Israel - Hamas war XIV

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

6 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

Probably because you lump it in with a desire to ethnic cleanse the Palestinians and consider both of those things equivalent.

How am I calling for an ethnic cleansing when saying Palestinians need to have their own state? If you really think Gaza needs to be its own state, say it, but it's not going to work, nor is a state which is both Gaza and the WB. Be honest about the reasons why this would just make things worse. Fantasy time is up. 

[Zorral]

Josh Marshall has some thoughts as to what happens with Israel (though, he being who he is, hasn't got anything for Palestinians who he generally = Hamas):

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/readers-respond-3-2

Quote

.... Second, the Israel-Hamas war. It’s been a horror from beginning to whatever-this-is-that-isn’t-the-end. Whatever hope there may have been at the beginning that Hamas would not survive this war seems to be lessening by the day. The hope that Netanyahu would quickly resign, if it ever existed, has vanished, and in the meantime his coalition of theocrats and pro-genocide lobbyists has little incentive to abandon him. Nonetheless, it’s clear that we are finally viewing Bibi’s last chapter in electoral politics, and it feels like we are standing on the cusp of a true Likud collapse. It will likely take more than a few election cycles to reach the depths Labor eventually sank to, but I wouldn’t be surprised to see them get there in my lifetime. I hope to see a revitalized Israeli left, for all that it seems like muscular centrism will win the day in the short term. That said, I also wouldn’t put it outside the realm of possibility that the centrists will prove capable of negotiating a true peace and not just a temporary cessation of hostilities. It wasn’t the left, after all, that brokered the peace with Egypt or kicked the settlers out of Gaza. On the Palestinian side, it’s hard to express anything like optimism in the midst of so much death and destruction, but one can at least hope that there will be widespread acknowledgement that Hamas and its allies led Gaza into an unmitigated disaster the likes of which we haven’t seen in generations. The fact that the international left has discovered a new level of bloodthirst about this conflict doesn’t really change the fact that all the relevant actors have the capacity to make (and support) peace. If Israel can eject its terrorists and zealots from leadership roles, perhaps Gaza can too. ....

 

[Kalbear]

3 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

How am I calling for an ethnic cleansing when saying Palestinians need to have their own state?

When you suggest that in order to do so 2 million people have to leave where they've been living for 80 years and go somewhere they haven't been living. Which, ya know, is the literal definition of ethnic cleansing. 

3 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

If you really think Gaza needs to be its own state, say it, but it's not going to work, nor is a state which is both Gaza and the WB. Be honest about the reasons why this would just make things worse. Fantasy time is up. 

I think it is an absolute atrocity equivalent to what the US did to the native American populations to have the Gazans move to the West Bank, giving up better land and more developed areas and their actual homes in exchange for the promises of governments that conveniently forget them until they blow shit up. That it is not what anyone actually wants is an even bigger problem - and if my ideas are living in fantasy land, this would be China Mieville levels of spec fic bullshit - to continue to cling to an atrocity that also no one even thinks is worth doing. It is insanely offensive to me still that you support this and consider it a rational decision; it is rational only if you absolutely do not value Palestinian life, family, and history one bit. 

I think that Palestine needs to be its own country. I think that it is probably the least bad option that has any chance of success and a future for Palestinians. Barring that, I think that Gaza and the West Bank should be their own separate countries. I think that is a less good solution, but it is still better. 

I think that it will absolutely cause problems, especially for Israel. It will not be easy in the short term. It will not satisfy everyone. It may cause violence down the road. That said, there is only one solution that guarantees no violence down the road - which is to utterly wipe out the Palestinian identity in the area. And that can only be done with massive crimes against humanity. There are logistical problems with Palestine being its own country, there are security problems for Israel, there are complications about borders and issues, and there are deep-seated trust issues with the two sides - and all of these things have actual solutions. Solutions that have been implemented in other places and other times in the real world and can work if people put effort into doing them. 

The real obstacle to anything happening other than the continued slow apartheid system Israel is practicing is Israel. Israel currently has no real incentive to change a damn thing. There is not particular pressure on Israel internally to stop killing Palestinians or ruining their lives or making them miserable - if anything, this has become more popular with Israelis. There is very little external pressure that Israel feels to stop what they're doing, nor has there been any pressure for 23 years - which is a big reason why many Palestinians supported 10-7, because for the first time in 17 years something was done for them. And for the first time in 17 years the world actually stood up and took notice. The US, for the first time, actually did something against illegal settlements in the West Bank - as effectively a direct response to 10-7 and the Israeli response! Houthis are now attacking shipping and causing companies to say they want change! The message that Palestinians are getting is that this is the only way to get something to happen for them. 

