|
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. |
Hamas didn't appear because Iran paid off some random dudes. It appeared because Israel kept fucking killing Palestinians.
Israeli government was making these statements for decades, long before October 7 was a thing. It's really no secret at all. Heck, Netanyahu said on record that Hamas is the most convenient tool Israel has to prevent the creation of an independent Palestinian state. But you know, they totally desire peace, if only Hamas would just stop, right.
Asking what Israel should do after Oct 7 is like asking what should have Germany done after the barbaric and brutal UK pilots started bombing their cities. How about, I don't know, not starting a fucking campaign of death and destruction in the first place? It's so weird you insist that Israel has no choice but to escalate when their entire policy in Palestine has been to escalate, escalate, escalate -- and which has never meaningfully reduced violence before. Like, why don't u ask what should Palestinians do after Nakba, or after the first Intifada, or after the second Intifada, or after the countless numbers of air strikes and bombings and arrests and other examples of IDF brutality? What sovereign country would accept those things? Oh, but Palestine is not a sovereign country so they should just sit down and take it, or what?
How is Israel 'gone' from Gaza? They don't have control of their borders, they don't have land or sea connections to anywhere, they don't have sufficient food production, they rely entirely on foreign supply for medicine, utilities and so on, they don't have anywhere nearly enough jobs, they don't have enough of anything -- on top of that, they're getting bombed and shot at on a near-daily basis even before the last years' attacks. Is that really your idea of being left to their own devices?
Yes, Hamas is a problem -- but Israel has been doing a great job at perpetuating their very existence, and ensuring there's a never ending flow of very dedicated recruits for them and their ilk. You seriously think that just killing more people is going to get you to a better place at some point?
|
On October 12 2024 18:48 Salazarz wrote:
Hamas didn't appear because Iran paid off some random dudes. It appeared because Israel kept fucking killing Palestinians.
Israeli government was making these statements for decades, long before October 7 was a thing. It's really no secret at all. Heck, Netanyahu said on record that Hamas is the most convenient tool Israel has to prevent the creation of an independent Palestinian state. But you know, they totally desire peace, if only Hamas would just stop, right.
Asking what Israel should do after Oct 7 is like asking what should have Germany done after the barbaric and brutal UK pilots started bombing their cities. How about, I don't know, not starting a fucking campaign of death and destruction in the first place? It's so weird you insist that Israel has no choice but to escalate when their entire policy in Palestine has been to escalate, escalate, escalate -- and which has never meaningfully reduced violence before. Like, why don't u ask what should Palestinians do after Nakba, or after the first Intifada, or after the second Intifada, or after the countless numbers of air strikes and bombings and arrests and other examples of IDF brutality? What sovereign country would accept those things? Oh, but Palestine is not a sovereign country so they should just sit down and take it, or what?
How is Israel 'gone' from Gaza? They don't have control of their borders, they don't have land or sea connections to anywhere, they don't have sufficient food production, they rely entirely on foreign supply for medicine, utilities and so on, they don't have anywhere nearly enough jobs, they don't have enough of anything -- on top of that, they're getting bombed and shot at on a near-daily basis even before the last years' attacks. Is that really your idea of being left to their own devices?
Yes, Hamas is a problem -- but Israel has been doing a great job at perpetuating their very existence, and ensuring there's a never ending flow of very dedicated recruits for them and their ilk. You seriously think that just killing more people is going to get you to a better place at some point?
What are you talking about? The period of the unilateral de-settlement in 05 and Hamas' ascension was characterized as relatively calm. So what exactly do you mean by "Israel kept fucking killing Palestinians"?
And yes, Iran financed Hamas since its beginning from 1990 onward as a resistance movement. I think you need to up your history knowledge on this. The financial and military support increased after the second Intifada, before Hamas' control over Gaza.
Can you quote official statements by the Israeli government that undermine your claim that it denies a two-state-solution?
What exactly in Gaza constitutes an escalation that would call for a response like 7th of October?
No, I never said that Palestinians should take it. I think the Nakba was a huge injustice and it was ok for them to fight back.
But that was nearly 80 years ago. October 7th happened last year, without any prior escalation. It was unprecedented in many aspects.
So here: you had me say Palestinians had the right to fight back. Now can you answer what a sovereign nation should do when its civilians were targeted deliberately, you faced unprecedented attacks since the foundation of your country 80 years ago and the invading force wants your country eliminated?
Are you saying that Hamas was justified in carrying out the attack the way it did, deliberately targeting Israeli and international civilians?
"they're getting bombed and shot at on a near-daily basis even before the last years' attacks."
Where is the evidence for that notion?
And they don't have those things, because Hamas took over after the Gazans were left on their own. That is why all the things you mentioned are in place. Do you know how much aid was flowing into Gaza daily before October 7th for years?
The problem is Hamas and that it doesn't give a shit about the people living there.
Killing people at this point is necessary in my opinion and it always happens in wars (though the IDF is acting immensely commendable according to the civilian casualty rate and the human shield usage by Hamas as I pointed out several times in this thread).
October 7th was too unprecedented and too much targeted at civilians. On top, the nearly daily bombardment in the north and the displacement left Israel no choice. If you disagree and you have alternatives, I am happy to discuss them.
And if it is your point of argumentation that Hamas is only in place because of Israeli policies... how is the PA doing much better in the West Bank under similar circumstances?
|
Norway28440 Posts
What's the calm period exactly? The three year period between 2005 and 2008? That's really not long enough to heal wounds, you know. 2000-2005 is the period of the second intifada - where roughly 1000 Israelis and 3k palestinians died. in 2008-2009 there's the gaza war, where 13 israelis and 1400 palestinians died. In 2014 we see 73 Israelis and 2300 palestinians killed. 2009-2014 was relatively peaceful with only a few hundred dead and 12000+ wounded, but I mean, from the palestinian side, they've basically experienced october 7th casualties on multiple occasions the past 25 years. And that's just the amount of people killed - add to it the discrimination and injuries and the conflict is even more lopsided.
Also October 7th numbers are roughly 700 civilians+250 hostages and 373 security forces killed. That percentage of civilian to soldier is no worse than what Israel is managing. Tbh I'm not really looking to engage but if the argument is that October 7th was so abhorrent that it forced Israel's hand and violence is the only possible response to such a happening then it's hard for me to understand the point of view that October 7th is the start of something rather than a response.
|
On October 12 2024 19:02 PremoBeats wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2024 18:48 Salazarz wrote:
Hamas didn't appear because Iran paid off some random dudes. It appeared because Israel kept fucking killing Palestinians.
Israeli government was making these statements for decades, long before October 7 was a thing. It's really no secret at all. Heck, Netanyahu said on record that Hamas is the most convenient tool Israel has to prevent the creation of an independent Palestinian state. But you know, they totally desire peace, if only Hamas would just stop, right.
Asking what Israel should do after Oct 7 is like asking what should have Germany done after the barbaric and brutal UK pilots started bombing their cities. How about, I don't know, not starting a fucking campaign of death and destruction in the first place? It's so weird you insist that Israel has no choice but to escalate when their entire policy in Palestine has been to escalate, escalate, escalate -- and which has never meaningfully reduced violence before. Like, why don't u ask what should Palestinians do after Nakba, or after the first Intifada, or after the second Intifada, or after the countless numbers of air strikes and bombings and arrests and other examples of IDF brutality? What sovereign country would accept those things? Oh, but Palestine is not a sovereign country so they should just sit down and take it, or what?
How is Israel 'gone' from Gaza? They don't have control of their borders, they don't have land or sea connections to anywhere, they don't have sufficient food production, they rely entirely on foreign supply for medicine, utilities and so on, they don't have anywhere nearly enough jobs, they don't have enough of anything -- on top of that, they're getting bombed and shot at on a near-daily basis even before the last years' attacks. Is that really your idea of being left to their own devices?
Yes, Hamas is a problem -- but Israel has been doing a great job at perpetuating their very existence, and ensuring there's a never ending flow of very dedicated recruits for them and their ilk. You seriously think that just killing more people is going to get you to a better place at some point?
What are you talking about? The period of the unilateral de-settlement in 05 and Hamas' ascension was characterized as relatively calm. So what exactly do you mean by "Israel kept fucking killing Palestinians"? And yes, Iran financed Hamas since its beginning from 1990 onward as a resistance movement. I think you need to up your history knowledge on this. The financial and military support increased after the second Intifada, before Hamas' control over Gaza. Can you quote official statements by the Israeli government that undermine your claim that it denies a two-state-solution? What exactly in Gaza constitutes an escalation that would call for a response like 7th of October? No, I never said that Palestinians should take it. I think the Nakba was a huge injustice and it was ok for them to fight back. But that was nearly 80 years ago. October 7th happened last year, without any prior escalation. It was unprecedented in many aspects. So here: you had me say Palestinians had the right to fight back. Now can you answer what a sovereign nation should do when its civilians were targeted deliberately, you faced unprecedented attacks since the foundation of your country 80 years ago and the invading force wants your country eliminated? Are you saying that Hamas was justified in carrying out the attack the way it did, deliberately targeting Israeli and international civilians? "they're getting bombed and shot at on a near-daily basis even before the last years' attacks." Where is the evidence for that notion? And they don't have those things, because Hamas took over after the Gazans were left on their own. That is why all the things you mentioned are in place. Do you know how much aid was flowing into Gaza daily before October 7th for years? The problem is Hamas and that it doesn't give a shit about the people living there. Killing people at this point is necessary in my opinion and it always happens in wars (though the IDF is acting immensely commendable according to the civilian casualty rate and the human shield usage by Hamas as I pointed out several times in this thread). October 7th was too unprecedented and too much targeted at civilians. On top, the nearly daily bombardment in the north and the displacement left Israel no choice. If you disagree and you have alternatives, I am happy to discuss them. And if it is your point of argumentation that Hamas is only in place because of Israeli policies... how is the PA doing much better in the West Bank under similar circumstances?
You're actually completely detached from reality. You keep talking about Israel 'having no choice' but the 'daily bombardments' and 'violent terrorist attacks' from Hamas & their ilk are nowhere remotely comparable to the amount of death and destruction Israel has been causing in Palestine for many decades. It is incredibly well documented and honestly if you can't be bothered to educate yourself enough to know this there's really no point talking to you any further. This is just a ceaseless stream of Israel's propaganda nonsense.
|
On October 12 2024 19:31 Liquid`Drone wrote:
What's the calm period exactly? The three year period between 2005 and 2008? That's really not long enough to heal wounds, you know. 2000-2005 is the period of the second intifada - where roughly 1000 Israelis and 3k palestinians died. in 2008-2009 there's the gaza war, where 13 israelis and 1400 palestinians died. In 2014 we see 73 Israelis and 2300 palestinians killed. 2009-2014 was relatively peaceful with only a few hundred dead and 12000+ wounded, but I mean, from the palestinian side, they've basically experienced october 7th casualties on multiple occasions the past 25 years. And that's just the amount of people killed - add to it the discrimination and injuries and the conflict is even more lopsided.
Also October 7th numbers are roughly 700 civilians+250 hostages and 373 security forces killed. That percentage of civilian to soldier is no worse than what Israel is managing. Tbh I'm not really looking to engage but if the argument is that October 7th was so abhorrent that it forced Israel's hand and violence is the only possible response to such a happening then it's hard for me to understand the point of view that October 7th is the start of something rather than a response.
I won't argue against the conflict being lopsided as it obviously is.
Hence, I call for the responsibility of the losing side. As the losing side needs to call quits and not re-engage with further escalation. Else, the discrepancies grow ever bigger, that is a given as a stronger force won't let themselves be attacked without retaliation.
Even comparing the numbers you posted (more specifically 766:373 = 2,05 and on top the hostages with the casualty rate of 24k:17k = 1,41 ) the IDF fares a little better, but you are right: the difference is not that big.
The controversy of terrorist attacks is the deliberate intent, while the civilians in the IDF-count are byproducts of the urban warfare and Hamas human shield tactics. The IDF's number would be much better, if Hamas wouldn't put their bases under/near mosques, schools and hospitals.
My overall point is that Israel could not have let 7th of October and 8th of October unanswered. No country could. But my interest is mostly in potential solutions and pointing out that there is no Israeli enforced famine and how Israel is managing a commendable rate of casualties in comparison to other conflict zones.
Do you think that my potential solution is unreasonable? If so, what part of it?
@Salazarz
In my opinion it is your side that does not address facts and numbers (civilian casualty rate, famine issue) and is only seeing this issue from an anti-Israel perspective and thus detached from reality.
The assymetry in death and destruction is irrelevant when the weaker side does not give up and keeps coming back with attacks like October 7th. The asymmetry will only grow bigger, hence it is their responsibility to stop.
You didn't put forth quotes to undermine your claims.
You didn't answer what what a sovereign nation should do when its civilians were targeted deliberately, the country faced unprecedented attacks since the foundation of the country 80 years ago and the invading force wants the country eliminated.
You didn't answer if you think that Hamas was justified in carrying out the attack the way it did, deliberately targeting Israeli and international civilians.
You are ignoring the influence of Iran which wants to destroy Israel's existence and you further made claims that it wasn't financing Hamas since over 3 decades, which is utterly false.
