GW Hayduke

Since people are comparing Hamas to the Israeli military, what are the numbers of civilian casualties caused by each one?

This part is makes me go wow. I suggest you ponder why you hold this belief and whether it based on your biases and the information sources you consume. It was about 17 years ago that Hamas was elected. They were elected without a majority. The average age of Gazans is 17 years old. When was Bibi last elected?

This reads like a “just asking questions” guy who’s sole source of media is Twitter. Collective punishment against 2 million people isn’t justified no matter what you think the polling of Gazans says.

This hurts my brain. Have you ever heard of Bibi or the Likud party?

The far right parties (Bibi and Likud) in Israel and the far right Hamas in Gaza are preventing peace.

Ordinary Palestinians don’t pose a threat to Israel. Hamas poses a threat to Israel. The Likud party also pose a threat to Israel by propping up Hamas, promoting propaganda that dehumanizes the entire Palestinian population, and pushing the blockade and settlements.

You mean Hamas or the Likud party?

Twisting in the wind like this still doesn’t equate the 2+ million people in Gaza to Hamas. This doesn’t justify collective punishment. It doesn’t justify the open air prison of 2 million. It doesn’t justify shutting off water or electricity to 2 million. Blurring the lines between Hamas and Gazans only serve to support Bibi and the Likud party. Maybe it is time for you to drop another strawman or more atrocity propaganda.

Now do the Likud party. Bibi and the far right factions in Israel are the ones who have undermined peace and empower hamas. Without spooky browns to stir up fear and provide political power, far right elements in Israel would be very weak, and left wing elements would be in power, the settlements would stop, and peace would become an option. To get to peace, we would need to remove the far right elements from both Palestine and Israel. Hamas needs Likud. Likud needs Hamas.

Suggest you look up the definition of anti-semitism and only use accordingly. Using that term freely based on your feelings and emotional state rather than the actual words you are responding to, only serve to dilute and weaken the ability to combat true anti-semitism IMO. I don’t know if there is a similar danger with misusing the term terrorism. It is mostly used by media and nation states to dehumanize the enemy, justify disproportionate responses, to justify large civilian sufferings/casualties, and to justify large military budgets, e.g., the war on terrorism. Obviously a nation state should protect itself against any form of attack (whether labeled terrorism, direct military attack, or social media manipulation), so I don’t see the use of the term terrorism as critical. If a civilian bus is bombed, the state should respond accordingly whether it is defined as terrorism or not. The DOJ and FBI can parse definitions during law enforcement actions, but they aren’t going to be affected by the overuse of the term. But I will concede that right wing terrorism is a growing threat in the US, so maybe the overuse of the term weakens the ability of our population to properly respond. So I agree that when dealing with US domestic acts of violence, a proper use of the term terrorism is important, but when dealing with foreign policy and justifying military actions, probably not

I don't know if it is possible for Israel's military to remove Hamas. Military action is going to kill more civilians and breed more hate and extremists, which will further empower Hamas. It is going to further degrade the education and economic systems of Palestine, which is going to breed more extremists and further empower Hamas. Maybe eventually all the Palestinians are dead or pushed out. That might get rid of Hamas from Palestine - if there are no people left. I'm not sure Israel's Likud Party, Bibi, and other far-right elements in Israel want to get rid of Hamas. Hamas provides a powerful boogeyman for the far-right and allows them to hold a lot of political power. I don't think it is a coincidence that the primary policies of the Likud party are settlements, blockade, and military action - the things that breed Hamas. I see this the same way I understand the GOP's refusal to help fix our immigration system - spooky brown sub-humans provide political power for both the GOP and Likud. I think the best way to remove a far-right extremist political organization from any population is to create an environment that allows another political organization to take over and maintain control. This is going to be hard because almost anyone educated or successful left Palestine a long time ago. Hamas has been controlling the education system in Palestine for almost two decades. The Palestinian economy has been in shambles for longer. I think we remove Hamas from Palestine the same way we remove Trumpism from the US. Increase the education and economic outlook of the population. Give them something to believe in and live for that doesn't include extremism. Give them a sanitized/regulated information space. Provide them access to health care and birth control. I think this would require action by the UN and a significant investment by the international community. Maybe after Israel destroys much of Palestine and kills a ton of people, the UN can step in - implement a hard border with Israel, remove Israel's blockade, and rebuild and invest. The UN can prop up a non-Hamas organization in the beginning and with enough time and investment - maybe a generation or two - Palestine can be self sufficient. Obviously, Israel would need to reverse all their far-right policies. I think any non-Hamas organization would constantly be undermined by far-right elements in Israel and other countries in the region. The UN and US would need to be serious for it to work. The US would probably need to pull support for Israel if Likud or other far-right Israeli parties aren't removed or gain power again.

