Israel-Hamas war thread

[InkaUtexas 25954]

13 minutes ago, Rex Kramer said:

He wastes his breath with every post and anyone who reads his posts and Fantana’s posts is wasting their time. As crazy as Brisket and bolverk make me, they’re at least rational and not totally biased. 

Damn man, I am not included in the B&B group? Guess I need to up my game. And to think, we were going to go get beers.

 

[Rex Kramer 1338]

19 minutes ago, InkaUtexas said:

Damn man, I am not included in the B&B group? Guess I need to up my game. And to think, we were going to go get beers.

 

Depends on if you just had a momentary lapse or you really think my opinion suggests I advocate genocide. 

[SL Xpress 7516]

Here are the two divergent viewpoints, written from a pro Palestinian perspective and then an Israeli perspective, within the last 24 hours.

Opinion: Israel's growing war with Hezbollah is traumatizing Lebanon. There's only one path to peace (msn.com)

This person writes the only path to peace is a cease fire in Gaza, whatever that takes, including the US withholding support until it's done. According to the author, Hezbollah has been circumspect in their daily rocket attacks into Israel, but now all bets are off. 

Compared to the Times of Israel:

Israel keeps moving up the escalation ladder, hoping Nasrallah will jump off (msn.com)

That basically concludes Hezbollah needs to back off their commitment to support Hamas in Gaza, and quit firing rockets into northern Israel. If they don't, Israel is making plans to invade to make them stop. 

Where's the middle ground between these two perspectives? To me both of these solutions look very much like capitulation, for one side or the other. 

[Serak The Preparer 3431]

So to sum up @Rex Kramer's and @MagicSoccerSpray's recent posts:

Supporting Palestine as a state - biased (and CR)

Suggesting that the US shouldn't support either - biased (and CR)

Supporting continued US funding of Israel - not biased (and totally not CR)

 

 

[Brian Fantana 6689]

On 9/23/2024 at 2:50 PM, SL Xpress said:

Why? To establish a two state system that isn't going to work? Your "moderate" stance is pro Palestinian. Period. The Palestinians aren't fundamentally upset about the settler movement in the West Bank and areas around Gaza. They're more upset the Jews control Jerusalem. That's what this conflict is about. People want to pretend if the Jews and Palestinians will just be nice to one another and treat each other with respect and human decency, we can all put this in the rear view mirror. The Jews want their historical homeland. More than that, they have it. The Palestinians want their homeland back that they believe - rightfully - was taken from them by force. That's the crux of it.

You'd have the Jews and Palestinians live in one country in perfect harmony somehow, with the Palestinians dominating the government because of having a larger population. I don't understand how you think that's ever going to work in the real world at all. Why in the world would the Israelis allow that to occur? They'd be under immediate threat of legal expulsion the moment something like that occurred. The same way it occurred in all the other Arab countries. 

The Palestinians want their country back. Not part of their country. The whole country. The Jews are going to make sure they die before they give it back. When the Jews say "Never Again" about the Holocaust, they don't mean there will never be another Jewish genocide. They mean they're not going to go meekly into the cattle cars and gas chambers next time. 

I feel like you think I'm extolling genocide of the Palestinian people. I am not. I'm simply saying one or the other has to go, one way or another. That's the only way towards lasting peace. Without it, no lasting peace. So if you don't have lasting peace, then you have to pick a side. Saying the Israelis should give up their settlements and quit being so mean to the poor Palestinians who want to be left alone so they can wipe the Israelis off the map somehow, is being pro Palestinian, whether you want to admit it or not.

There's no moderate side here. There's no way to halve this baby. 

I think you're maybe misunderstanding or (less likely) purposefully misrepresenting my position. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt because I doubt you have actually read many of my posts on the subject.

I have extended family (by marriage, I'm a basic ass white boy of boring ass Welsh ancestry) that live in Israel, Gaza, and the West Bank. I've gone into this before, but suffice to say it mostly consists of culturally Muslim but (mostly) non-practicing Israeli citizens with a small smattering of families that either currently live in Gaza and the West Bank, or have previously and expatriated. I can tell you with absolute certainty that the notion that the Palestinians aren't upset about the settler militias that kill them and steal their homes in the West Bank, etc. is patently false. The actions of the settler militias are, at best, gross violations of international law/convention, and at worst (and most accurately in my opinion) outright terrorism.

I'm pro-Palestinian insofar as I don't want to see them exterminated or displaced by the millions, like the Jews have been. I certainly don't want Israelis to give up Israel, I think Israel can work and I want it to exist as it can be, not as it is right now with literal bloodthirsty extremists [that are little better than the animals that lead Hamas] running the country. I do not believe that Israel can work in the long term as an apartheid/ethno state. I definitely do not think a one-state solution will work, especially one dominated by either side. I'm pretty sure I've said so plenty of times, @Brisketexan and others can attest. I'm not sure where you even got that idea.

Of course Palestinians largely want their country back, as much as Israelis want Gaza and the West Bank for themselves. It's only natural, that's not even a point of contention here. I believe that a working compromise is ultimately possible because I believe that the majority of Palestinians and Israelis are not actually bloodthirsty monsters that want to slaughter each other. I've had this conversation a million times. I'm well aware that there's a good chance that I'm wrong in the end, and that something horrible and irreversible happens. Still, that's my ultimate hope and I'm never going to give in to defeatism.

Needless to say, I do not agree with your assertion that one side or the other has to go. I don't want that, and I will never give ground on that. When I say I consider my position to be moderate, it's moderate in contrast to the default American position, which is to support whatever Israel does without question. Countless elected officials in this country have said those exact words. I simply do not agree and I hold out hope that a better path forward can be found.

Lastly, you keep saying that you aren't extolling genocide, but it's the only logical conclusion to your line of thought. You're not extolling it, but you're ok with it. There's really not much difference between those two positions, sadly.

Like Ana said, I appreciate your honesty and wanted to reciprocate with my own. Hate me or love me, I don't give a shit, enjoy your evening.

[staboner 4984]

17 hours ago, Anastasis said:

I just can't agree with most of that post, but I do appreciate the honesty in you laying out your perspective. I mean come on. The US led international order-Ayatollah bit is too over the top even for this scene. 

I was in this part of the world last month, with my family of a particular persuasion, as you know. They are quite pro - Palestinian for lets say expected reasons, and thats fine. They are also racist AF against Moooslims in general, cuz the situation there of course. Nice bit of mental gymnastics at a dinner party one night, thankfully I had the 12 star Metaxa to ensure my inverted mental levity landed correctly 

Bitching bitching bitching, America this, Israel that, and what do you think Stabone? I just let out "lets take all the kids 5 and under from all sides of this goatfuck and get them out of there, their the only ones we can save". and just went blank. There are no leaders in the room who wish to stop this cycle, so what - is that on me? us? who then? Why do we have to watch? Why do so many of you post the same shit every page for a year now? 

anyway, party on surlsters. here's to less of this soon enough. 

