Israel - Palestine discussion thread

[MatskiMonk]

Nothing wrong with Islam, but comparison between orthodox Jewish believes and version of Islam in Gaza is pathetic antisemitism.

Murderous Jews are no better or worse than murderous Muslims, I don't care if that makes me sound antisemitic.

 

[Joey D]

Murderous Jews are no better or worse than murderous Muslims, I don't care if that makes me sound antisemitic.

It doesn't make you antisemitic at all, although to many in America at least, it would absolutely make you antisemitic.

I get called antisemitic for making statements like this all the time, which I find weird because both my wife and son are Jewish. Seems like if I hated Jews that much 66% of my family wouldn't be, well Jewish.

 

[omgitsbees]

I didn't say anything about white people or christians. I said a fear of Islam seems rational because it hatches a lot of terrorism (and other kinds of crimes). I also didn't say anything about people that "looked like an arab".


Orthodox Jews are bombing and starving innocent children right now bud. I choose to mention kids mostly because I assume you can't be convinced to see some adults in the area as not being Hamas terrorists.

It's not rational though, you're just repeating racist dog whistles. The point of my response is that there is what you believe, and then there is the reality.

 

[inCloud]

But when they do try and get out of the way Israel does this kind of thing. A tactic out of Putlers playbook.

If thats truth, its warcrime and shouldn't be tolerated. Considering massive amount of fakes, I highly recommend to triple check everything you see.

Orthodox Jews are bombing and starving innocent children right now bud.

There are big difference between beheading someone with cold weapon and killing by bomb as part of collateral damage.

The logic that everyone in Palestine must support Hamas because they've been brainwashed since kindergarten and they're not capable of any other thought.

Do you read my post? You constantly ignoring my posts and cherry picking sentences. There are big gap between support and being in opposition, I didn't wrote that everyone in Gaza supporting HAMAS.

 

[Imari]

Even that would not be argument for islamic radical. AFAIK, no one knows how to argue with brainwashed religious fanatics, only way that work till now is aggressive filtration of most radical ones and secular education. For obvious reasons, you need to eliminate HAMAS before you can do this. Its not humanistic at all, but anyone knows better ways?

Are you even bothering to read?

Because they just evils jews that wants to dominate the World, I guess.

Don't project your fears onto me. If that's what you wanna guess, then that says something about your mindset with regards to Israel.

There are big difference between beheading someone with cold weapon and killing by bomb as part of collateral damage.

Murderous Jews are no better or worse than murderous Muslims, I don't care if that makes me sound antisemitic.

I kinda hate that religion even comes up in this at all. Yes, we have two groups that strongly define themselves by their religions fighting each other. But I feel like if you put any two groups in a similar situation (both sides have a long standing animosity backed by decades of violence and an unwillingness to cede territory) it wouldn't be surprising to get similar things happening regardless of religion.

The religious background helps understand the history and how we got to where we are today to some extent, but it's really not needed to understand what's going on right now. Adding in Judaism and Islam is just throwing fuel on the fire of an already emotionally and ethically charged situation - it's begging for people to make judgements based on propaganda and history rather than evaluating the situation as it is.

It doesn't help that apparently a lot of people can't deal with the idea that there can be a conflict where one side isn't "the good guys", and will latch onto any excuse to explain why their chosen group is in the right ackchually.

 

[Joey D]

Do you read my post? You constantly ignoring my posts and cherry picking sentences. There are big gap between support and being in opposition, I didn't wrote that everyone in Gaza supporting HAMAS.

Yes, I've read all your posts and you continue to conflate the idea that because you don't see Palestinian people protesting or speaking out (nevermind they probably don't have a way to at the moment), they must accept or be fine with Hamas as their government (since they've been brainwashed since kindergarten), which I continue to tell you is a profoundly ignorant position to take. Take away everything and put it at the most simplistic level. No country's population supports one thing 100% and there will always be people opposed to it.

I've also said "supports or are at least OK with". I don't know if it's a language barrier or what but if you're not opposed to something, you're either OK with it or support it.

 

[omgitsbees]

Yes, I've read all your posts and you continue to conflate the idea that because you don't see Palestinian people protesting or speaking out (nevermind they probably don't have a way to at the moment), they must accept or be fine with Hamas as their government (since they've been brainwashed since kindergarten), which I continue to tell you is a profoundly ignorant position to take. Take away everything and put it at the most simplistic level. No country's population supports one thing 100% and there will always be people opposed to it.

