That's a high quality comment but nothing at all like the comment it is defending whose main thrust is that the conflict is simple to understand and one side is just wrong.
Apartheid, oppression, occupation, genocide, and ethno-nationalist supremacy are "just wrong", and not all that complex once you get past the lie that they don't exist.
Also, the comment's "main thrust" was in response to the claim that the area is 'just always like that', for 'thousands of years', which is categorically untrue; a deliberate thought-terminating lie. Israel's terror campaign and colonialist brutality of the last 80 years is something quite new and different, based as it is on brutal British and American colonial strategies.
> Go to Israel and look at the well dressed Palestinians shopping in the major malls in Jerusalem and Tel Aviv and think about if that is really what apartheid looks like.
> Show me a population graph of Palestinians that decreases at all
You'd think Jewish/Israeli experts in Holocaust studies like Omer Bartov, Amos Goldberg, Raz Segal, Daniel Blatman would know what a genocide looks like better than others. Of course, atrocity denial isn't anything new. And any decent populace reserves visceral disgust for those who do.
ישראל היא ממש מקרה פרדיגמטי של חברות כאלה, מקרה שעוד יילמד בכל סמינר באוניברסיטה בעולם העוסק בנושא
ישראלים טועים לחשוב שג'נוסייד צריך להיראות כמו השואה. הם מדמיינים רכבות, תאי גזים, משרפות, בורות הריגה, מחנות ריכוז והשמדה, ורדיפה שיטתית עד חורמה של כל בני קבוצת הקורבנות עד האחרון שבהם. אירוע מהסוג הזה אכן לא מתקיים בעזה. בדומה למה שהתרחש בשואה, מרבית הישראלים גם מדמיינים שקבוצת הקורבנות אינה מעורבת בפעילות אלימה או בקונפליקט ממשי, והרוצחים משמידים אותם בשל אידיאולוגיה מטורפת וחסרת כל הגיון. גם זה לא המקרה של עזה
Oh, right, I've interacted with you on this site before — you repeatedly lied about Hamas being willing to recognize Israel and renounce violence, and when I provided official Hamas statements to the contrary, you started making negative statements about people from "Brooklyn" [which I am not from], an obvious antisemitic dogwhistle that got your comment flagged and removed. I see from your comment history that you're still spending 90+% of your time on this site posting factually-incorrect anti-Israel content. Good luck! I won't be engaging with you again.
>Russia accuses Ukraine of oppression, genocide, and ethno-nationalist supremacy of Ukrainians against Russians in Ukraine happily pointing to the Azov brigade and all kinds of fringe rhetoric.
The most ironic thing about this is that Azov are almost entirely the "ethnically Russian, Russian-speaking-minority" that Russia claims to be acting in the interest of.
What makes me feel uncomfortable is the whole and eye for an eye argumentation in these debates. Your comment on the actions of the US makes me see that clearer. I do not think you can compare war crimes that will end in what-aboutism, and I do believe Israel, the US and Russia has commited horrible war crimes against civilians.
I do not get is how any sane human being can justify killing or abusing civilians at such large scales. A war crime is always a crime even though you might think it is justified.
There is no eye for an eye argument. The Gaza war is not about revenge, it’s about security. Israel didn’t poke out the Palestinians “eyes” because the Palestinians poked their eye first. They did it because they wanted the stop the Palestinians from poking their eye out before it happens again.
As far as justifying killing and abuse, the world is a complicated place. Personally I think killing is justified in self defense but you may not agree. Israel is certainly a bad actor but Hamas is far worse and unfortunately you do have to choose sides here.
What I think is clear is that Israel is not obligated to go easy on Hamas just because Hamas is economically and militarily weak. Being oppressed doesn’t automatically make you right.
Dig up WW2 German propaganda. It is the same hysteria around "security" aka "If we Aryans don't genocide, all the bad non-Aryans will genocide us".
> What I think is clear is that Israel is not obligated to go easy on Hamas just because Hamas is economically and militarily weak.
Not what the International Law Israel is signatory to, says. Besides, you'd do well to recall that NATO imposed a no-fly zone over Libya so that Gaddafi wouldn't bomb the living daylights out of the rebels who didn't have an Airforce to counteract. And we all know, NATO did no such thing for Palestinians.
> Personally I think killing is justified in self defense
The Israeli security narrative is not hysteria. It is a fact that Palestinian militants have committed terrorism against Israelis and they plan to continue to do so at every given opportunity. The same can not be said for the Jews in Germany(nor the Jews in Israel either, they have by and large not committed to a terrorism campaign like Hamas has). A bit confusing to me that you can’t see the obvious difference between lies and fact.