Unless you are willing to support the kind of external boycotting, divesting, blockading and other global punishments done to countries like South Africa you're not going to get any kind of change that is at all favorable to Palestinians. Israel will continue to either lie about what they're doing, ignore UN sanctions and pressure, kill reporters and civilians as they largely please, settle illegally and take over more land, and blow up as much as they'd really like to because no one will hold them accountable. Or someone will hold them accountable, and then the Middle East will become a nuclear wasteland. 

[Jace, Extat]

Nothing was done for Palestinians on Oct. 7th except provocation of war and tragedy.

They cheered not m for freedom, but for dead jews.

[Kalbear]

17 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

Show some evidence for that claim. You can't have it both ways, that half of Gaza is under 20 and their grandparents lived and grew up in what's now Israel when the state is 75 years old. Those two numbers don't work. Gaza and the WB? Sure, but all of Israel, no.

That was my point - that they are either from Gaza or from Israel. They are not from, say, Eastern Europe like Netanyahu is. 

17 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

What leg? Many Jews were forced to flee MENA during a number of purges. 

Quite a long time ago. Netanyahu was not one of them. Almost none of the current Israeli government was, either. 

17 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

I said it is an ethnostate and Palestinians should have their own with the better territory, ie the WB, with all the settlements given over for free. JFC, do I have to write this in crayon for you? I've only said it numerous times. 

Are you having to write in crayon because pens are dangerous for you to use?

The West Bank is not 'better' territory. The only reason Israel wants it is because it has fewer Palestinians per square foot. Gaza is by virtually every other account significantly more valuable - beachfront, access to ports, better weather, better access to trade partners, far more developed. What it doesn't have is arable land, but much of the West Bank is garbage for that too. I don't know why you think West Bank is amazing and Gaza is some shithole but it really isn't accurate. 

But my point before that you missed - presumably because you were chewing on crayons or something - is that the big difference between comparing what happened to Germans in WW2 with what happened to Gazans is that Germans were allowed back into the places they had to flee from. One of the most basic tenets of the world right now is that if you are a refugee you are allowed to actually return from the land you had to flee from. 

And Israel is explicitly not allowing that. That is a very big difference between the sides, and ignoring that means you're just chewing on that crayon more. 

17 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

And the other is actively calling for a complete colonization. Again this isn't hard. 

Some are, sure! But again you don't have to do 'two sides' to this. You don't! This isn't a football game. It is okay to point out how there are many different viewpoints. You can use something other than a crayon! 

I'll also point out that there is a distinctive difference between a goal of having people who were kicked off their land in their living memory return to it and a goal of letting anyone from anywhere for the last 2000 years return to a land based on historical views. Making them equivalent ignores a very big point. 

17 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

They have gotten a shitty deal. When have I said otherwise? However, a plurality of them have associated themselves with Hamas and in turn Hamas has fucked up any chance of a two state solution in the near future. This is why I've said they and the PA need new leadership along with Israel doing the same. There's never going to be a perfect deal, but a reasonable one that could lead to peace is possible. 

Then why repeat the crayola argument that if you're making points about Israel's problems you're siding with Hamas? Like, you get how if you constantly deride people who criticize Israel you're not really going to be encouraging Israeli changes in leadership, right? You can see how those things are connected? 

17 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

I'm not actually all that ideological and can compromise.

Yeah, you'll bargain and only have a little bit of genocide. Not the whole thing. 

17 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

The problem here is leaders on both sides of this war and those adjacent are and want total victory. That's why nothing will probably change for decades while so many needlessly suffer. 

It doesn't appear that you want anything less than total victory either. Whenever you chide people for pointing out anything bad about Israel - especially when you say how they must also declare Hamas is bad or give equal press to both despite one happening two months ago or 90 years ago and one happening right now - you are actively shutting down any kind of compromise. I hope you get that. You probably won't. 

[Jace, Extat]

I've never killed anybody, nor particularly wanted to. I became a medic specifically because I wanted to save lives, not end them. 

 

[fionwe1987]

5 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

How am I calling for an ethnic cleansing when saying Palestinians need to have their own state? If you really think Gaza needs to be its own state, say it, but it's not going to work, nor is a state which is both Gaza and the WB. Be honest about the reasons why this would just make things worse. Fantasy time is up. 

That Israel could be created where it was was a fantastical notion too. That it became reality is because of the money effort and political will that was poured into it.

That you think that effort was worth it, but think no comparable error should be made for Gazans to maintain their homes, their current land, says it all. 