You claimed that Hamas is only in place because of Israeli policies, yet you can't explain why the West Bank which faces similar circumstances is doing much better.
In my opinion, the reason why most of you anti-Israel guys abort the discussion sooner or later is because you don't have answers to these questions that invalidate your point of view. But instead of adapting and ask yourself these questions I pose, you fall into cognitive dissonance and repeat the same narrative over and over.
It is obvious that Iran doesn't give two shits about the Palestinian population and neither does Hamas. Arab Muslims have a better life under Israeli governance than in Iran, the West Bank and Gaza.
Has Israel once declared that it denies a two-state-solution like Iran, Hamas and Hezbollah declared on several occasions or wrote in their charter that Israel is illegitimate?
Do you think Israel as a state is legitimate?
|
Alright, that's enough lies and propaganda. Back to ignoring this thread until Premo decides to disappear for a few weeks again.
|
On October 12 2024 20:43 Magic Powers wrote:
Alright, that's enough lies and propaganda. Back to ignoring this thread until Premo decides to disappear for a few weeks again.
I never disappeared for weeks, but I mostly engage on weekends, as otherwise I don't have time for this.
But feel free to point out the "lies and propaganda".
I pointed out the "lies and propaganda" - or no, wait - I simply call it misinformation as I don't want to attribute motif, several times without you coming back.
I seriously wonder how you all rationalize these things. Do you simply ignore the facts and numbers I posted ad nauseam, as Nebuchad would put it?
|
On October 12 2024 20:30 PremoBeats wrote:
@Salazarz
In my opinion it is your side that does not address facts and numbers (civilian casualty rate, famine issue) and is only seeing this issue from an anti-Israel perspective and thus detached from reality.
The assywmety in death and destruction is irrelevant when the weaker side does not give up and keeps coming back with attacks like October 7th. The asymmetry will only grow bigger, hence it is their responsibility to stop.
So in other words, might makes right, and as long as you can keep your own casualties to a minimum, it doesn't matter how many people you're slaughtering and radicalizing, the beatings shall continue until morale improves? Great example of progressive democratic liberal thinking right there, mate.
On October 12 2024 20:30 PremoBeats wrote:You didn't put forth quotes to undermine your claims.
I don't see you quoting any sources for the bullshit you keep spewing, either. The difference being, things I'm talking about are easily googled, things you speak of only show up in Israeli propaganda media because they aren't real.
On October 12 2024 20:30 PremoBeats wrote:You didn't answer what what a sovereign nation should do when its civilians were targeted deliberately, the country faced unprecedented attacks since the foundation of the country 80 years ago and the invading force wants the country eliminated.
I mean, they have supposedly the best intelligence agencies in the world. Infiltrate and target the leadership, sources of funding and weapons, ain't nobody gonna have a problem with that. Slaughtering 50,000 people? Yeah nah dawg, that ain't okay. Also, the idea that the attacks they face are 'unprecedented' is pants over head idiotic seeing as, you know, the very people they are oppressing have been facing far more brutal and destructive attacks for longer. It's also kind of weird that you think Hamas are an 'invading force' because I haven't seen an invasion into Israel for quite a long time now but maybe you can uhh provide quotes and sources that you like to talk about so much?
On October 12 2024 20:30 PremoBeats wrote:You didn't answer if you think that Hamas was justified in carrying out the attack the way it did, deliberately targeting Israeli and international civilians.
Because it's a fucking stupid question, obviously they're not 'justified' in killing civilians just like Israel isn't 'justified' in killing civilians, journalists, aid workers etc. Hasn't stopped them from doing it for decades, though, and I don't see you having an issue with that which is kind of weird but hey, you're clearly not biased and just being totes real and down with the truth right.
On October 12 2024 20:30 PremoBeats wrote:You are ignoring the influence of Iran which wants to destroy Israel's existence and you further made claims that it wasn't financing Hamas since over 3 decades, which is utterly false.
When did I say that Iran isn't supporting Hamas? What is it with you and making things up? As for Iran wanting to 'destroy Israel's existence', well I want a billion dollars but it ain't happening either so ehh, whatever I guess? Realistically, Iran could have had a functioning nuclear bomb years ago, and they certainly could have used it to 'destroy Israel's existence' so I guess they aren't all that all-in on the idea. Anyway, what does that have to do with Israel occupying Palestinian territories and killing Palestinian people?
On October 12 2024 20:30 PremoBeats wrote:You claimed that Hamas is only in place because of Israeli policies, yet you can't explain why the West Bank which faces similar circumstances is doing much better.
Because West Bank actually has jobs and at least slightly more normal living conditions and a chance for a normal life for its people, whereas Gaza is quite literally an open air prison. Gaza & West Bank really aren't very similar at all, and if anything, West Bank is great evidence that the problem isn't with Palestinians 'hating' Israel or Iran or whatever bullshit but rather the fact that people in Gaza literally have nothing to live for so they choose to die fighting against those they see responsible instead.
On October 12 2024 20:30 PremoBeats wrote:In my opinion, the reason why most of you anti-Israel guys abort the discussion sooner or later is because you don't have answers to these questions that invalidate your point of view.
Nah, it's because reading the same utterly bullshit arguments and answering the same utterly bullshit 'questions' gets tiresome and on top of that seeing people justify mass murder and ethnic cleansing honestly just pisses me off. Nothing you wrote invalidates my point of view in any way, because the things you write are almost entirely made up.
On October 12 2024 20:30 PremoBeats wrote:But instead of adapting and ask yourself these questions I pose, you fall into cognitive dissonance and repeat the same narrative over and over.
Right, it's cognitive dissonance to be against ethnic cleansing, mass murder, and apartheid.
On October 12 2024 20:30 PremoBeats wrote:It is obvious that Iran doesn't give two shits about the Palestinian population and neither does Hamas. Arab Muslims have a better life under Israeli governance than in Iran, the West Bank and Gaza.
This is what just about every oppressor and colonizer has ever said. "Your backwards peoples are better off as servants of our enlightened society, and if you disagree with that we're going to kill you because we know better so bend the knee." Arab Muslims deserve to choose whether they want to live under Israeli governance or their own, and they have made it abundantly clear that they would rather find their own way. Not to mention that Israel doesn't actually want to absorb those people either, since that would threaten the Jewish majority of their precious apartheid ethnonstate.
On October 12 2024 20:30 PremoBeats wrote:Has Israel one declared that it denies a two-state-solution like Iran, Hamas and Hezbollah declared on several occasions or wrote in their charter that Israel is illegitimate?
Israel literally throws a hissy fit whenever anyone suggests that Palestine is a sovereign state. Obviously they do not consider Palestine to be 'legitimate', what the fuck are you even on about with this shit seriously.
On October 12 2024 20:30 PremoBeats wrote:Do you think Israel as a state is legitimate?
Sure, counter question, do you think Israel is not a fascist, apartheid, colonizer state?
Btw, you don't have to answer this last one, it's seriously not interesting at all 'discussing' these things with you since you've been repeating the same nonsense for about 50 posts already in this thread.
some quotes for you, since you keep saying you want quotes:
https://www.timesofisrael.com/pointing-to-hamass-little-state-netanyahu-touts-role-blocking-2-state-solution/
Netanyahu: I’m proud that I prevented the establishment of a Palestinian state
https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/israel-palestinians-netanyahu-two-state-solution-1.7087705
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says he has informed the United States that he opposes the establishment of a Palestinian state as part of any postwar scenario
He said Israel "must have security control over the entire territory west of the Jordan River."
So uhh, you want to tell me more how Israel is totally for peace and totally doesn't reject the idea of a Palestinian state?
|
On October 12 2024 20:50 Salazarz wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2024 20:30 PremoBeats wrote:
@Salazarz
In my opinion it is your side that does not address facts and numbers (civilian casualty rate, famine issue) and is only seeing this issue from an anti-Israel perspective and thus detached from reality.
The assywmety in death and destruction is irrelevant when the weaker side does not give up and keeps coming back with attacks like October 7th. The asymmetry will only grow bigger, hence it is their responsibility to stop. So in other words, might makes right, and as long as you can keep your own casualties to a minimum, it doesn't matter how many people you're slaughtering and radicalizing, the beatings shall continue until morale improves? Great example of progressive democratic liberal thinking right there, mate. Show nested quote +On October 12 2024 20:30 PremoBeats wrote:You didn't put forth quotes to undermine your claims. I don't see you quoting any sources for the bullshit you keep spewing, either. The difference being, things I'm talking about are easily googled, things you speak of only show up in Israeli propaganda media because they aren't real. Show nested quote +On October 12 2024 20:30 PremoBeats wrote:You didn't answer what what a sovereign nation should do when its civilians were targeted deliberately, the country faced unprecedented attacks since the foundation of the country 80 years ago and the invading force wants the country eliminated. I mean, they have supposedly the best intelligence agencies in the world. Infiltrate and target the leadership, sources of funding and weapons, ain't nobody gonna have a problem with that. Slaughtering 50,000 people? Yeah nah dawg, that ain't okay. Also, the idea that the attacks they face are 'unprecedented' is pants over head idiotic seeing as, you know, the very people they are oppressing have been facing far more brutal and destructive attacks for longer. It's also kind of weird that you think Hamas are an 'invading force' because I haven't seen an invasion into Israel for quite a long time now but maybe you can uhh provide quotes and sources that you like to talk about so much? Show nested quote +On October 12 2024 20:30 PremoBeats wrote:You didn't answer if you think that Hamas was justified in carrying out the attack the way it did, deliberately targeting Israeli and international civilians. Because it's a fucking stupid question, obviously they're not 'justified' in killing civilians just like Israel isn't 'justified' in killing civilians, journalists, aid workers etc. Hasn't stopped them from doing it for decades, though, and I don't see you having an issue with that which is kind of weird but hey, you're clearly not biased and just being totes real and down with the truth right. Show nested quote +On October 12 2024 20:30 PremoBeats wrote:You are ignoring the influence of Iran which wants to destroy Israel's existence and you further made claims that it wasn't financing Hamas since over 3 decades, which is utterly false. When did I say that Iran isn't supporting Hamas? What is it with you and making things up? As for Iran wanting to 'destroy Israel's existence', well I want a billion dollars but it ain't happening either so ehh, whatever I guess? Realistically, Iran could have had a functioning nuclear bomb years ago, and they certainly could have used it to 'destroy Israel's existence' so I guess they aren't all that all-in on the idea. Anyway, what does that have to do with Israel occupying Palestinian territories and killing Palestinian people? Show nested quote +On October 12 2024 20:30 PremoBeats wrote:You claimed that Hamas is only in place because of Israeli policies, yet you can't explain why the West Bank which faces similar circumstances is doing much better. Because West Bank actually has jobs and at least slightly more normal living conditions and a chance for a normal life for its people, whereas Gaza is quite literally an open air prison. Gaza & West Bank really aren't very similar at all, and if anything, West Bank is great evidence that the problem isn't with Palestinians 'hating' Israel or Iran or whatever bullshit but rather the fact that people in Gaza literally have nothing to live for so they choose to die fighting against those they see responsible instead. Show nested quote +On October 12 2024 20:30 PremoBeats wrote:In my opinion, the reason why most of you anti-Israel guys abort the discussion sooner or later is because you don't have answers to these questions that invalidate your point of view. Nah, it's because reading the same utterly bullshit arguments and answering the same utterly bullshit 'questions' gets tiresome and on top of that seeing people justify mass murder and ethnic cleansing honestly just pisses me off. Nothing you wrote invalidates my point of view in any way, because the things you write are almost entirely made up. Show nested quote +On October 12 2024 20:30 PremoBeats wrote:But instead of adapting and ask yourself these questions I pose, you fall into cognitive dissonance and repeat the same narrative over and over. Right, it's cognitive dissonance to be against ethnic cleansing, mass murder, and apartheid. Show nested quote +On October 12 2024 20:30 PremoBeats wrote:It is obvious that Iran doesn't give two shits about the Palestinian population and neither does Hamas. Arab Muslims have a better life under Israeli governance than in Iran, the West Bank and Gaza. This is what just about every oppressor and colonizer has ever said. "Your backwards peoples are better off as servants of our enlightened society, and if you disagree with that we're going to kill you because we know better so bend the knee." Arab Muslims deserve to choose whether they want to live under Israeli governance or their own, and they have made it abundantly clear that they would rather find their own way. Not to mention that Israel doesn't actually want to absorb those people either, since that would threaten the Jewish majority of their precious apartheid ethnonstate. Show nested quote +On October 12 2024 20:30 PremoBeats wrote:Has Israel one declared that it denies a two-state-solution like Iran, Hamas and Hezbollah declared on several occasions or wrote in their charter that Israel is illegitimate? Israel literally throws a hissy fit whenever anyone suggests that Palestine is a sovereign state. Obviously they do not consider Palestine to be 'legitimate', what the fuck are you even on about with this shit seriously. Show nested quote +On October 12 2024 20:30 PremoBeats wrote:Do you think Israel as a state is legitimate? Sure, counter question, do you think Israel is not a fascist, apartheid, colonizer state? Btw, you don't have to answer this last one, it's seriously not interesting at all 'discussing' these things with you since you've been repeating the same nonsense for about 50 posts already in this thread. some quotes for you, since you keep saying you want quotes: https://www.timesofisrael.com/pointing-to-hamass-little-state-netanyahu-touts-role-blocking-2-state-solution/Show nested quote +Netanyahu: I’m proud that I prevented the establishment of a Palestinian state https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/israel-palestinians-netanyahu-two-state-solution-1.7087705Show nested quote +Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says he has informed the United States that he opposes the establishment of a Palestinian state as part of any postwar scenario Show nested quote +He said Israel "must have security control over the entire territory west of the Jordan River." So uhh, you want to tell me more how Israel is totally for peace and totally doesn't reject the idea of a Palestinian state?