I've also said "supports or are at least OK with". I don't know if it's a language barrier or what but if you're not opposed to something, you're either OK with it or support it.

He doesn't care, his entire bit is to just wear everyone down by repeating the same racist talking points over and over again. I've been glossing over his posts for awhile now because it just isn't worth it to engage in someone like this. They don't care.

 

[TexRex]

This was purportedly posted by the official IDF presence on Twitter. I think there just may be a bit more nuance.

 

[inCloud]

Yes, I've read all your posts

I don't think so

No country's population supports one thing 100% and there will always be people opposed to it.

Lack of opposition doesn't mean there isn't electorate that would choose it.

In politics, the opposition comprises one or more political parties or other organized groups that are opposed

Here we go again:

Not all Palestinians are terrorists or support terrorism

There are big gap between support and being in opposition, I didn't wrote that everyone in Gaza supporting HAMAS.

Are you even bothering to read?

I answered your question, its even in your quote.

Don't project your fears onto me.

What fears? You just posted nonsense. Last thing any jew wants is collateral damage. Guess why? Because Israel is cornered between states with Muslim arabic population that wouldn't be happy to see their relatives dead or injured.

 

[Danoff]

It's not rational though, you're just repeating racist dog whistles. The point of my response is that there is what you believe, and then there is the reality.

What I believe is that Islam encourages terrorism, and this is a verifiable fact that can be understood by understanding the teachings of Islam directly. It is also borne out practically by observing terrorism carried out in the name of Islam. If you think this is a "racist dog whistle" and so you don't want to hear it, that's your belief vs. reality.

Islam encourages terrorism, and many terrorist attacks have been carried out in its name. I don't have to mention any other religion, and I didn't mention skin color.

There are big difference between beheading someone with cold weapon and killing by bomb as part of collateral damage.

If you think that the collateral damage is accidental, sure. But that's not what's happening here. The "collateral damage" is intentional. It's not actually collateral, it's part of the intended effect. The same is true of cutting off water and blockading other supplies. The idea is collective punishment, not collateral damage, collective damage. It is no accident that children in Gaza are being murdered by Israel.

I do understand the moral distinction you're trying to make. But you keep coming back to "these people are barbarians that don't value human lives" and then try to hold onto the conflicting view that "these other human lives don't matter because reasons".

 

[unit-one]

Rockets being fired right from the streets.

 

[omgitsbees]

This was purportedly posted by the official IDF presence on Twitter. I think there just may be a bit more nuance.

This meme that the IDF created, is exactly what George W. Bush said after 9/11. It's propaganda garbage and should be treated as such.

Rockets being fired right from the streets.

I am not looking forward to learning how many innocent people were murdered during those IDF raids into Gaza. I suspect though that everyone killed by them was innocent. Fully expecting revenge killings and IDF soldiers getting carried away. There will be absolutely zero accountability for any of this, which is why it's going to happen if it hasn't already.

 

[Joey D]

I don't think so

I have read each and every one of your posts numerous times. I guess I'll chalk it up to English not being your language, because in your posts you have made it clear that if you don't openly oppose Hamas, then you're either in support of it or at least OK with it. I guess you could add don't care one way or another to that list too. However you meant it though, the words you wrote paint all the non-protesting Palestinians with the same brush.

Even your statement of "Lack of opposition doesn't mean there isn't electorate that would choose it" says that if opposition doesn't exist, it doesn't mean that the population would choose to oppose it. Or to put it another way, if no one is opposing Hamas, it doesn't automatically mean people would oppose them. In English, if it's not Thing A, then it's going to be Thing B, C, etc. All those other things range from being OK with Hamas, to supporting Hamas, to just not caring.

I'm not the only one seeing that here either.

 

[Imari]

Take away everything and put it at the most simplistic level. No country's population supports one thing 100% and there will always be people opposed to it.

If I was in Gaza, I'd also question how safe it would be to speak out against Hamas. Even legitimate democratic governments tend not to put up with much in the way of local opposition in times of true crisis - at best they will arrest you and get you out of the way so that they can get on with what they think they need to do for the immediate good of the country.

