Israel and Palestine- The permanent mess

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

1 hour ago, kissdbyfire said:

No, it wasn’t. It was horrific and disgusting.
And Israel’s response where upwards of 23K people have been killed, with ~ 10K being children isn’t justified either. It also isn’t self-defence but looks a lot more like vengeance. 
 

For instance, Oxfam says ~ 250 Palestinians are being killed daily. And they posted this for comparison:

Using publicly available data, Oxfam calculated that number of average deaths per day for Gaza is significantly higher than any recent major armed conflict including Syria (96.5 deaths per day), Sudan (51.6), Iraq (50.8), Ukraine (43.9) Afghanistan (23.8) and Yemen (15.8).

I agree entirely 

[Ran]

This conflict isn't like any of those other conflicts, so while one can draw parallels, trying to figure out "deaths per day" as some sort of metric like we're back in Vietnam is silly. The death toll is a direct result of fighting the most entrenched enemy in a crowded populace urban place in modern history. You probably need to go back to WWII for any similar scenario, and suffice it to say, the conflict isn't a spot on the Battle of Stalingrad (~19,000 killed per day). 

Hamas could have ended this conflict on October 8th, or any day since. It still can. 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

Or they could have just not attacked in the first place...

[straits]

8 minutes ago, Mr. Chatywin et al. said:

Or they could have just not attacked in the first place...

Israel does not need to drag thousands of Palestinians to their military courts, or subject them to an entire catalogue of oppressive practices. Not do they need to advance settler colonialism further. But here we are.

[Kalbear]

10 hours ago, Mr. Chatywin et al. said:

Of course. These factions don't really care about each other. Iran is just the sugar daddy. 

I vehemently disagree. The leadership would very much love to not care about Palestinians but the people of the region have repeatedly shown themselves to care and it being one of their biggest priorities. To the point that if a government does not show interest in helping Palestinians it can cause riots, coups and assassinations.

[kissdbyfire]

34 minutes ago, Mr. Chatywin et al. said:

Or they could have just not attacked in the first place...

What does this mean? Sounds an awful lot like "they [Palestinians] got what they asked for". Which btw kind of fits with how I personally see as what Netanyahu & his goons are doing. 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

30 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

I vehemently disagree. The leadership would very much love to not care about Palestinians but the people of the region have repeatedly shown themselves to care and it being one of their biggest priorities. To the point that if a government does not show interest in helping Palestinians it can cause riots, coups and assassinations.

Except I was talking about leadership.

23 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

What does this mean? Sounds an awful lot like "they [Palestinians] got what they asked for". Which btw kind of fits with how I personally see as what Netanyahu & his goons are doing. 

Isn't it obvious? If Hamas didn't attack pretty much everyone on both sides would be alive right now. 

[Kalbear]

55 minutes ago, Mr. Chatywin et al. said:

Except I was talking about leadership.

And that leadership does care inasmuch as anyone cares. Maybe not for altruistic values but it hardly matters.

The important thing is that they are almost certainly not just doing it at the behest of Iran. Houthis showing their strength and leadership of the Arabs in the area is valuable to them; there's a reason that Saudi Arabia and other Arab nations aren't trying very hard to stop them and are warning the west to not go too far.

 

[Here's Looking At You, Kid]

Disclaimer - I haven't read the replies to this post.  I will give my opinion based on what I know about geopolitics.

I am of the opinion that the only permanent solution is the two-state solution based on the old borders. 

[fionwe1987]

2 hours ago, Mr. Chatywin et al. said:

Isn't it obvious? If Hamas didn't attack pretty much everyone on both sides would be alive right now. 

Can this then be extended to, "if Likud didn't bolster Hamas for so many years, everyone on both sides would be alive right now"?

[House Balstroko]

28 minutes ago, Here's Looking At You, Kid said:

Disclaimer - I haven't read the replies to this post.  I will give my opinion based on what I know about geopolitics.

I am of the opinion that the only permanent solution is the two-state solution based on the old borders. 

On paper, that’s the best solution. The problem then becomes how to draw the borders. The general idea of respecting the 1967 borders seems to be the best solution, except for the fact that Israel has already built settlements in Area C of the West Bank. How do we proceed from here? Do the 2 parties agree to a land swap where Israel gets to keep Area C in favour of relinquishing territory that it currently holds?

[fionwe1987]

2 hours ago, House Balstroko said:

On paper, that’s the best solution. The problem then becomes how to draw the borders. The general idea of respecting the 1967 borders seems to be the best solution, except for the fact that Israel has already built settlements in Area C of the West Bank. How do we proceed from here? Do the 2 parties agree to a land swap where Israel gets to keep Area C in favour of relinquishing territory that it currently holds?

