[RD] War in Gaza: News Thread

[EgonSpengler]

You're not getting me. I'm not saying the two conflicts are the same, just that if the participants were switched suddenly some people would switch sides as well, almost as if it were a fixation on identity rather than any consistent moral framework

Oh, okay. Yeah, if this thread is just posters taking shots at each other, I guess I don't need to be here.

 

[Gorbles]

There are many Israelis who were bon in Israel that don't want the war and just want to live in peace in their homeland.

This is an RD news thread, could you do the basic bare minimum and cite your claims, please?

 

[Ordnael]

Careful Sarin... some folks can't stand different opinions or views! Anyone that gives an opinion that might slide just a little inch out of their view is a monster.

 

[Ordnael]

This is an RD news thread, could you do the basic bare minimum and cite your claims, please?

I have read elsewhere that there are IDF members that come from Palestinian background, it might not be a stretch to assume there are also civilians with the same background living as full fledged Israelites.

 

[Gorbles]

I have read elsewhere that there are IDF members that come from Palestinian background, it might not be a stretch to assume there are also civilians with the same background living as full fledged Israelites.

None of that is evidence for Sarin's claim.

Not that "both sides are bad" is anything but an upholding of the status quo (which favours Israel right now), but that's irrelevant. Sarin can hold whatever opinions he wants to. However, if he's going to make claims about what is actually happening in Israel, then the claim(s) need to have a supporting piece of evidence. One, at the very least. Otherwise it's nothing more than wishful thinking (at best).

 

[Bonyduck Campersang]

Oh, okay. Yeah, if this thread is just posters taking shots at each other, I guess I don't need to be here.

Every now and then we have a sporadic group of posters who are very active in another thread, and sometimes wander here to complain about the exact same things they do in that thread

 

[EgonSpengler]

Every now and then we have a sporadic group of posters who are very active in another thread, and sometimes wander here to complain about the exact same things they do in that thread

Oh, I see. I don't really pay a lot pf attention to the political threads on this forum anymore. I just stuck my head in to see what was going on, but maybe that was a mistake.

 

[Bonyduck Campersang]

Oh, I see. I don't really pay a lot pf attention to the political threads on this forum anymore. I just stuck my head in to see what was going on, but maybe that was a mistake.

I realise just now that my comment was vague enough to be interpreted in myriad ways

 

[Sarin]

Where are these Israeli anti-war protesters? The only protesters we've seen are the Orthodox Jews who don't want to be drafted, the anti-Netanyahu protests (because he's a corrupt ****), and the pro-rape activists


Yes there is a great difference between the conflicts. !Remindme when Ukraine is totally abandoned by its Western allies, Russia is receiving unconditional aid from the US and assassinating Ukrainian leaders left and right


You're not getting me. I'm not saying the two conflicts are the same, just that if the participants were switched suddenly some people would switch sides as well, almost as if it were a fixation on identity rather than any consistent moral framework

You haven't been paying attention, have you...There have been plenty of protests against the war itself, not just Netanyahu. Though lately you can pretty much equate these two.

How ridiculous your position is is exemplified by the fact that you're imagining how some people, whom you don't even really know, would react in a completely ridiculous, implausible scenario, without really having a shred of evidence for it, and trying to pull some kind of moral argument from that.
FYI. In a rather more plausible, though still extremely unlikely scenario, where China, Mongolia and Kazakhstan jointly decide to take advantage of Russia's weakness and push claim on some of its territory, I'd support Russia. And if India unilaterally decided to solve its border disputes with China using force, I'd support China in defending its territory. And at the same time, I support Philippines against the Chinese territorial claims.

 

[Lexicus]

Same as every other person on the planet.

If this were actually true you would have to be an anti-Zionist and reject Israel's "right to exist" and to "defend itself" on its stolen land. Palestinian human rights are incompatible with the existence of an exclusionary "Jewish state" occupying more than half Palestine.

You keep accusing me of lying without any evidence, because you paint, in your mind, everyone who disagrees in any way with you as rabid Netanyahu supporter, and can't or do not want to understand that people have vastly different views on this conflict that don't fully support either side like you do. Thus you argue not against me and my views, but against imagined person. As long as you keep at it, there's no point in you engaging in this discussion any further.

I actually think you're lying to yourself about "not fully supporting each side," but that's between you and your gods, it's really nothing to do with me.

In my view there is clear right and wrong here and the only way one can pretend it's at all complicated is by making things up.

