Israel

[SydneyCarton 48153]

1 minute ago, G650 said:

 

We are talking about two separate things, yes I agree dropping a nuclear bomb was clearly disproportionate, but it's not eradication, which some people are floating. It's an important distinction.

 

On the second part, yes I agree. My point is success has to be determined in the long term implications, and there's a lot of downstream repercussions beyond "these people aren't shooting me anymore". I'm not suggesting that is going to be a big factor in the Israeli response though.

Who are the people floating eradication? Certainly you're not suggesting people on this thread?

[G650 14275]

4 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

Who are the people floating eradication? Certainly you're not suggesting people on this thread?

 On this thread, but more in DT, there are saying the Israelis annihilate the Palestinian state. Which to be clear I'm I'm not saying anyone is floating it as a suggestion or anything. But that's not what I'm getting at though, people are using Japan as an example of annihilation and its not.

[BrickHorn 18283]

1 hour ago, Dbeasy said:

After being sympathetic to Israel initially, I’m rapidly starting to change my viewpoint based upon real time events.

With more bombs being dropped on civilians in Gaza in a day than in a month in Afghanistan by the US, and a declaration that 1 million Palestinian people must leave, and a ground force about to do who knows what, it’s becoming clear that the atrocities of Hamas are starting to be matched or exceeded by Israel. There is no way Israel will be able to ferret out Hamas terrorists from the population without wholesale killing.  

The West can’t just stand by and let this happen. The response is going too far. It’s not proportionate. And most importantly, disproportionate responses never ultimately work. It just solidifies the determination of the enemy to resist even more for longer. 

 

The only point I might clarify is that I remain sympathetic to Israel as victims of this horrific mass murder. And I also fear for the safety of my Jewish friends. This shit is going to be tense and scary for a while, I’m afraid.

[Chuckie Finster 22727]

Maybe. Probably. But those people rejected the PA, which is roundly stil despised, and elected a group who's charter was literally jewish genocide. They may regret that decision, but they elected it. And nevermind people keep talking about how Bibi is, and how things have been since Hamas got elected. But that's ignoring the dozens of offers to find a solution that happened BEFORE 2006. You can't simply look at the past 17 years when Israel started going authoritarian AF. There's been opportunities in every decade since the 1967 war to broker a peace, accept a 2 state solution, or negotiate in good faith and they've all roundly been rejected. 

You can't make excuses for Palestine over and over again, over the course of 75+ years of fighting and atrocities on both sides, they're the ones who always reject any path towards peace, whatsoever, time and again. That can't be all on fucking Israel. And it's been going on since long before Hamas. 

As someone who has really been struggling this week in a battle between head (fuck Bibi) and heart (Jew), was really hoping to read some insightful responses to this post as I feel it is a missing link that may help me bridge some of my emotions.

Unfortunately (unsurprisingly?) it has gone ignored so far.

[Aqua Buddha 14605]

Uh oh.  More Republican on Republican anti Semitism.  You hate to see it:

 

[Brisketexan 105286]

12 minutes ago, Aqua Buddha said:

Uh oh.  More Republican on Republican anti Semitism.  You hate to see it:

 

Wait....is that little fucker Ben Shapiro saying that Jesus Christ can't hit a curve ball?

[chainsaw 9873]

8 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

As someone who has really been struggling this week in a battle between head (fuck Bibi) and heart (Jew), was really hoping to read some insightful responses to this post as I feel it is a missing link that may help me bridge some of my emotions.

Unfortunately (unsurprisingly?) it has gone ignored so far.

They haven't been able to have elections since the VY Rose Bowl. Scroll a few pages back. I posted a recent poll of Palestinians; a wide majority supported maintaining the ceasefire (peace). A majority supported a two-state solution (1967 borders) if it would mean peace.

I know there's a lot of scary rhetoric directed at Jews, and it's not just from Hamas. That's unacceptable. It's inexcusable. It didn't grow in a vacuum, though. My hypothesis is that the hatred is a product not of who Israelis are (Jews) but of what Israel (the nation state) has done to them.

It's bizarre to me because there's the widespread acceptability of a father hunting down and murdering a boy who sexually assaults his daughter, and braying in the comments section in stories where something along those lines has happened, braying to the effect of "if I'm on that jury I let him walk" or "I'd do the exact same thing." Deep down, there's a universal normalization of the notion that retributive violence can sometimes be justified. We're just really selective about when it's socially acceptable to express support for that kind of thing.

I don't believe it is, and I think when cooler heads are permitted to prevail, a man who murders a rapist is still guilty of murder. As it should be.

Let's not normalize retributive violence in any context. Hamas's violence against Israelis, although the accompanying rhetoric suggests is because of Jew hatred, is more persuasively explained as retributive violence against the people they perceive, perhaps correctly, as oppressors. When you take the direct oppression out of the equation (like when Palestinian refugees coexist with Jews in safe countries), the violence subsides, which tells me how much of a factor oppression is in motivating people to carry out acts of violence. I don't doubt that some, perhaps even most, refugees may carry with them some lingering resentment, nor that they are capable of disgusting rhetoric. I'm proud that the retributive violence of Saturday was swiftly denounced, but disappointed that the response has been retributive violence against a population that is at least 98% non-Hamas.

 

[Brisketexan 105286]

1 hour ago, Michael Knight said:

‘The Onion’ Stands With Israel Because It Seems Like You Get In Less Trouble For That

https://www.theonion.com/the-onion-stands-with-israel-because-it-seems-like-yo-1850922505

Also....dear lord, the times we live in.  When a satire is dead, yet satire is also some of the most pointed, thoughtful news coverage we can get.  Helluva world, man.

[SydneyCarton 48153]

10 hours ago, chainsaw said:

They haven't been able to have elections since the VY Rose Bowl. Scroll a few pages back. I posted a recent poll of Palestinians; a wide majority supported maintaining the ceasefire (peace). A majority supported a two-state solution (1967 borders) if it would mean peace.