No, might makes not right.
But as I said way back to Magic Powers: It is the responsibility of the weaker force to admit defeat and not re-engage. These 42k dead Palestinians are on the re-escalating side.
To quote myself from back then:
“I further said that "with great power comes great responsibility" is an idiotic sentiment when thinking about a superior power having to dial back on war. I never rejected it. I even said how the inferior and superior side have different responsibilities: "It is the responsibility of the leader of the inferior force to acknowledge defeat. It is the responsibility of the superior force to make acceptable terms for defeat (to avoid Versailles-consequences for example). "
I gave further context that an immoral enemy won't give two shits about responsibility anyway, hence why I said it (with great power comes great responsibility) was an idiotic sentiment.”
Which things I said are “not real”?
You never asked for sources so far. I did and you gave none.
42k you mean? Of which 17k are terrorists? It is a war and it can be ended as soon as the hostages are freed and/or Hamas is eliminated - whatever Israel seems to be satisfied by.
So do you deny that Hamas invaded Israel’s territory?
And yes, the attacks were unprecedented.
- Number of rockets (Over 5.000 in a matter of hours) - no bigger attack was ever carried out by any faction against Israel since its foundation. You can deny this claim easily, by finding a bigger attack.
- Ground assault: Hamas crossed into southern Israel via air (paragliders) and sea targeting civilians and carried out its biggest ground invasion ever. Again, easy to deny, if you find a bigger attack.
- Hostages: Over 200 people were abducted. It was the largest and most coordinated mass abduction since Israels's foundation. Easily debunked, if you find a bigger mass abduction.
So something happening for the first time means unprecedented. Where did I spew bullshit?
I obviously have an issue with Israel killing aid workers/journalists/no threat targets every time it happens. And I repeatedly said on this thread that all of these occasions should be treated as war crimes. Sorry, you didn’t get the memo, but that was my stance since the beginning.
You said that “It appeared because Israel kept fucking killing Palestinian”, not because of Iran giving it money.
Which btw, a claim, you did not back up for that time period I mentioned (Hamas’ rise to power).
I don’t understand the reason of that particular paragraph? Are you denying Iran’s financing of Hamas since 1990?
But why don’t Gazans have anything?
That is exactly my point. The West Bank - looking at Israel’s policies - is similar to Gaza. You said Hamas is only in place because of Israel policies. Then why don’t we see the same effect in the West Bank? Why didn’t Hamas build a similar infrastructure since nearly 18 years with all the funding and international aid and support they got (even from Israel)?
Asking questions is the perfect way to find blindspots in your own and other’s POV. Not answering them is the reason, why some people here still think Israel is enforcing a famine or committing genocide. Because they don’t ask deeply enough. A rational being always digs deeper, questioning at every level. You guys fail to do so in such a superficial manner, that you can’t even engage with the most obvious of questions.
You still fail to provide an official statement by Israel's government. “hissy fit”? What the hell, lol.
Fascist, Apartheid: no. Obviously, as I laid out several times.
Colonizer state wasn’t put up yet.
Does Israel exploit resources? No, I don’t think so, as this land hardly has any.
Cultural suppression? Gaza has had self-governance since… arguably 1993 or 2005. With all the jew-hating culture in education and daily life, I’d say no.
I mean.. colonies are completely distinct from what Israel and Palestine are engaged in, thus it would be easy to say no, but I can guess what the insinuation is. I would say military occupying state.
Thanks for the quote. As I said before: Probably post October 7th.
And of course a two-state-solution is delusionary at this point, as I laid out before.
Or would you say that it would be wise to have a Palestine that rejects Israel as a state and that keeps attacking Israel the way Hamas did 1 year ago? No one wants or needs such a state... hence I built this situation into my potential solution and said before:
"When and how exactly did the Israeli government make these statements? Post 7th of October? Would it be unreasonable according to you to say that a two-state-solution is off the table when the new state denies the existence of Israel and in barbaric fashion keeps attacking Israel?"
Btw: These are the words of the PM in relation to most recent events; they are not official Israeli government policy for the years to come (although it might end up that way, if the terror continues).
Yes, my claim is that Israel doesn't gain anything except high military costs from an on going conflict. It further is completely reasonable to assume that a state simply wants its existence acknowledged by its neighbors.
What is your claim? That Israel wants to genocide the Palestinians? Take control over the complete West Bank and Gaza?
|
Northern Ireland22439 Posts
Outside of comparison why would people be spending much time talking about other conflicts in a thread specifically relating to the Israeli-Palestinian one?
|
On October 12 2024 21:24 PremoBeats wrote:
No, might makes not right.
But as I said way back to Magic Powers: It is the responsibility of the weaker force to admit defeat and not re-engage. These 42k dead Palestinians are on the re-escalating side.
To quote myself from back then:
“I further said that "with great power comes great responsibility" is an idiotic sentiment when thinking about a superior power having to dial back on war. I never rejected it. I even said how the inferior and superior side have different responsibilities: "It is the responsibility of the leader of the inferior force to acknowledge defeat. It is the responsibility of the superior force to make acceptable terms for defeat (to avoid Versailles-consequences for example). "
I gave further context that an immoral enemy won't give two shits about responsibility anyway, hence why I said it (with great power comes great responsibility) was an idiotic sentiment.”
Which things I said are “not real”?
You never asked for sources so far. I did and you gave none.
42k you mean? Of which 17k are terrorists? This is a war. Do you say anything about other conflicts going on at the moment, that have much higher death tolls? No, you don’t, as you are simply against what Israel is doing. For you, this is no matter of principle, else you would agree that wars cost lifes and normally much more than they do in this conflict.
So do you deny that Hamas invaded Israel’s territory?
And yes, the attacks were unprecedented.
- Number of rockets (Over 5.000 in a matter of hours) - no bigger attack was ever carried out by any faction against Israel since its foundation. You can deny this claim easily, by finding a bigger attack.
- Ground assault: Hamas crossed into southern Israel via air (paragliders) and sea targeting civilians and carried out its biggest ground invasion ever. Again, easy to deny, if you find a bigger attack.
- Hostages: Over 200 people were abducted. It was the largest and most coordinated mass abduction since Israels's foundation. Easily debunked, if you find a bigger mass abduction.
So something happening for the first time means unprecedented. Where did I spew bullshit?
I obviously have an issue with Israel killing aid workers/journalists/no threat targets every time it happens. And I repeatedly said on this thread that all of these occasions should be treated as war crimes. Sorry, you didn’t get the memo, but that was my stance since the beginning.
You said that “It appeared because Israel kept fucking killing Palestinian”, not because of Iran giving it money.
Which btw, a claim, you did not back up for that time period I mentioned (Hamas’ rise to power).
I don’t understand the reason of that particular paragraph? Are you denying Iran’s financing of Hamas since 1990?
But why don’t Gazans have anything?
That is exactly my point. The West Bank - looking at Israel’s policies - is similar to Gaza. You said Hamas is only in place because of Israel policies. Then why don’t we see the same effect in the West Bank? Why didn’t Hamas build a similar infrastructure since nearly 18 years with all the funding and international aid and support they got (even from Israel)?
Asking questions is the perfect way to find blindspots in your own and other’s POV. Not answering them is the reason, why some people here still think Israel is enforcing a famine or committing genocide. Because they don’t ask deeply enough. A rational being always digs deeper, questioning at every level. You guys fail to do so in such a superficial manner, that you can’t even engage with the most obvious of questions.
You still fail to provide an official statement by Israel's government. “hissy fit”? What the hell, lol.
Fascist, Apartheid: no. Obviously, as I laid out several times.
Colonizer state wasn’t put up yet.
Does Israel exploit resources? No, I don’t think so, as this land hardly has any.
Cultural suppression? Gaza has had self-governance since… arguably 1993 or 2005. With all the jew-hating culture in education and daily life, I’d say no.
I mean.. colonies are completely distinct from what Israel and Palestine are engaged in, thus it would be easy to say no, but I can guess what the insinuation is. I would say military occupying state.
Thanks for the quote. As I said before: Probably post October 7th.
And of course a two-state-solution is delusionary at this point, as I laid out before.
Or would you say that it would be wise to have a Palestine that rejects Israel as a state and that keeps attacking Israel the way Hamas did 1 year ago? No one wants or needs such a state... hence I built this situation into my potential solution and said before:
"When and how exactly did the Israeli government make these statements? Post 7th of October? Would it be unreasonable according to you to say that a two-state-solution is off the table when the new state denies the existence of Israel and in barbaric fashion keeps attacking Israel?"
Btw: These are the words of the PM in relation to most recent events; they are not official Israeli government policy for the years to come (although it might end up that way, if the terror continues).
Yes, my claim is that Israel doesn't gain anything except high military costs from an on going conflict. It further is completely reasonable to assume that a state simply wants its existence acknowledged by its neighbors.
What is your claim? That Israel wants to genocide the Palestinians? Take control over the complete West Bank and Gaza?
What does October 7th have to do with the Oslo accords? Netanyahu was bragging about tanking the peace process back then. And yes, it is unreasonable to say that two-state-solution is off the table 'under any circumstances', would you say it isn't? What does that leave us with? Oh right, ethnic cleansing.
Seriously, fuck off. Military occupying states don't displace local civilians and build settlements for their own people. You're such a tedious, obnoxious shill, I really hope you're at least getting paid for the drivel you're posting here. I'm not, so I'm really not going to spend much more of my effort on this nonsense. Wow, 200 hostages were taken by Hamas. Look up how many Palestinians are being abducted by the IDF. But of course, it's not abduction, it's 'administrative detention.' Yeah, right.
|
On October 13 2024 01:18 Salazarz wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2024 21:24 PremoBeats wrote:
No, might makes not right.
But as I said way back to Magic Powers: It is the responsibility of the weaker force to admit defeat and not re-engage. These 42k dead Palestinians are on the re-escalating side.
To quote myself from back then:
“I further said that "with great power comes great responsibility" is an idiotic sentiment when thinking about a superior power having to dial back on war. I never rejected it. I even said how the inferior and superior side have different responsibilities: "It is the responsibility of the leader of the inferior force to acknowledge defeat. It is the responsibility of the superior force to make acceptable terms for defeat (to avoid Versailles-consequences for example). "
I gave further context that an immoral enemy won't give two shits about responsibility anyway, hence why I said it (with great power comes great responsibility) was an idiotic sentiment.”
Which things I said are “not real”?
You never asked for sources so far. I did and you gave none.
42k you mean? Of which 17k are terrorists? This is a war. Do you say anything about other conflicts going on at the moment, that have much higher death tolls? No, you don’t, as you are simply against what Israel is doing. For you, this is no matter of principle, else you would agree that wars cost lifes and normally much more than they do in this conflict.
So do you deny that Hamas invaded Israel’s territory?
And yes, the attacks were unprecedented.
- Number of rockets (Over 5.000 in a matter of hours) - no bigger attack was ever carried out by any faction against Israel since its foundation. You can deny this claim easily, by finding a bigger attack.
- Ground assault: Hamas crossed into southern Israel via air (paragliders) and sea targeting civilians and carried out its biggest ground invasion ever. Again, easy to deny, if you find a bigger attack.
- Hostages: Over 200 people were abducted. It was the largest and most coordinated mass abduction since Israels's foundation. Easily debunked, if you find a bigger mass abduction.
So something happening for the first time means unprecedented. Where did I spew bullshit?
I obviously have an issue with Israel killing aid workers/journalists/no threat targets every time it happens. And I repeatedly said on this thread that all of these occasions should be treated as war crimes. Sorry, you didn’t get the memo, but that was my stance since the beginning.
You said that “It appeared because Israel kept fucking killing Palestinian”, not because of Iran giving it money.
Which btw, a claim, you did not back up for that time period I mentioned (Hamas’ rise to power).
I don’t understand the reason of that particular paragraph? Are you denying Iran’s financing of Hamas since 1990?
But why don’t Gazans have anything?
That is exactly my point. The West Bank - looking at Israel’s policies - is similar to Gaza. You said Hamas is only in place because of Israel policies. Then why don’t we see the same effect in the West Bank? Why didn’t Hamas build a similar infrastructure since nearly 18 years with all the funding and international aid and support they got (even from Israel)?
Asking questions is the perfect way to find blindspots in your own and other’s POV. Not answering them is the reason, why some people here still think Israel is enforcing a famine or committing genocide. Because they don’t ask deeply enough. A rational being always digs deeper, questioning at every level. You guys fail to do so in such a superficial manner, that you can’t even engage with the most obvious of questions.
You still fail to provide an official statement by Israel's government. “hissy fit”? What the hell, lol.
Fascist, Apartheid: no. Obviously, as I laid out several times.
