Israel

[SydneyCarton 49534]

3 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

I think you and I might have very different views on what qualifies as "left alone."

Well, enlighten me. Because to my understanding, every actual conflict with Israel has started with other people invading the territory of Israel. Then losing territory to Israel, then using that as a justification for having to re-invade Israel again. And all of this has been happening for decades. And the main reason I see cited here is how inhumanely the Isarelis have been treating the Palestinians, specifically in the West Bank and Gaza. Nervermind that Israel has been getting invaded by outsiders since before they even HAD the West Bank and Gaza. It's how they fucking acquired that territory in the first place, it's almost like losing wars has consequecnes.

 

So help me understand what I'm missing. 

Edited October 11, 2023 by SydneyCarton

[chainsaw 10309]

Just now, SydneyCarton said:

Well, enlighten me. Because to my undrestanding, every actual conflict with Israel has started with other people invading the territory of Israel. Then losing territory to Israel, then using that as a justification for having to re-invade Israel again. And all of this has been happening for decades. And the main reason I see cited here is how inhumanely the Isarelis have been treating the Palestinians, specifically in the West Bank and Gaza. Nervermind that Israel has been getting invaded by outsiders since before they even HAD the West Bank and Gaza. It's how they fucking acquired that territory in the first place, it's almost like losing wars has consequecnes.

 

So help me understand what I'm missing. 

Start here.

[G650 14451]

10 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

Go ahead. Are you saying that Israel fired first in 1948, or Palestine was displesed with Isarel declaring Independance and attacked? To be transparent, I'm using this as my cheat sheet. 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/israel-palestine-conflict-timeline-history-explained/

 

They had a fucking country imposed on them in 1948.

[SydneyCarton 49534]

10 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

Start here.

Yeah, I read that earlier today. The United Nations mandated the creation of a Jewish state, from the British occupied Palestine. The Jewish accepted the partition, the Palestinians rejected it. Fighting breaks out, Jews start going on the offensive. Britain pulls out, Israel declared it's independance. Surrounding Arab armies attack. Five armies from five countires fought Israel, and they pushed them all back and gained territory. It's a pretty good summary when you dig a bit further:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1948_Palestine_war
 

Edited October 11, 2023 by SydneyCarton

[Patricio Swayze 17058]

I posted this in the other thread, but perhaps helpful here. Not been vetted for dates but a quick scan it looked right.

https://reddit.com/r/MapPorn/s/lFRyr6xVt2

[chainsaw 10309]

Just now, SydneyCarton said:

Yeah, I read that earlier today. The United Nations mandated the creation of a Jewish state, from the British occupied Palestine. The Jewish accepted the partition, the Palestinians rejected it. Fighting breaks out, Jews start going on the offence. Britain pulls out, Israel declared it's independance. Surrounding Arab armies attack. Five armies from five countires fought Israel, and they pushed them all back and gained territory. It's a pretty good summary when you dig a bit further:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1948_Palestine_war
 

Nakba is inexcusable. Read up on it.

[SydneyCarton 49534]

4 minutes ago, G650 said:

They had a fucking country imposed on them in 1948.

Yeah, I'm aware. And they rejected the UN proposal. And then they fought and got beat. And then they repeatedly fought and got beat, and lost more land, and more land, and more land. And now here we are thinking that if the Jews would stop being oppressive in Gaza, they'd happily be left alone. When time and time again, they've shown that ANYTHING other than the destruction of Israel and the full restoration of Palestine is the only thing that will make them happy. 

I've said over and over that it's not like Palestine doesn't have reason to be upset, and it's not like Israel hasn't really made it worse since Hamas took power in Gaza, but lets not pretend that if they just had their own soverign territory things would be fine. They've rejected that multiple times, and they've fought multiple wars and lost MORE land. There isn't a "just enough" land that would make them less upset. They want back ALL of the land. 

I don't know how to solve that problem. Relocate Israel somehwere else? That doesn't seem plausible. 

[Brisketexan 107033]

Just now, SydneyCarton said:

When time and time again, they've shown that ANYTHING other than the destruction of Israel and the full restoration of Palestine is the only thing that will make them happy. 