I know there's a lot of scary rhetoric directed at Jews, and it's not just from Hamas. That's unacceptable. It's inexcusable. It didn't grow in a vacuum, though. My hypothesis is that the hatred is a product not of who Israelis are (Jews) but of what Israel (the nation state) has done to them.

It's bizarre to me because there's the widespread acceptability of a father hunting down and murdering a boy who sexually assaults his daughter, and braying in the comments section in stories where something along those lines has happened, braying to the effect of "if I'm on that jury I let him walk" or "I'd do the exact same thing." Deep down, there's a universal normalization of the notion that retributive violence can sometimes be justified. We're just really selective about when it's socially acceptable to express support for that kind of thing.

I don't believe it is, and I think when cooler heads are permitted to prevail, a man who murders a rapist is still guilty of murder. As it should be.

Let's not normalize retributive violence in any context. Hamas's violence against Israelis, although the accompanying rhetoric suggests is because of Jew hatred, is more persuasively explained as retributive violence against the people they perceive, perhaps correctly, as oppressors. When you take the direct oppression out of the equation (like when Palestinian refugees coexist with Jews in safe countries), the violence subsides, which tells me how much of a factor oppression is in motivating people to carry out acts of violence. I don't doubt that some, perhaps even most, refugees may carry with them some lingering resentment, nor that they are capable of disgusting rhetoric. I'm proud that the retributive violence of Saturday was swiftly denounced, but disappointed that the response has been retributive violence against a population that is at least 98% non-Hamas.

 

I have to stop you. The Jews have been persecuted since the times of the Romans. They were persecuted in the Bible. They were blamed for the black plague throughout Europe. They were slaughtered in the Holocaust by Germany. But the problem here is the Nation State of Israel, created in what, 1948? 
 

I agree with you in retributive violence, but that first part, get the fuck outta here. And there are plenty of protests all over the world in other countries by pro Palestinians. And a teacher in France today was murdered after a call to a day of rage. So it’s not all fine once they’re not in Gaza or the West Bank. And I found polling from 2021 saying more than 50% viewed Hamas positively, so leads not pretend your polling is definitive, as we’ve been over already. 
 

And I say all this fully acknowledging that what it looks like Israel is about to do to Gaza is unconscionable. 

Edited October 14, 2023 by SydneyCarton

[chainsaw 9873]

2 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

I have to stop you. The Jews have been persecuted since the times of the Romans. They were persecuted in the Bible. They were blamed for the black plague throughout Europe. They were slaughtered in the Holocaust by Germany. But the problem here is the Nation State of Israel, created inc what, 1948? 
 

I agree with you in retributive violence, but that first part, get the fuck outta here. 

I was only talking about from the Arab world. Should have been clearer about that.

[G650 14275]

2 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

I have to stop you. The Jews have been persecuted since the times of the Romans. They were persecuted in the Bible. They were blamed for the black plague throughout Europe. They were slaughtered in the Holocaust by Germany. But the problem here is the Nation State of Israel, created inc what, 1948? 
 

I agree with you in retributive violence, but that first part, get the fuck outta here. 

So a total aside, I've always found antisemitism to be the most bizarre thing, like from the time I was a child. And these days when I hear some crackpot thing abot the Jews running the world, it's just, man. Like <waves at everything that's happened to Jews in the past two millennia >. Y'all really think these people control shit?

[SydneyCarton 48153]

3 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

I was only talking about from the Arab world. Should have been clearer about that.

Yes. But my point is that irrational hatred of Jews has existed for millennia. But you think it’s more likely the formation of Israel in this one instance.  Not the existing general hatred of Jews. Ok. 

[Neonmoon 38130]

13 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Wait....is that little fucker Ben Shapiro saying that Jesus Christ can't hit a curve ball?

He can’t. And neither can Buddha, Allah, Moses, or Vishnu. It’s a really difficult pitch to hit statistically. 

[chainsaw 9873]

1 minute ago, SydneyCarton said:

Yes. But my point is that irrational hatred of Jews has existed for millennia. But you think it’s more likely the formation of Israel in this one instance.  Not the existing general hatred of Jews. Ok. 

Actually I separated identity from conduct. The kind of hatred that drives some to violence and terrorism is fueled by conduct (oppression) moreso than arbitrary lines in the sand, although the lines don't help especially not when accompanied by Nakba

[Brisketexan 105286]

1 minute ago, chainsaw said:

I know there's a lot of scary rhetoric directed at Jews, and it's not just from Hamas. That's unacceptable. It's inexcusable. It didn't grow in a vacuum, though. My hypothesis is that the hatred is a product not of who Israelis are (Jews) but of what Israel (the nation state) has done to them.

I like your hypothesis.  I wish very, very, very much that it was a good hypothesis.

But it is not.  Because it disregards literally centuries/millenia of data.  "Hatred of jews" (violent anti-semitism) didn't spring forth from a bad situation created in 1948.  It's been a strong thread that has run through history, and yes, the region and the people who populate it, for a LONG-ASS time.  Before they had any Israeli occupation to be angry about, LONG before the nation state of Israel even existed.

Jews have a couple thousand years of evidence that the strategy of "maybe if we're just really nice, keep to ourselves, and don't start shit, people won't try to kill us" is.....not effective.  You want us to understand the Palestinian perspective, but I think you're ignoring both 1) the jewish perspective and 2) the hard, real-world data that formed that perspective.

Why do jews believe that some other group very much wants to kill them?  Because for millenia, other groups have very much wanted to kill them, have made repeated efforts to do so in while or in large part, and continue to do so right up to this very second.  And yes, the modern Palestinians are one of those groups.