Colonizer state wasn’t put up yet.
Does Israel exploit resources? No, I don’t think so, as this land hardly has any.
Cultural suppression? Gaza has had self-governance since… arguably 1993 or 2005. With all the jew-hating culture in education and daily life, I’d say no.
I mean.. colonies are completely distinct from what Israel and Palestine are engaged in, thus it would be easy to say no, but I can guess what the insinuation is. I would say military occupying state.
Thanks for the quote. As I said before: Probably post October 7th.
And of course a two-state-solution is delusionary at this point, as I laid out before.
Or would you say that it would be wise to have a Palestine that rejects Israel as a state and that keeps attacking Israel the way Hamas did 1 year ago? No one wants or needs such a state... hence I built this situation into my potential solution and said before:
"When and how exactly did the Israeli government make these statements? Post 7th of October? Would it be unreasonable according to you to say that a two-state-solution is off the table when the new state denies the existence of Israel and in barbaric fashion keeps attacking Israel?"
Btw: These are the words of the PM in relation to most recent events; they are not official Israeli government policy for the years to come (although it might end up that way, if the terror continues).
Yes, my claim is that Israel doesn't gain anything except high military costs from an on going conflict. It further is completely reasonable to assume that a state simply wants its existence acknowledged by its neighbors.
What is your claim? That Israel wants to genocide the Palestinians? Take control over the complete West Bank and Gaza? What does October 7th have to do with the Oslo accords? Netanyahu was bragging about tanking the peace process back then. And yes, it is unreasonable to say that two-state-solution is off the table 'under any circumstances', would you say it isn't? What does that leave us with? Oh right, ethnic cleansing. Seriously, fuck off. Military occupying states don't displace local civilians and build settlements for their own people. You're such a tedious, obnoxious shill, I really hope you're at least getting paid for the drivel you're posting here. I'm not, so I'm really not going to spend much more of my effort on this nonsense. Wow, 200 hostages were taken by Hamas. Look up how many Palestinians are being abducted by the IDF. But of course, it's not abduction, it's 'administrative detention.' Yeah, right.
Ah sorry, I only looked at the dates of the articles. So Netanyahu was speaking about the point I made earlier too: 2005 showed that slowly giving up control over Gaza did not work out.
Only if you want to say that there is no middle ground between ethnic cleansing and terror attacks that deliberately target civilians. But yes, I think a two-state-solution is off the table with Hamas ruling Gaza and attacking the way it did 1 year ago.
I can agree to disagree if you that this is an unreasonable position. But I truly think that the world does not need another state, that does not support Israel's legitimacy.
I can also live with occupying state that has around 150 illegal settlements, lol. But I don't think that they qualify as colonies in the original sense of the word. For all I care, we can also call it occupying, colonizing state though, as I think the settlements are illegal either way (said so multiple times in this thread).
You want to help the Palestinian people and I think that course of action is commendable. But if you neglect the influence of Iran or think that the best course of action is lifting all bans and simply letting the Gazans be, I think you are wrong while underestimating the hatred against the Jewish state.
You would also have to ask yourself why there is no Hamas in the West Bank, when your claim stays that Hamas is only in Gaza because of Israeli policies, as these are present in the West Bank as well.
And I am happy to discuss things I said that "are not real" like you proposed. You simply have to tell me, which things these are.
But so far I stand by my claims that...
- Israel is not committing genocide according to the casualty rate and comparing the numbers to genocides that happened in Cambodia, Europe, Rwanda etc.
- Israel is not enforcing a famine according to the hundreds of thousands of aid trucks that went into Gaza and that several sources listed (on top having reports of Hamas stealing and re-selling at inflated prices, plus having bursting ware houses)
- October the 7th was in many aspects an unprecedented attack against the state of Israel
- My potential solution is also up for discussion (de-settlement by Israel, de-militarization of Palestine, re-education under supervision by a confederation with Egypt and Jordan, acceptance of Israel as a state by all involved parties, reparation or direct construction of schools, hospitals by Israel)
|
On October 13 2024 02:33 PremoBeats wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2024 01:18 Salazarz wrote:On October 12 2024 21:24 PremoBeats wrote:
No, might makes not right.
But as I said way back to Magic Powers: It is the responsibility of the weaker force to admit defeat and not re-engage. These 42k dead Palestinians are on the re-escalating side.
To quote myself from back then:
“I further said that "with great power comes great responsibility" is an idiotic sentiment when thinking about a superior power having to dial back on war. I never rejected it. I even said how the inferior and superior side have different responsibilities: "It is the responsibility of the leader of the inferior force to acknowledge defeat. It is the responsibility of the superior force to make acceptable terms for defeat (to avoid Versailles-consequences for example). "
I gave further context that an immoral enemy won't give two shits about responsibility anyway, hence why I said it (with great power comes great responsibility) was an idiotic sentiment.”
Which things I said are “not real”?
You never asked for sources so far. I did and you gave none.
42k you mean? Of which 17k are terrorists? This is a war. Do you say anything about other conflicts going on at the moment, that have much higher death tolls? No, you don’t, as you are simply against what Israel is doing. For you, this is no matter of principle, else you would agree that wars cost lifes and normally much more than they do in this conflict.
So do you deny that Hamas invaded Israel’s territory?
And yes, the attacks were unprecedented.
- Number of rockets (Over 5.000 in a matter of hours) - no bigger attack was ever carried out by any faction against Israel since its foundation. You can deny this claim easily, by finding a bigger attack.
- Ground assault: Hamas crossed into southern Israel via air (paragliders) and sea targeting civilians and carried out its biggest ground invasion ever. Again, easy to deny, if you find a bigger attack.
- Hostages: Over 200 people were abducted. It was the largest and most coordinated mass abduction since Israels's foundation. Easily debunked, if you find a bigger mass abduction.
So something happening for the first time means unprecedented. Where did I spew bullshit?
I obviously have an issue with Israel killing aid workers/journalists/no threat targets every time it happens. And I repeatedly said on this thread that all of these occasions should be treated as war crimes. Sorry, you didn’t get the memo, but that was my stance since the beginning.
You said that “It appeared because Israel kept fucking killing Palestinian”, not because of Iran giving it money.
Which btw, a claim, you did not back up for that time period I mentioned (Hamas’ rise to power).
I don’t understand the reason of that particular paragraph? Are you denying Iran’s financing of Hamas since 1990?
But why don’t Gazans have anything?
That is exactly my point. The West Bank - looking at Israel’s policies - is similar to Gaza. You said Hamas is only in place because of Israel policies. Then why don’t we see the same effect in the West Bank? Why didn’t Hamas build a similar infrastructure since nearly 18 years with all the funding and international aid and support they got (even from Israel)?
Asking questions is the perfect way to find blindspots in your own and other’s POV. Not answering them is the reason, why some people here still think Israel is enforcing a famine or committing genocide. Because they don’t ask deeply enough. A rational being always digs deeper, questioning at every level. You guys fail to do so in such a superficial manner, that you can’t even engage with the most obvious of questions.
You still fail to provide an official statement by Israel's government. “hissy fit”? What the hell, lol.
Fascist, Apartheid: no. Obviously, as I laid out several times.
Colonizer state wasn’t put up yet.
Does Israel exploit resources? No, I don’t think so, as this land hardly has any.
Cultural suppression? Gaza has had self-governance since… arguably 1993 or 2005. With all the jew-hating culture in education and daily life, I’d say no.
I mean.. colonies are completely distinct from what Israel and Palestine are engaged in, thus it would be easy to say no, but I can guess what the insinuation is. I would say military occupying state.
Thanks for the quote. As I said before: Probably post October 7th.
And of course a two-state-solution is delusionary at this point, as I laid out before.
Or would you say that it would be wise to have a Palestine that rejects Israel as a state and that keeps attacking Israel the way Hamas did 1 year ago? No one wants or needs such a state... hence I built this situation into my potential solution and said before:
"When and how exactly did the Israeli government make these statements? Post 7th of October? Would it be unreasonable according to you to say that a two-state-solution is off the table when the new state denies the existence of Israel and in barbaric fashion keeps attacking Israel?"
Btw: These are the words of the PM in relation to most recent events; they are not official Israeli government policy for the years to come (although it might end up that way, if the terror continues).
Yes, my claim is that Israel doesn't gain anything except high military costs from an on going conflict. It further is completely reasonable to assume that a state simply wants its existence acknowledged by its neighbors.
What is your claim? That Israel wants to genocide the Palestinians? Take control over the complete West Bank and Gaza? What does October 7th have to do with the Oslo accords? Netanyahu was bragging about tanking the peace process back then. And yes, it is unreasonable to say that two-state-solution is off the table 'under any circumstances', would you say it isn't? What does that leave us with? Oh right, ethnic cleansing. Seriously, fuck off. Military occupying states don't displace local civilians and build settlements for their own people. You're such a tedious, obnoxious shill, I really hope you're at least getting paid for the drivel you're posting here. I'm not, so I'm really not going to spend much more of my effort on this nonsense. Wow, 200 hostages were taken by Hamas. Look up how many Palestinians are being abducted by the IDF. But of course, it's not abduction, it's 'administrative detention.' Yeah, right. Ah sorry, I only looked at the dates of the articles. So Netanyahu was speaking about the point I made earlier too: 2005 showed that slowly giving up control over Gaza did not work out. Only if you want to say that there is no middle ground between ethnic cleansing and terror attacks that deliberately target civilians. But yes, I think a two-state-solution is off the table with Hamas ruling Gaza and attacking the way it did 1 year ago. I can agree to disagree if you that this is an unreasonable position. But I truly think that the world does not need another state, that does not support Israel's legitimacy. I can also live with occupying state that has around 150 illegal settlements, lol. But I don't think that they qualify as colonies in the original sense of the word. For all I care, we can also call it occupying, colonizing state though, as I think the settlements are illegal either way (said so multiple times in this thread). You want to help the Palestinian people and I think that course of action is commendable. But if you neglect the influence of Iran or think that the best course of action is lifting all bans and simply letting the Gazans be, I think you are wrong while underestimating the hatred against the Jewish state. You would also have to ask yourself why there is no Hamas in the West Bank, when your claim stays that Hamas is only in Gaza because of Israeli policies, as these are present in the West Bank as well. And I am happy to discuss things I said that "are not real" like you proposed. You simply have to tell me, which things these are. But so far I stand by my claims that... - Israel is not committing genocide according to the casualty rate and comparing the numbers to genocides that happened in Cambodia, Europe, Rwanda etc. - Israel is not enforcing a famine according to the hundreds of thousands of aid trucks that went into Gaza and that several sources listed (on top having reports of Hamas stealing and re-selling at inflated prices, plus having bursting ware houses) - October the 7th was in many aspects an unprecedented attack against the state of Israel - My potential solution is also up for discussion (de-settlement by Israel, de-militarization of Palestine, re-education under supervision by a confederation with Egypt and Jordan, acceptance of Israel as a state by all involved parties, reparation or direct construction of schools, hospitals by Israel)
The fuck are you on about. Netanyahu's statements make no sense, you don't get to occupy, bomb, kill, and starve a bunch of people for 50+ years and then say, 'well see, they totally don't want to co-exist peacefully, we were right not to negotiate with them in good faith!'
Netanyahu isn't saying that two-state solution is off the table with Hamas ruling Gaza, by the way. He's saying it's off the table completely and permanently. And why can't world live with a state that doesn't support Israel's legitimacy (even if we assume that would continue to be such if Palestine were recognized) but having a state that doesn't support Palestine's legitimacy is perfectly fine for you?
Colony: noun
a country or area under the full or partial political control of another country and occupied by settlers from that country
How do Israeli settlements in West Bank not qualify under this definition? Like, it's about as straightforward as it gets and still you wriggle around it because colonization is not a nice word and in your world, Israel is nothing but a force of good apparently.
What you have to ask yourself, is why is there hatred against Jews amongst the Palestinians in the first place, and then maybe work from there.
There's nothing to discuss in your 'potential solution' because Israel is not going to stop colonizing Palestine without outside pressure and while they continue to do it, Palestine will remain a breeding ground for radical terrorism.
|
On October 12 2024 17:19 PremoBeats wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2024 16:30 pmp10 wrote:
You are no fun.
This was the point where you were supposed to show Israeli humanitarian data where there is absolutely no change to aid reaching Gaza whatsoever.
And then I would counter with UN dataset showing that most Palestinians have starved to death already.
That's the problem with high level politics, we will never be provided with data that contradicts the narrative.