I've said over and over that it's not like Palestine doesn't have reason to be upset, and it's not like Israel hasn't really made it worse since Hamas took power in Gaza, but lets not pretend that if they just had their own soverign territory things would be fine. They've rejected that multiple times, and they've fought multiple wars and lost MORE land. There isn't a "just enough" land that would make them less upset. They want back ALL of the land. 

QFT.  What part of this is not true?

[Tonesky 1059]

I'm probably just forgetful, but can someone point me to the map with a proposed two state boundary that any Palestinian religious, political, or military leader has, at any time since 1948, suggested as even a starting point?  (Just to be clear, this excludes the only one I can recall - the Jew-less single state from the river to the sea)  

[SydneyCarton 49534]

3 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

Nakba is inexcusable. Read up on it.

It's pretty horrible. And I honestly don't justify how you can advocate how wrong it was, and then deny that refugees prove that there is no deep, innate hatred for Jews and Israel becuase many refugees aren't committing crimes abroad. Which is some version of what you've been advocating all day. You can't have it both ways, which one is it? Are they a peaceful people that are just looking for their own space and would be great citizens if just given their own land and left alone? Or are they a people with deep, deep long standing grievances that have rejected multiple two state solutions because they didn't include everything they wanted, and have a justifiable and deep resentment and hatred towards Jews? You're making my initial point for me. 

[G650 14451]

11 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Well, when you've demonstrated that indeed you don't understand, and relentlessly downplay the deep and strong thread of antisemitism that exists in the region (and that has manifested itself in multiple actual wars with the actual goal of actually exterminating the jewish state, I mean for fuck's sake, we're not making this shit up)....yeah, you just don't understand.

The fucking dismissive handwave of how big a factor antisemitism is....is truly baffling to me.

Brisket, you are so far out in front of your skis on this not only do you not know what the reality of the situation is, you don't even have a concept of what posters in this threads positions are. You are ascribing things to people they have never even said or insinuated.

 

My point to you this entire time is literally if you are writing a sentence with the word should you need to shut the fuck up. Asking someone what the think should be done is grade A idiocy. They are in the right by not saying it, and neither you, me, or anyone else in this thread has the slightest capability or right to opine on what should be done, because there is no should. Full fucking stop.

 

It is, to repeat, just like the morons in DT theorizing carrier movements or being VERY SERIOUS about what teams are going to Israel. I'm friends with dozens of guys from 6, I have friends who are ex NSA, CIA, you name it. You know what I know because of that? Not to give stupid fucking opinions on the internet. I know that I don't know and speculation is the r word.

I'm saying this shit because I fucking like you, stop. Sympathize with the people killed and their loves ones, curse the situation that got us here. Be determined that the Hamas fucks that did this die. All good things.

But for the live of God please quit fucking theorizing some grand schemes and dehumanizing random people. You aren't solving shit amd you looking like an idiot for talking about tit because you are tying yourself in knots.

[David Dennison 19570]

4 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

Yeah, I'm aware. And they rejected the UN proposal. And then they fought and got beat. And then they repeatedly fought and got beat, and lost more land, and more land, and more land. And now here we are thinking that if the Jews would stop being oppressive in Gaza, they'd happily be left alone. When time and time again, they've shown that ANYTHING other than the destruction of Israel and the full restoration of Palestine is the only thing that will make them happy. 

I've said over and over that it's not like Palestine doesn't have reason to be upset, and it's not like Israel hasn't really made it worse since Hamas took power in Gaza, but lets not pretend that if they just had their own soverign territory things would be fine. They've rejected that multiple times, and they've fought multiple wars and lost MORE land. There isn't a "just enough" land that would make them less upset. They want back ALL of the land. 

I don't know how to solve that problem. Relocate Israel somehwere else? That doesn't seem plausible. 

Since annexation is off the table, Israel might consider leaving the occupied territories.

[Tonesky 1059]

4 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

Nakba is inexcusable. Read up on it.