TLDR; we have periods where we have a control, eliminating the event of "the nation state of Israel being a fucking dick."  The common thread, whether or not Israel even exists/is a piece of dick, is that people want to exterminate the jews.  So, writing off violent anti-semitism as a product of the last 75 years of events requires ignoring of all of that other data.  We can't do that.

[chainsaw 9873]

1 minute ago, Brisketexan said:

I like your hypothesis.  I wish very, very, very much that it was a good hypothesis.

But it is not.  Because it disregards literally centuries/millenia of data.  "Hatred of jews" (violent anti-semitism) didn't spring forth from a bad situation created in 1948.  It's been a strong thread that has run through history, and yes, the region and the people who populate it, for a LONG-ASS time.  Before they had any Israeli occupation to be angry about, LONG before the nation state of Israel even existed.

Jews have a couple thousand years of evidence that the strategy of "maybe if we're just really nice, keep to ourselves, and don't start shit, people won't try to kill us" is.....not effective.  You want us to understand the Palestinian perspective, but I think you're ignoring both 1) the jewish perspective and 2) the hard, real-world data that formed that perspective.

Why do jews believe that some other group very much wants to kill them?  Because for millenia, other groups have very much wanted to kill them, have made repeated efforts to do so in while or in large part, and continue to do so right up to this very second.  And yes, the modern Palestinians are one of those groups.

TLDR; we have periods where we have a control, eliminating the event of "the nation state of Israel being a fucking dick."  The common thread, whether or not Israel even exists/is a piece of dick, is that people want to exterminate the jews.  So, writing off violent anti-semitism as a product of the last 75 years of events requires ignoring of all of that other data.  We can't do that.

There's a difference between legitimate self-defense and what's currently happening (and the maintenance of open-air prisons). I don't think it's okay to bend the rules just because of these data points, many of which don't necessarily apply to modern Gaza. I'm trying to learn more about the history of this particular region and whether the threat of imminent, genocidal violence emanated from its Arab population for reasons separate from retribution (e.g., the reason that they just hate Jews that much simply because they're Jews). I have no doubt that there have existed for centuries existential threats to Jewish lives. What I want to know more about is how many of those threats have come from the Arab world and, if so, when did the threats begin? It's been my understanding that the beef between Arabs and Jews is a relatively new one.

[Brisketexan 105286]

Just now, chainsaw said:

There's a difference between legitimate self-defense and what's currently happening (and the maintenance of open-air prisons).

You get, and always would have gotten, no argument from me on this point.  There's no defending how Bibi's admin has treated Gaza, and I suspect there will be no defending the many war crimes they seem intent on committing in this war.  Hamas must be eliminated, and there will be civilian casualties, as it is war....but I am confident that what we are seeing and will see will go far beyond that.  Because if there's one thing these belligerents have shown a knack for, it's rapidly surrendering the moral high ground whenever you  might have it.

And as for the history of the beef between the muslim world and jews....it's not a new one.  It's perhaps WORSE than it has been at times (but it's also been pretty bad at other times), but it's not new.

And, without excusing war crimes committed in retribution, it puts Israel in an impossible spot: how do you negotiate with a counter-party (if not as a whole, at least a large plurality) that fundamentally wants you and all of your people extinguished from the roster of humanity?  That's why I see no hope for a resolution, ever.  Because I don't believe that the impediment (violent anti-semitism) is a flare-up that will go away if the jews just make nice.  And the jews sure as SHIT don't believe that, because they've seen that strategy fail the world over....what makes the Palestinians any different (better at being able to ditch their anti-semitism) than everyone else?  Shit, jews don't feel entirely safe here in the "enlightened" USA (nor should they, because we've always had a violent anti-semitic streak, and it's growing again these days).

[bolverk 29717]

32 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

TLDR; we have periods where we have a control, eliminating the event of "the nation state of Israel being a fucking dick."  The common thread, whether or not Israel even exists/is a piece of dick, is that people want to exterminate the jews.  So, writing off violent anti-semitism as a product of the last 75 years of events requires ignoring of all of that other data.  We can't do that.

Counterpoint:

Jews lived, albeit in small numbers, in the area we call Palestine for centuries alongside their Arab/Palestinian neighbors without being exterminated. Even during the early Zionism movement, starting in the 1880s when more Jews were arriving and their numbers began to swell, they were not exterminated by their Arab/Palestinian neighbors.

It's not a coincidence that the violence didn't really get started until about the time the UN carved out a bunch of land and the Palestinians were being kicked out of their ancestral homeland did major conflict arise. It wasn't because of any inherent hatred of the Jews (they were tolerated); it was because Palestinians being displaced (forcibly I might add) from the farms they'd been tilling and villages they'd been inhabiting for 1500 years.

Edited October 14, 2023 by bolverk

[Brian Fantana 6690]

7 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

You get, and always would have gotten, no argument from me on this point.  There's no defending how Bibi's admin has treated Gaza, and I suspect there will be no defending the many war crimes they seem intent on committing in this war.  Hamas must be eliminated, and there will be civilian casualties, as it is war....but I am confident that what we are seeing and will see will go far beyond that.  Because if there's one thing these belligerents have shown a knack for, it's rapidly surrendering the moral high ground whenever you  might have it.

And as for the history of the beef between the muslim world and jews....it's not a new one.  It's perhaps WORSE than it has been at times (but it's also been pretty bad at other times), but it's not new.

And, without excusing war crimes committed in retribution, it puts Israel in an impossible spot: how do you negotiate with a counter-party (if not as a whole, at least a large plurality) that fundamentally wants you and all of your people extinguished from the roster of humanity?  That's why I see no hope for a resolution, ever.  Because I don't believe that the impediment (violent anti-semitism) is a flare-up that will go away if the jews just make nice.  And the jews sure as SHIT don't believe that, because they've seen that strategy fail the world over....what makes the Palestinians any different (better at being able to ditch their anti-semitism) than everyone else?  Shit, jews don't feel entirely safe here in the "enlightened" USA (nor should they, because we've always had a violent anti-semitic streak, and it's growing again these days).