[Rex Kramer 1338]

3 hours ago, Serak The Preparer said:

So to sum up @Rex Kramer's and @MagicSoccerSpray's recent posts:

Supporting Palestine as a state - biased (and CR)

Suggesting that the US shouldn't support either - biased (and CR)

Supporting continued US funding of Israel - not biased (and totally not CR)

 

 

Wrong

[Anastasis 23474]

7 hours ago, SL Xpress said:

Where's the middle ground between these two perspectives?

Stop dumping arms by the globemaster load into the region. Some funding an apartheid regime that is involved in an internationally recognized illegal occupation. Stop deflecting from the ongoing terrorist activities of the settler population being backstopped by the IDF. 

It's not really that hard. 

If you want to let the two go at it and the card fall where they will, fine, but American taxpayers dollars dont need to be involved. Israel is a fully capable nation state, with a sophisticated arms industry and military complex. They don't need our fucking money and it is condescending to suggest that they do.  Condescending to both Israel and the US taxpayer. But they will of course take it, and more importantly, the cover and deflection provided by State. It was not lost on me the shift in your prior response from "US-led rules-based international order" to "US led international order". And it is not lost of the rest of the world either. 

Edited September 25 by Anastasis

[Anastasis 23474]

3 hours ago, staboner said:

Why do so many of you post the same shit every page for a year now? 

Happy no-nuke Tuesday, my friend.  At least for as long as that lasts. 

[atomheartbevo 89690]

7 hours ago, SL Xpress said:

Where's the middle ground between these two perspectives? To me both of these solutions look very much like capitulation, for one side or the other. 

Can there be a middle ground when Israel has been preparing to destroy Hamas once and for all (and possibly Hezbollah) and Hamas opened the door and made themselves a literal existential threat to Israelis?

I don't have the article and video handy, and possibly it was posted earlier, but basically people are finally realizing that Israel has been mapping the shit out of the Gaza Strip, Southern Lebanon, etc., and have been observing everything 24/7 since last October (along with using informants on the ground). They are methodically destroying the Hamas leadership as they can reach them, and are working their way up and down the Hamas chain from foot soldiers to the officers, and they basically know where everything is at (tunnels, weapons, ammo, various stockpiles, etc.).

One of the articles I read mentioned they had been observed running drones all over the areas with the Palestinians, as well as Southern Lebanon, since last October, and they were most likely capable of mapping things down to inches, both in daylight as well as running infrared at night, and were tracking people and vehicles moving things around, etc.

Israel is not going to stop until Hamas is an empty shell, and Hezbollah is probably not far behind.  At that point, they might just turn their sights formally toward Iran. If there is going to be any kind of "peace" it's going to be after Hamas and probably Hezbollah are finished, but maybe before Iran is hit hard.

[Loch Ness Monster 3533]

45 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

It's not really that hard. 

If you want to let the two go at it and the card fall where they will, fine, but American taxpayers dollars dont need to be involved. Israel is a fully capable nation state, with a sophisticated arms industry and military complex. They don't need our fucking money and it is condescending to suggest that they do.  Condescending to both Israel and the US taxpayer. But they will of course take it, and more importantly, the cover and deflection provided by State. It was not lost on me the shift in your prior response from "US-led rules-based international order" to "US led international order". And it is not lost of the rest of the world either. 

100%. Israeli citizens have both free college and universal healthcare. They don't need our money. 

[SL Xpress 7516]

3 hours ago, Brian Fantana said:

I think you're maybe misunderstanding or (less likely) purposefully misrepresenting my position. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt because I doubt you have actually read many of my posts on the subject.

I have extended family (by marriage, I'm a basic ass white boy of boring ass Welsh ancestry) that live in Israel, Gaza, and the West Bank. I've gone into this before, but suffice to say it mostly consists of culturally Muslim but (mostly) non-practicing Israeli citizens with a small smattering of families that either currently live in Gaza and the West Bank, or have previously and expatriated. I can tell you with absolute certainty that the notion that the Palestinians aren't upset about the settler militias that kill them and steal their homes in the West Bank, etc. is patently false. The actions of the settler militias are, at best, gross violations of international law/convention, and at worst (and most accurately in my opinion) outright terrorism.

I'm pro-Palestinian insofar as I don't want to see them exterminated or displaced by the millions, like the Jews have been. I certainly don't want Israelis to give up Israel, I think Israel can work and I want it to exist as it can be, not as it is right now with literal bloodthirsty extremists [that are little better than the animals that lead Hamas] running the country. I do not believe that Israel can work in the long term as an apartheid/ethno state. I definitely do not think a one-state solution will work, especially one dominated by either side. I'm pretty sure I've said so plenty of times, @Brisketexan and others can attest. I'm not sure where you even got that idea.

Of course Palestinians largely want their country back, as much as Israelis want Gaza and the West Bank for themselves. It's only natural, that's not even a point of contention here. I believe that a working compromise is ultimately possible because I believe that the majority of Palestinians and Israelis are not actually bloodthirsty monsters that want to slaughter each other. I've had this conversation a million times. I'm well aware that there's a good chance that I'm wrong in the end, and that something horrible and irreversible happens. Still, that's my ultimate hope and I'm never going to give in to defeatism.

Needless to say, I do not agree with your assertion that one side or the other has to go. I don't want that, and I will never give ground on that. When I say I consider my position to be moderate, it's moderate in contrast to the default American position, which is to support whatever Israel does without question. Countless elected officials in this country have said those exact words. I simply do not agree and I hold out hope that a better path forward can be found.

Lastly, you keep saying that you aren't extolling genocide, but it's the only logical conclusion to your line of thought. You're not extolling it, but you're ok with it. There's really not much difference between those two positions, sadly.

Like Ana said, I appreciate your honesty and wanted to reciprocate with my own. Hate me or love me, I don't give a shit, enjoy your evening.

I can say I've never purposefully misrepresented your position, but I can admit I possibly did. Thank you for taking the time to type that out. 

I didn't mean to suggest that the Palestinians are a-okay with the settlers or their behavior. My point is that there is anger that is even more fundamental that underlies every interaction that isn't going away when Israel stops expanding the settlements. 

I think it's admirable you're not a defeatist. 

I do believe Israel will be an apartheid/ethno state for as long as the Israelis have any kind of power over the situation. I don't know what you mean by the term "work." It will be constant conflict with a lot of murder and barbarous behavior on both sides, until one or the other are displaced. I guess there's the option of assimilation. Either one side or the other take on the cultural values and identity of the other, through conversion or intermarriage or a combination, but that seems extremely farfetched to me. 

I don't think it matters what the majority of people really want. You know what the majority of people really want? They pretty much want their basic needs met plus a little more than what they have right now. It's a moving goalpost because that's how we're built. But societies aren't driven by the mainstream. That's not what the mainstream does. It doesn't drive society anywhere. Societies are driven by the extremes. If there's not a compelling voice this generation to move a society in one direction or another, there will be in the next generation. Not necessarily in a good direction, either. Possibly to that society's ruin. But maybe not. Maybe to greater heights. That's how it works. 