Nakba is the Palestinian narrative.  A large number of the Palestinians who left what is now Israel, did so at the encouragement of the invading Arab armies.  Essentially - get out of the way and you can come back after we kill all of the Jews.  Also, the contemporaneous migration of a similar number of Jews from Arab countries is also a thing - read up on it.

[G650 14451]

6 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

Yeah, I'm aware. And they rejected the UN proposal. And then they fought and got beat. And then they repeatedly fought and got beat, and lost more land, and more land, and more land. And now here we are thinking that if the Jews would stop being oppressive in Gaza, they'd happily be left alone. When time and time again, they've shown that ANYTHING other than the destruction of Israel and the full restoration of Palestine is the only thing that will make them happy. 

I've said over and over that it's not like Palestine doesn't have reason to be upset, and it's not like Israel hasn't really made it worse since Hamas took power in Gaza, but lets not pretend that if they just had their own soverign territory things would be fine. They've rejected that multiple times, and they've fought multiple wars and lost MORE land. There isn't a "just enough" land that would make them less upset. They want back ALL of the land. 

I don't know how to solve that problem. Relocate Israel somehwere else? That doesn't seem plausible. 

Yeah I'm not debating that or anything, I was just saying there was a pretty big provocation in 1948 is all

 

 

 

[chainsaw 10309]

1 minute ago, SydneyCarton said:

It's pretty horrible. And I honestly don't justify how you can advocate how wrong it was, and then deny that refugees prove that there is no deep, innate hatred for Jews and Israel becuase many refugees aren't committing crimes abroad. Which is some version of what you've been advocating all day. You can't have it both ways, which one is it? Are they a peaceful people that are just looking for their own space and would be great citizens if just given their own land and left alone? Or are they a people with deep, deep long standing grievances that have rejected multiple two state solutions because they didn't include everything they wanted, and have a justifiable and deep resentment and hatred towards Jews? You're making my initial point for me. 

That's kind of a false dichotomy. My proposal is to leave them alone, because there is strong evidence that if they are left alone they will leave everyone else alone. No occupation, no oppression. Return their ancestral lands, reconstruct them, and pay reparations to the victims and their descendants.

[David Dennison 19570]

3 minutes ago, Tonesky said:

Nakba is the Palestinian narrative.  A large number of the Palestinians who left what is now Israel, did so at the encouragement of the invading Arab armies.  Essentially - get out of the way and you can come back after we kill all of the Jews.  Also, the contemporaneous migration of a similar number of Jews from Arab countries is also a thing - read up on it.

Was the Irgun part of a Palestinian narrative?

[SydneyCarton 49534]

4 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

That's kind of a false dichotomy. My proposal is to leave them alone, because there is strong evidence that if they are left alone they will leave everyone else alone. No occupation, no oppression. Return their ancestral lands, reconstruct them, and pay reparations to the victims and their descendants.

Ok. So your proposal is that israel should dissolve entirely and they pay reparations to the descendants or Palestine. Because the restoration of their ancestral lans is all of Israel. I'm not trying to be a fucking cunt here, but that is what you're saying correct? Also, side not, if a country dissolves entirely how do they pay reparations?

Or are the ancestral lands after the UN resolution that Palestine rejected, but Israel did and then took by force when they were attacked by give neighboring armies when they decared independance. 

Should Ukraine be given back to the Russia becuase of Ancestral Lands? Again, not trying to be a cunt, this is an honest question. Should we give all of America back to the native Americans? Becuase what we did to them is fucking horrible and bullshit, but I honestly just don't see these things as realistic. So what's realistic now?

 

Edited October 11, 2023 by SydneyCarton

[Brisketexan 107033]

2 minutes ago, G650 said:

My point to you this entire time is literally if you are writing a sentence with the word should you need to shut the fuck up. Asking someone what the think should be done is grade A idiocy. They are in the right by not saying it, and neither you, me, or anyone else in this thread has the slightest capability or right to opine on what should be done, because there is no should. Full fucking stop.

Yet....you and plenty of others spent a shitload of keystrokes telling us what Israel "should not" do.  Sure looks like sentences with the word "should" in it, repeatedly.  If all you have to offer, when discussing a response to a challenging situation, is "well.....here's what you SHOULDN'T do," that's fucking bullshit.  Yet....you're a-ok with that.  Your hypocrisy is noted.