Folks with historic connections to the land, as far back as 2000 years, settle and make a new nation? A reality to be cherished.

But Muslims who want to stay where they are? Fantasy! 

You've made it clear Palestinian lives mean nothing to you. And that is utterly contemptible. 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

3 hours ago, Kalbear said:

When you suggest that in order to do so 2 million people have to leave where they've been living for 80 years and go somewhere they haven't been living. Which, ya know, is the literal definition of ethnic cleansing. 

I said it was one idea and to me seemed like the best way make life better as quickly as possible.

Quote

I think it is an absolute atrocity equivalent to what the US did to the native American populations to have the Gazans move to the West Bank, giving up better land and more developed areas and their actual homes in exchange for the promises of governments that conveniently

Yeah, I just stopped reading here. The WB is much better land and has ready made developments. Gaza is going to be hell for a long time. 

 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

1 hour ago, fionwe1987 said:

That Israel could be created where it was was a fantastical notion too. That it became reality is because of the money effort and political will that was poured into it.

Careful now.

Quote

That you think that effort was worth it, but think no comparable error should be made for Gazans to maintain their homes, their current land, says it all. 

I said make it its own state if that's what the people really want. I'm just against a noncontiguous Palestinian state because it opens up more cans of worms and won't lead to a lasting peace. 

Quote

You've made it clear Palestinian lives mean nothing to you. And that is utterly contemptible. 

 I clearly care more about Palestinian lives than Hamas. 

Look, I want a solution that will make things better for everyone in the long run. And ya'll seem to constantly ignore the many sacrifices I've said Israel needs to make. This will only work if both sides plus the international community are willing to give up some serious things. Otherwise it will be more of the same and you'll push two factions further and further to the right demanding they get their whole cake. 

Edited December 28, 2023 by Tywin et al.

[karaddin]

41 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Careful now.

Oh come on now. Yes there is a big issue with the antisemitic trope of wealthy Jews controlling the world but that isn't what Fionwe was doing - the worst in that bit you quoted was a crime of punctuation. The "money, effort, and political will" that was poured into creating the infrastructure and associated institutions necessary to run a new state.

It wasn't saying those things were suspicious or any of that conspiratorial bullshit, an awful lot of it came from major powers trying to absolve their guilt. It's also similar to rebuilding done in Germany (minus that guilt part).

Getting anything major done requires investment, all Fionwe was saying is that this investment was made in Israel.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

6 minutes ago, karaddin said:

Oh come on now. Yes there is a big issue with the antisemitic trope of wealthy Jews controlling the world but that isn't what Fionwe was doing - the worst in that bit you quoted was a crime of punctuation. The "money, effort, and political will" that was poured into creating the infrastructure and associated institutions necessary to run a new state.

It wasn't saying those things were suspicious or any of that conspiratorial bullshit, an awful lot of it came from major powers trying to absolve their guilt. It's also similar to rebuilding done in Germany (minus that guilt part).

Getting anything major done requires investment, all Fionwe was saying is that this investment was made in Israel.

I was being playful. If I really thought it was anti-Semitic you'd know.  

[House Balstroko]

10 hours ago, kissdbyfire said:

It was and that absolutely should be respected. It is funny how that goes though… because the UN’s decision on this issue is taken to be so meaningful (as it should), but then the same UN decided that Western Sahara is an independent and legitimate country and the whole world but two countries agreed. Care to guess which countries did not recognise the UN’s decision? No drumroll necessary: the US and Israel, who both hold that Morocco owns WS. So whatever meaning UN’s decisions have is very much dependent on the interests of very few countries. That’s probably why the UN is such a toothless organisation. except, of course, when it decides in favour of a handful of powerful countries. 

Then that also creates a plethora of other problems. What happens to Somaliland or Northern Cyprus? For that matter, you could throw in Taiwan as well which has only limited recognition, as most nations recognize the PRC as the legitimate government. 
 

On a side note, Western Sahara has just over 500 000 people spread out over an area that is over 10 times bigger than Israel. 

[fionwe1987]

1 hour ago, Tywin et al. said:

Careful now.

You've said below this was meant to be playful, but if so, it didn't land. 

And can we not be playful and address the actual statement? There were many "practical" reasons the creation of Israel could have been dismissed as a "fantasy" too. Will you acknowledge that?

1 hour ago, Tywin et al. said:

I said make it its own state if that's what the people really want. I'm just against a noncontiguous Palestinian state because it opens up more cans of worms and won't lead to a lasting peace. 

That is a lot of speculation to move a lot of people from their homes. Try again. 