The biggest glue we have in our tribes is the identification of an other. We do it as children. We do it as teenagers. We do it as adults. It's inherent in our humanity. Palestinians and Israelis are not going to be able to peacefully live side by side unless one side is so utterly dominant the other is not seen as a threat. The Jews were successful minorities for two millennia because they never took overt power and they made themselves useful. Even then they were constantly persecuted and expelled from nation after nation. And they were one of the most successful diasporas ever. The most successful, I'd argue. 

The Arabs who are citizens in Israel are able to do so because they're not a threat to power. They take part in no government sharing responsibilities. They've had one Arab cabinet member in the history of Israel. As long as the Arab citizens are okay with that, or at least pretend to be okay with that, no problem. Of course they're not completely okay, but what are they going to do?

I know I come from a place of conviction and that can be very offputting, and I apologize for that. I certainly believe there's room to agree to disagree. I find your stance hopeful, and mine more fatalistic. But I do feel I have the right of it. And from a policy making standpoint I don't see the purpose changing the overall US foreign policy stance towards Israel. They're in a continual fight for their existence and will be for the rest of my lifetime at a bare minimum. Really, for much longer than that. Could be the same issues are extant a century or more from now. If they aren't, again, it means one side or the other lost their cultural identity for the most part. 

What's going on currently and why we have this thread is that Hamas performed a successful military occupation that killed 1200 people and took 250 hostages, and in a show of unity, Hezbollah has fired off rockets continuously for as long as the military action in Gaza has continued. Fundamentally both organizations want Israel to cease to exist. I guess if the Arabs would just be happy with their second class citizenship and quit pining for the land the Jews took from them, sure, we'd have a real chance for some lasting peace. What are the odds of that? Especially when it serves one foreign actor or another to fund them to disrupt Israel as much as possible. And even when there's some pretense of peace, Hamas is going about preparing for conflict, like they did for a decade or more before the recent operation while Israel seemingly focused on the West Bank. And as you've noted, the Israelis are expanding their settlements, especially in the West Bank, and making day to day life miserable for the Palestinians just wanting to live their lives with some aspirations that still live there. I just believe any peace is a mirage preparing for the next stage of the conflict, and to pretend otherwise is dangerous in the same sense of Chamberlain's peace in our lifetime speech. 

[SL Xpress 7516]

1 hour ago, atomheartbevo said:

Can there be a middle ground when Israel has been preparing to destroy Hamas once and for all (and possibly Hezbollah) and Hamas opened the door and made themselves a literal existential threat to Israelis?

I don't have the article and video handy, and possibly it was posted earlier, but basically people are finally realizing that Israel has been mapping the shit out of the Gaza Strip, Southern Lebanon, etc., and have been observing everything 24/7 since last October (along with using informants on the ground). They are methodically destroying the Hamas leadership as they can reach them, and are working their way up and down the Hamas chain from foot soldiers to the officers, and they basically know where everything is at (tunnels, weapons, ammo, various stockpiles, etc.).

One of the articles I read mentioned they had been observed running drones all over the areas with the Palestinians, as well as Southern Lebanon, since last October, and they were most likely capable of mapping things down to inches, both in daylight as well as running infrared at night, and were tracking people and vehicles moving things around, etc.

Israel is not going to stop until Hamas is an empty shell, and Hezbollah is probably not far behind.  At that point, they might just turn their sights formally toward Iran. If there is going to be any kind of "peace" it's going to be after Hamas and probably Hezbollah are finished, but maybe before Iran is hit hard.

That's not going to bring about peace. The underlying issues will still be there, and the next generation will step in. 

But it will give a respite because of the loss of institutional knowledge. Nothing that is being done right now changes the fundamental calculus. It simply changes the ability for one side to strike at the other. And while this has been very one sided on the battlefield, I'd say the Palestinian cause has been very successful in the public relations department. Which was part of the goal of Hamas in the first place. Provoke a reaction from Israel so extreme that it generates a sympathetic response. I have been very impressed with how well the Palestinian cause has successfully aligned themselves with groups who on the face of it wouldn't be natural allies even a little bit. And how active everyone has been. I don't know if that does anything in the long run, but it certainly seems like a sea change to me. 

Edited September 25 by SL Xpress

[SL Xpress 7516]

1 hour ago, Anastasis said:

Stop dumping arms by the globemaster load into the region. Some funding an apartheid regime that is involved in an internationally recognized illegal occupation. Stop deflecting from the ongoing terrorist activities of the settler population being backstopped by the IDF. 

It's not really that hard. 

If you want to let the two go at it and the card fall where they will, fine, but American taxpayers dollars dont need to be involved. Israel is a fully capable nation state, with a sophisticated arms industry and military complex. They don't need our fucking money and it is condescending to suggest that they do.  Condescending to both Israel and the US taxpayer. But they will of course take it, and more importantly, the cover and deflection provided by State. It was not lost on me the shift in your prior response from "US-led rules-based international order" to "US led international order". And it is not lost of the rest of the world either. 

I would agree the American taxpayers don't need to be involved. I'm in favor of them being involved. You are not. I get that. 

But the US not being involved is not a moderate stance. It's an isolationist stance that favors the Palestinian cause. 

I don't understand what you mean by, "It was not lost on me the shift in your prior response from 'US-led rules-based international order' to 'US led international order'. And it is not lost on the rest of the world either." 

The rest of the world knows good and well the US will either craft rules that work in their favor, or they'll create exceptions in the rules when it's to their benefit. I don't think that's some kind of secret. 

[Anastasis 23474]

30 minutes ago, SL Xpress said:

The rest of the world knows good and well the US will either craft rules that work in their favor, or they'll create exceptions in the rules when it's to their benefit. I don't think that's some kind of secret. 

I could at least appreciate a reflection of honesty in our foreign policy. Spare me the shit about democratic values and human rights. We clown ourselves. It's hard to watch Matt do his thing week in and week out. 

[totallynotabuttpirate 5400]

3 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

...It's hard to watch Matt do his thing week in and week out....

[Anastasis 23474]

40 minutes ago, SL Xpress said:

I don't understand what you mean by, "It was not lost on me the shift in your prior response from 'US-led rules-based international order' to 'US led international order'. And it is not lost on the rest of the world either." 

I think the meaning is clear. 

[Anastasis 23474]

1 minute ago, totallynotabuttpirate said:

"weak in" and "weak out" probably also works for that total clown. 

[Brian Fantana 6689]

29 minutes ago, SL Xpress said:

But the US not being involved is not a moderate stance. It's an isolationist stance that favors the Palestinian cause. 

Except it is not an isolationist stance, that is a disingenuous reading. They're still our allies. We should still have their backs if shit really hits the fan. We should still be involved in their politics, etc. We need to be involved, only in a different way. I mean seriously, when did we become Israel's bitch? Because it sure seems like that's precisely what we are. For as powerful as we like to pretend we are, we sure do grovel at the feet of some of the worst people on Earth in the middle east (see: Bibi, MBS, etc.). Israel is the only other country on Earth that can continually commit war crimes and thumb its nose at international law with impunity, and it's literally only because they have made us their bitch by buying off our elected officials and relentlessly pushing agitprop in Western media for decades.