Again, given where we are....there is no possible peace at this point unless Israel does some very specific things. If you're not willing to even consider that, we might as well just let them wipe the Palestinians out, once and for all, and see how that fucking works out for them in the long run. Israel has only been getting away with their pants-shittingly long list of war crimes for so long because they are backed by the might of the US military and the relative indifference of the world at large.

Palestinians have no power to change anything. It's like I said earlier, their hatred of Jews, such as it is for whatever X% of them, is not baked into their fucking DNA, it can god damned well be unlearned, it is just a very difficult and time consuming process should it ever be undertaken. And there's of course, no guarantee that some other awful fucking thing wouldn't happen in the middle of it to wipe out all the hard work.

There can never, ever be peace unless Israel stops the ethnic cleansing in its tracks, first and foremost, and shows willingness to treat Palestinians like humans and with equality. No matter what minutiae we kick around here and argue about, absolutely nothing will change or get better unless those things happen first. It's the only possible first step on the way to peace.

But, I'm a doomer like you, and the Israeli government is run by bloodthirsty freaks, so I suspect the most likely outcome is mass genocide. Cheered on by the DT posters and every other shitty person in America, I might add.

[cactusflinthead 27601]

Hope it was worth it to Hamas because this is what it's going to be.

 

[956 Worldwide 34747]

2 hours ago, Satchel said:

Hamas has not allowed an election in Gaza in 17 years and has ruled its inhabitants with an iron hand. Palestinians live in fear.

You head to the polls in 2006, heady with the promise of self-rule, and case a ballot for a violent, fundamentalist group that explicitly rejects democratic governance in its mission statement. Then 17 years later, promise after promise of good governance unfulfilled, and they won’t even hold an election! 
 

This has to be the most obvious case of FAFO out there. And it sucks, it’s shitty. It truly does. It sucks for the people who were not old enough to vote and never got a vote. It even sucks for people who got emotional and angry and regret their choices. It sucks shit through a straw all around and Hamas is a brutal and disgusting bunch of assholes— but you can’t say they didn’t deliver on the whole “democracy is bullshit” part of their campaign platform. 
 

And here’s the other thing— they are brutal and awful and won’t allow elections BUT…..the only military that might get rid of them is apparently not supposed to take any action that might lead to their destruction, because of all the civilians who might get hurt or killed. And fair enough, that’s a great argument not to intervene but what’s the theory of change then? 

[jimmyjazz 46109]

Wait, Ben Shapiro (who is a Jew) espouses what is essentially the Jewish perspective on the nature of Jesus Christ, and we're mad?  

I can think of a bunch of things to criticize Benny for, but that ain't one of them.

[SydneyCarton 48153]

42 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

There's a difference between legitimate self-defense and what's currently happening (and the maintenance of open-air prisons). I don't think it's okay to bend the rules just because of these data points, many of which don't necessarily apply to modern Gaza. I'm trying to learn more about the history of this particular region and whether the threat of imminent, genocidal violence emanated from its Arab population for reasons separate from retribution (e.g., the reason that they just hate Jews that much simply because they're Jews). I have no doubt that there have existed for centuries existential threats to Jewish lives. What I want to know more about is how many of those threats have come from the Arab world and, if so, when did the threats begin? It's been my understanding that the beef between Arabs and Jews is a relatively new one.

Id like to point you towards a little story about the plight of Jews in that region, Egypt, chronicled in a somewhat famous book called the Bible. 
 

Are you serious man? Jews have been hated in that region of the world since before Islam even fucking existed. The same way the Book of Mormon loves to demonize the “red skinned demons” to capitalize on the hatred of Native American hate of the day, because you don’t get followers unless you lean into the fucking pre-existing hatreds. A coach at Texas doesn’t endear himself in his opening press conference by telling people to lay down the hate and love OU. Humans aren’t fucking complicated, we’re stupid and filled with hatred. And every religion needs a fucking enemy. Sadly the Jews just always seem to be the fucking pick. They’ve enjoyed periods in the region where they’ve been accepted and prospered, and then the pendulum swings back and they’re persecuted and hated. Everyone goes back to playing the hits. 
 

Have you ever heard of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion? If not fucking google it. It’s a goddamn 1900 QAnon pamphlet that literally has become the accepted facts of the entire antisemitic world today. It’s fucking depressing. And guess what that’s 50 years before Israel became a state. And we’re still hearing about its underpinnings today. Thank that piece of shit book every time you hear “globalist conspiracy.” Everyone resorts to playing the hits, and the biggest hit is “fuck the Jews.”

[956 Worldwide 34747]

1 hour ago, chainsaw said:

There's a difference between legitimate self-defense and what's currently happening (and the maintenance of open-air prisons). I don't think it's okay to bend the rules just because of these data points, many of which don't necessarily apply to modern Gaza. I'm trying to learn more about the history of this particular region and whether the threat of imminent, genocidal violence emanated from its Arab population for reasons separate from retribution (e.g., the reason that they just hate Jews that much simply because they're Jews). I have no doubt that there have existed for centuries existential threats to Jewish lives. What I want to know more about is how many of those threats have come from the Arab world and, if so, when did the threats begin? It's been my understanding that the beef between Arabs and Jews is a relatively new one.

GTFO with this shit. Wars between Muslim (which at the time was exclusively an Arab phenom) and Jewish tribes were literally the OG militant jihads along with the fight against polytheists in Mecca and Medina.  The Koran and Hadiths (which may only be considered authoritative in Arabic) has verses about how at the end of days it’s going to be awesome because Muslims will kill all the Jews.  
 

And there’s a long, long history of tolerant and peaceful Muslims choosing a symbolic and metaphorical interpretation of those verses and the lessons of that history. Just like there are centuries of tolerant and peaceful Jews and Christians that choose to find a humane way to interpret the bloody passages of their texts.  But let’s not pretend that the other violent and intolerant strain hasn’t existed just as long, and side by side with the other one. 
 