As an example of this, earlier in this same post you imply that Hamas are "occupiers" of Palestinian land in an attempt to draw a false equivalence between Hamas and Israel. This is the sort of lying I'm talking about: it is preposterous to say that the largest faction of the Palestinian resistance is "occupying" Palestinian territory. It's like calling the Ukrainian government the "Kiev regime."

Case in point. There are many Israelis who were bon in Israel that don't want the war and just want to live in peace in their homeland. They disagree with Netanyahu, and many openly protest against him. Yet, you've called them thieves, murderers and deserving the Hamas terrorism all the same...

When Russian propagandists say they want peace now, you correctly understand this to be what Martin Luther King Jr called "peace without justice." The real question is peace on what terms? And the answer for most Israeli liberals is peace without settling the Palestinian refugee issue and without granting the Palestinians any real guarantees.

I don't see any value in conflating the Russian invasion of Ukraine with either the current Israeli bombing of Gaza or the longer history behind the conflict in Palestine. Forcing one onto the other as some kind of analogy or template or parallel doesn't seem to illuminate or clarify anything about either conflict, for me.

Disappointing, you're usually more perceptive than this.

 

[Kyriakos]

I also don't see how it can be argued that if one side doesn't like how the negotiations are, they can murder the negotiator/leader of the other side and see if the next one does better for them.
I mean, it's almost comedic to believe this.

If there was any sort of progress during these talks, maybe. But it has stalled. Maybe his replacement will be more willing to make some compromises. And if not, maybe HIS replacement...and on and on until Israel finds someone willing to accept their terms.

 

[Sarin]

If this were actually true you would have to be an anti-Zionist and reject Israel's "right to exist" and to "defend itself" on its stolen land. Palestinian human rights are incompatible with the existence of an exclusionary "Jewish state" occupying more than half Palestine.



I actually think you're lying to yourself about "not fully supporting each side," but that's between you and your gods, it's really nothing to do with me.

In my view there is clear right and wrong here and the only way one can pretend it's at all complicated is by making things up.

As an example of this, earlier in this same post you imply that Hamas are "occupiers" of Palestinian land in an attempt to draw a false equivalence between Hamas and Israel. This is the sort of lying I'm talking about: it is preposterous to say that the largest faction of the Palestinian resistance is "occupying" Palestinian territory. It's like calling the Ukrainian government the "Kiev regime."



When Russian propagandists say they want peace now, you correctly understand this to be what Martin Luther King Jr called "peace without justice." The real question is peace on what terms? And the answer for most Israeli liberals is peace without settling the Palestinian refugee issue and without granting the Palestinians any real guarantees.



Disappointing, you're usually more perceptive than this.

I don't support genocide. Of either Israelis or Palestinians, unlike you. Two state solution is the only other possibility here, and I support those who want it, even if it means compromises on their side. There are such people among Israelis and Palestinians, but they need to be allowed to come to terms without interference from maximalist factions.

If I seem pro-Israeli, it's because your stance is way into the maximalist Palestinian territory, and from there, every compromise seem pro-Israeli. That's your problem, not mine.
Speaking about that, Hamas is about as Palestinian as Houtis. It's an Iranian proxy for a war against Israel that doesn't give a damn about Palestinians wanting to live in peace. Just look where the actual leadership is...mostly cowering in other countries. Pity you can't see that.

Speaking about Israeli opinions...I took a brief look. In 2003 poll, which was latest I could find in quick search, 76% supported full or partial Israeli withdrawal from West Bank. I'd say that there would be real support for the kind of "Keep Gaza and West Bank, just leave us alone" kind of peace among Israeli. I wouldn't call that "peace without justice" in this conflict.

He seems more perceptive than you.

I also don't see how it can be argued that if one side doesn't like how the negotiations are, they can murder the negotiator/leader of the other side and see if the next one does better for them.
I mean, it's almost comedic to believe this.

Intimidation. Eventually, someone will value his life high enough to sincerely start negotiating.

 

[Gorbles]

Intimidation. Eventually, someone will value his life high enough to sincerely start negotiating.

So you support this as a strategy, regardless of which side enacts it?

As you don't support or prefer either side, meaning it shouldn't matter if other countries start employing this as a way to get Israel to negotiate in good faith.

 

[Bonyduck Campersang]

As you don't support or prefer either side, meaning it shouldn't matter if other countries start employing this as a way to get Israel to negotiate in good faith.