We shouldn't be directly funding their wars, and we don't need foreign leaders coming to our soil (ironically, maybe one of the few places on Earth he's going to be able to visit without being arrested soon) to arrogantly scold Congress for the president even hinting that fewer billions may be heading their direction. Especially when that foreign leader is a right wing extremist and a corrupt criminal that's likely to end up in an Israeli prison once he loses his ministership over the country. Especially when there exists strong evidence that that foreign leader sat on actionable intelligence and allowed October 7th to happen. Especially when there exists literal mountains of evidence that that foreign leader has purposefully propped up the most extreme elements of Palestinian society (Hamas) in order to both use them as a bludgeon against Palestinians and as an excuse to crank up the pressure on their belligerent occupancy of Palestinian lands. If you stick Bibi next to Bashar al-Assad and squint, there's little difference between the two save one is backed by us, and the other is backed by Russia.

[SL Xpress 7516]

14 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

Except it is not an isolationist stance, that is a disingenuous reading. They're still our allies. We should still have their backs if shit really hits the fan. We should still be involved in their politics, etc. We need to be involved, only in a different way. I mean seriously, when did we become Israel's bitch? Because it sure seems like that's precisely what we are. For as powerful as we like to pretend we are, we sure do grovel at the feet of some of the worst people on Earth in the middle east (see: Bibi, MBS, etc.). Israel is the only other country on Earth that can continually commit war crimes and thumb its nose at international law with impunity, and it's literally only because they have made us their bitch by buying off our elected officials and relentlessly pushing agitprop in Western media for decades.

We shouldn't be directly funding their wars, and we don't need foreign leaders coming to our soil (ironically, maybe one of the few places on Earth he's going to be able to visit without being arrested soon) to arrogantly scold Congress for the president even hinting that fewer billions may be heading their direction. Especially when that foreign leader is a right wing extremist and a corrupt criminal that's likely to end up in an Israeli prison once he loses his ministership over the country. Especially when there exists strong evidence that that foreign leader sat on actionable intelligence and allowed October 7th to happen. Especially when there exists literal mountains of evidence that that foreign leader has purposefully propped up the most extreme elements of Palestinian society (Hamas) in order to both use them as a bludgeon against Palestinians and as an excuse to crank up the pressure on their belligerent occupancy of Palestinian lands. If you stick Bibi next to Bashar al-Assad and squint, there's little difference between the two save one is backed by us, and the other is backed by Russia.

I guess we have different definitions of the shit hitting the fan. 

There isn't a single country in the world under the same kind of existential threat Israel is, outside of the use of nuclear weapons, which is its own level of existential threat. That's been true since they became a nation. To me the shit is always hitting the fan. 

I do not feel like we are as powerful as people like to assume we are. I feel like we were very powerful coming out of WWII. Economically we were as dominant as any society has ever been through the 60s. 

Since then we have lost our manufacturing base. We keep up our standard of living by exporting our debt to create our current account balance, and the rest of the world funds it because we're all in a codependent relationship economically speaking. The rest of the world funds our consumption so they can keep selling us stuff. Which works until it doesn't, and the fall whenever it happens won't be some kind of soft landing. 

In the meantime we keep this Ponzi scheme of sorts going by having the world's most competent projection of power and using it to keep the global trade going, and using the dollar as the reserve currency. We're less united as a society than we've been since before the Civil War. We have no real vision for what our future is supposed to be, or what or how we're going to get there. Our military strength is less now than it was, especially the Navy, which is the chief tool for the projection of power. We have less collective trust in our institutions than we ever have. 

In any case, I'm not sure how material that is because overall if anything supporting Israel is an albatross to economic growth. Not a boon.

As far as the buying of elected officials, there is an element of conviction involved. The most vociferous supporters of Israel don't do so because they're bought and paid for. They're supported because they support Israel. That's how the different representatives lost their primary this go around after going against Israel. AIPAC and affiliated PACs found candidates who were supportive of Israel and could win the election. Israel wasn't even brought up on the campaign trail even though everyone knew where a huge source of the money was coming from. But that funding is coming from American citizens on Israel's behalf. Not from Israel itself.

Whatever Netanyahu knew or didn't know, whatever he's guilty of regarding Hamas, he is not the one who ordered that attack. And that attack doesn't happen without some complicity from the people of Gaza. Nor did Netanyahu encourage all the celebrations after the attack from pro Palestinian circles - a celebration that still occurs to some extent as representative of a mighty blow to the implacable foe. Hamas is just as guilty in many ways of knowing exactly what the Israeli response would be and purposefully triggering it. Well, now they have it. 

I do not believe Israel acts with impunity. Their actions have consequences consistently. They do, however, act with conviction. If not for the support of the US I feel certain they would be much more isolated than they are now, and even with US support they often are very isolated. 

It goes back to what I've said all along. I believe a side has to be picked. The US has picked Israel since its existence and continues to do so. That's a stance I'm supportive of. I don't think there's any such thing as a neutral stance. I guess indifference maybe? That would be a neutral stance of a sort. But anything that resembles a neutral stance to me is actually a pro Palestinian stance. I realize you find that offensive, but that's not my intention. 

[Brian Fantana 6689]

21 minutes ago, SL Xpress said:

As far as the buying of elected officials, there is an element of conviction involved. The most vociferous supporters of Israel don't do so because they're bought and paid for. They're supported because they support Israel. That's how the different representatives lost their primary this go around after going against Israel. AIPAC and affiliated PACs found candidates who were supportive of Israel and could win the election. Israel wasn't even brought up on the campaign trail even though everyone knew where a huge source of the money was coming from. But that funding is coming from American citizens on Israel's behalf. Not from Israel itself.

Whatever Netanyahu knew or didn't know, whatever he's guilty of regarding Hamas, he is not the one who ordered that attack. And that attack doesn't happen without some complicity from the people of Gaza. Nor did Netanyahu encourage all the celebrations after the attack from pro Palestinian circles - a celebration that still occurs to some extent as representative of a mighty blow to the implacable foe. Hamas is just as guilty in many ways of knowing exactly what the Israeli response would be and purposefully triggering it. Well, now they have it. 

I don't necessarily disagree with most of what you said, but I have some notes. Your first paragraph here kind of a circular argument. This is a little too CR of a conversation for this thread, probably, but it matters little where the money actually comes from. AIPAC and its like largely exist because of the massive amount of agitprop that's been fed through Western media over the decades, coupled with decades of evangelical Christian ideology worming its way into mainstream politics. Of course there are some true believers, Joe Biden among them as a prime example, but there is an incredibly lopsided incentive to never question anything Israel does publicly, which isn't healthy for Israel in the long run first and foremost, and extremely unhealthy for our political system to boot.