1 hour ago, Tywin et al. said:

 I clearly care more about Palestinian lives than Hamas. 

So you're somewhat better than the perpetrators of October 7th, and this is supposed to be you defending yourself now? 

1 hour ago, Tywin et al. said:

Look, I want a solution that will make things better for everyone in the long run. And ya'll seem to constantly ignore the many sacrifices I've said Israel needs to make. This will only work if both sides plus the international community are willing to give up some serious things. Otherwise it will be more of the same and you'll push two factions further and further to the right demanding they get their whole cake. 

There is no sacrifice Israel is making at the scale of moving Palestinians out of Gaza. And if there is something you drum up at that scale, the question remains, why not have both sides not do those things, instead of asking Gazans to give up their homes?

45 minutes ago, karaddin said:

Oh come on now. Yes there is a big issue with the antisemitic trope of wealthy Jews controlling the world but that isn't what Fionwe was doing - the worst in that bit you quoted was a crime of punctuation. The "money, effort, and political will" that was poured into creating the infrastructure and associated institutions necessary to run a new state.

It wasn't saying those things were suspicious or any of that conspiratorial bullshit, an awful lot of it came from major powers trying to absolve their guilt. It's also similar to rebuilding done in Germany (minus that guilt part).

Getting anything major done requires investment, all Fionwe was saying is that this investment was made in Israel.

Thank you. 

Edited December 28, 2023 by fionwe1987

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

43 minutes ago, fionwe1987 said:

You've said below this was meant to be playful, but if so, it didn't land. 

And can we not be playful and address the actual statement? There were many "practical" reasons the creation of Israel could have been dismissed as a "fantasy" too. Will you acknowledge that?

Not really. It was a necessity and was only fantasy before the Holocaust happened. 

Quote

That is a lot of speculation to move a lot of people from their homes. Try again. 

A lot more than you're considering. 

Quote

So you're somewhat better than the perpetrators of October 7th, and this is supposed to be you defending yourself now? 

I mean I clearly am, and besides, I've always said the Palestinians have gotten a raw deal. 

Quote

There is no sacrifice Israel is making at the scale of moving Palestinians out of Gaza. And if there is something you drum up at that scale, the question remains, why not have both sides not do those things, instead of asking Gazans to give up their homes?

I have specifically said they should receive the settlements in the WB, free of charge and then get a ton of aid. The Israelis living there should go back to Israel and that's their government's problem. I'm not just asking one side to relocate.

Furthermore, how will Gaza be a livable place? How can there be a lasting peace without a major change? There are a million questions like this you can ask. Change nothing while Gaza is destroyed is not going to accomplish much, will it? 

[Kalbear]

1 minute ago, Tywin et al. said:

I have specifically said they should receive the settlements in the WB, free of charge and then get a ton of aid. The Israelis living there should go back to Israel and that's their government's problem. I'm not just asking one side to relocate.

You're asking Israel to give up the stolen property they've taken illegally. In exchange for getting coastal land that 10 times the population currently lives on. 

You are absolutely asking one side to relocate. You're asking the other side to return stolen property. These aren't remotely equivalent sacrifices. The settlements do have some value, but it's nothing like the value of Gaza. You're asking people who have lived in a place for multiple generations to swap to get houses that can hold 1/10th the population with people who have lived there for 10 years or less. And you consider this justice. 

1 minute ago, Tywin et al. said:

Furthermore, how will Gaza be a livable place? How can there be a lasting peace without a major change? There are a million questions like this you can ask. Change nothing while Gaza is destroyed is not going to accomplish much, will it? 

Gaza's been destroyed several times, and they've rebuilt. They can continue doing so. The idea that Gaza is somehow never going to be inhabitable again is ridiculous. Unless you're planning on nuking the place. 

It is also significantly more dense, which makes it significantly easier to rebuild even if you have to do it from scratch. It's a lot easier to build sewer, water, electric systems to cover 30 miles than 300. It's a lot easier to build apartments than it is individual houses. All the investments that you recommend go into West Bank would be better in Gaza and go further there. 

As to a lasting peace without a major change - I agree! You seem to have this weird idea that if you don't agree to ethnic cleansing then you're fine with the status quo, when you could far more easily just...not do that cleansing and it would be a lot easier to do. 

Not that it matters. Israel isn't going to give up settlements regardless of what they get, Gazans aren't going to want to move anyway, and all of this is a fantasy. One fantasy just recreates the trail of tears a bit more. 

[fionwe1987]

50 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Not really. It was a necessity and was only fantasy before the Holocaust happened. 

So you need Israel to perpetrate a Holocaust on Gazans before you will consider letting them stay in their homes? Good to know. 