It’s true that modern anti-Semitism in the Muslim world draws from and feeds from the codex of European antisemitism that led to the Holocaust and that the Israel question inflames it. And it’s also true that in a grotesque feedback loop, modern anti-Semitic narratives in the Muslim world feed back into the remaining Western anti-Semite groups as further justification for their stance. 
 

But let’s not pretend Arabs and Jews were copacetic before 1948, Jews lived in the Middle East at the birth of Islam.  And wars between the armies of Muhammad and the Jewish tribes only stopped once Islam was triumphant and the Jews either eliminated or living in total subjugation. And pogroms and massacres of Jews in the larger Islamic world rocked right along in a tug of war between Islam’s tolerant and urbane strain and its rigorous puritanical streak. In both the Islamic and Christian worlds, Jews tended to suffer most when one or the other of the bigger monotheisms seemed to have an upper hand and Jews became suspect as the internal enemy. 

Edited October 14, 2023 by 956 Worldwide

[F250 28817]

33 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Wait, Ben Shapiro (who is a Jew) espouses what is essentially the Jewish perspective on the nature of Jesus Christ, and we're mad?  

I can think of a bunch of things to criticize Benny for, but that ain't one of them.

[Anastasis 23481]

39 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Wait, Ben Shapiro (who is a Jew) espouses what is essentially the Jewish perspective on the nature of Jesus Christ, and we're mad?  

I can think of a bunch of things to criticize Benny for, but that ain't one of them.

Wut?

[chainsaw 9873]

10 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

GTFO with this shit. Wars between Muslim (which at the time was exclusively an Arab phenom) and Jewish tribes were literally the OG militant jihads along with the fight against polytheists in Mecca and Medina.  The Koran (which may only be considered authoritative in Arabic) has verses about how at the end of days it’s going to be awesome because Muslims will kill all the Jews.  
 

And there’s a long, long history of tolerant and peaceful Muslims choosing a symbolic and metaphorical interpretation of those verses and the lessons of that history. Just like there are centuries of tolerant and peaceful Jews and Christians that choose to find a humane way to interpret the bloody passages of their texts.  But let’s not pretend that the other violent and intolerant strain hasn’t existed just as long, and side by side with the other one. 
 

It’s true that modern anti-Semitism in the Muslim world draws from and feeds from the codex of European antisemitism that led to the Holocaust and that the Israel question inflames it. And it’s also true that in a grotesque feedback loop, modern anti-Semitic narratives in the Muslim world feed back into the remaining Western anti-Semite groups as further justification for their stance. 
 

But let’s not pretend Arabs and Jews were copacetic before 1948, Jews lived in the Middle East at the birth of Islam.  And wars between the armies of Muhammad and the Jewish tribes only stopped once Islam was triumphant and the Jews either eliminated or living in total subjugation. And pogroms and massacres of Jews in the larger Islamic world rocked right along in a tug of war between Islam’s tolerant and urbane strain and its rigorous puritanical streak. In both the Islamic and Christian worlds, Jews tended to suffer most when one or the other of the bigger monotheisms seemed to have an upper hand and Jews became suspect as the internal enemy. 

All religious texts say a lot of really questionable things. many of which are utterly incompatible with modern sensibilities. But also you're skipping over a lot of time between the make-believe stories in those religious texts and the present day. If we're talking about bloodlust and deep-seated desires to exterminate the other (which is what I'm talking about and what I'm interested in focusing on), I've seen very little evidence that it's anything more than a recent thing for Arabs assuming you buy into this idea that these people are genetically incapable of living side by side with Jews, which I don't.

I'm not saying relations were ideal before 1948, but they were markedly better than they are now. The evidence I have seen strongly suggests that Israel's conduct has played a larger role than the irrational hatred of Jews in getting us to where we are now. Unfortunately, the most violent elements of Gaza are laying blame where it does not belong (Israeli civilians) and the most violent elements of Israel are seeking violent retribution from the over 98% of Gazans who are not part of Hamas, over 50% of whom are children and never cast a vote in their lives for Hamas.

[jimmyjazz 46109]

12 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Wut?

Maybe I misunderstood what he said.  I have about zero interest in figuring out where I went astray, though.

[SydneyCarton 48153]

1 minute ago, chainsaw said:

All religious texts say a lot of really questionable things. many of which are utterly incompatible with modern sensibilities. But also you're skipping over a lot of time between the make-believe stories in those religious texts and the present day. If we're talking about bloodlust and deep-seated desires to exterminate the other (which is what I'm talking about and what I'm interested in focusing on), I've seen very little evidence that it's anything more than a recent thing for Arabs assuming you buy into this idea that these people are genetically incapable of living side by side with Jews, which I don't.

I'm not saying relations were ideal before 1948, but they were markedly better than they are now. The evidence I have seen strongly suggests that Israel's conduct has played a larger role than the irrational hatred of Jews in getting us to where we are now. Unfortunately, the most violent elements of Gaza are laying blame where it does not belong (Israeli civilians) and the most violent elements of Israel are seeking violent retribution from the over 98% of Gazans who are not part of Hamas, over 50% of whom are children and never cast a vote in their lives for Hamas.

Let’s talk about “your evidence” and “all that you’ve read.” What is this exactly? 
 

And now you’re at 2% Hamas, 98% innocent Palestinians. The own single poll you found at best said 70% were open to a 2 state solution. That’s not 98%. And that’s also ignoring the fact you found one poll and are citing it as fact, meanwhile I cited another one with drastically different numbers in favor of Hamas. And you’re here running that shit out here like it’s an irrefutable truth. You’re doing a lot of gymnastics to make things fit your narrative. 