5 minutes ago, G650 said:

But for the live of God please quit fucking theorizing some grand schemes and dehumanizing random people. You aren't solving shit amd you looking like an idiot for talking about tit because you are tying yourself in knots.

I'm not dehumanizing anyone.  Haven't proposed doing so, am not doing so, will not do so.  It is a reality that the thread of antisemitism is incredibly powerful in the region -- so powerful it has led the Palestinians and their allies to make multiple attempts to evict the jews from the levant, and for a movement that was literally elected by popular vote of Palestinians in Gaza to make it the foundation of their platform.  I'm not making any of that up.  Actual people actually did these things.

Maybe we even understand some of WHY they did those things.  But it's still where they ended up.  It's not "dehumanizing" to observe that a fuckload of the German people either happily went along with violent antisemitism or were quite comfortable being complicit in it.  It's true.  They did that.  And the Palestinians are doing similarly now.

I know you don't like that this truth keeps getting put back in front of you, because it's incompatible with how you want things to be now and in the future, but denying it is only lying to ourselves.

[chainsaw 10309]

1 minute ago, SydneyCarton said:

Ok. So your proposal is that israel should dissolve entirely and they pay reparations to the descendants or Palestine. Because the restoration of their ancestral lans is all of Israel. I'm not trying to be a fucking cunt here, but that is what you're saying correct? Also, side not, if a country dissolves entirely how do they pay reparations?

Or are the ancestral lands after the UN resolution that Palestine rejected, but Israel did and then took by force when they were attacked by give neighboring armies when they decared independance. 

Should Ukraine be given back to the Soviet Union becuase of Ancestral Lands? Again, not trying to be a cunt, this is an honest question. 

 

I think the latest data suggests a large majority of Palestinians would accept the 1967 borders. But yes reparations and reconstruction would go a long way in fostering peace.

[SydneyCarton 49534]

6 minutes ago, G650 said:

Yeah I'm not debating that or anything, I was just saying there was a pretty big provocation in 1948 is all

 

 

 

I get it man. And I'm just trying to illustrate that after losing land, then losing more land, there's never been any kind of acceptance of "Ok, if I just had SOME of this land, back, and it would be mine, we can move forward and be fine, and eventually live peacefully." It's been constant wars to reclaim the lost land, rejection of the 2 state proposals, and a situation that continues to get worse and worse. I don't see any indication that i theyhave anyhting less than their original territory, and the extermination of the jews with it, would they let this matter rest. 

And the fact that the charter of Hamas indicates hunting down Jews throughout the world indicates to me that a large percentage of people wouldn't stop with that either. 

[Tonesky 1059]

5 minutes ago, Tonesky said:

Nakba is the Palestinian narrative.  A large number of the Palestinians who left what is now Israel, did so at the encouragement of the invading Arab armies.  Essentially - get out of the way and you can come back after we kill all of the Jews.  Also, the contemporaneous migration of a similar number of Jews from Arab countries is also a thing - read up on it.

 

1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

Was the Irgun part of a Palestinian narrative?

I did not remotely say that all Palestinian refugees left their homes in what is now Israel voluntarily or without duress.  But, i note you ignore the reference to the similar number of Jews who fled their homes in neighboring Arab states.

[SydneyCarton 49534]

2 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

I think the latest data suggests a large majority of Palestinians would accept the 1967 borders. But yes reparations and reconstruction would go a long way in fostering peace.

I'm saying this in the best possible manner and in good faith as a joke, an I hope you take it that way in good faith, but I can't help myself:

Is this latest data...polling data? Was that polling data collected entirely for refugees?

 

/ducks

[David Dennison 19570]

Just now, Tonesky said:

I did not remotely say that all Palestinian refugees left their homes in what is now Israel voluntarily or without duress.  But, i note you ignore the reference to the similar number of Jews who fled their homes in neighboring Arab states.

I'm not ignoring anything. I'm acknowledging what some of the founders were up to prior to the establishment of the state of Israel.