Your second paragraph is also one half of another circular argument. Literally everything you said can also be applied to the other side. You don't get to handwave away Bibi's crimes and pretend that he didn't spend years tightening the screws on a captive population, often killing and displacing thousands in the process and deliberately provoking the very kind of attack that happened as if none of the context matters, as if the same (or worse, in some cases) sickness doesn't exist within Israeli society as well, as if Israel was just minding its own business before October 7th. It's disingenuous to an almost hysterical degree.

46 minutes ago, SL Xpress said:

But anything that resembles a neutral stance to me is actually a pro Palestinian stance. I realize you find that offensive, but that's not my intention. 

I don't know why anyone would find that offensive. Stupid, maybe, but not offensive. I say stupid because you keep insisting that a pro-Palestinian stance is inherently an anti-Israel stance when it's not, and act like "pro-Palestinian" are bad words when they're not. I'm not sure if it's just deep-seated Islamophobia, or anti-Arab racism, but it's an incredibly dumb position to take. I'm not anti-Israel. Most pro-Palestinian people, like myself, hold a very simple position: Please don't do genocide/ethnic cleansing, find a better way. It should be easy for anyone to see that preventing Holocaust 2.0 can't be done by instead doing one yourself. If you really, truly, don't want Israel to be alone in the world, you should be vociferously arguing against something like that, because if they do it, they won't have any friends left. Treating the entire situation like it's a team sport and insisting upon the path of least resistance because you can't see any other way to get the ball into the endzone isn't the way to a better world.

[SL Xpress 7516]

1 hour ago, Brian Fantana said:

I don't necessarily disagree with most of what you said, but I have some notes. Your first paragraph here kind of a circular argument. This is a little too CR of a conversation for this thread, probably, but it matters little where the money actually comes from. AIPAC and its like largely exist because of the massive amount of agitprop that's been fed through Western media over the decades, coupled with decades of evangelical Christian ideology worming its way into mainstream politics. Of course there are some true believers, Joe Biden among them as a prime example, but there is an incredibly lopsided incentive to never question anything Israel does publicly, which isn't healthy for Israel in the long run first and foremost, and extremely unhealthy for our political system to boot.

Your second paragraph is also one half of another circular argument. Literally everything you said can also be applied to the other side. You don't get to handwave away Bibi's crimes and pretend that he didn't spend years tightening the screws on a captive population, often killing and displacing thousands in the process and deliberately provoking the very kind of attack that happened as if none of the context matters, as if the same (or worse, in some cases) sickness doesn't exist within Israeli society as well, as if Israel was just minding its own business before October 7th. It's disingenuous to an almost hysterical degree.

I don't know why anyone would find that offensive. Stupid, maybe, but not offensive. I say stupid because you keep insisting that a pro-Palestinian stance is inherently an anti-Israel stance when it's not, and act like "pro-Palestinian" are bad words when they're not. I'm not sure if it's just deep-seated Islamophobia, or anti-Arab racism, but it's an incredibly dumb position to take. I'm not anti-Israel. Most pro-Palestinian people, like myself, hold a very simple position: Please don't do genocide/ethnic cleansing, find a better way. It should be easy for anyone to see that preventing Holocaust 2.0 can't be done by instead doing one yourself. If you really, truly, don't want Israel to be alone in the world, you should be vociferously arguing against something like that, because if they do it, they won't have any friends left. Treating the entire situation like it's a team sport and insisting upon the path of least resistance because you can't see any other way to get the ball into the endzone isn't the way to a better world.

I feel like it's inherent in my fundamental view of this specific dynamic, and moreso, my fundamental view of humanity. 

I think it's fair to say I believe at heart we're a species of genocidal maniacs, always have been, always will be in default mode, and only through a significant amount of various types of repression, assimilation, and ultimately interbreeding does that get alleviated. I know people like to think we've evolved past all that, but we really haven't. It's still there always waiting for another generation to reboot. To me it's instinctual on the same level flying south for the winter is for birds. Not necessarily directly, but all the mechanisms that make us fundamentally human also ultimately compel us to seek the extermination and subjugation of our others, whoever that happens to be. 

If I felt like there was a decent possibility Palestinians and Israelis would intermarry, assimilate, someday to the point where they're indistinguishable from one another that to me is the best path forward. But I don't think that's a decent possibility.

In any case, I just read a really good article about Ta-Nehisi's new book. He wrote a famous essay in The Atlantic called "The Case for Reparations" and a memoir "Between the World and Me." HIs next book is called "The Message." It's apparently about 3 different visits. One to Dakar, Senegal, where he experiences a deep sympathy for the oppressed from colonialism from his own perspective; Chapin, South Carolina, where a teacher has been pressured to stop teaching his book Between the World and Me because it was making some student feel ashamed to be Caucasian. But the lion's share of the article is about Ta-Nehisi visiting the West Bank, and how he returned transformed by the injustice of what he saw there. 

It was very powerful and evocative, especially where the article channels Ta-Nehisi's passion for the subject. I think you'd enjoy reading it. I did, even if I remain unpersuaded to his view. I'll try to read The Message and see how I feel after that. 

The Return of Ta-Nehisi Coates - Longreads

[atomheartbevo 89690]

10 hours ago, SL Xpress said:

That's not going to bring about peace. The underlying issues will still be there, and the next generation will step in. 

It may not bring about peace, but it'll sure put a damper on anything massively happening, particularly if they not only wipe out Hamas, but cripple Hezbollah and/or hit at Iran. If you can isolate Hezbollah/Southern Lebanon, that would go a long way towards a "peace" of sorts and Israel has clearly been plotting over the last 10-11 months to take out the leadership at all levels.

 

[atomheartbevo 89690]

10 hours ago, SL Xpress said:

I would agree the American taxpayers don't need to be involved. I'm in favor of them being involved. You are not. I get that. 

But the US not being involved is not a moderate stance. It's an isolationist stance that favors the Palestinian cause. 

9 hours ago, Brian Fantana said:

Except it is not an isolationist stance, that is a disingenuous reading. They're still our allies. We should still have their backs if shit really hits the fan. We should still be involved in their politics, etc. We need to be involved, only in a different way. I mean seriously, when did we become Israel's bitch? Because it sure seems like that's precisely what we are. For as powerful as we like to pretend we are, we sure do grovel at the feet of some of the worst people on Earth in the middle east (see: Bibi, MBS, etc.).

I don't think we should be as involved as we are - I agree with Brian Fantana - we can still be their allies and have their backs if somebody tries to sucker-punch them, but we need to rethink our relationship because it comes across as us giving Israel a blank check to do whatever they want (not economically, but morally/ethically).  To take the USA as an example, we have a lot of allies, but when we decided to go into Iraq in 2003, we had plenty who were like "you know what, we will help in Afghanistan, but fuck that, if you want to do Iraq, that's all on you buddy."

And I doubt I agree with @Loch Ness Monster all that often, but here we are dumping weapons and aid on Israel, meanwhile they do in fact have universal healthcare and free/cheap college for everybody. They don't really need our help as much as we think they do, and I won't go into why we give them so much help because that's CR, but that's something we need to rethink in the future, because as I said, it comes across as us giving them our full support (and legitimacy as a result) for whatever they want to do.