[bolverk 29717]

35 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

And here’s the other thing— they are brutal and awful and won’t allow elections BUT…..the only military that might get rid of them is apparently not supposed to take any action that might lead to their destruction, because of all the civilians who might get hurt or killed. And fair enough, that’s a great argument not to intervene but what’s the theory of change then? 

Who has stated this? Like Sidney, I've read every single post in both threads. You are the only poster I've seen that has typed out that phrase or something similar.

Personally, I want the IDF to take every necessary legal action to eradicate Hamas. I fully understand there will be "collateral damage," as our government has so euphemistically termed the unintentional killing of civilians. I want to see Hamas so thoroughly whipped that (much like the German people after the Nazis) the Palestinians come to realize that peace is the only answer. But I also want the Israelis to conduct themselves within the legal framework of acceptable behavior as outlined by international law.

Finally, I want the Israelis to do what the US did in the aftermath: assist in building an economy and government in the West Bank and Gaza so that the Palestinians themselves demand from their fellow people that they have peace. What that means is Israel must also grant them the ability to have a viable country that's not carved up into little ghettos surrounded by radical Orthodox settlers who want to eradicate them.

That's it. That is all. Kick ass and be magnanimous in victory. The Israeli government has never done that since the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza.

The Oslo Plan that everyone keeps citing as fair was anything but that, as I outlined with citations to American participants in the negotiations and the Mitchell Report that investigated the Second Intifada. The Israelis still wanted to have the West Bank chopped up into pieces, never explicitly supported a completely independent Palestinian state, and insisted on having the right to bring in the IDF whenever they wanted. Moreover, during and after the process, the Israeli government continued to allow settlers to encroach on what the international community recognized as not Israeli land. At the beginning of that process, there were 100,000 settlers in the West Bank. By the end of it, there were 200,000. Today, there are 700,000.

Give the Palestinians a fucking chance to have their own country, which they did not have prior to 1967. Sidney keeps saying the Palestinians invaded Israel in all those wars. Yes, there may have been participants who hadn't been living in refugee camps for 20 years, but it was Syria, Jordan, and Egypt that were doing the invasion.

Give the Palestinians the right to full self-rule.

[956 Worldwide 34747]

3 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

All religious texts say a lot of really questionable things. many of which are utterly incompatible with modern sensibilities. But also you're skipping over a lot of time between the make-believe stories in those religious texts and the present day. If we're talking about bloodlust and deep-seated desires to exterminate the other (which is what I'm talking about and what I'm interested in focusing on), I've seen very little evidence that it's anything more than a recent thing for Arabs assuming you buy into this idea that these people are genetically incapable of living side by side with Jews, which I don't.

I'm not saying relations were ideal before 1948, but they were markedly better than they are now. The evidence I have seen strongly suggests that Israel's conduct has played a larger role than the irrational hatred of Jews in getting us to where we are now. Unfortunately, the most violent elements of Gaza are laying blame where it does not belong (Israeli civilians) and the most violent elements of Israel are seeking violent retribution from the over 98% of Gazans who are not part of Hamas, over 50% of whom are children and never cast a vote in their lives for Hamas.

There’s literally a Wikipedia category of Muslim and Arab pogroms against the Jews across centuries my guy. The special non-believer tax was invented specifically for Jews.I’m sorry you don’t know about it. 

There wasn’t a deep-seated desire in Europe to exterminate the Jews (as opposed to subjugate and perpetrate sporadic programs and massacres alternating with periods of enlightenment and tolerance—which is similar pattern to how Muslim rulers treated their Jews in their own sphere) until suddenly it appeared in the 1930s. What’s the fucking point you’re trying to make, anti-Semitism doesn’t count if it’s not genocidal? 

[Brian Fantana 6690]

8 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Maybe I misunderstood what he said.  I have about zero interest in figuring out where I went astray, though.

This is one of the few instances where Ben Shapiro is not the biggest dipshit in the room. The dude who tweeted that is basically a Nazi, Christofascist freak and he's saying what Ben was saying there is pure blasphemy even though it's actually a completely normal thing coming out of Ben's mouth for a change.

Edited October 14, 2023 by Brian Fantana

[chainsaw 9873]

1 minute ago, SydneyCarton said:

Let’s talk about “your evidence” and “all that you’ve read.” What is this exactly? 
 

And now you’re at 2% Hamas, 98% innocent Palestinians. The own single poll you found at best said 70% were open to a 2 state solution. That’s not 98%. And that’s also ignoring the fact you found one poll and are citing it as fact, meanwhile I cited another one with drastically different numbers in favor of Hamas. And you’re here running that shit out here like it’s an irrefutable truth. You’re doing a lot of gymnastics to make things fit your narrative. 

That's simple math. How many people live in Gaza? 2.2 million. What's the size of Hamas? The biggest estimate I've seen is 40,000. What's 40,000 divided by 2,200,000? 0.018 (just under 2 percent). What's 100 minus 2? 98.

[chainsaw 9873]

2 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

There’s literally a Wikipedia category of Muslim and Arab pogroms against the Jews across centuries my guy. The special non-believer tax was invented specifically for Jews.I’m sorry you don’t know about it. 

There wasn’t a deep-seated desire in Europe to exterminate the Jews (as opposed to subjugate and perpetrate sporadic programs and massacres alternating with periods of enlightenment and tolerance—which is similar pattern to how Muslim rulers treated their Jews in their own sphere) until suddenly it appeared in the 1930s. What’s the fucking point you’re trying to make, anti-Semitism doesn’t count if it’s not genocidal? 

Anti-semitism counts, but we're talking about defense and war. Imminent threats, which I don't believe Gaza would be if it were treated fairly and with dignity.

[SydneyCarton 48153]

4 minutes ago, bolverk said:

Who has stated this? Like Sidney, I've read every single post in both threads. You are the only poster I've seen that has typed out that phrase or something similar.

