occupation of Palestine and Israel's brutal subjugation of Palestinians is part of why so many people rightfully have so little faith in Israel's "day after plan". If Israel wants to dismantle and replace a government with one that won't radicalize Palestinians they can focus on their own. There are so many things wrong with this post that I don't have time to deal with it all. But on one foot, I'll point out that the one place on Earth where Palestinians have the most self governance, the most self determination, the closest thing to a country they have ever had, was Gaza from 2005. Israel unilaterally removed their entire military, forcefully evicted all Israeli settlers, and pulled all the way back to 1967 borders (all the things people claim will solve all the problems). Instead of creating a utopia though, it led to, well, all the violence and destruction that has come out of Gaza since, including some 5 wars, and the most radicalized group of Palestinians around. Yet, in terms of oppression and causes for their violence, Hamas always points to things happening outside of Gaza as justification for their acts. (Presumably because a restriction on weapon imports wasn't a great rallying cry.) Gaza wasn't a state, it was the equivalent of a bantustan in South Africa, and served a similar purpose. A bantustan isn't autonomy. It's a tried and tested way for an apartheid regime to fake giving control to the regional power, while de facto maintaining full control. Gaza had self-governance, but had no power over its imports or exports, and was thus entirely dependent on Israel for its economy. It also wasn't recognized by the UN, because US keeps vetoing that on behalf of Israel, meaning Gazans couldn't really travel outside Gaza except with Israel's explicit permission, they couldn't effectively determine their own foreign policy. Unsurprisingly, just as in South Africa, the creation of a bantustan didn't lead to peace. + Show Spoiler +Gaza is not a full fledged state for a few technical reasons, but for most intents and purposes (at least regarding creating the living conditions for locals and the like), acts like one. Hamas had complete direct control of all government processes within Gaza (besides the ones they let the UNRWA pay for). Israel didn't have officials in Gaza telling people what to do, nor do they have the heads of Hamas in their pockets like SA had with the Bantustans. Israel doesn't take taxes in Gaza (unless you count income tax on the handful of workers who worked in Israel). In fact, Israel gives tax revenue to the PA, who give some to Hamas to run their government. Regarding foreign affairs, they have Observer State status at the UN, which is equivalent to what the Vatican has. The Pope manages foreign affairs just fine without being able to vote on silly UN resolutions, and so do Palestinians. Check out all the countries they have embassies or missions at, because it's significantly more than a lot of other nations around the world have: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_diplomatic_missions_of_the_State_of_PalestineSo really, the main thing Israel had influence over was imports and exports. You can't fault Israel for having control of goods entering and exiting their own borders as all countries do that. And in fact, people don't seem to fault Egypt for having those exact same controls on their border to Gaza . You could critique Israel for filtering imports at sea, but they let pretty much everything through by 2023 (heck, they apparently didn't even do a very good job and stopping full on guns from getting through based on how well stocked every neighborhood seems to be in Gaza). Gazans had ipads and the like, it's not like nothing was getting through. They probably did a great job, maybe the best possible job, the problem is it an impossible task. I see the same thing with the "war" on drugs trillions spent in all sorts of ways to stop the flow of drugs and the result is more drugs in the US than ever before. Then the real frustrating part is that instead of thinking this is not working a huge percentage of people think they just need to spend more and go harder. The only actual way for things to get better is to attack the actual root cause of the problem. Whether that is addiction or extremism. With addiction we know the root cause which is lack of connection and hopelessness. For many drugs we can be fairly successful with rehabilitation and very successful in prevention. We don't do it mind you but we basically know how. With extremism I would suggest the root causes are similar. Before Oct. 7th Hamas was not that popular and thought of as a corrupt organization. If you had leadership that built up the more positive opposition and Palestinians lives better with much of that money spent of "Security" it might not have happened. Instead you had leadership who propped up the worst of the worst to justify their actions and spending on security. Post 7th I don't have a great answer on what Israel should have done. But I am sure that this was not it, the cost is way to high and it is very likely that Israeli's in reality are less safer and secure than they were before.
You're totally right. Lack of connection and hopelessness play a huge role in radicalization. Which is why bombing the fuck out of Palestinians is not likely to be any more successful than the ham-fisted 'War of Drugs' in America. You need to address the root causes. Stopping their oppression would be a great start.
|
Cerebrate coming out swinging. So now the real reason why there's so much support for the recently invaded Ukraine and the long-time oppressed/genocided Uyghurs and Tibetans is of course to weaken Russia and China. What a fantastic geopolitical opportunity to destroy other world powers and instate US hegemony on the world stage!
Reminds me of a certain propagandist in a different thread. Same exact school of thought.