I'd say it's fair to say that Gaza is in true crisis right now, and it arguably has been for years. For anyone that disagrees with what Hamas is doing, speaking up about it in any meaningful way could be significantly less safe than charging the Israeli lines with a rifle right now. Given how unwelcome pro-Palestinian sentiment seems to be in Israel and elsewhere, I can't imagine that pro-Israeli sentiment in Gaza would go down well at all.

Speaking up just so that wanna-be Israeli lieutenants on the internets can see that actually Palestinians aren't a hive mind would be insane. It achieves nothing but puts the lives of you and your family at risk.

What fears? You just posted nonsense. Last thing any jew wants is collateral damage. Guess why? Because Israel is cornered between states with Muslim arabic population that wouldn't be happy to see their relatives dead or injured.

Right, right. That's why they've been so generous and peaceful in how they've approached the whole issue of a Palestinian state, because they're worried about antagonising surrounding Muslim states. Of course. Notoriously diplomatic and reserved, Israel is.

Israel has a clear history of being perfectly fine with antagonising the surrounding Muslim states when it wants to, and even going to war with them. It has done so multiple times. Hell, at the start of all this Israel had an explicit policy of retribution with the idea that it would be a deterrent. It obviously doesn't have that policy now, at least not publically, but it's far from established that Israel has any aversion to collateral damage.

It's like you have no idea of any of the history behind any of this. Unfortunately, even basic reading on Wikipedia is enough to show that you're just making **** up. How about you see if you can go one post without projecting your hopes and dreams onto Israel?

 

[Dennisch]

Another rocket attack just now coming out of Gaza.

 

[inCloud]

The "collateral damage" is intentional.

And offcourse, you can provide some evidence of this.

because in your posts you have made it clear that if you don't openly oppose Hamas, then you're either in support of it or at least OK with it. I guess you could add don't care one way or another to that list too.

This. There also could be some % of invisible sabotage, as Tzahal getting their intel not only from drones.

However you meant it though, the words you wrote paint all the non-protesting Palestinians with the same brush.

What brush? They don't want or can't negotiate. Most of them aren't responsible for terrorism, but it doesn't mean things should be as they were. HAMAS should be extinct. This way both Israel and Palestine could go next.

That's why they've been so generous and peaceful in how they've approached the whole issue of a Palestinian state

1947 - Israel was founded according to UN plan, something that could be called Palestine also.
1948 - Arab League annexing Palestine and declare war to Israel. Israel beat them and annex most of Palestine to himself, Gaza and West Bank still under Transjordan and Egypt.
1967 - Six day war - another aggression from Arab states, another lose. Israel occupied Gaza and West Bank as result.
In 1993 Israel provide PLO control under West Bank and Gaza as part of Oslo Accords. Since 2005 Israel doesn't have any control under Gaza, but supplying it with water and electricity. Gaza supplying terror and rockets instead.

Seems peaceful and generous enough to me.

 

[MIE1992]

It kills me that these Ivy League liberals can't see the forest for the trees. They think sympathy is a zero-sum game, where you're either pro-Israel or pro-Palestinian. Why not both? I think the most rational stance is to be pro-Palestine but anti-Hamas, and also being pro-Israel but anti-Likud. I expected more out of students attending these elite schools, but I suppose it goes to show you can still have excrement for grey matter.

 

[Northstar]

And offcourse, you can provide some evidence of this.

They have a system that can intercept incoming missiles without even trying, but can't seem to avoid the very routes they told people were safe.

Gaza civilians afraid to leave home after bombing of ‘safe routes’

Analysis of aerial photos and social media posts confirms attack on road identified as safe by Israeli army

www.theguardian.com

Than there's the whole thing where they are apparently going to target a hospital...

Israel gives Palestine's Red Crescent until 1300 GMT to evacuate Al-Quds hospital in Gaza City

The Palestinian Red Crescent Society received an order from Israeli forces on Saturday with a new deadline to evacuate its Al-Quds hospital in Gaza City by 1300 GMT (16:00 pm local), according to a statement.

www.reuters.com

 

[Joey D]

It kills me that these Ivy League liberals can't see the forest for the trees. They think sympathy is a zero-sum game, where you're either pro-Israel or pro-Palestinian. Why not both? I think the most rational stance is to be pro-Palestine but anti-Hamas, and also being pro-Israel but anti-Likud. I expected more out of students attending these elite schools, but I suppose it goes to show you can still have excrement for grey matter.