Or other countries employing this method with other countries that aren't Israel, like a certain country that starts with an 'R' starting this with a certain country that starts with a 'U'...

 

[Lexicus]

I don't support genocide.

The end of apartheid is not genocide, however much the pro-apartheid people might want to pretend otherwise.

Two state solution is the only other possibility here,

The actually-existing two-state solution is just apartheid with plausible deniability. With Israeli "security control" over the territory of the putative Palestinian state, there is no Palestinian sovereignty, only a bantustan.

Speaking about that, Hamas is about as Palestinian as Houtis.

Yes, yes, and Ukraine is just a US puppet, we've heard this all before. Just complete and utter nonsense.

In 2003 poll, which was latest I could find in quick search, 76% supported full or partial Israeli withdrawal from West Bank.

Wow, and just when I thought you'd said the most asinine thing possible in the previous quote.

I don't know why you feel the need to opine on an issue you evidently know nothing about.

 

[Sarin]

So you support this as a strategy, regardless of which side enacts it?

As you don't support or prefer either side, meaning it shouldn't matter if other countries start employing this as a way to get Israel to negotiate in good faith.

You know, this kind of pathetic attempted gotcha is one of reasons why you're in ignore list, and will remain there. Had it not been for the next post quoting you, I wouldn't know you wrote anything. Still, you wrote nothing of substance again. You're still arguing against a twisted, vastly inaccurate version of me you keep in your head. I never wrote anything about endorsing assassination, this one or in general. I merely explained Israel's reasons for it.

Or other countries employing this method with other countries that aren't Israel, like a certain country that starts with an 'R' starting this with a certain country that starts with a 'U'...

As always, you've missed the fact that both sides have used, or attempted to use assassinations in that conflict.

The end of apartheid is not genocide, however much the pro-apartheid people might want to pretend otherwise.



The actually-existing two-state solution is just apartheid with plausible deniability. With Israeli "security control" over the territory of the putative Palestinian state, there is no Palestinian sovereignty, only a bantustan.



Yes, yes, and Ukraine is just a US puppet, we've heard this all before. Just complete and utter nonsense.



Wow, and just when I thought you'd said the most asinine thing possible in the previous quote.

I don't know why you feel the need to opine on an issue you evidently know nothing about.

The destruction of Israel, the way Hamas and Iran want it and you very much seem to be supporting, is genocide.

Who said anything about current status, anyway? What we have now is not a two-state solution. That would be both sides agreeing on set borders and recognizing each other as sovereign political entities within those borders. And I see no will for that coming from either Hamas or Netanyahu's cabinet. However...

All I said is that there's evidence for a will for lasting peaceful compromise among Israelis, and you call that asinine. You have to be pretty twisted warmonger to call a will for peace asinine.

 

[Klaus Hergersheimer]

Haniyeh and one of his bodyguards were killed after the building where they were staying was struck

Struck by what?

According to media reports, the Hamas leader was killed when an “airborne guided projectile” hit a special residence for military veterans in the north of Tehran

Still doesn't answer it. Do they mean a "done" and it didn't get translated? A rocket?

edit:
“The criminal and terrorist Zionist regime martyred our dear guest in our house and made us bereaved,” Khamenei said in a statement on Wednesday, adding that “it also prepared the ground for a harsh punishment for itself.”

I also don't very much understand this "he died a martyr's death" vs. "how dare you kill him? there will be consequences!" going on here in this one statement.
Look, if he was truly was a martyr, then avenging him sort-of eliminates the whole idea of him giving his life for some greater cause.
But I guess that's just Iranian Revolution talk...

 

[Kyriakos]

You're still arguing against a twisted, vastly inaccurate version of me you keep in your head. I never wrote anything about endorsing assassination, this one or in general. I merely explained Israel's reasons for it.

Do you think it is normal to not sanction countries that assassinate foreign leaders as a matter of routine now? Because it does look extremely weird that some pretend Israel is just doing what everyone does, when it has killed high-ranking foreign officials and bombed third countries more than anyone else.

 

[REDY]

IMHO Hamas cannot be negotiated, bought or intimitated. This was Netanyahu strategy which led to 7th October.

 

[Bonyduck Campersang]

As always, you've missed the fact that both sides have used, or attempted to use assassinations in that conflict.

Which both sides are you referring to?

The destruction of Israel, the way Hamas and Iran want it and you very much seem to be supporting, is genocide.

Nah