Personally, I want the IDF to take every necessary legal action to eradicate Hamas. I fully understand there will be "collateral damage," as our government has so euphemistically termed the unintentional killing of civilians. I want to see Hamas so thoroughly whipped that (much like the German people after the Nazis) the Palestinians come to realize that peace is the only answer. But I also want the Israelis to conduct themselves within the legal framework of acceptable behavior as outlined by international law.

Finally, I want the Israelis to do what the US did in the aftermath: assist in building an economy and government in the West Bank and Gaza so that the Palestinians themselves demand from their fellow people that they have peace. What that means is Israel must also grant them the ability to have a viable country that's not carved up into little ghettos surrounded by radical Orthodox settlers who want to eradicate them.

That's it. That is all. Kick ass and be magnanimous in victory. The Israeli government has never done that since the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza.

The Oslo Plan that everyone keeps citing as fair was anything but that, as I outlined with citations to American participants in the negotiations and the Mitchell Report that investigated the Second Intifada. The Israelis still wanted to have the West Bank chopped up into pieces, never explicitly supported a completely independent Palestinian state, and insisted on having the right to bring in the IDF whenever they wanted. Moreover, during and after the process, the Israeli government continued to allow settlers to encroach on what the international community recognized as not Israeli land. At the beginning of that process, there were 100,000 settlers in the West Bank. By the end of it, there were 200,000. Today, there are 700,000.

Give the Palestinians a fucking chance to have their own country, which they did not have prior to 1967. Sidney keeps saying the Palestinians invaded Israel in all those wars. Yes, there may have been participants who hadn't been living in refugee camps for 20 years, but it was Syria, Jordan, and Egypt that were doing the invasion.

Give the Palestinians the right to full self-rule.

I agree completely agree. It’s almost like they should have come to the table one of the dozen times and negotiated a second state that everyone seems to claim they all want. 

[Brisketexan 105286]

Again, given where we are....there is no possible peace at this point unless Israel does some very specific things. If you're not willing to even consider that, we might as well just let them wipe the Palestinians out, once and for all, and see how that fucking works out for them in the long run. Israel has only been getting away with their pants-shittingly long list of war crimes for so long because they are backed by the might of the US military and the relative indifference of the world at large.
Palestinians have no power to change anything. It's like I said earlier, their hatred of Jews, such as it is for whatever X% of them, is not baked into their fucking DNA, it can god damned well be unlearned, it is just a very difficult and time consuming process should it ever be undertaken. And there's of course, no guarantee that some other awful fucking thing wouldn't happen in the middle of it to wipe out all the hard work.
There can never, ever be peace unless Israel stops the ethnic cleansing in its tracks, first and foremost, and shows willingness to treat Palestinians like humans and with equality. No matter what minutiae we kick around here and argue about, absolutely nothing will change or get better unless those things happen first. It's the only possible first step on the way to peace.
But, I'm a doomer like you, and the Israeli government is run by bloodthirsty freaks, so I suspect the most likely outcome is mass genocide. Cheered on by the DT posters and every other shitty person in America, I might add.

Does it surprise you that I really don’t disagree with your take?
Israel will have to try, and that means doing things very differently than they’ve been done in the Bibi era. They have to try treating the Palestinians with humanity and respect for human rights.
The tough to balance part is that they ALSO have to eliminate Hamas as a military and political entity, or get damned close to it.
Israel CAN do both those things. But it’s making it clear that it’s going to go full Bibi, and war crime the shit out of this.
In each direction, with two sides who each have a very fair and understandable position, the bloodthirsty shitheels are in charge.
But then….maybe the people of Israel and the Palestinians both are getting what they deserve, because they CHOSE this leadership. Sure, plenty of them didn’t….but enough of them did.
If the Palestinians don’t want their cities blasted, don’t support leadership that pledges endless jihad and extermination of all Jews.
If the Israelis don’t want to stoke the fires of Palestinian anger, don’t support leadership that pledges to shit on them even more.
But that’s what they all do. Fuck, it’s what we do here - we can’t say “Trump isn’t on us.” Like hell he ain’t. Enough of us supported him to get him elected. It doesn’t take a majority to make you a shitty nation, just a plurality big enough to make you shitty.
We’re going to get war crimes galore in Gaza.
We’re going to get murders of Jews worldwide.
And round and round it goes. We are a shit species. And we’re incapable of changing for the better. Eventually, we’ll get around to exterminating ourselves completely.

[bolverk 29717]

1 minute ago, SydneyCarton said:

I agree completely agree. It’s almost like they should have come to the table one of the dozen times and negotiated a second state that everyone seems to claim they all want. 

They did in 2011 during the Obama administration. Bibi was prime minister by then. It did not go well.

[SydneyCarton 48153]

4 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

That's simple math. How many people live in Gaza? 2.2 million. What's the size of Hamas? The biggest estimate I've seen is 40,000. What's 40,000 divided by 2,200,000? 0.018 (just under 2 percent). What's 100 minus 2? 98.

Yet up to 57% polled say they feel positive about them. And they shelter and house them, lie for them, etc. but yes, ignore all the polling you’ve cited elsewhere when it suits you. What’s 30% of 2.2? 57%?

[hobbes2702 13060]

3 hours ago, SydneyCarton said:

1) look at my post right above yours. That's some timing.

2.) Maybe he should stop with one sentence replies and meme pics and a refusal to answer any direct questions, much less hypocritical bullshit. 

[chainsaw 9873]

Just now, SydneyCarton said:

Yet up to 57% polled say they feel positive about them. And they shelter and house them, lie for them, etc. but yes, ignore all the polling you’ve cited elsewhere when it suits you. What’s 30% of 2.2? 57%?

"Feel positive" about is much different from "joining" or "providing material support to." There's no justification for the slaughter of these children, and you know it.

[Neonmoon 38130]

1 minute ago, chainsaw said:

There's no justification for the slaughter of these children, and you know it.