[Nice Guy Eddie 13743]

11 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Since annexation is off the table, Israel might consider leaving the occupied territories.

Was Israel in Gaza? Someone correct me, but I think Israel would have been happy many times if Gaza wanted to break off on their own. But that doesn't mean Israel has to accept a terrorist state (Gaza) to exist next door with the sole purpose of eliminating Israel. Important to note that Egypt wants nothing to do with Gaza as well. 

[Brisketexan 107033]

12 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

Ok. So your proposal is that israel should dissolve entirely and they pay reparations to the descendants or Palestine. Because the restoration of their ancestral lans is all of Israel. I'm not trying to be a fucking cunt here, but that is what you're saying correct? Also, side not, if a country dissolves entirely how do they pay reparations?

Or are the ancestral lands after the UN resolution that Palestine rejected, but Israel did and then took by force when they were attacked by give neighboring armies when they decared independance. 

Should Ukraine be given back to the Russia becuase of Ancestral Lands? Again, not trying to be a cunt, this is an honest question. Should we give all of America back to the native Americans? Becuase what we did to them is fucking horrible and bullshit, but I honestly just don't see these things as realistic. So what's realistic now?

 

He gave you the answer.  It's the final conclusion behind all of their suggestions: "Return their ancestral lands, reconstruct them, and pay reparations to the victims and their descendants."

You correctly understand EXACTLY what it means: dissolve Israel, jews should leave.

It all comes back to that.  It always does.  There is not and can never be a two-state solution, because the Palestinians (and their supporters -- just read their posts here, when they finally give you their honest conclusion) DO NOT WANT IT AND WILL NEVER ACCEPT IT.  Nothing less than the dissolution of Israel will do.

EDIT: and for the record, I have long believed that a two-state approach is the path forward.  And I mean a REAL two-state solution, with some significant concessions from Israel - shit they really won't want to give on.  But I've also realized that even if it's the right path, and the smartest path, it still won't fucking work.  Because see David Dennison's approach.  We'll never get past that.  No state, no solution to the problem will ever be enough, so long as Israel still exists and there are jews still in the levant.

Edited October 11, 2023 by Brisketexan

[BrickHorn 18450]

40 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

What I mean here is that, uniquely for Jews, they are accused of making up their own genocide and then those accusations are used as ammunition to justify further atrocities and the same murderous ideology  that led to the original genocide.

I don’t deny at all that Jewish people seem uniquely subject to racist hatred, conspiratorial lies, etc. But they are not remotely the only persecuted group who have suffered genocide only to be victim blamed. That’s kind of a hallmark of persecution and genocide: the perpetrators rarely come out and say “This one’s on us, guys!” (Although in the case of the Holocaust, the successor state to the Nazi regime has gone out of its way to prevent attempts to deny the genocide.)

And while I don’t doubt that some portion of Palestinians deny the Holocaust, is that really a significant motivating factor in their beef with Israel? Is Hamas lashing out to defend Hitler’s historical reputation? Seems like they have much more immediate and local disputes to drive hostility.

[G650 14451]

8 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

You and plenty others.

 

18 minutes ago, G650 said:

Brisket, you are so far out in front of your skis on this not only do you not know what the reality of the situation is, you don't even have a concept of what posters in this threads positions are

[chainsaw 10309]

6 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

I'm saying this in the best possible manner and in good faith as a joke, an I hope you take it that way in good faith, but I can't help myself:

Is this latest data...polling data? Was that polling data collected entirely for refugees?

 

/ducks

In all seriousness, I'm not sure where I saw that, but yes I believe it was a poll. Not my preference but given the thing we're trying to measure I don't know if better evidence could exist.

My sense of it is that a majority of them believe all of Israel should belong to Palestine, but are willing to accept 1967 borders if it would mean peace and the removal of occupying forces.

[SydneyCarton 49534]

30 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

In all seriousness, I'm not sure where I saw that, but yes I believe it was a poll. Not my preference but given the thing we're trying to measure I don't know if better evidence could exist.