And that this is a "problem" is why I find arguments against the settler-colonial lens being used to view the Israel-Palestine conflict utterly bizzare. 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

4 hours ago, fionwe1987 said:

Can this then be extended to, "if Likud didn't bolster Hamas for so many years, everyone on both sides would be alive right now"?

Sure, but Hamas predates this current regime and their goals were clear. Empowering them was always stupid, but at the end of they day they executed a long planned out terrorist attack. And it wasn't to liberate anyone. It was to kill an ethnic group they hate and probably also to disrupt peace talks between Israelis and Saudis. Iran hates both and make no mistake, they run Hamas. 

Edited January 14 by Mr. Chatywin et al.

[fionwe1987]

31 minutes ago, Mr. Chatywin et al. said:

Sure,

And how would you feel if, looking at the destruction and pain of October 7th, someone glibly brought this up as a thinly veiled excuse to imply the Israeli's deserved it?

That is exactly what you're doing when, in response to conversation about the massive civilian loss of life, you say "Or they couldn't have attacked in the first place". So maybe cut out that BS?

31 minutes ago, Mr. Chatywin et al. said:

but Hamas predates this current regime and their goals were clear. Empowering them was always stupid, but at the end of they day they executed a long planned out terrorist attack. And it wasn't to liberate anyone. It was to kill an ethnic group they hate and probably also to disrupt peace talks between Israelis and Saudis. Iran hates both and make no mistake, they run Hamas. 

And you can make a similar case about Israel not caring about Palestinian civilian lives, ever, both based on their pre-Oct 7 actions in Gaza, as well as the continued impunity and occupation in the West Bank. Quit using the geopolitical hypocrisy of Hamas or Israel to justify civilian deaths. Or apply it equally on both sides. This idea of impunity for Israel, blended with "you deserve it coz Hamas" for Palestinians is beyond the pale.

Edited January 14 by fionwe1987

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

1 hour ago, fionwe1987 said:

And how would you feel if, looking at the destruction and pain of October 7th, someone glibly brought this up as a thinly veiled excuse to imply the Israeli's deserved it?

That is exactly what you're doing when, in response to conversation about the massive civilian loss of life, you say "Or they couldn't have attacked in the first place". So maybe cut out that BS?

Well it was, and no, I don't think anyone here has said Gaza deserves what's happening. Only that Israel is in the right to try to get rid of Hamas. But like I've said there's no good way to do it.

Quote

And you can make a similar case about Israel not caring about Palestinian civilian lives, ever, both based on their pre-Oct 7 actions in Gaza, as well as the continued impunity and occupation in the West Bank. Quit using the geopolitical hypocrisy of Hamas or Israel to justify civilian deaths. Or apply it equally on both sides. This idea of impunity for Israel, blended with "you deserve it coz Hamas" for Palestinians is beyond the pale.

I don't think they care much about Palestinian lives. They're just not as loud about wanting to kill everyone and/or forcing them to leave until Oct 7th happened. 

And don't you dare talk to me about applying it to both sides. I have consistently said they both suck. These threads have basically been "Hamas bad" at best and then an essay on why Israel sucks. 

[Daeron the Daring]

2 hours ago, Mr. Chatywin et al. said:

These threads have basically been "Hamas bad" at best and then an essay on why Israel sucks.

That's mainly because nobody (in these threads) questions where Hamas stands on the spectrum of morality. 

2 hours ago, Mr. Chatywin et al. said:

And don't you dare talk to me about applying it to both sides. I have consistently said they both suck.

Saying they both suck wouldn't mean they suck equally though, would it? You take a position that everybody supposedly agrees with (which is that both suck), how come there's still a disagreement? Everybody's opinion is much more layered than that, and the combination of all of what we individually say paints the whole picture that is an opinion. I'm 100% sure double standards remain possible even if said person thinks both Hamas and Likud are bad or good.

2 hours ago, Mr. Chatywin et al. said:

I don't think anyone here has said Gaza deserves what's happening. Only that Israel is in the right to try to get rid of Hamas. But like I've said there's no good way to do it.

Is there a better way to do it, tough? Many argue there is, and the "there's no good way around this" does not rule out the possibility of doing better.

Even if *it is what it is*.

[straits]

3 hours ago, Mr. Chatywin et al. said:

Well it was, and no, I don't think anyone here has said Gaza deserves what's happening. Only that Israel is in the right to try to get rid of Hamas. But like I've said there's no good way to do it.
And don't you dare talk to me about applying it to both sides. I have consistently said they both suck. These threads have basically been "Hamas bad" at best and then an essay on why Israel sucks. 