Denying that Gaza and the West bank were handed no more than partial autonomy for many generations. Skipping over Israel's continuation of the war crime that is stealing occupied land. Ignoring the fact that Israel has long been following a policy of military occupation not only in Gaza and the West bank but also in other surrounding countries.
Giving away your game so easily won't help you receive support around here, Cerebrate.
|
It is so weird how JimmiC manages to constantly post in a way that totally feels (and to be honest reads) like he has a very strong bias for Israel whilst then always retracting somewhat somehow. It really leaves me dumbfounded.
I connect many different views to certain names. Salazarz feels Israel is a big culprit (whilst at some times not also stating Hamas is horrible but ofc he feels that way). MagicPowers is also definitely not shying away from critique towards Israel/IDF. WombaT feels pretty balanced. Cerebrate1 is extremely pro Israel and dreams up stuff like "Gazans/Palestine" had a window where they were completely free and could have tinkered up a prospering Palestine if "they" only wanted. That is so complicated and has so many factors that matter btw.. (what an insanely dumb statement from him).
But for basically everyone here I feel like I understand what they post and i can deduce from the posts what their overall thoughts are on this issue.
To me it feels like JimmiC is basically every post siding with Israel and how tough it is what they need to do and how reasonable it is and how bad Hamas ist and then kinda retracting that every 2nd post and saying he is the bigges nethanyau and Israel critic out there. Really tiresome and confusing.
|
It's not difficult to learn about Israel's war crimes before and after October 7. Every claim on Wikipedia can be traced to its source, and when a source isn't known to be credible the same report can often be found on credible outlets.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_war_crimes
And this is only military action. On top of that Israel's administration instated policies that actively undermined political stability just in Gaza alone, as others have shown plenty of times.
|
I mean in a way one has to appreciate the fact that many here don't have the stance "IDF is doing horrible things and Hamas is doing horrible things; I am unsure who is precisely to blame how much but it is a back and forth that seemingly won't stop" because then the topic would indeed come to a rather fast halt.
Then again I feel this is the most objective, true take.
Ofc it is more nuanced.
Let me ask another question: I recently heard a lot about these (partly alleged) rape stories from Hamas (mainly?) during Oct 7. So I am not sure to what extent this is true - but even if it were entirely true can anyone explain to me how this would change something fundamental?
Like would that make the "collateral damage" less problematic? Would that make you feel better that millions get punished and hundred thousands replaced and thousand over thousands innocent young human beings killed?
I know this might sound weird from the get-go but for me this does not substantially change things. And if it does for you or the average "western individual" I really have to question our sanity in terms of large scale geopolitical, war, genocidal stuff, power balance, ect..
Like I legit don't see how morally you can be more outraged about individuals raping someone vs. an entity at least partly indiscriminitaley killing countless of innocent children.. For me to be more outraged about one or the other is weird to begin with.. but it feels like western/israeli propaganda works that way?
Newspapers/online sources bringing up the "rape stuff" and the average/stupid westerner is like "yeah now I guess bombing ALL of Palestine from the face of the earth is ofc legitimate, let's fucking go"
Like are you kidding me? 
|
@ FN
To address this:
"Let me ask another question: I recently heard a lot about these (partly alleged) rape stories from Hamas (mainly?) during Oct 7. So I am not sure to what extent this is true - but even if it were entirely true can anyone explain to me how this would change something fundamental?
Like would that make the "collateral damage" less problematic? Would that make you feel better that millions get punished and hundred thousands replaced and thousand over thousands innocent young human beings killed?"
I've noticed a trend in this thread of people bringing up an alleged widespread support for Hamas among Palestinians whenever the matter of retaliation for Hamas' actions comes up, basically trying to blame Palestinians as a collective group for Hamas' crimes in Israel. It's an attempt to justify the crime of collective punishment by the IDF in Gaza, because otherwise people would have to admit that Israel has gone too far several months ago.
Then people pivot to the other argument that Israel "needs to be secure" (ignoring that Israel has been secure since late October) which means "there's no other way to stop the enemy" (which also happens to be Hamas' reasoning, only flipped around) and thus we have to just accept that "horrible things happen in war" such as bombing refugee camps and hospitals, mass starvation, a number of war crimes, and so on and so forth (yet again also Hamas' reasoning, only flipped around).
But the worst is this: all of these reasons and rationalizations rely on the dehumanization of Palestinians. If we assume that Palestinian lives are worth as much as Israeli lives, the equation completely flips on its head and Israel's continuation of the war is strictly an abhorent evil and nothing less than that. There's no rationalization to get around that fact.
Palestinians have been dehumanized, and that's how the war is justified. It's all about supremacy.
The reasoning is that Hamas has previously dehumanized Israelis, therefore it's ok for Israel to do the same in return and dehumanize Palestinians. Evil is being justified by another evil. Two wrongs make a right.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