My sense of it is that a majority of them believe all of Israel should belong to Palestine, but are willing to accept 1967 borders if it would mean peace and the removal of occupying forces.

Hamas doesn’t believe that. They were elected. And over 50% of Palestinians all say they have at least a somewhat positive opinion of Hamas. Doesn’t that count as equal evidence? You know, outside of all the wars and killing. 
 

in my experience, the bolded part is always the problem. They say they would accept it, but give it a few years and then it’s that Jurusalem isn’t part of the deal. 
 

crimea was all Russia wanted. Then it wasn’t. This shit always ends the same. 

Edited October 11, 2023 by SydneyCarton

[Nivek 17426]

3 hours ago, jimmyjazz said:

Well, it happened.  I desperately hope Israel doesn't return that particular favor.

They have to.  This is a political game.  Israel must project strength and destroy enough of Gaza and its citizenry so that the next time an attack is planned, the people within Gaza thwart it or rat it out.   If Israel does little, then they look weak, and more borders may be tested.  If Israel does attack but limits its response, Hamas would recover and plan another strike in X number of years.  Sadly this shit comes down to middle school recess punk tests.  One has to establish boundaries to have a functional and symbiotic relationship with others.

Germany and Japan are poor comparisons.  The plight of the Native Americans are better examples.  Europeans of all nations kicked the shit out of them, or manipulated them.  They resisted, tried to cooperate, and sometimes fought back.  Fighting back resulted in only more asskickings.   When they stopped resisting, they were given some table scraps.    The history lesson here is that if you resist, you better have the capabilities to really resist even if you have to use a Fabian strategy (as the US did with the Brits).   The Natives didn't.   The Palestinians do not. 

There is a reason Rome decided to just fucking murder all the Carthaginians and Corinthians in the same year.  They were done fucking about with warfare in those regions and wanted complete subjugation of those nearby powers.   If Israel did that, they would hear about it for about 30 years.  Then they would apologize for the past, set up a memorial, and the ancestors would genuinely be contrite.  Ah man, how barbaric those 120 years were in history, future scholars would say while sipping coffee at some street cafe in Gaza after their class field trip to some memorial.    

As far as the non-combatants go.  It really really sucks for them.  There is a cost to being passive in a militant society.   You don't get a free pass at home and certainly not when the foreign powers come in to clean house.  You just pick your lottery number and hope you make it through with your family and friends.  

[MC Fresh Breath 4075]

[David Dennison 19570]

8 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Was Israel in Gaza? Someone correct me, but I think Israel would have been happy many times if Gaza wanted to break off on their own. But that doesn't mean Israel has to accept a terrorist state (Gaza) to exist next door with the sole purpose of eliminating Israel. Important to note that Egypt wants nothing to do with Gaza as well. 

While Israel might not technically be in the Gaza Strip, they have instituted permanent land, air, and sea blockade since 2007. That will need to stop if there is any hope for peace.

[Tonesky 1059]

1 minute ago, chainsaw said:

My sense of it is that a majority of them believe all of Israel should belong to Palestine, but are willing to accept 1967 borders if it would mean peace and the removal of occupying forces.

And, if we snapped our fingers and made this happen, what Palestinian government would disarm and police/control Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Al-Aqsa martyrs Brigade, etc?  And, should they fail to successfully do so, what would Israel reasonably be allowed to do to protect its citizens?

['stache 22147]

32 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

Yeah, I'm aware. And they rejected the UN proposal. And then they fought and got beat. And then they repeatedly fought and got beat, and lost more land, and more land, and more land. And now here we are thinking that if the Jews would stop being oppressive in Gaza, they'd happily be left alone. When time and time again, they've shown that ANYTHING other than the destruction of Israel and the full restoration of Palestine is the only thing that will make them happy. 

I've said over and over that it's not like Palestine doesn't have reason to be upset, and it's not like Israel hasn't really made it worse since Hamas took power in Gaza, but lets not pretend that if they just had their own soverign territory things would be fine. They've rejected that multiple times, and they've fought multiple wars and lost MORE land. There isn't a "just enough" land that would make them less upset. They want back ALL of the land. 