 

 

 

Edited September 25 by atomheartbevo

[bolverk 29683]

@Brian Fantana One thing I appreciate is the turn in the conversation toward honesty.

@SL Xpress, you've clearly staked out your position. You acknowledge the truth that Israel is an apartheid state, and you accept our government's continued support for one. You go even further by saying ethnic cleansing is simply the natural order of things and have come to the conclusion that you're okay with Israel expelling Palestinians if they refuse to assimilate into a Jewish ethno-religious state. It's basically a social Darwinism logic, and you've made peace with that conclusion.

It's akin to the 19th-century American argument for Manifest Destiny, Germany's 20th-century desire for Lebensraum and Russia's 21-century ongoing attempt to take Ukraine. The underlying rationale for why Americans genocided and ethnically cleansed the continent of Natives, Hitler's attempts to expel and/or exterminate all the Jews, Slavs, and Roma, and Putin's attempt to erase Ukraine doesn't really matter. Previous attempts to create an international order that respects national boundaries and ethnic/religious minority rights like the League of Nations, the United Nations, and the Geneva Conventions are all folly. Might makes right.

So, thank you for bringing clarity to the discussion. I wish all other supporters of Bibi's actions were as candid instead of arguing under any other pretense. If that's the world you want to live in, I suppose there's nothing I can say to change your mind. We'll just have to relearn the same lesson that our grandparents and their parents did: the hard way.

If other supporters hold any doubt about Netanyahu's or his domestic allies' intentions, turn your gaze away from Gaza for a moment and look at the West Bank.

 

Israeli Bulldozers Flatten Mile After Mile in the West Bank
[Click the headline for a free link to see embedded videos and photographs.]
Videos from Tulkarm and Jenin show bulldozers destroying infrastructure and businesses, as well as soldiers impeding local emergency responders.

Over two weeks, Palestinians watched as Israeli military bulldozers tore up mile after mile of their streets and alleys, sewage seeping into the dusty ruts left behind.

The people of Tulkarm and Jenin, the two West Bank towns that were the focus of Israel’s latest military raids, said they had never before experienced such a scale of destruction.

Residents pointed to one video that shows an Israeli armored bulldozer flattening a decorative roundabout and nearby vegetation.

Visual evidence analyzed by The New York Times supports accounts from residents about the damage from Israel’s latest raids. Videos filmed in Tulkarm and Jenin show bulldozers destroying infrastructure and businesses, and soldiers impeding local emergency responders.

“We watched their bulldozers tear up streets, demolish businesses, pharmacies, schools. They even bulldozed the town soccer field, and a tree in the middle of a road,” said Kamal Abu al-Rub, the governor of Jenin, a governorate in the northern West Bank. “What was the point of all of this?”

In late August, the Israeli military launched one of its most extensive and deadliest raids in the West Bank in years, an escalation from the nearly nightly raids that have become the norm since the Hamas-led Oct. 7 attacks.

Israel has described the operations as counterterrorism efforts, aimed at rooting out Hamas and other armed militants who have increased their attacks against Israelis. The military said it had found stockpiles of weapons in its recent operations in the northern West Bank, killed 23 militants and arrested 45. One Israeli soldier was killed in Jenin, it said.

In a response to a detailed list of questions from The Times, the Israeli military said that it operated in accordance with international law and “undertakes all feasible precautions to avoid damaging essential infrastructure.” It said military engineers had to undertake such operations to demine roads or destroy arms stores hidden on private property.

But it acknowledged that these “operations in the area have caused unavoidable harm to certain civilian structures.”

Residents in Jenin and Tulkarm, towns with a history of rebellion against Israeli occupation, had long been accustomed to targeted, nighttime raids. But many of them who spoke to The Times said the raids that lasted for nine days in Jenin and even longer in Tulkarm went far beyond, noting that the extent of the damaged roads and infrastructure surpassed any previous assaults.

Several districts were declared “disaster zones,” officials said, because so many buildings were bombed or blown up that they threatened the stability of the broader neighborhood. And incursions that once focused on the towns’ refugee camps spread deeper into other parts of the city.

Rights groups have also tracked Israeli forces’ intensifying use of airstrikes in the West Bank, which they say violates international law.

“They are imposing conditions, materially and psychologically, that make people feel: Gaza is coming to you,” said Shawan Jabarin, the director of Al Haq, a rights group based in the West Bank. “There is a feeling among Palestinians across the West Bank that what is coming is very bad — that it will be a plan to kill and expel us.”

cont'd:

Spoiler

A Morning Raid
The most recent operations began early on Aug. 28 when residents of Tulkarm and Jenin awoke to Israeli military bulldozers ripping up streets.

The digging damaged water and sewage pipes. In Tulkarm, home to one of the largest refugee camps in the West Bank, videos showed water gushing down a street from what appeared to be a destroyed water main.

For months, Israeli raids destroyed roads and other infrastructure that local officials said they repeatedly fixed, only to see their work razed again in the next assault.

Muhanad Matar, the head of general relations for the municipality of Tulkarm, estimated that in the latest operations alone, more than 90 percent of water and sewage lines had been destroyed.

In Jenin, some 70 percent of roads have been damaged or destroyed by the recent raids, according to the mayor, Nidal Obeidi. Internet, electricity and phone lines were shut down in some areas. Sewage and water lines were also cut, leaving about 80 percent of Jenin without running water, local officials said, including the main hospital.

“The problem with trying to calculate the costs is that it doesn’t stop,” Mr. Matar said. “It’s an unending string of raids.”

Businesses Destroyed
Israeli bulldozers have also plowed through commercial areas. Videos showed them digging up streets in Cinema Square, the heart of Jenin’s business district.

Israel’s military said the risk of militants hiding explosives necessitated the use of “engineering tools when entering areas where the terrorist organizations operate, in order to uncover the axes where explosive devices were planted, and to remove the danger that arises from the terrorist organizations’ use of civilian structures.”

Residents highlighted such efforts as examples of needless destruction. Local business owners who spoke to The Times insisted this area had no links to militants in the city.

Rami Kmail, 35, is the owner of Rami Center, overlooking the square — the corner building with a red storefront seen in the video below.

Mr. Kmail said his store had been damaged in 10 Israeli raids since Oct. 7. It has cost him up to $20,000 in repairs each time.

Like other shopkeepers, he has stopped replacing some window panes and shop signs. “There was no way to keep up with the cost,” he said.

Mr. Kmail insisted this kind of destruction was aimed at hurting society and daily life.

“It felt like we were targeted. That was very clear — there was an intentional effort to destroy businesses,” he said. “They think they’re teaching people a lesson. The army’s message is: No one is getting out of this without being punished.”

The owner of the jewelry store being bulldozed in the video below said that all of his display cases were crushed when the facade was destroyed. He spoke on the condition of anonymity out of concerns for his safety.