Your factoids are just more cherry-picked and context-less than most. Which data do you want to discuss? The endless excel sheets that were published? COGAT’s data? gaza-aid-data.gov.il? Do you want to go through all > 54000 shipments since October 21st separately? Or the data this paper gathered? https://biochem-food-nutrition.agri.huji.ac.il/arontroen/publications/nutritional-assessment-of-food-aid-delivered-to-gazaAnd as I don’t cherry-pick: Let’s not go with the data of Israel… let’s go with the data of the UN: https://www.ochaopt.org/data/crossingsOr let’s even go with one of Israel’s biggest critics: UNRWA (by the way… all the data say mostly the same). It admits that in March 159 trucks entered Gaza. In major humanitarian envoys such trucks often deliver 40 tons of aid. 20 - 30 tons is a common average, so let's go with 20 tons per truck to be generous to your side. 159 trucks * 20 tons =3180 tons in total. Different sources cite between 60 - 80% food in the total amount of aid. 70% is the middle ground. 70% of 3180 are 2226 tons of food. 2.2 million people need about 2.2 kg of food daily. In tons that are 2200. Meaning if there were no food to be produced in Gaza, Hamas having no full warehouses with stolen humanitarian aid… there’d still be enough food for the Gazan population. BUT, there is more. I calculated with 1kg of food. A mixture of 1kg of humanitarian food provides approximately 3500 to 4000 calories. The caloric requirements per person per day in a crisis by the World Food Programme (WFP) is 2100 calories. Meaning, if we go - again, to be generous to your side - with 3500 calories per kg of humanitarian food, there is an excess of over 66% (very simple calculation but you get the point) Do you have any issues with these calculations? Or the provided data? Do you have data that is different from mine, as you said I cherry-picked? If no, then I ask you: Where does all that humanitarian aid vanish to? Because as I said multiple times: The providing side is not the issue, based on the numbers that are floating around by different sources. So it would be on you to 1. show different numbers if you disagree with them 2. explain where all the sufficient resources go to post-inspection, if they don’t end up with the civilians
No need for that much more number, these just need a little more context you seem to be missing here.
So let's discuss the details of UNRWA numbers on the basis of proximity of geographical aid arrival point.
Let's add Erez, floating pier, Gate 96 as Gaza North and Kerem and Rafah as Gaza South.
Monthly loads since November 23 will look like this:
Month Gaza North Gaza South
2023-11 0 2545
2023-12 0 3248
2024-01 0 4371
2024-02 0 2874
2024-03 0 4993
2024-04 0 5671
2024-05 902 3300
2024-06 1269 2361
2024-07 1723 2899
2024-08 1581 1771
2024-09 1226 1751
Notice a strange trend starting around the time gaza pier was build?
It's not that the thing was at all effective in delivering aid, but it was a political message that some things won't fly.
Or at least didn't at the time.
Now, some might say that no deliveries in the north is purely a distribution issue and 6 months of no food support doesn't matter as long as the south was being supplied.
But said some tend to forget that IDF cut-off Gaza city from the south sometime early November 23.
And while they were happy to see Palestinians leave south they allowed little aid north for the ones that stayed.
They certainly were not about provide any security and usually declared anyone doing that as Hamas to blow them up.
So I think my point stands.
Israel was starving Gaza, the data bears that out and in fact, they are openly thinking of doing it again.
We might have another discussion if it was a particularly harsh tactic to deprive Hamas of human shields, opportunistic ethnic cleansing or just straight out geocidal bloodlust.
|
Listened to the Coates guest appearance on the Ezra Klein show youtu.be, and its a very interesting but ultimately dead end conversation. The discussions on the occupation done by Israel is harrowing, and brings into start display the horror show that is going on.
However like half the way through Coates is unwilling to accept that throughout the entirety of the Israel/Palestine (and all the surrounding states) conflict, any action against Israel as worth considering. As someone that wants Israel today sanctioned and punished in the courts of international law for their horrorshow in Gaza, it is literal brain rot to not consider the foundational setup that was the Holocaust and how that shaped the state of Israel. The power levels and occupation between Palestine/regional players in the 1940s and 1960s was completely different. Coates fails as a journalist in that his main message is hindered by his unwillingness to entertain the idea that in the 20th century Israel is no where near similar to the genocide and enslavement of African Americans in the USA. You can kinda make that case today, but holy context batman, you are an idiot.
This is the divide where a sane person would say, gee I dont support Hamas, but I understand how a total occupation would lead to something like Oct 7... vs yeah lets cheer for Hamas and Hezbollah, viva the resistance! Like read a fucking history book or article. The timing of events and actors really fucking matters. Hezbollah in their early formation, hey thats probably more sympathetic. Hezbollah post massacring Syrians for Assad. Oh, yeah they are shitheads.
|
On October 13 2024 02:47 Salazarz wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2024 02:33 PremoBeats wrote:On October 13 2024 01:18 Salazarz wrote:On October 12 2024 21:24 PremoBeats wrote:
No, might makes not right.
But as I said way back to Magic Powers: It is the responsibility of the weaker force to admit defeat and not re-engage. These 42k dead Palestinians are on the re-escalating side.
To quote myself from back then:
“I further said that "with great power comes great responsibility" is an idiotic sentiment when thinking about a superior power having to dial back on war. I never rejected it. I even said how the inferior and superior side have different responsibilities: "It is the responsibility of the leader of the inferior force to acknowledge defeat. It is the responsibility of the superior force to make acceptable terms for defeat (to avoid Versailles-consequences for example). "
I gave further context that an immoral enemy won't give two shits about responsibility anyway, hence why I said it (with great power comes great responsibility) was an idiotic sentiment.”
Which things I said are “not real”?
You never asked for sources so far. I did and you gave none.
42k you mean? Of which 17k are terrorists? This is a war. Do you say anything about other conflicts going on at the moment, that have much higher death tolls? No, you don’t, as you are simply against what Israel is doing. For you, this is no matter of principle, else you would agree that wars cost lifes and normally much more than they do in this conflict.
So do you deny that Hamas invaded Israel’s territory?
And yes, the attacks were unprecedented.
- Number of rockets (Over 5.000 in a matter of hours) - no bigger attack was ever carried out by any faction against Israel since its foundation. You can deny this claim easily, by finding a bigger attack.
- Ground assault: Hamas crossed into southern Israel via air (paragliders) and sea targeting civilians and carried out its biggest ground invasion ever. Again, easy to deny, if you find a bigger attack.
- Hostages: Over 200 people were abducted. It was the largest and most coordinated mass abduction since Israels's foundation. Easily debunked, if you find a bigger mass abduction.
So something happening for the first time means unprecedented. Where did I spew bullshit?
I obviously have an issue with Israel killing aid workers/journalists/no threat targets every time it happens. And I repeatedly said on this thread that all of these occasions should be treated as war crimes. Sorry, you didn’t get the memo, but that was my stance since the beginning.
You said that “It appeared because Israel kept fucking killing Palestinian”, not because of Iran giving it money.
Which btw, a claim, you did not back up for that time period I mentioned (Hamas’ rise to power).
I don’t understand the reason of that particular paragraph? Are you denying Iran’s financing of Hamas since 1990?
But why don’t Gazans have anything?
That is exactly my point. The West Bank - looking at Israel’s policies - is similar to Gaza. You said Hamas is only in place because of Israel policies. Then why don’t we see the same effect in the West Bank? Why didn’t Hamas build a similar infrastructure since nearly 18 years with all the funding and international aid and support they got (even from Israel)?
Asking questions is the perfect way to find blindspots in your own and other’s POV. Not answering them is the reason, why some people here still think Israel is enforcing a famine or committing genocide. Because they don’t ask deeply enough. A rational being always digs deeper, questioning at every level. You guys fail to do so in such a superficial manner, that you can’t even engage with the most obvious of questions.
You still fail to provide an official statement by Israel's government. “hissy fit”? What the hell, lol.
Fascist, Apartheid: no. Obviously, as I laid out several times.
Colonizer state wasn’t put up yet.
Does Israel exploit resources? No, I don’t think so, as this land hardly has any.
Cultural suppression? Gaza has had self-governance since… arguably 1993 or 2005. With all the jew-hating culture in education and daily life, I’d say no.
I mean.. colonies are completely distinct from what Israel and Palestine are engaged in, thus it would be easy to say no, but I can guess what the insinuation is. I would say military occupying state.
Thanks for the quote. As I said before: Probably post October 7th.
And of course a two-state-solution is delusionary at this point, as I laid out before.
Or would you say that it would be wise to have a Palestine that rejects Israel as a state and that keeps attacking Israel the way Hamas did 1 year ago? No one wants or needs such a state... hence I built this situation into my potential solution and said before:
"When and how exactly did the Israeli government make these statements? Post 7th of October? Would it be unreasonable according to you to say that a two-state-solution is off the table when the new state denies the existence of Israel and in barbaric fashion keeps attacking Israel?"
Btw: These are the words of the PM in relation to most recent events; they are not official Israeli government policy for the years to come (although it might end up that way, if the terror continues).
Yes, my claim is that Israel doesn't gain anything except high military costs from an on going conflict. It further is completely reasonable to assume that a state simply wants its existence acknowledged by its neighbors.
What is your claim? That Israel wants to genocide the Palestinians? Take control over the complete West Bank and Gaza? What does October 7th have to do with the Oslo accords? Netanyahu was bragging about tanking the peace process back then. And yes, it is unreasonable to say that two-state-solution is off the table 'under any circumstances', would you say it isn't? What does that leave us with? Oh right, ethnic cleansing. Seriously, fuck off. Military occupying states don't displace local civilians and build settlements for their own people. You're such a tedious, obnoxious shill, I really hope you're at least getting paid for the drivel you're posting here. I'm not, so I'm really not going to spend much more of my effort on this nonsense. Wow, 200 hostages were taken by Hamas. Look up how many Palestinians are being abducted by the IDF. But of course, it's not abduction, it's 'administrative detention.' Yeah, right. Ah sorry, I only looked at the dates of the articles. So Netanyahu was speaking about the point I made earlier too: 2005 showed that slowly giving up control over Gaza did not work out. Only if you want to say that there is no middle ground between ethnic cleansing and terror attacks that deliberately target civilians. But yes, I think a two-state-solution is off the table with Hamas ruling Gaza and attacking the way it did 1 year ago. I can agree to disagree if you that this is an unreasonable position. But I truly think that the world does not need another state, that does not support Israel's legitimacy. I can also live with occupying state that has around 150 illegal settlements, lol. But I don't think that they qualify as colonies in the original sense of the word. For all I care, we can also call it occupying, colonizing state though, as I think the settlements are illegal either way (said so multiple times in this thread). You want to help the Palestinian people and I think that course of action is commendable. But if you neglect the influence of Iran or think that the best course of action is lifting all bans and simply letting the Gazans be, I think you are wrong while underestimating the hatred against the Jewish state. You would also have to ask yourself why there is no Hamas in the West Bank, when your claim stays that Hamas is only in Gaza because of Israeli policies, as these are present in the West Bank as well. And I am happy to discuss things I said that "are not real" like you proposed. You simply have to tell me, which things these are. But so far I stand by my claims that... - Israel is not committing genocide according to the casualty rate and comparing the numbers to genocides that happened in Cambodia, Europe, Rwanda etc. - Israel is not enforcing a famine according to the hundreds of thousands of aid trucks that went into Gaza and that several sources listed (on top having reports of Hamas stealing and re-selling at inflated prices, plus having bursting ware houses) - October the 7th was in many aspects an unprecedented attack against the state of Israel - My potential solution is also up for discussion (de-settlement by Israel, de-militarization of Palestine, re-education under supervision by a confederation with Egypt and Jordan, acceptance of Israel as a state by all involved parties, reparation or direct construction of schools, hospitals by Israel) The fuck are you on about. Netanyahu's statements make no sense, you don't get to occupy, bomb, kill, and starve a bunch of people for 50+ years and then say, 'well see, they totally don't want to co-exist peacefully, we were right not to negotiate with them in good faith!' Netanyahu isn't saying that two-state solution is off the table with Hamas ruling Gaza, by the way. He's saying it's off the table completely and permanently. And why can't world live with a state that doesn't support Israel's legitimacy (even if we assume that would continue to be such if Palestine were recognized) but having a state that doesn't support Palestine's legitimacy is perfectly fine for you? Show nested quote +Colony: noun
a country or area under the full or partial political control of another country and occupied by settlers from that country How do Israeli settlements in West Bank not qualify under this definition? Like, it's about as straightforward as it gets and still you wriggle around it because colonization is not a nice word and in your world, Israel is nothing but a force of good apparently. What you have to ask yourself, is why is there hatred against Jews amongst the Palestinians in the first place, and then maybe work from there. There's nothing to discuss in your 'potential solution' because Israel is not going to stop colonizing Palestine without outside pressure and while they continue to do it, Palestine will remain a breeding ground for radical terrorism.
It is the hen and and egg-issue. Trust has to be gained from both sides for a better future and when one side is re-escalating the conflict in a way Hamas did on October 7th, then yes, a two-state-solution is off the table with a Hamas led Gaza.
And ultimately it isn't about what Netanyahu says (who like your link points out, changed his mind in the past before), but what Israel officially as a government states, the same Hezbollah and Hamas have it written in their charter that they don't accept Israel as a state.
I never said that Israel is "nothing but a force of good" and already said multiple times that the settlements are illegal in my opinion.
The hatred of the Jews predates all conflicts around Palestine.
But if you truly want to look into the more recent history (which I think is a silly idea to base any solutions on today), I'd suggest looking into the Peel commission where the very first partition plan was worked out and both sides would have gotten a percentage of land mass that reflected the population size and main settling areas plus where Jerusalem was still under British control to give both sides access to it. The rejection of a Jewish state was the driver from the start, despite there being several Arab states back then and now.
So you say that Israel won't stop "colonizing"? And that this is the reason for "breeding terrorism"?
Is that the Israeli policy you spoke about earlier, that was responsible for Hamas taking control in Gaza? Where the settlements had just been pulled back?