50 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

A lot more than you're considering. 

Explain, please. Its good to get more words from you. 

50 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

I mean I clearly am, and besides, I've always said the Palestinians have gotten a raw deal. 

Congrats. I think most of the board aims to be more than slightly better than Hamas. And since you're proposing a rawer deal for Palestinians that even Hamas will accept, this very low bar is now not being cleared by you. 

50 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

I have specifically said they should receive the settlements in the WB, free of charge

Gosh really? They wouldn't have to pay to receive back stolen land? Such magnanimity! 

50 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

and then get a ton of aid. The Israelis living there should go back to Israel and that's their government's problem. I'm not just asking one side to relocate.

Since one group is legally in their homes, and is being asked to move, and the other is in illegally occupied land, how kind of you to equate making them move as the same. 

Do you even read the crap you type before you publish it?

50 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Furthermore, how will Gaza be a livable place? How can there be a lasting peace without a major change? There are a million questions like this you can ask. Change nothing while Gaza is destroyed is not going to accomplish much, will it? 

So the only choices are that Gazans move, or we do nothing? 

You can grandstand that way, but that's far from the truth. Its just a particularly stinky serving of justification for ethnic cleansing. 

Edited December 28, 2023 by fionwe1987

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

44 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

You're asking Israel to give up the stolen property they've taken illegally. In exchange for getting coastal land that 10 times the population currently lives on. 

Palestinians would say all of Israel was taken illegally. 

Quote

You are absolutely asking one side to relocate. You're asking the other side to return stolen property. These aren't remotely equivalent sacrifices. The settlements do have some value, but it's nothing like the value of Gaza. You're asking people who have lived in a place for multiple generations to swap to get houses that can hold 1/10th the population with people who have lived there for 10 years or less. And you consider this justice. 

Not really, but I'm looking for solutions, not virtue signaling. And yes, the settlements do have a lot of value. Giving them all over will never happen anyways, but that is a pretty big chip in a negotiation, especially when Israel values them more. 

Quote

Gaza's been destroyed several times, and they've rebuilt. They can continue doing so. The idea that Gaza is somehow never going to be inhabitable again is ridiculous. Unless you're planning on nuking the place. 

Never said it couldn't be, but who is going to pay for rebuilding it? And we both know the most likely outcome is things are going to get a lot worse before they can get better.

[fionwe1987]

1 minute ago, Tywin et al. said:

Palestinians would say all of Israel was taken illegally. 

And? What does that have to do with the specifics of the settlements in WB? 

1 minute ago, Tywin et al. said:

Not really, but I'm looking for solutions, not virtue signaling. And yes, the settlements do have a lot of value. Giving them all over will never happen anyways, but that is a pretty big chip in a negotiation, especially when Israel values them more. 

Your solutions lack virtue. So it isn't just about the siginaling, it is about the morality of the actions you're proposing. 

And yes, the thief values his stolen property. Bug surprise. That doesn't mean the Palestinians have to give up more to get back what was stolen.

1 minute ago, Tywin et al. said:

Never said it couldn't be, but who is going to pay for rebuilding it? And we both know the most likely outcome is things are going to get a lot worse before they can get better.

Israel will definitely have to bear a big chunk of the cost of rebuilding, but I'd expect and demand the United States, Europe and the Arab states to make major contributions as well. 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

11 minutes ago, fionwe1987 said:

So you need Israel to perpetrate a Holocaust on Gazans before you will consider letting them stay in their homes? Good to know. 

The Holocaust was the Holocaust. Just stop.
 

Quote

Explain, please. Its good to get more words from you. 

So many people's homes are destroyed and won't be rebuilt anytime soon. Ready made property for no charge isn't bad.

Or would you prefer extended times living in tent cities? 

Quote

Congrats. I think most of the board aims to be more than slightly better than Hamas. And since you're proposing a rawer deal for Palestinians that even Hamas will accept, this very low bar is now not being cleared by you. 

I've said they should receive significant aid. Will that happen? Idk. 

 

Quote

So the only choices are that Gazans move, or we do nothing? 

No, but what's the best choice when working with a lot of bad options? 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

4 minutes ago, fionwe1987 said:

And? What does that have to do with the specifics of the settlements in WB? 

Kind of important to the Israelis that Israel is recognized. 

I'm skipping the rest of your post. Do you have any experience working in government? Because my guess is no and I hate to break it to you, most of this kind of work is trying to decide which bad option is the best one. Every option here is awful and only going to get worse. You have to make a deal and right now neither side really will when what's going on the ground demands that they need to.