I don't know how to solve that problem. Relocate Israel somehwere else? That doesn't seem plausible. 

These questions should have been asked in 1948 and dozens of time thereafter but the west has never viewed Palestinians as equals in any respect. As far as how to solve it now, it's probably too late, the west has acquiesced to Israel dominating Palestine, and that's how its going to be for the foreseeable future. One thing that might help is for the UN and western powers to demand that Israel remove their illegal settlements in the West Bank, but that will never happen.

Palestinians are basically in the same situation as Native Americans in the early 1800s. When they fought American expansion into their territories they fought back and were called savages. They lost and the law treated them as vanquished enemies . Palestinians have not quite been wiped out yet to that extent, but they will be soon. There is no other possibility. Either accept Israeli rule or be wiped out. Not a fair choice, but might is right in this world. 

Edited October 11, 2023 by 'stache

[Brisketexan 107033]

5 minutes ago, G650 said:

 

You were perfectly happy to defend Hobbes' repeated takes on what Israel SHOULDN'T do in response to these attacks.  In fact, you were happy to absolve him from offering what Israel should do....when he'd spent post after post telling us what Israel shouldn't do.  Seems like you were perfectly fine with a lotta sentences with "should" in them, so long as that "should" is followed by "not."

And no shit we're all amateurs offering up what we think Israel should do here.  It's a message board discussion.  It's what we do.  If someone was dumb enough to invite me into an actual decision-making meeting on behalf of Israel, I'd expect that I'd largely shut the fuck up, because I sure as shit would hope that everyone else in the room was much more qualified than me to offer strategic suggestions.

[G650 14451]

2 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

ou were perfectly happy to defend Hobbes' repeated takes on what Israel SHOULDN'T do in response to these attacks.  In fact, you were happy to absolve him from offering what Israel should do....when he'd spent post after post telling us what Israel shouldn't do.  Seems like you were perfectly fine with a lotta sentences with "should" in them, so long as that "should" is followed by "not."

 

Seriously go back an find where a single time I said literally anything in your post that I responded to. I'll wait

 

2 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

It's what we do. 

You fucking shouldn't.

Edited October 11, 2023 by G650

[chainsaw 10309]

Just now, SydneyCarton said:

Hana’s doesn’t believe that. They were elected. And over 50% of Palestinians all say they have at least a somewhat positive opinion of Hamas. Doesn’t that count as equal evidence? You know, outside of all the wars and killing. 

What's more likely, that a majority of Palestinians are irredeemably supportive of terror and genocide but only "somewhat" support their de facto government or that a majority Palestinians want their own liberation and "somewhat" support a group who has promised but continually fails to deliver liberation?

I'd like to see this poll done in Palestine: If Hamas were to quit using terror and violence, would that make you more likely or less likely to support it?

My guess it would be something like 80+% "more likely"

 

[chainsaw 10309]

4 minutes ago, Tonesky said:

And, if we snapped our fingers and made this happen, what Palestinian government would disarm and police/control Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Al-Aqsa martyrs Brigade, etc?  And, should they fail to successfully do so, what would Israel reasonably be allowed to do to protect its citizens?

The same things any other country can do within the bounds of the law of war. Which means no crimes against humanity, and no violence intended to harm civilians.

[Tonesky 1059]

2 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

The same things any other country can do within the bounds of the law of war. Which means no crimes against humanity, and no violence intended to harm civilians.

The IDF does as much or more than any military in the world to honor just that, but they seem to be the only country/armed forces judged by a standard of perfection.

[Brisketexan 107033]

Just now, G650 said:

You fucking shouldn't.

But I will.

I also have hot takes on how we should utilize Brooks on third downs, the best color for a roux in a seafood gumbo, and how to score with the ladies (put on side one of Led Zeppelin IV).  I'll keep offering those around here, too.

4 minutes ago, G650 said:

Seriously go back an find where I said a single time I said literally anything in your post I responded to. I'll wait

When I dared challenge Hobbes' take of all the things Israel SHOULDN'T do by asking him to tell us what they SHOULD do, your response was to give him a pass on both:

Quote

Is Hobbes the Israeli defense minister? He doesn't have to suggest anything man.