And? Israel has maintained a steady increase in human rights violations and departures from UN resolutions before Hamas existed. It has continued that during the existence of Hamas, and all the facts today point towards a continuation of those practices if Hamas is destroyed.

[kissdbyfire]

5 hours ago, Mr. Chatywin et al. said:

Sure, but Hamas predates this current regime and their goals were clear.

Yeah, but Netanyahu has been talking about driving Palestinians out since the 70s, so before Hamas even existed. 
 

Quote

Ironically, it was the experience of spending much more time with the Israeli army in the mid-1970s, in the course of researching a book, which caused me to begin to perceive the importance of what Cameron said. I glimpsed a darker side of Israel. I learned a lot about the ruthlessness of Israeli anti-terrorist operations. I spent many hours talking to thoughtful Israelis, who voiced their fears about the perils, the threatened corruption of their own society, which they perceived in the 1967 conquests. I also became dismayed by the naked imperialism displayed by Israel's rightwing zealots. One night at a dinner party in Jerusalem in 1977, I heard a young Israeli talking about the Arabs in terms which chilled my blood. "In the next war," he said, "we've got to get the Palestinians out of the West Bank for good."

To me, in my naivete, Israel's struggle had hitherto seemed that of a brilliant little people, who had suffered the most ghastly experience of the 20th century, struggling for survival amid a hostile Middle East still bent upon their destruction. Now, suddenly, I found myself meeting Israelis committed to the creation of a greater Israel embracing the West Bank, who were utterly heedless of the fate of its inhabitants. The Palestinians were perceived as losers, a mere incidental impediment to the fulfilment of Israel's historic territorial destiny. By a curious quirk, that young Israeli whom I heard enthuse about emptying the West Bank of Arabs was Binyamin Netanyahu, today his country's prime minister.

And the article quoted is from May 2009, and Netanyahu is still the PM with only a little gap of 1 or 2 years? Not very encouraging.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2009/may/09/israel-middle-east-max-hastings

[fionwe1987]

3 hours ago, Mr. Chatywin et al. said:

Well it was, and no, I don't think anyone here has said Gaza deserves what's happening. Only that Israel is in the right to try to get rid of Hamas. But like I've said there's no good way to do it.

And is "no good way to do it" an excuse you'll extend to the Palestinians, as well? Can they say that about October 7? Is there any limit to "no good way to do it", as an excuse? 

3 hours ago, Mr. Chatywin et al. said:

I don't think they care much about Palestinian lives. They're just not as loud about wanting to kill everyone and/or forcing them to leave until Oct 7th happened. 

And this supposed lack of loudness explains you offering them this many excuses for their actions now?

3 hours ago, Mr. Chatywin et al. said:

And don't you dare talk to me about applying it to both sides. I have consistently said they both suck. These threads have basically been "Hamas bad" at best and then an essay on why Israel sucks. 

"Hamas bad", or rather "Hamas awful/atrocious" is not something anyone is contesting. So why exactly do you expect essays on the topic? Second, does Israel suck is in fact contested, and Israel's sucky actions continue, and continue to get worse, so why wouldn't that take more space in these threads?

More critically, you've said "both suck", but apply the suckage of Hamas as an excuse to Israel doing what it is currently doing, as if it is this chain of blind retaliation, or nothin. But have exactly the opposite with respect to how Palestinians/Hamas should respond to Likud/Israeli right winger's sucky actions. They have even fewer options against these forces. I don't believe that justifies October 7, and clearly, neither do you, but why do you think destroying so much of Gaza, humiliating its citizens, starving and ethnically cleansing them... why is all this accepted by you under the guise of "no good way to do it"?

Edited January 14 by fionwe1987

[fionwe1987]

22 minutes ago, kissdbyfire said:

Yeah, but Netanyahu has been talking about driving Palestinians out since the 70s, so before Hamas even existed. 
 

And the article quoted is from May 2009, and Netanyahu is still the PM with only a little gap of 1 or 2 years? Not very encouraging.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2009/may/09/israel-middle-east-max-hastings

A prescient essay.

Quote

An Israeli listening to all this might interrupt angrily: "But why do you say so little about Hamas and Hizbollah, rocketing and suicide-bombing innocent Israeli civilians?" Yes, indeed – such acts must always be condemned. But what of proportionality? In recent years, for every Israeli killed by terrorism, the Israeli security forces have killed 30, 40, 50 Palestinians – most of them civilians. Israel exacts a blood price from the innocent of a severity which only tyrannies have historically thought appropriate.

Sums up pages of debate in this thread. So long as Israel continues to do this, its claims to being a humane, democratic state will remain laughable.