Is anyone trying to justify the slaughter of children? 

[Anastasis 23481]

18 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Maybe I misunderstood what he said.  I have about zero interest in figuring out where I went astray, though.

Yeah. I must be missing something cause I am not sure why we are talking about Shapiro. 

[SydneyCarton 48153]

4 minutes ago, bolverk said:

They did in 2011 during the Obama administration. Bibi was prime minister by then. It did not go well.

 No shit it didn’t. Maybe show up more than 1/30 times. And I’m shocked Bibi scuttled shit. What happened when his predecessor left Gaza in 2005?

[956 Worldwide 34747]

7 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

Anti-semitism counts, but we're talking about defense and war. Imminent threats, which I don't believe Gaza would be if it were treated fairly and with dignity.

There were no wars because early Muslim armies destroyed all the Jewish political entities in the region, massacred the obstinate Jews, occupied their lands, and forced the survivors to live under an oppressive special regime where they were deprived of full rights and subject to random violence whenever the majority population felt threatened. 

This should all sound exceedingly familiar to the current situation. I really don’t know how obtuse you can be. 

[SydneyCarton 48153]

3 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

"Feel positive" about is much different from "joining" or "providing material support to." There's no justification for the slaughter of these children, and you know it.

Which I’ve never advocated, and condemned repeatedly. It’s horrific. And Bibi has put us here in the near term, except he didn’t elect Hamas after Israel withdrew from Gaza.. And you act like only the last 18 years exist and no previous history that led to that fucking cunt Bibi to grab and retain power. 

Quote me where I’ve been anything other than distraught over the loss of lives in Gaza that’s coming. I fucking dare you. 

[bolverk 29717]

11 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

There’s literally a Wikipedia category of Muslim and Arab pogroms against the Jews across centuries my guy. The special non-believer tax was invented specifically for Jews.I’m sorry you don’t know about it. 

There wasn’t a deep-seated desire in Europe to exterminate the Jews (as opposed to subjugate and perpetrate sporadic programs and massacres alternating with periods of enlightenment and tolerance—which is similar pattern to how Muslim rulers treated their Jews in their own sphere) until suddenly it appeared in the 1930s. What’s the fucking point you’re trying to make, anti-Semitism doesn’t count if it’s not genocidal? 

After the 1880s, the Ottomans were selling land to Zionist settlers, who employed Palestinian laborers to help work their farms. Yeah, they were paying that extra tax (as were Christians), but they were allowed to build new villages along the coast from Jaffa to Haifa and into the interior.

Were there tensions prior to Balfour? Yes.

Did things amp up after Balfour? Yes, but it was because the Brits had promised to help establish Palestine as its own state as a buffer to protect the Suez.

And then, of course, when the UN carved out a bunch of land and 250,000 Palestinians were forcibly removed, did the Palestinians really get pissed? You bet.

[956 Worldwide 34747]

9 minutes ago, bolverk said:

After the 1880s, the Ottomans were selling land to Zionist settlers, who employed Palestinian laborers to help work their farms. Yeah, they were paying that extra tax (as were Christians), but they were allowed to build new villages along the coast from Jaffa to Haifa and into the interior.

Were there tensions prior to Balfour? Yes.

Did things amp up after Balfour? Yes, but it was because the Brits had promised to help establish Palestine as its own state as a buffer to protect the Suez.

And then, of course, when the UN carved out a bunch of land and 250,000 Palestinians were forcibly removed, did the Palestinians really get pissed? You bet.

You mean almost exactly like this:

Quote

There wasn’t a deep-seated desire in Europe to exterminate the Jews (as opposed to subjugate and perpetrate sporadic programs and massacres alternating with periods of enlightenment and tolerance—which is similar pattern to how Muslim rulers treated their Jews in their own sphere) until suddenly it appeared in the 1930s. 

 

[Anastasis 23481]

The west should have gave them Germany as a reparation.

[bolverk 29717]

17 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

 No shit it didn’t. Maybe show up more than 1/30 times. And I’m shocked Bibi scuttled shit. What happened when his predecessor left Gaza in 2005?

How much effort in building up democratic norms and making investments to create a viable economy had Israel made before unleashing them? You militarily occupy a territory for 40 years and then just let go? That spells trouble.

You'd think they would've had a Marshall Plan or not forced people to live under a pretty harsh police state or something while also concurrently putting forth genuine efforts in building peace between neighbors.

Tell me again, how did all those Israeli settlers who were made to leave when the occupation of Gaza ended acquire all that farmland in Gaza, which was not internationally recognized as Israeli soil?

Seems if you're in charge of a place for 40 years, you'd try not to let it bite you in the ass when you suddenly let it go.

[956 Worldwide 34747]

16 minutes ago, bolverk said:

After the 1880s, the Ottomans were selling land to Zionist settlers, who employed Palestinian laborers to help work their farms. Yeah, they were paying that extra tax (as were Christians), but they were allowed to build new villages along the coast from Jaffa to Haifa and into the interior.

Were there tensions prior to Balfour? Yes.

Did things amp up after Balfour? Yes, but it was because the Brits had promised to help establish Palestine as its own state as a buffer to protect the Suez.

And then, of course, when the UN carved out a bunch of land and 250,000 Palestinians were forcibly removed, did the Palestinians really get pissed? You bet.

I think it’s relevant to remember that about 60 percent of the Jews in Israel are descendants of Middle Eastern Jews who got kicked out of their ancient homes as revenge for the establishment of Israel. Which they had nothing to do with. 
 

And in a big population swap, they came to Israel as refugees while Arab Palestinians fled as refugees. The difference being that Israel integrated and gave citizenship to those people as opposed to maintaining them as permanent aggrieved refugees. 
 

So there’s a big chunk of Israelis with just as much claim to righteous fury for being evicted, and that’s almost never mentioned in the settler/colonial narrative, nor is a realistic alternative as to what they should have done.