 

[SydneyCarton 49534]

9 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

What's more likely, that a majority of Palestinians are irredeemably supportive of terror and genocide but only "somewhat" support their de facto government or that a majority Palestinians want their own liberation and "somewhat" support a group who has promised but continually fails to deliver liberation?

I'd like to see this poll done in Palestine: If Hamas were to quit using terror and violence, would that make you more likely or less likely to support it?

My guess it would be something like 80+% "more likely"

 

I’ve at least cited a poll, the charter of a voted in ruling party, and decades of their own fighting against Israel. Your post here amounts to little more than “I think this because I think this.” And a poll you’d like to see given. You’re guessing is just that. 

7 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

The same things any other country can do within the bounds of the law of war. Which means no crimes against humanity, and no violence intended to harm civilians.

So back to where we are now?  Like exactly.

 

I can play hypotheticals too. What’s more likely, a people that just want to be left alone and in peace elect in a party that’s charter is worldwide genocide, poll support for that party, and that have rejected multiple offers for a 2 state solution to any peace, or they want to keep fighting until they have all of Israel? 

Edited October 11, 2023 by SydneyCarton

[chainsaw 10309]

1 minute ago, Tonesky said:

The IDF does as much or more than any military in the world to honor just that, but they seem to be the only country/armed forces judged by a standard of perfection.

I'm afraid we'll have to agree to disagree about that.

[Nice Guy Eddie 13743]

11 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

While Israel might not technically be in the Gaza Strip, they have instituted permanent land, air, and sea blockade since 2007. That will need to stop if there is any hope for peace.

Yes because the elected (once) govt of Gaza is a acknowledged terrorist organization. I can understand why Israel blockages weapons from getting in, and obviously the blockage isn't that good.

[G650 14451]

Just now, Brisketexan said:

When I dared challenge Hobbes' take of all the things Israel SHOULDN'T do by asking him to tell us what they SHOULD do, your response was to give him a pass on both:

Yes! He shouldn't. Go read the post again and maybe delete the three paragraphs of beliefs you ascribed to me that I do not hold in the least. None of which have anything to do with Hobbes

[chainsaw 10309]

Just now, SydneyCarton said:

I’ve at least cited a poll, the charter of a voted in ruling party, and decades of their own fighting against Israel. Your post here amounts to little more than “I think this because I think this.” And a pol tour like to see given. You’re guessing is just that. 

So back to where we are now?  Like exactly.

Yes but the polls don't really support the conclusion you're drawing. The charter was amended in 2017 and is no longer quite as bloodthirsty. Have you read it?

[Brisketexan 107033]

1 minute ago, chainsaw said:

The charter was amended in 2017 and is no longer quite as bloodthirsty. Have you read it?

I read their new "charter."  They wrote it on Saturday.  They wrote it in blood.  In bold type.

[956 Worldwide 35602]

On the good news front, there remains a political wing in the United States capable of making courageous decisions that happen to be right. 
 

 

 

[Fastbreak 4057]

My peace plan:

Step 1: get rid of religions
Step 2: problem solved
Step 3: send me Nobel Peace Prize

[Neonmoon 38130]

1 minute ago, Fastbreak said:

My peace plan:

Step 1: get rid of religions
Step 2: problem solved
Step 3: send me Nobel Peace Prize

I created that plan before you. I’ll fight you for it 

[tchookem 3986]

I'm legitimately curious if you think Israel should bear any blame for this aspect of the conflict. You seem very much focused on "they want to eradicate the Jews." Even if that is true for many (which I think is way overbroad), don't you think there is some logic to that belief for people who have lived under the oppressive thumb of Israel for decades? It's like abusing a dog for years then letting it lose and when it bites someone you have no choice but to put it down. The decision to put it down was probably the right call, but why should we ignore the circumstances that led to that outcome?

I'm starting to think that Israeli leadership's view of Palestinians isn't all that different than Hamas's view of Israelis. Bibi may not come out and say they want Palestinians eradicated, but their treatment and dehumanization gives me pause to think.