Unfortunately the Palestinians have left the Israelis with the options of “oppress the Palestinians” or “be the victim of terrorist attacks”. I don’t think they’re wrong for choosing to be safe.
"Settlements is security" is in fact a restraint on Palestinian part, while settlers/govt/IDF continue to ramp up the ante.
This article examines the choice made by the Palestinians in the West Bank and East Jerusalem since October 7, 2023, not to rise against the increasing oppression by the Israeli settlers, military, and government.
This choice, to which the Israeli public and professional discourse appears to be completely blind, is particularly surprising against the backdrop of the dramatic events of the past year.
> Jews in Israel either, they have by and large not committed to a terrorism campaign
Now that they rule the land, they don't. There's no need for "terrorism" as "militarism" has long replaced it. Back in the day, Irgun/Lehi, by all measures, were every bit Fascist terrorists themselves: https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/terror-o...
> nor the Jews in Israel either, they have by and large not committed to a terrorism campaign like Hamas has
Israelis have killed at least an order of magnitude more Palestinian civilians than Palestinians ever killed Israelis, even before the 7th October war, even counting the 7th October war crimes by Hamas.
The fact that Palestinians do this with bomb cars while the Israelis do it in uniform and with sniper rifles or planes doesn't change anything about who the real threat to whose security is.
Israel has been in Gaza ever since the 1950s or so. They only stopped directly occupying Gaza about 18 years ago. They have since enforced a complete blockade of Gaza, and have shot and killed or bombed thousands of Palestinians, before October 7th.
Winning a war isn’t terrorism. The Palestinians and their Arab allies started every war except the original one and even that is arguable. Losing has consequences. The Palestinians can now choose to settle for what little Israel will give them or they can continue starting wars/engaging in terrorism which will lead to them never having any level of sovereignty.
> Winning a war isn’t terrorism. The Palestinians and their Arab allies started every war except the original one
There is no war except the original one, which never ended with a peace (although a few participants eventually made peace with Israel.) The other things often referred to as separate wars are just more active phases of the same war.
My response remains the same. The Palestinians have decisively lost. Their options are attempt to make whatever peace Israel will give them or die a slow painful death. Continuing to fight only makes things worse for them.
> The Gaza war is not about revenge, it’s about security.
Neither. It's about land, resources, and trade routes. The justifications are about revenge, security, religion, etc, but that's not what's keeping this all going.
> As far as justifying killing and abuse, the world is a complicated place.
There's nothing complicated about illegal occupation, apartheid, systemic rape and torture, or genocide. There really isn't.
> I think killing is justified in self defense
Sure, and the UN agrees. Try comparing casualty rates some time.
> Israel is certainly a bad actor but Hamas is far worse
By what possible metric? Certainly not as measured by civilian casualties. Not confirmed rapes or torture. Not hostages taken. Not in tons of bombs dropped on civilians, not on targeting of journalists and UN workers, not in terms of hospitals bombed, or schools, or mosques, or churches, or ancient landmarks. Not in terms of 'who started it'. Not in terms of buying media and politicians favor, or spreading lies designed to justify atrocities.
> What I think is clear is that Israel is not obligated to go easy on Hamas
They are obligated to follow international law. And we (the Western countries arming and enabling them) are obligated to punish their failure to do so.
> Gaza is worthless land, Israel does not want it.
You don't know about the Ben-Gvir canal? About Gaza's offshore oil? Maybe you could do a bare minimum of research before making wholly incorrect pronouncements, in your vain attempt to deflect from genocide.
> > by what possible metric?
> Their intentions?
This is where you get laughed out of the room.
> All the metrics you used are in Israel’s favor
They're really not.
> Israel doesn’t send their citizens to die in Zerg waves like Hamas does.
Not a thing.
> You are falling for Hamas’ strategy of killing their own people to make Israel look bad
Hamas doesn't kill their own people to make Israel bad. Israel does the killing, and the making themselves look bad. You might be thinking of the Hannibal doctrine? Again though, that's Israel.
> If Hamas had any amount of military of economic power they would kill every Israeli they could find
Netanyahu has long said that propping up Hamas is essential, so that a Palestinian state can be prevented.
And, what percentage of Hamas fighters are orphans, due to decades of Israeli brutality?
> The same is just not true for Israel.
That's counter to what hundreds of statements from Israeli political and military leaders would attest [0], as well as hundreds of pages of ICJ documents.