I hate that 956 Worldwide's irresponsibility with information has led me to upvoting Antastasis. What the fuck, man. Get your shit together.

Agree. That is why everyone is against Hamas, but that doesn't mean we should be against the Palestinian people. We should be for the Palestinian people just like we should be fore the Israeli people. We should be against Hamas just like we should be against Bibi, the Likud party, and Israel's current government. We should step in and root out right wing parties from both sides. Hamas took power in 2004 and have not allowed elections since then. For people asking for solutions: The US, regional partners, and the international community needs to step in and push aside Hamas - just like they should take a hard ethical stance and push aside Israel's current government. For both Palestine and Israel, the UN should impose restrictions on their democratic process - no right wing parties. The UN should impose a hard border and provide security for a generation or two. The UN should impose restrictions on Israeli land development, pull settlers out of disputed areas, and manage all disputed holy sites. The UN should build up the Palestinian economy and education system. There is no solution if Hamas and the Likud party stay in power.

Everyone should be more responsible of the media we consume and share with others. A good tip is to stay off twitter.

There is a ton of connection between Israel's Likud and Putin's Russia. Both use the power of government and military to control and oppress the "others." This is why DT, fox news loons, and trumpists align in their support with both. Trumpists love the idea of an ethno-state imposing apartheid. This is what they want in the US. They want to use government to control culture and oppress. They see both Bibi and Putin as heroes and see Trump as the same. The fact that Hamas is so incredibly terrible and literal terrorists gives a ton of cover to the trumpists to push their true desires - see the DT - genocide, oppression, ethnic cleansing.

I didn’t see the reporting. Are you referring to what you saw on Twitter?

Source?

Site seems very stable without ads. Thanks for shutting them down. They were a beating. I’m ok with most ads on most sites but the ones that were on surly were out of wack. If you could fix those ads and make them normal - not fucking up my phone, covering text on my PC, or taking me to some weird random website - I’d be more than good with it. Maybe that would cost a lot of money to fix.

Because they embrace the culture wars

If we pretend everyone is corrupt, it allows me to ignore the corrupt actions of the ones actually corrupt. https://www.texastribune.org/2023/09/16/ken-paxton-impeachment-vote/#:~:text=In a historic vote on,making false statements and more.

I think this is a good way to think about the situation. Campaign finance reform and ending citizen's united are very much needed things. This is my only quibble. I'm good with reforming compensation and limiting stock trading, but I think our real goal should be to have a functioning government that meets the needs of the country. In order to get to that point IMO, we need to shape up the electorate through education, critical thinking, and addressing misinformation so we stop electing clowns. Also, career politicians are just as effective, if not more so, than rookies at building consensus, whipping votes, and passing legislation. Nancy vs AOC is a prime example. Mitch vs Tuberville is another.

If we want a stronger and healthier democracy those would be a big step forward. It may not be easy but no one said democracy should be easy.

I'm serious about fixing our political situation and making our democracy stronger. However, age restrictions are just window dressing and would be an actual step back for democracy. Campaign finance reform, ending citizen's united, increasing education and critical thinking, managing misinformation/disinformation and information bubbles are all real substantive solutions. Age restrictions are just dumb. It is the kind of shit Ted Cruz and Bernie Bros can all rally around.

She is running to represent a district. If the people of that district don't want her to represent them, then they can vote for someone else. If the people of that district want her to represent them, then they can vote for her. The people in her district know her age. That is how democracy works. I understand folks here want to set limitations on our democracy and be able to control who the people in that district are able to vote for.