In my opinion Israel can't do anything to please the terrorists, as their goal will always be the destruction of Israel, no matter how many concessions Israel would make. This is stated in their charter/founding texts.
Hamas
Article 6: Establishment of a Palestinian state in all off Palestine, including present day-Israel
Article 13: Rejection of peaceful negotiations or political solutions that recognize Israel and the mentioning of there being no solution for the Palestinian question except Jihad.
Article 28: Israel will exist until Hamas eradicates it and Jewish's people on Palestinian land is illegitimate.
Hezbollah
Calls for the destruction of Israel, describing it as an entity that must be eradicated, as Israel is an illegitimate occupier of Islamic territory and land in all of Palestine.
So if you think that these forces, including their financial supporters, are gonna be swayed by nice policies, I think you are wrong. As they did in the past since 2005, they will ensure that the people in Gaza will suffer and no progress in their lives will be made. Again: To withdraw from Gaza completely, will only mean more pain and death in the future.
On October 13 2024 06:11 pmp10 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2024 17:19 PremoBeats wrote:On October 07 2024 16:30 pmp10 wrote:
You are no fun.
This was the point where you were supposed to show Israeli humanitarian data where there is absolutely no change to aid reaching Gaza whatsoever.
And then I would counter with UN dataset showing that most Palestinians have starved to death already.
That's the problem with high level politics, we will never be provided with data that contradicts the narrative.
Your factoids are just more cherry-picked and context-less than most. Which data do you want to discuss? The endless excel sheets that were published? COGAT’s data? gaza-aid-data.gov.il? Do you want to go through all > 54000 shipments since October 21st separately? Or the data this paper gathered? https://biochem-food-nutrition.agri.huji.ac.il/arontroen/publications/nutritional-assessment-of-food-aid-delivered-to-gazaAnd as I don’t cherry-pick: Let’s not go with the data of Israel… let’s go with the data of the UN: https://www.ochaopt.org/data/crossingsOr let’s even go with one of Israel’s biggest critics: UNRWA (by the way… all the data say mostly the same). It admits that in March 159 trucks entered Gaza. In major humanitarian envoys such trucks often deliver 40 tons of aid. 20 - 30 tons is a common average, so let's go with 20 tons per truck to be generous to your side. 159 trucks * 20 tons =3180 tons in total. Different sources cite between 60 - 80% food in the total amount of aid. 70% is the middle ground. 70% of 3180 are 2226 tons of food. 2.2 million people need about 2.2 kg of food daily. In tons that are 2200. Meaning if there were no food to be produced in Gaza, Hamas having no full warehouses with stolen humanitarian aid… there’d still be enough food for the Gazan population. BUT, there is more. I calculated with 1kg of food. A mixture of 1kg of humanitarian food provides approximately 3500 to 4000 calories. The caloric requirements per person per day in a crisis by the World Food Programme (WFP) is 2100 calories. Meaning, if we go - again, to be generous to your side - with 3500 calories per kg of humanitarian food, there is an excess of over 66% (very simple calculation but you get the point) Do you have any issues with these calculations? Or the provided data? Do you have data that is different from mine, as you said I cherry-picked? If no, then I ask you: Where does all that humanitarian aid vanish to? Because as I said multiple times: The providing side is not the issue, based on the numbers that are floating around by different sources. So it would be on you to 1. show different numbers if you disagree with them 2. explain where all the sufficient resources go to post-inspection, if they don’t end up with the civilians No need for that much more number, these just need a little more context you seem to be missing here. So let's discuss the details of UNRWA numbers on the basis of proximity of geographical aid arrival point. Let's add Erez, floating pier, Gate 96 as Gaza North and Kerem and Rafah as Gaza South. Monthly loads since November 23 will look like this: Month Gaza North Gaza South 2023-11 0 2545 2023-12 0 3248 2024-01 0 4371 2024-02 0 2874 2024-03 0 4993 2024-04 0 5671 2024-05 902 3300 2024-06 1269 2361 2024-07 1723 2899 2024-08 1581 1771 2024-09 1226 1751 Notice a strange trend starting around the time gaza pier was build? It's not that the thing was at all effective in delivering aid, but it was a political message that some things won't fly. Or at least didn't at the time. Now, some might say that no deliveries in the north is purely a distribution issue and 6 months of no food support doesn't matter as long as the south was being supplied. But said some tend to forget that IDF cut-off Gaza city from the south sometime early November 23. And while they were happy to see Palestinians leave south they allowed little aid north for the ones that stayed. They certainly were not about provide any security and usually declared anyone doing that as Hamas to blow them up.So I think my point stands. Israel was starving Gaza, the data bears that out and in fact, they are openly thinking of doing it again.We might have another discussion if it was a particularly harsh tactic to deprive Hamas of human shields, opportunistic ethnic cleansing or just straight out geocidal bloodlust.
So do I understand you correctly that it is your point that during some time in November Israel tried to starve civilians? Although the quote of the general in the last link you posted speaks directly about letting civilians go south and only let "Hamas people" SURRENDER or starve.
I understand the point that a complete or restricted blockade can be devastating to the population, but to say that the civilians have been primarily targeted by this strategy, in my opinion was or is not true (no idea if you are one of the people saying this in this thread... can't remember some of the nuances in arguing points).
But I can completely agree that complete blockades were enacted in October from he 9th to the 21st and at some point in November in the North of Gaza and that especially the second one had devastating consequences.
|
On October 13 2024 15:44 PremoBeats wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2024 02:47 Salazarz wrote:On October 13 2024 02:33 PremoBeats wrote:On October 13 2024 01:18 Salazarz wrote:On October 12 2024 21:24 PremoBeats wrote:
No, might makes not right.
But as I said way back to Magic Powers: It is the responsibility of the weaker force to admit defeat and not re-engage. These 42k dead Palestinians are on the re-escalating side.
To quote myself from back then:
“I further said that "with great power comes great responsibility" is an idiotic sentiment when thinking about a superior power having to dial back on war. I never rejected it. I even said how the inferior and superior side have different responsibilities: "It is the responsibility of the leader of the inferior force to acknowledge defeat. It is the responsibility of the superior force to make acceptable terms for defeat (to avoid Versailles-consequences for example). "
I gave further context that an immoral enemy won't give two shits about responsibility anyway, hence why I said it (with great power comes great responsibility) was an idiotic sentiment.”
Which things I said are “not real”?
You never asked for sources so far. I did and you gave none.
42k you mean? Of which 17k are terrorists? This is a war. Do you say anything about other conflicts going on at the moment, that have much higher death tolls? No, you don’t, as you are simply against what Israel is doing. For you, this is no matter of principle, else you would agree that wars cost lifes and normally much more than they do in this conflict.
So do you deny that Hamas invaded Israel’s territory?
And yes, the attacks were unprecedented.
- Number of rockets (Over 5.000 in a matter of hours) - no bigger attack was ever carried out by any faction against Israel since its foundation. You can deny this claim easily, by finding a bigger attack.
- Ground assault: Hamas crossed into southern Israel via air (paragliders) and sea targeting civilians and carried out its biggest ground invasion ever. Again, easy to deny, if you find a bigger attack.
- Hostages: Over 200 people were abducted. It was the largest and most coordinated mass abduction since Israels's foundation. Easily debunked, if you find a bigger mass abduction.
So something happening for the first time means unprecedented. Where did I spew bullshit?
I obviously have an issue with Israel killing aid workers/journalists/no threat targets every time it happens. And I repeatedly said on this thread that all of these occasions should be treated as war crimes. Sorry, you didn’t get the memo, but that was my stance since the beginning.
You said that “It appeared because Israel kept fucking killing Palestinian”, not because of Iran giving it money.
Which btw, a claim, you did not back up for that time period I mentioned (Hamas’ rise to power).
I don’t understand the reason of that particular paragraph? Are you denying Iran’s financing of Hamas since 1990?
But why don’t Gazans have anything?
That is exactly my point. The West Bank - looking at Israel’s policies - is similar to Gaza. You said Hamas is only in place because of Israel policies. Then why don’t we see the same effect in the West Bank? Why didn’t Hamas build a similar infrastructure since nearly 18 years with all the funding and international aid and support they got (even from Israel)?
Asking questions is the perfect way to find blindspots in your own and other’s POV. Not answering them is the reason, why some people here still think Israel is enforcing a famine or committing genocide. Because they don’t ask deeply enough. A rational being always digs deeper, questioning at every level. You guys fail to do so in such a superficial manner, that you can’t even engage with the most obvious of questions.
You still fail to provide an official statement by Israel's government. “hissy fit”? What the hell, lol.
Fascist, Apartheid: no. Obviously, as I laid out several times.
Colonizer state wasn’t put up yet.
Does Israel exploit resources? No, I don’t think so, as this land hardly has any.
Cultural suppression? Gaza has had self-governance since… arguably 1993 or 2005. With all the jew-hating culture in education and daily life, I’d say no.
I mean.. colonies are completely distinct from what Israel and Palestine are engaged in, thus it would be easy to say no, but I can guess what the insinuation is. I would say military occupying state.
Thanks for the quote. As I said before: Probably post October 7th.
And of course a two-state-solution is delusionary at this point, as I laid out before.
Or would you say that it would be wise to have a Palestine that rejects Israel as a state and that keeps attacking Israel the way Hamas did 1 year ago? No one wants or needs such a state... hence I built this situation into my potential solution and said before:
"When and how exactly did the Israeli government make these statements? Post 7th of October? Would it be unreasonable according to you to say that a two-state-solution is off the table when the new state denies the existence of Israel and in barbaric fashion keeps attacking Israel?"
Btw: These are the words of the PM in relation to most recent events; they are not official Israeli government policy for the years to come (although it might end up that way, if the terror continues).
Yes, my claim is that Israel doesn't gain anything except high military costs from an on going conflict. It further is completely reasonable to assume that a state simply wants its existence acknowledged by its neighbors.
What is your claim? That Israel wants to genocide the Palestinians? Take control over the complete West Bank and Gaza? What does October 7th have to do with the Oslo accords? Netanyahu was bragging about tanking the peace process back then. And yes, it is unreasonable to say that two-state-solution is off the table 'under any circumstances', would you say it isn't? What does that leave us with? Oh right, ethnic cleansing. Seriously, fuck off. Military occupying states don't displace local civilians and build settlements for their own people. You're such a tedious, obnoxious shill, I really hope you're at least getting paid for the drivel you're posting here. I'm not, so I'm really not going to spend much more of my effort on this nonsense. Wow, 200 hostages were taken by Hamas. Look up how many Palestinians are being abducted by the IDF. But of course, it's not abduction, it's 'administrative detention.' Yeah, right. Ah sorry, I only looked at the dates of the articles. So Netanyahu was speaking about the point I made earlier too: 2005 showed that slowly giving up control over Gaza did not work out. Only if you want to say that there is no middle ground between ethnic cleansing and terror attacks that deliberately target civilians. But yes, I think a two-state-solution is off the table with Hamas ruling Gaza and attacking the way it did 1 year ago. I can agree to disagree if you that this is an unreasonable position. But I truly think that the world does not need another state, that does not support Israel's legitimacy. I can also live with occupying state that has around 150 illegal settlements, lol. But I don't think that they qualify as colonies in the original sense of the word. For all I care, we can also call it occupying, colonizing state though, as I think the settlements are illegal either way (said so multiple times in this thread). You want to help the Palestinian people and I think that course of action is commendable. But if you neglect the influence of Iran or think that the best course of action is lifting all bans and simply letting the Gazans be, I think you are wrong while underestimating the hatred against the Jewish state. You would also have to ask yourself why there is no Hamas in the West Bank, when your claim stays that Hamas is only in Gaza because of Israeli policies, as these are present in the West Bank as well. And I am happy to discuss things I said that "are not real" like you proposed. You simply have to tell me, which things these are. But so far I stand by my claims that... - Israel is not committing genocide according to the casualty rate and comparing the numbers to genocides that happened in Cambodia, Europe, Rwanda etc. - Israel is not enforcing a famine according to the hundreds of thousands of aid trucks that went into Gaza and that several sources listed (on top having reports of Hamas stealing and re-selling at inflated prices, plus having bursting ware houses) - October the 7th was in many aspects an unprecedented attack against the state of Israel - My potential solution is also up for discussion (de-settlement by Israel, de-militarization of Palestine, re-education under supervision by a confederation with Egypt and Jordan, acceptance of Israel as a state by all involved parties, reparation or direct construction of schools, hospitals by Israel) The fuck are you on about. Netanyahu's statements make no sense, you don't get to occupy, bomb, kill, and starve a bunch of people for 50+ years and then say, 'well see, they totally don't want to co-exist peacefully, we were right not to negotiate with them in good faith!' Netanyahu isn't saying that two-state solution is off the table with Hamas ruling Gaza, by the way. He's saying it's off the table completely and permanently. And why can't world live with a state that doesn't support Israel's legitimacy (even if we assume that would continue to be such if Palestine were recognized) but having a state that doesn't support Palestine's legitimacy is perfectly fine for you? Colony: noun
a country or area under the full or partial political control of another country and occupied by settlers from that country How do Israeli settlements in West Bank not qualify under this definition? Like, it's about as straightforward as it gets and still you wriggle around it because colonization is not a nice word and in your world, Israel is nothing but a force of good apparently. What you have to ask yourself, is why is there hatred against Jews amongst the Palestinians in the first place, and then maybe work from there. There's nothing to discuss in your 'potential solution' because Israel is not going to stop colonizing Palestine without outside pressure and while they continue to do it, Palestine will remain a breeding ground for radical terrorism. It is the hen and and egg-issue. Trust has to be gained from both sides for a better future and when one side is re-escalating the conflict in a way Hamas did on October 7th, then yes, a two-state-solution is off the table with a Hamas led Gaza. And ultimately it isn't about what Netanyahu says (who like your link points out, changed his mind in the past before), but what Israel officially as a government states, the same Hezbollah and Hamas have it written in their charter that they don't accept Israel as a state. I never said that Israel is "nothing but a force of good" and already said multiple times that the settlements are illegal in my opinion. The hatred of the Jews predates all conflicts around Palestine. But if you truly want to look into the more recent history (which I think is a silly idea to base any solutions on today), I'd suggest looking into the Peel commission where the very first partition plan was worked out and both sides would have gotten a percentage of land mass that reflected the population size and main settling areas and where Jerusalem was still under British control to give both sides access to it. The rejection of a Jewish state was the driver from the start, despite there being several Arab states back then and now. So you say that Israel won't stop "colonizing"? And that this is the reason for "breeding terrorism"? Is that the Israeli policy you spoke about earlier, that was responsible for Hamas taking control in Gaza? Where the settlements had just been pulled back? In my opinion Israel can't do anything to please the terrorists, as their goal will always be the destruction of Israel, no matter how many concessions Israel would make. This is stated in their charter/founding texts. Hamas Article 6: Establishment of a Palestinian state in all off Palestine, including present day-Israel Article 13: Rejection of peaceful negotiations or political solutions that recognize Israel and the mentioning of there being no solution for the Palestinian question except Jihad. Article 28: Israel will exist until Hamas eradicates it and Jewish's people on Palestinian land is illegitimate. Hezbollah Calls for the destruction of Israel, describing it as an entity that must be eradicated, as Israel is an illegitimate occupier of Islamic territory and land in all of Palestine. So if you think that these forces, including their financial supporters, are gonna be swayed by nice policies, I think you are wrong. As they did in the past since 2005, they will ensure that the people in Gaza will suffer and no progress in their lives will be made. Again: To withdraw from Gaza completely, will only mean more pain and death in the future. Show nested quote +On October 13 2024 06:11 pmp10 wrote:On October 12 2024 17:19 PremoBeats wrote:On October 07 2024 16:30 pmp10 wrote:
You are no fun.