“I think we lost everything,” he said. Asked if he would reopen, he said: “I don’t know if we are going to be able to. For now only God knows.”

In Tulkarm’s Nur Shams refugee camp, the Kinwa family sold cooking gas canisters for three decades from the ground floor of the building that had long been their home in the Manshiya District. It is one of several districts that municipal officials have declared “disaster zones” to be evacuated.

The business, the family said, went up in flames this month, after Israeli soldiers rigged and detonated explosives in the shop — ignoring neighbors’ warnings that some 50 gas canisters were inside.

“Every other night, we move and find someone else to stay with,” said Ayman Al-Kinwa, who ran the family’s business. “We were a big home, and now we are scattered.”

Unanswered Emergency Calls
Perhaps the heaviest cost of the raids has been the effect on medical care.

Several videos showed ambulances unable to navigate destroyed roads. Ambulance drivers said they sometimes could not find alternate routes among the cratered roads.

Even when roads were intact, Israeli bulldozers, other videos showed, appeared to block emergency vehicles from passing.

Mahmoud Al-Saadi, the head of the Red Crescent branch in Jenin, said that calls for help increased significantly during the recent raids. His teams, he said, failed to respond to 500 to 600 calls per day because they simply could not reach them.

The sudden rise in calls was not only related to the fighting, medics and municipal officials said, but also to soldiers encircling hospitals. The soldiers, they said, granted entry only to ambulances and not civilian vehicles, so rescuers also had to escort patients needing regular treatments, like dialysis or radiation.

One video showed Israeli soldiers inspecting an ambulance in Jenin.

Israel’s military, in response to The Times, said it “does not intend to harm medical personnel. However, in several cases, terrorists have carried out terror attacks via the exploitation of ambulances and medical institutions.”

As a result, the army said it “has been compelled, in some instances, to search ambulances leaving the camps and villages,” but said it tried to minimize the delays.

Mr. Al-Saadi said some of his teams were forced to wait for long periods of time, putting some patients’ lives at risk.

With evacuations so difficult, many volunteers said they put together first-aid kits to treat people at their homes. And in cases where emergency vehicles could not reach people, some Red Crescent officials said, teams sometimes guided people through treatments by phone until one could.

“This is collective punishment,” said Laith Hassan, 25, a volunteer for the Red Crescent in Tulkarm. “I don’t know what else you could call it.”

Increase in Airstrikes
Since the second intifada, or uprising, ended in the early 2000s, Israeli airstrikes on the West Bank have been extremely rare. After Oct. 7, airstrikes by drones, fighter jets and helicopters increased rapidly, killing 41 Palestinians in August alone — more than at any point in close to two decades, according to the U.N. Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs and the rights group Al-Haq.

In its latest raid, the Israeli military said it carried out 50 airstrikes “on buildings, infrastructure, and weapon storage sites.” It also said it launched targeted strikes on militants.

A video posted by the military shows what appears to be gunmen being corralled by an Israeli military vehicle. When they open fire and try to flee, an airstrike kills one as they run away.

Such airstrikes violate Israel’s obligations under international law, said Sari Bashi, a program director for Human Rights Watch, which stipulates that an occupying power must conduct security operations as a policing force, not an army.

“One of our concerns is that lethal force is actually a first resort — that the Israeli military is trying to kill people, as opposed to arrest them, under circumstances where it’s possible to arrest them,” she said.

Israel’s army said that it had complied with international law, and that aerial strikes “are carried out in cases where the option of arrest was ruled out in view of the immediate risk to the forces.”

The U.N. office and Al-Haq have both documented more than 150 Palestinians killed by airstrikes in the West Bank since Oct. 7. Palestinians in Jenin and Tulkarm say they increasingly fear the drones that almost constantly circle overhead. Medics and municipal workers repairing roads say they have come under drone surveillance, and have sometimes been fired on.

“They even shot at my car,” said Mr. Obeidi, Jenin’s mayor.

Some Palestinian men, like the shop owner Mr. Al-Kinwa, say they now avoid going outside or gathering in groups.

“The fear of drone strikes is with me 24 hours a day,” he said. “It’s there even when I sleep.”

The intensity of these latest raids, some residents warn, may backfire against Israel’s efforts to ensure its security and lead to more people joining groups like Hamas.

“If you deliberately destroy the place, what do you think those people are going to do?” asked the shopkeeper Mr. Kmail. “Israel just added to the numbers in the resistance.”

[Brian Fantana 6689]

Very busy today but again, appreciate the honest conversation @SL Xpress @atomheartbevo @bolverket al.

[Rex Kramer 1338]

15 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

Israel is not going to stop until Hamas is an empty shell, and Hezbollah is probably not far behind.  At that point, they might just turn their sights formally toward Iran. If there is going to be any kind of "peace" it's going to be after Hamas and probably Hezbollah are finished, but maybe before Iran is hit hard.

Correct and as it should be. Agreeing to a cease fire before Hamas is eliminated is a nonstarter. I’d do the same with Hezbollah. 

[statsman 5471]

I disagree that Israel is an apartheid state. It is formally a Jewish state, but Muslim and Christian citizens have all the rights Jews do, with the exception of institutional adjustment to the constraints of Judaism. It is a liberal democracy. 
 
South Africa was an apartheid state. Black South Africans, born in South Africa, had limited rights and liberties in almost every aspect. 
 
To call Israel an apartheid state, you have to argue that Palestinian refugees (born and residing outside the borders of Israel, in the WB, Gaza and other regions) are or should be citizens of Israel. Is that the argument? Isn’t this what the whole “right of return” is about?

It seems to me that Israel being an apartheid state is fully a matter of opinion- opinion over who should be a citizen or not. In my opinion, it isn’t. 
 
(Obviously, if the “right of return” were granted, after the first vote Israel would become an Islamic state and that would be that). 

Edited September 25 by statsman

[Rex Kramer 1338]

3 minutes ago, statsman said:

I disagree that Israel is an apartheid state. It is formally a Jewish state, but Muslim and Christian citizens have all the rights Jews do, with the exception of institutional adjustment to the constraints of Judaism. It is a liberal democracy. 
 
South Africa was an apartheid state. Black South Africans, born in South Africa, had limited rights and liberties in almost every aspect. 
 
To call Israel an apartheid state, you have to argue that Palestinian refugees (born and residing outside the borders of Israel, in the WB, Gaza and other regions) are or should be citizens of Israel. Is that the argument? Isn’t this what the whole “right of return” is about?

It seems to me that Israel being an apartheid state is fully a matter of opinion- opinion over who should be a citizen or not. In my opinion, it isn’t. 
 
(Obviously, if the “right of return” were granted, after the first vote Israel would become an Islamic state and that would be that). 

It’s not an apartheid state. People who claim this have an axe to grind and are regurgitating shit Rashida Tlaib blurts out of her fat ugly mouth. 

[Brian Fantana 6689]

15 minutes ago, statsman said:

I disagree that Israel is an apartheid state. It is formally a Jewish state, but Muslim and Christian citizens have all the rights Jews do, with the exception of institutional adjustment to the constraints of Judaism. It is a liberal democracy. 
 