I think a ton of Americans can't see the bigger picture. Hell, the president isn't even indicating he can see the bigger picture (whether he can or not is another story). Israel is awful and doing awful, awful things to innocent Palestinians while creating an apartheid state and killing people indiscriminately. Hamas is awful and doing awful, awful things like killing, torturing, and kidnapping innocent Israelis.

Chances are that a decent number of people in both countries just want to coexist and go on about their business, raise their families, and just live their lives. But now they're stuck in the middle of a bloody war where the end game is thousands of dead people, ruined infrastructure, and no closer to peace. Pretty much as this point, anyone who's looking at the situation reasonably should be anti-government/heads-of-state and pro-civilians.

 

[Imari]

1947 - Israel was founded according to UN plan, something that could be called Palestine also.
1948 - Arab League annexing Palestine and declare war to Israel. Israel beat them and annex most of Palestine to himself, Gaza and West Bank still under Transjordan and Egypt.
1967 - Six day war - another aggression from Arab states, another lose. Israel occupied Gaza and West Bank as result.
In 1993 Israel provide PLO control under West Bank and Gaza as part of Oslo Accords. Since 2005 Israel doesn't have any control under Gaza, but supplying it with water and electricity. Gaza supplying terror and rockets instead.

Seems peaceful and generous enough to me.

I've lived next door to an orchard and I've never seen anyone pick so many cherries.

 

[MIE1992]

Pretty much as this point, anyone who's looking at the situation reasonably should be anti-government/heads-of-state and pro-civilians.

Why this, though? I feel like I agree with everything else you said. What does one replace government with? Unless you mean we should be anti-Hamas and anti-Likud, which I'd agree with.

 

[Joey D]

Why this, though? I feel like I agree with everything else you said. What does one replace government with? Unless you mean we should be anti-Hamas and anti-Likud, which I'd agree with.

Oh sorry, anti-government/anti-heads of state between Israel and Palestine. So Hamas and Likud.

 

[MIE1992]

Oh sorry, anti-government/anti-heads of state between Israel and Palestine. So Hamas and Likud.

Yes, I agree. FWIW, I have a cousin in Modiin who, some weeks before the attack, had protested against Netanyahu when he wanted to hose around with the Israeli judiciary.

 

[Dennisch]

They have a system that can intercept incoming missiles without even trying, but can't seem to avoid the very routes they told people were safe.

There might be more to that story.

But, I've been fooled too before. Both sides can be this heinous, so both stories can be true.

 

[omgitsbees]

There might be more to that story.

But, I've been fooled too before. Both sides can be this heinous, so both stories can be true.

I dont know who this person is, this isn't a trust worthy source. Looking more at their timeline, they are posting non-stop genocide denial b.s. and trying to argue that Israel is doing nothing wrong.

 

[Dennisch]

I dont know who this person is, this isn't a trust worthy source.

Great! I don't know who you are either so why should I take your knowledge for granted. I'm just sharing more possible information.

If the Ukrainian war and this current squabble are anything to go by, there aren't any trustworthy sources out there hence :

But, I've been fooled too before. Both sides can be this heinous, so both stories can be true.

 

[omgitsbees]

Great! I don't know who you are either so why should I take your knowledge for granted. I'm just sharing more possible information.

If the Ukrainian war and this current squabble are anything to go by, there aren't any trustworthy sources out there hence :

There are actually plenty of trust worthy sources. The one you shared is pretty obviously not one of them. Stop arguing about this in bad faith, and stop being so defensive.

 

[Dennisch]

There are actually plenty of trust worthy sources.

No, not really. They're all trying to bring out the news ASAP just to be the first to bring the news. For the views, clicks and likes.

The one you shared is pretty obviously not one of them.

Doesn't matter, it just a reminder to take every single piece of news with quite a bit of salt.

Stop arguing about this in bad faith

This isn't even close to an argument yet.

and stop being so defensive

You do not get to dictate my posting habits.

 

[MIE1992]

FWIW, I would typically recommend The Atlantic and Politico for sources, alongside AP Reuters.

 

[Dennisch]

AP Reuters.

They're on that : "I want to be the first" route too.

It has been my to go to news source for many years now but the last couple of years it's getting harder to rely on them too.