This was the point where you were supposed to show Israeli humanitarian data where there is absolutely no change to aid reaching Gaza whatsoever.
And then I would counter with UN dataset showing that most Palestinians have starved to death already.
That's the problem with high level politics, we will never be provided with data that contradicts the narrative.
Your factoids are just more cherry-picked and context-less than most. Which data do you want to discuss? The endless excel sheets that were published? COGAT’s data? gaza-aid-data.gov.il? Do you want to go through all > 54000 shipments since October 21st separately? Or the data this paper gathered? https://biochem-food-nutrition.agri.huji.ac.il/arontroen/publications/nutritional-assessment-of-food-aid-delivered-to-gazaAnd as I don’t cherry-pick: Let’s not go with the data of Israel… let’s go with the data of the UN: https://www.ochaopt.org/data/crossingsOr let’s even go with one of Israel’s biggest critics: UNRWA (by the way… all the data say mostly the same). It admits that in March 159 trucks entered Gaza. In major humanitarian envoys such trucks often deliver 40 tons of aid. 20 - 30 tons is a common average, so let's go with 20 tons per truck to be generous to your side. 159 trucks * 20 tons =3180 tons in total. Different sources cite between 60 - 80% food in the total amount of aid. 70% is the middle ground. 70% of 3180 are 2226 tons of food. 2.2 million people need about 2.2 kg of food daily. In tons that are 2200. Meaning if there were no food to be produced in Gaza, Hamas having no full warehouses with stolen humanitarian aid… there’d still be enough food for the Gazan population. BUT, there is more. I calculated with 1kg of food. A mixture of 1kg of humanitarian food provides approximately 3500 to 4000 calories. The caloric requirements per person per day in a crisis by the World Food Programme (WFP) is 2100 calories. Meaning, if we go - again, to be generous to your side - with 3500 calories per kg of humanitarian food, there is an excess of over 66% (very simple calculation but you get the point) Do you have any issues with these calculations? Or the provided data? Do you have data that is different from mine, as you said I cherry-picked? If no, then I ask you: Where does all that humanitarian aid vanish to? Because as I said multiple times: The providing side is not the issue, based on the numbers that are floating around by different sources. So it would be on you to 1. show different numbers if you disagree with them 2. explain where all the sufficient resources go to post-inspection, if they don’t end up with the civilians No need for that much more number, these just need a little more context you seem to be missing here. So let's discuss the details of UNRWA numbers on the basis of proximity of geographical aid arrival point. Let's add Erez, floating pier, Gate 96 as Gaza North and Kerem and Rafah as Gaza South. Monthly loads since November 23 will look like this: Month Gaza North Gaza South 2023-11 0 2545 2023-12 0 3248 2024-01 0 4371 2024-02 0 2874 2024-03 0 4993 2024-04 0 5671 2024-05 902 3300 2024-06 1269 2361 2024-07 1723 2899 2024-08 1581 1771 2024-09 1226 1751 Notice a strange trend starting around the time gaza pier was build? It's not that the thing was at all effective in delivering aid, but it was a political message that some things won't fly. Or at least didn't at the time. Now, some might say that no deliveries in the north is purely a distribution issue and 6 months of no food support doesn't matter as long as the south was being supplied. But said some tend to forget that IDF cut-off Gaza city from the south sometime early November 23. And while they were happy to see Palestinians leave south they allowed little aid north for the ones that stayed. They certainly were not about provide any security and usually declared anyone doing that as Hamas to blow them up.So I think my point stands. Israel was starving Gaza, the data bears that out and in fact, they are openly thinking of doing it again.We might have another discussion if it was a particularly harsh tactic to deprive Hamas of human shields, opportunistic ethnic cleansing or just straight out geocidal bloodlust. So do I understand you correctly that it is your point that during some time in November Israel tried to starve civilians? Although the quote of the general in the last link you posted speaks directly about letting civilians go south and only let "Hamas people" SURRENDER or starve. I understand the point that a complete or restricted blockade can be devastating to the population, but to say that the civilians have been primarily targeted by this strategy, in my opinion was or is not true (no idea if you are one of the people saying this in this thread... can't remember some of the nuances in arguing points). But I can completely agree that complete blockades were enacted in October from he 9th to the 21st and at some point in November in the North of Gaza and that especially the second one had devastating consequences.
Two state solution was off the table for Israel long before October 7th happened, as evident from numerous conversations and admissions from Netanyahu and other senior Israeli politicians.
Hamas took control of Gaza because Israel's unilateral withdrawal left a power vacuum, not to mention Israel actually helping Hamas take power as they did not want a unified West Bank & Gazan government. So yeah, nice chicken and egg situation this is.
Israel doesn't need to 'please' the terrorists, all it needs is to give people that are currently happy to martyr themselves to hurt a Jew a reason think twice whether throwing away their life over it is worth it. As seen in West Bank, most people don't actually hate Jews enough to become martyrs if they have at least a smidgeon of a chance for a normal life. You've literally used the example of West Bank yourself, pointing out the significant difference in how active & successful terrorist cells are in Gaza vs West Bank. Why do you think that is? They're both Palestinian territories, and people in neither of them like Israel particularly much.
|
On October 13 2024 16:31 Salazarz wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2024 15:44 PremoBeats wrote:On October 13 2024 02:47 Salazarz wrote:On October 13 2024 02:33 PremoBeats wrote:On October 13 2024 01:18 Salazarz wrote:On October 12 2024 21:24 PremoBeats wrote:
No, might makes not right.
But as I said way back to Magic Powers: It is the responsibility of the weaker force to admit defeat and not re-engage. These 42k dead Palestinians are on the re-escalating side.
To quote myself from back then:
“I further said that "with great power comes great responsibility" is an idiotic sentiment when thinking about a superior power having to dial back on war. I never rejected it. I even said how the inferior and superior side have different responsibilities: "It is the responsibility of the leader of the inferior force to acknowledge defeat. It is the responsibility of the superior force to make acceptable terms for defeat (to avoid Versailles-consequences for example). "
I gave further context that an immoral enemy won't give two shits about responsibility anyway, hence why I said it (with great power comes great responsibility) was an idiotic sentiment.”
Which things I said are “not real”?
You never asked for sources so far. I did and you gave none.
42k you mean? Of which 17k are terrorists? This is a war. Do you say anything about other conflicts going on at the moment, that have much higher death tolls? No, you don’t, as you are simply against what Israel is doing. For you, this is no matter of principle, else you would agree that wars cost lifes and normally much more than they do in this conflict.
So do you deny that Hamas invaded Israel’s territory?
And yes, the attacks were unprecedented.
- Number of rockets (Over 5.000 in a matter of hours) - no bigger attack was ever carried out by any faction against Israel since its foundation. You can deny this claim easily, by finding a bigger attack.
- Ground assault: Hamas crossed into southern Israel via air (paragliders) and sea targeting civilians and carried out its biggest ground invasion ever. Again, easy to deny, if you find a bigger attack.
- Hostages: Over 200 people were abducted. It was the largest and most coordinated mass abduction since Israels's foundation. Easily debunked, if you find a bigger mass abduction.
So something happening for the first time means unprecedented. Where did I spew bullshit?
I obviously have an issue with Israel killing aid workers/journalists/no threat targets every time it happens. And I repeatedly said on this thread that all of these occasions should be treated as war crimes. Sorry, you didn’t get the memo, but that was my stance since the beginning.
You said that “It appeared because Israel kept fucking killing Palestinian”, not because of Iran giving it money.
Which btw, a claim, you did not back up for that time period I mentioned (Hamas’ rise to power).
I don’t understand the reason of that particular paragraph? Are you denying Iran’s financing of Hamas since 1990?
But why don’t Gazans have anything?
That is exactly my point. The West Bank - looking at Israel’s policies - is similar to Gaza. You said Hamas is only in place because of Israel policies. Then why don’t we see the same effect in the West Bank? Why didn’t Hamas build a similar infrastructure since nearly 18 years with all the funding and international aid and support they got (even from Israel)?
Asking questions is the perfect way to find blindspots in your own and other’s POV. Not answering them is the reason, why some people here still think Israel is enforcing a famine or committing genocide. Because they don’t ask deeply enough. A rational being always digs deeper, questioning at every level. You guys fail to do so in such a superficial manner, that you can’t even engage with the most obvious of questions.
You still fail to provide an official statement by Israel's government. “hissy fit”? What the hell, lol.
Fascist, Apartheid: no. Obviously, as I laid out several times.
Colonizer state wasn’t put up yet.
Does Israel exploit resources? No, I don’t think so, as this land hardly has any.
Cultural suppression? Gaza has had self-governance since… arguably 1993 or 2005. With all the jew-hating culture in education and daily life, I’d say no.
I mean.. colonies are completely distinct from what Israel and Palestine are engaged in, thus it would be easy to say no, but I can guess what the insinuation is. I would say military occupying state.
Thanks for the quote. As I said before: Probably post October 7th.
And of course a two-state-solution is delusionary at this point, as I laid out before.
Or would you say that it would be wise to have a Palestine that rejects Israel as a state and that keeps attacking Israel the way Hamas did 1 year ago? No one wants or needs such a state... hence I built this situation into my potential solution and said before:
"When and how exactly did the Israeli government make these statements? Post 7th of October? Would it be unreasonable according to you to say that a two-state-solution is off the table when the new state denies the existence of Israel and in barbaric fashion keeps attacking Israel?"
Btw: These are the words of the PM in relation to most recent events; they are not official Israeli government policy for the years to come (although it might end up that way, if the terror continues).
Yes, my claim is that Israel doesn't gain anything except high military costs from an on going conflict. It further is completely reasonable to assume that a state simply wants its existence acknowledged by its neighbors.