South Africa was an apartheid state. Black South Africans, born in South Africa, had limited rights and liberties in almost every aspect. 
 
To call Israel an apartheid state, you have to argue that Palestinian refugees (born and residing outside the borders of Israel, in the WB, Gaza and other regions) are or should be citizens of Israel. Is that the argument? Isn’t this what the whole “right of return” is about?

It seems to me that Israel being an apartheid state is fully a matter of opinion- opinion over who should be a citizen or not. In my opinion, it isn’t. 
 
(Obviously, if the “right of return” were granted, after the first vote Israel would become an Islamic state and that would be that). 

You're a fucking unserious clownass.

[statsman 5471]

1 minute ago, Brian Fantana said:

You're a fucking unserious clownass.

Well, I can’t argue with that…

[Brian Fantana 6689]

11 minutes ago, statsman said:

Well, I can’t argue with that…

When you stop making inherently dishonest arguments like claiming Israeli apartheid doesn't exist because it's not a 1-to-1 copy of South African apartheid, and compartmentalizing your argument to exclude occupied/administered territories, then maybe someone that isn't Rex will listen to you. Otherwise, fuck off and go back to lurking and drive by negging as is your usual practice.

[Rex Kramer 1338]

16 minutes ago, statsman said:

Well, I can’t argue with that…

Don’t quote him please. Ironic he’d call anyone else a clownass. He is serious occasionally, but it’s hard to wade through all the anti-Israel nonsense to get there. 

[Conqueeftador 123]

15 hours ago, Brian Fantana said:

we don't need foreign leaders coming to our soil to arrogantly scold Congress for the president even hinting that fewer billions may be heading their direction

agreed

[aggie08 21504]

11 minutes ago, Conqueeftador said:

agreed

I thought that was you, GRU!

[MagicSoccerSpray 1732]

 

[Bevo 13577]

4 minutes ago, MagicSoccerSpray said:

 

 

 

I wonder what the real chart looks like.

[Loch Ness Monster 3533]

Admit I don't have all the answers but isn't taking out leadership alone kinda like playing whac-a-mole? Stir up a hornets nest and soon enough new leaders emerge. However this time they are each bringing three of their buddies with them to join the cause.

Unless the goal is to provoke a strong enough retaliation for a 3D chess move? 

[Parliament 14260]

You take out a whole lotta experience, wisdom and tribal knowledge when you whack one of those shitbags.  Yeah is replacement is right there, but that guy isn't as good at killing Israeli civilians.  It's a net positive.

[Rex Kramer 1338]

4 minutes ago, Parliament said:

You take out a whole lotta experience, wisdom and tribal knowledge when you whack one of those shitbags.  Yeah is replacement is right there, but that guy isn't as good at killing Israeli civilians.  It's a net positive.

Of course it’s a net positive. “Another will rise in their place.”  Well, kill them too. 

[atomheartbevo 89690]

On 9/24/2024 at 10:55 PM, SL Xpress said:

But it will give a respite because of the loss of institutional knowledge.

2 hours ago, Parliament said:

You take out a whole lotta experience, wisdom and tribal knowledge when you whack one of those shitbags.  Yeah is replacement is right there, but that guy isn't as good at killing Israeli civilians.  It's a net positive.

Just look at what's happening in Russia with experienced Russian troops being lost early on - the amount of institutional knowledge that's been lost in the Russian Army is staggering, and we know the people coming into the Russian Army, whether conscripted or mobilized, have very little training these days (just look at how trashy their trenches are), and I can only imagine what things like vehicle maintenance are like.

Those Hamas and Hezbollah leaders being killed - those are the guys who know where the money comes from, where it needs to go, what is being stored where, who can be trusted, etc. Their replacements are going to come in, not knowing who they can trust and who might be an informant, and they aren't going to be comfortable moving around the various areas, tunnels/underground complexes, etc.  They'll stand out.

 

 

Edited September 26 by atomheartbevo

[MagicSoccerSpray 1732]

 

[jeevsie 3734]

11 hours ago, Parliament said:

You take out a whole lotta experience, wisdom and tribal knowledge when you whack one of those shitbags.  Yeah is replacement is right there, but that guy isn't as good at killing Israeli civilians.  It's a net positive.

ISWYDT

[PRONG HORN 3146]

 

[PRONG HORN 3146]

 

 

 

This entire interview beyond this 1:22 clip was a pretty good watch. 

 

 

 

[Loch Ness Monster 3533]

On 9/25/2024 at 8:49 PM, Parliament said:

You take out a whole lotta experience, wisdom and tribal knowledge when you whack one of those shitbags.  Yeah is replacement is right there, but that guy isn't as good at killing Israeli civilians.  It's a net positive.

Feel like the main achievement accomplished is the generational conflict has been successfully passed down to the next generation. Hamas / Hezbollah may be defanged in the short term yes. But more popular than ever maybe?...And I'm worried about the United States reputation in the UN. 

Maybe I'm just ignorant and don't quite get it. That's possible.

[PRONG HORN 3146]

7 minutes ago, Loch Ness Monster said:

Feel like the main achievement accomplished is the generational conflict has been successfully passed down to the next generation. Hamas / Hezbollah may be defanged in the short term yes. But more popular than ever maybe?...And I'm worried about the United States reputation in the UN. 

Maybe I'm just ignorant and don't quite get it. That's possible.

 

 

They wont be more popular than ever with the Lebanese.  Hezbollah is Iran's baby and not very popular in general with most of the mid east.  It's hard to say how much of the population of palestine actually supports hamas and it's actions.  I find it hard to believe that the majority of palestinians are that dumb.  I think they wish they had a better alternative than hamas, but who is stepping up?  The war hawks are in charge everywhere you go over there, and as long as that is the case, Israel will just keep kicking ass.  

 

 

 

 

 

[Rex Kramer 1338]

1 hour ago, Loch Ness Monster said:

Feel like the main achievement accomplished is the generational conflict has been successfully passed down to the next generation. Hamas / Hezbollah may be defanged in the short term yes. But more popular than ever maybe?...And I'm worried about the United States reputation in the UN. 

Maybe I'm just ignorant and don't quite get it. That's possible.

First of all, fuck the UN. Second, your argument is constantly used and always wrong and extremely naive. There are people that want to kill Americans and Israelis, and there always will be.  Concern only about future terrorism takes your eye off the ball from the very radical element within Islam that is only quieted when dead. If necessary lethal actions create more terrorists, kill them too. The only way to combat terrorism is to aggressively root it out sans compassion. 

[Brian Fantana 6689]

Baby brain

[Brisketexan 105154]

2 hours ago, Rex Kramer said:

The only way to combat terrorism is to aggressively root it out sans compassion. 

Now, apply that take to the hard right in Israel that has openly stated that it wants to wipe all Palestinians from the levant.

And see how fucked we are for a long, long, long time, because the current war is adding generations of fuel to the fire for the extremist elements on both sides.