What is your claim? That Israel wants to genocide the Palestinians? Take control over the complete West Bank and Gaza? What does October 7th have to do with the Oslo accords? Netanyahu was bragging about tanking the peace process back then. And yes, it is unreasonable to say that two-state-solution is off the table 'under any circumstances', would you say it isn't? What does that leave us with? Oh right, ethnic cleansing. Seriously, fuck off. Military occupying states don't displace local civilians and build settlements for their own people. You're such a tedious, obnoxious shill, I really hope you're at least getting paid for the drivel you're posting here. I'm not, so I'm really not going to spend much more of my effort on this nonsense. Wow, 200 hostages were taken by Hamas. Look up how many Palestinians are being abducted by the IDF. But of course, it's not abduction, it's 'administrative detention.' Yeah, right. Ah sorry, I only looked at the dates of the articles. So Netanyahu was speaking about the point I made earlier too: 2005 showed that slowly giving up control over Gaza did not work out. Only if you want to say that there is no middle ground between ethnic cleansing and terror attacks that deliberately target civilians. But yes, I think a two-state-solution is off the table with Hamas ruling Gaza and attacking the way it did 1 year ago. I can agree to disagree if you that this is an unreasonable position. But I truly think that the world does not need another state, that does not support Israel's legitimacy. I can also live with occupying state that has around 150 illegal settlements, lol. But I don't think that they qualify as colonies in the original sense of the word. For all I care, we can also call it occupying, colonizing state though, as I think the settlements are illegal either way (said so multiple times in this thread). You want to help the Palestinian people and I think that course of action is commendable. But if you neglect the influence of Iran or think that the best course of action is lifting all bans and simply letting the Gazans be, I think you are wrong while underestimating the hatred against the Jewish state. You would also have to ask yourself why there is no Hamas in the West Bank, when your claim stays that Hamas is only in Gaza because of Israeli policies, as these are present in the West Bank as well. And I am happy to discuss things I said that "are not real" like you proposed. You simply have to tell me, which things these are. But so far I stand by my claims that... - Israel is not committing genocide according to the casualty rate and comparing the numbers to genocides that happened in Cambodia, Europe, Rwanda etc. - Israel is not enforcing a famine according to the hundreds of thousands of aid trucks that went into Gaza and that several sources listed (on top having reports of Hamas stealing and re-selling at inflated prices, plus having bursting ware houses) - October the 7th was in many aspects an unprecedented attack against the state of Israel - My potential solution is also up for discussion (de-settlement by Israel, de-militarization of Palestine, re-education under supervision by a confederation with Egypt and Jordan, acceptance of Israel as a state by all involved parties, reparation or direct construction of schools, hospitals by Israel) The fuck are you on about. Netanyahu's statements make no sense, you don't get to occupy, bomb, kill, and starve a bunch of people for 50+ years and then say, 'well see, they totally don't want to co-exist peacefully, we were right not to negotiate with them in good faith!' Netanyahu isn't saying that two-state solution is off the table with Hamas ruling Gaza, by the way. He's saying it's off the table completely and permanently. And why can't world live with a state that doesn't support Israel's legitimacy (even if we assume that would continue to be such if Palestine were recognized) but having a state that doesn't support Palestine's legitimacy is perfectly fine for you? Colony: noun
a country or area under the full or partial political control of another country and occupied by settlers from that country How do Israeli settlements in West Bank not qualify under this definition? Like, it's about as straightforward as it gets and still you wriggle around it because colonization is not a nice word and in your world, Israel is nothing but a force of good apparently. What you have to ask yourself, is why is there hatred against Jews amongst the Palestinians in the first place, and then maybe work from there. There's nothing to discuss in your 'potential solution' because Israel is not going to stop colonizing Palestine without outside pressure and while they continue to do it, Palestine will remain a breeding ground for radical terrorism. It is the hen and and egg-issue. Trust has to be gained from both sides for a better future and when one side is re-escalating the conflict in a way Hamas did on October 7th, then yes, a two-state-solution is off the table with a Hamas led Gaza. And ultimately it isn't about what Netanyahu says (who like your link points out, changed his mind in the past before), but what Israel officially as a government states, the same Hezbollah and Hamas have it written in their charter that they don't accept Israel as a state. I never said that Israel is "nothing but a force of good" and already said multiple times that the settlements are illegal in my opinion. The hatred of the Jews predates all conflicts around Palestine. But if you truly want to look into the more recent history (which I think is a silly idea to base any solutions on today), I'd suggest looking into the Peel commission where the very first partition plan was worked out and both sides would have gotten a percentage of land mass that reflected the population size and main settling areas and where Jerusalem was still under British control to give both sides access to it. The rejection of a Jewish state was the driver from the start, despite there being several Arab states back then and now. So you say that Israel won't stop "colonizing"? And that this is the reason for "breeding terrorism"? Is that the Israeli policy you spoke about earlier, that was responsible for Hamas taking control in Gaza? Where the settlements had just been pulled back? In my opinion Israel can't do anything to please the terrorists, as their goal will always be the destruction of Israel, no matter how many concessions Israel would make. This is stated in their charter/founding texts. Hamas Article 6: Establishment of a Palestinian state in all off Palestine, including present day-Israel Article 13: Rejection of peaceful negotiations or political solutions that recognize Israel and the mentioning of there being no solution for the Palestinian question except Jihad. Article 28: Israel will exist until Hamas eradicates it and Jewish's people on Palestinian land is illegitimate. Hezbollah Calls for the destruction of Israel, describing it as an entity that must be eradicated, as Israel is an illegitimate occupier of Islamic territory and land in all of Palestine. So if you think that these forces, including their financial supporters, are gonna be swayed by nice policies, I think you are wrong. As they did in the past since 2005, they will ensure that the people in Gaza will suffer and no progress in their lives will be made. Again: To withdraw from Gaza completely, will only mean more pain and death in the future. On October 13 2024 06:11 pmp10 wrote:On October 12 2024 17:19 PremoBeats wrote:On October 07 2024 16:30 pmp10 wrote:
You are no fun.
This was the point where you were supposed to show Israeli humanitarian data where there is absolutely no change to aid reaching Gaza whatsoever.
And then I would counter with UN dataset showing that most Palestinians have starved to death already.
That's the problem with high level politics, we will never be provided with data that contradicts the narrative.
Your factoids are just more cherry-picked and context-less than most. Which data do you want to discuss? The endless excel sheets that were published? COGAT’s data? gaza-aid-data.gov.il? Do you want to go through all > 54000 shipments since October 21st separately? Or the data this paper gathered? https://biochem-food-nutrition.agri.huji.ac.il/arontroen/publications/nutritional-assessment-of-food-aid-delivered-to-gazaAnd as I don’t cherry-pick: Let’s not go with the data of Israel… let’s go with the data of the UN: https://www.ochaopt.org/data/crossingsOr let’s even go with one of Israel’s biggest critics: UNRWA (by the way… all the data say mostly the same). It admits that in March 159 trucks entered Gaza. In major humanitarian envoys such trucks often deliver 40 tons of aid. 20 - 30 tons is a common average, so let's go with 20 tons per truck to be generous to your side. 159 trucks * 20 tons =3180 tons in total. Different sources cite between 60 - 80% food in the total amount of aid. 70% is the middle ground. 70% of 3180 are 2226 tons of food. 2.2 million people need about 2.2 kg of food daily. In tons that are 2200. Meaning if there were no food to be produced in Gaza, Hamas having no full warehouses with stolen humanitarian aid… there’d still be enough food for the Gazan population. BUT, there is more. I calculated with 1kg of food. A mixture of 1kg of humanitarian food provides approximately 3500 to 4000 calories. The caloric requirements per person per day in a crisis by the World Food Programme (WFP) is 2100 calories. Meaning, if we go - again, to be generous to your side - with 3500 calories per kg of humanitarian food, there is an excess of over 66% (very simple calculation but you get the point) Do you have any issues with these calculations? Or the provided data? Do you have data that is different from mine, as you said I cherry-picked? If no, then I ask you: Where does all that humanitarian aid vanish to? Because as I said multiple times: The providing side is not the issue, based on the numbers that are floating around by different sources. So it would be on you to 1. show different numbers if you disagree with them 2. explain where all the sufficient resources go to post-inspection, if they don’t end up with the civilians No need for that much more number, these just need a little more context you seem to be missing here. So let's discuss the details of UNRWA numbers on the basis of proximity of geographical aid arrival point. Let's add Erez, floating pier, Gate 96 as Gaza North and Kerem and Rafah as Gaza South. Monthly loads since November 23 will look like this: Month Gaza North Gaza South 2023-11 0 2545 2023-12 0 3248 2024-01 0 4371 2024-02 0 2874 2024-03 0 4993 2024-04 0 5671 2024-05 902 3300 2024-06 1269 2361 2024-07 1723 2899 2024-08 1581 1771 2024-09 1226 1751 Notice a strange trend starting around the time gaza pier was build? It's not that the thing was at all effective in delivering aid, but it was a political message that some things won't fly. Or at least didn't at the time. Now, some might say that no deliveries in the north is purely a distribution issue and 6 months of no food support doesn't matter as long as the south was being supplied. But said some tend to forget that IDF cut-off Gaza city from the south sometime early November 23. And while they were happy to see Palestinians leave south they allowed little aid north for the ones that stayed. They certainly were not about provide any security and usually declared anyone doing that as Hamas to blow them up.So I think my point stands. Israel was starving Gaza, the data bears that out and in fact, they are openly thinking of doing it again.We might have another discussion if it was a particularly harsh tactic to deprive Hamas of human shields, opportunistic ethnic cleansing or just straight out geocidal bloodlust. So do I understand you correctly that it is your point that during some time in November Israel tried to starve civilians? Although the quote of the general in the last link you posted speaks directly about letting civilians go south and only let "Hamas people" SURRENDER or starve. I understand the point that a complete or restricted blockade can be devastating to the population, but to say that the civilians have been primarily targeted by this strategy, in my opinion was or is not true (no idea if you are one of the people saying this in this thread... can't remember some of the nuances in arguing points). But I can completely agree that complete blockades were enacted in October from he 9th to the 21st and at some point in November in the North of Gaza and that especially the second one had devastating consequences. Two state solution was off the table for Israel long before October 7th happened, as evident from numerous conversations and admissions from Netanyahu and other senior Israeli politicians. Hamas took control of Gaza because Israel's unilateral withdrawal left a power vacuum, not to mention Israel actually helping Hamas take power as they did not want a unified West Bank & Gazan government. So yeah, nice chicken and egg situation this is. Israel doesn't need to 'please' the terrorists, all it needs is to give people that are currently happy to martyr themselves to hurt a Jew a reason think twice whether throwing away their life over it is worth it. As seen in West Bank, most people don't actually hate Jews enough to become martyrs if they have at least a smidgeon of a chance for a normal life. You've literally used the example of West Bank yourself, pointing out the significant difference in how active & successful terrorist cells are in Gaza vs West Bank. Why do you think that is? They're both Palestinian territories, and people in neither of them like Israel particularly much.
Israel's stance on the two-state solution has varied over time, largely depending on the government in power. Historically, Israel has officially supported the idea of a two-state solution since the 1993 Oslo Accords. However - you are right - in recent years, particularly under the leadership of Netanyahu and right-wing factions, support has waned. Netanyahu expressed skepticism about the viability of a Palestinian state, especially citing security concerns and the actions of groups like Hamas. Nevertheless, official Israeli policy hasn't entirely abandoned the two-state solution, hence you can't provide an official statement by the Israeli government.
Although there is evidence that Israel indirectly contributed to the rise of Hamas in its early years, it did never directly help it seize power in 2007.
In the late 1980s, Israeli authorities allowed Hamas, which was originally an Islamic social and religious movement, to operate and expand as a counterbalance to the secular nationalist Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) and its Fatah faction. Israel perceived Hamas as less of a threat at the time compared to the PLO, which was engaged in violent resistance against Israel.
However, by the early 1990s, as Hamas became more militant and began carrying out attacks, Israel shifted its stance and began cracking down on the group. Hamas's rise to power in Gaza in 2007, through armed conflict with Fatah, was not supported by Israel. In fact, Israel has regarded Hamas as a terrorist organization since its inception and has implemented a blockade of Gaza after the group took control.
What is your evidence for saying "Israel actually helping Hamas take power"?
Didn't Israel do exactly that in 2005? Tons of aid flowed into Gaza? Israel left. That is why I asked you several times, while pointing to the West Bank how you could make the claim that Hamas only became powerful because of "Israel policies", which are in action in the West Bank too.
Hamas had their chance to build a better life for the Gazans. But they didn't/don't want it. All they want is to eradicate Israel.
And we seem to agree at least that the Gazans need a certain level of life so they have something else to choose besides martyrdom if I understand you correctly. But that won't happen with Hamas in charge of Gaza... so how would you get rid of them?
|
Multiple scholars and diplomats were saying for years that Oslo accords failed because of Israel and Israel was never interested in seeing them through; now you have Netanyahu himself directly admitting he sabotaged the peace process -- yet you still continue to claim that 'historically' Israel totally was for peace and two-state approach. Yeah, there's really nothing to discuss with you.
|
On October 13 2024 18:17 Salazarz wrote:
Multiple scholars and diplomats were saying for years that Oslo accords failed because of Israel and Israel was never interested in seeing them through; now you have Netanyahu himself directly admitting he sabotaged the peace process -- yet you still continue to claim that 'historically' Israel totally was for peace and two-state approach. Yeah, there's really nothing to discuss with you.
And multiple observers say that the Arabs were the reason for failure - others said both parties. I'd suggest re-reading your comments where at the end of each and every angle there is only ever Israel or their officials responsible for the state we are in now. And you say that there is nothing to discuss with me?
I would ask you again: If we agree, that Gazans need something to lose and better lives to stay away form ideas of martyrdom: How would you want to achieve that and get rid of Hamas in Gaza, as it is obvious that prosperity or the state of the Gazan population is not primarily Hamas' main target, as 2007 and later years have shown? More so: That they even gain martyrs and supporters when letting the population suffer and blame Israel (not saying that Israel is free of responsibility entirely at the same time)?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