> Frankly I don’t care who started it
How convenient for you.
> litigating that will never lead to a solution.
Your belief in the ineffectiveness of 'litigation' is no excuse to ignore international law. You understand that, right?
> I agree the Palestinians are oppressed and have been treated horribly by Israel. But it’s mostly their own fault.
:o
Some day, I hope you can hear yourself.
> They keep starting wars they can’t win and then crying that they lose.
Wow it's almost as if they want to defend their land, even when up against a military force backed by the world's most militaristic superpower.
Also, remember when you said "Frankly I don't care who started it" earlier in your comment? But now it excuses brutal oppression? If only you were capable of recognizing blatant logical inconsistency.
The Vatican isn’t an ethnostate. There are many Palestinian Israeli citizens, clearly it’s not the race but the culture that Israel has a problem with.
Israel has many bad actors, few will deny that. But Hamas is much much worse and at the end of the day they can’t co-exist so you have to choose sides. Looking at the history of the last 100 years in the region it is clear to me that israel can not let the Palestinians into their country if they want any amount of security.
> reasonable counterarguments to all those accusations. To cover them all would result in a massive wall of text ... intractable security problems ... extremism in the wider region ... justifications for Israel's existence ... 'never again'
Goebbels also laid down "reasonable" arguments in "a wall of text" on intractable security problems, extremism among the diaspora, justifiable 'Reich must not fall again' rhetoric when it came to German Jews. He was indeed "just wrong". If 'never again' is our ethos, we mustn't be like Goebbels.
The [Palestinians] are responsible for the war. The treatment they receive from us is hardly unjust. They have deserved it all.
It is the job of the government to deal with them. No one has the right to act on his own, but each has the duty to support the state's measures against the [Palestinians], to defend them with others, and to avoid being misled by any [Palestinian] tricks.
The security of the state requires that of us.
> contrast Israel's behavior between Gazan vs Israeli arabs
Settler Colonialism 101. Nothing dramatic about it at all, as many have who spilled ink on the topic have taken pains to point out, like here: https://archive.is/UAs9G
Members of the same community were separated by chance into three different groups. All suffered occupation and oppression by Israeli governments. All had lands and property stolen, and all were denied collective national rights. But only those inside the Green Line were given citizenship (without anyone asking their opinion). East Jerusalem residents had permanent residency imposed on them (with a theoretical possibility of becoming citizens). And Palestinians in the territories got Dayan's “different relationship.”
After 56 years, the results of this experiment are clear. It’s the citizenship, stupid! Arabs in Israel, despite the discrimination and for all their reservations, have by and large integrated into Israeli society. Every day, we entrust our lives to Arab doctors, nurses, bus drivers, lawyers and mechanics.
Without any regard for the security issues, the conflict would be simple. That's not very helpful. Deserved or not, suicide bombings and missiles are real security issues.
Re: granting all Palestinians Citizenship
If the argument is that this would be a good idea, of course it would, as long as it were under a reasonably pluralistic system. It would be fantastic to see a single Israeli/Palestinian state with a slight arab majority, but everyone with their voice represented, all living in peace and harmony.
> Without any regard for the security issues, the conflict would be simple. That's not very helpful. Deserved or not, suicide bombings and missiles are real security issues.
Recency bias. Post 67, many a non-violent Palestinian demonstrations were met with Israeli violence [0]. And this has since kept escalating with each round. You'd think a peoples so utterly out-gunned would lay low, but they somehow aren't. There's something else that's fanning the flames, keeping the hatred going. Potentially, by whatever/whoever stands to benefit from the conflict, either financially (hi-tech [1]) or politically (Revisionists/Hamasniks/PA).
> the argument is that this would be a good idea
The argument is that, that ship has sailed, and so other than 2SS (67 borders), any other enclave-like arrangement (ex: Oslo) will not bring peace (instead lead to Goebbels-esque narratives & Fascist-esque behaviour). Though, 67 borders sounds like a recipe for a civil war.
>You'd think a peoples so utterly out-gunned would lay low, but they somehow aren't. There's something else that's fanning the flames, keeping the hatred going.
Never underestimate Culture, Religion and Nationhood as motivators - the West has a coloured history of martyring itself in the pursuit of all three in the 21st Century.
In this case they have a clear picture of their future; imagine a boot stamping on a human face - forever. In that context its easily understood.
Funny thing that the people that got citizenship to the place they were born and their basic human rights recognized by the government running them weren't subject to those motivations from "Culture, Religion and Nationhood".
> It would be fantastic to see a single Israeli/Palestinian state with a slight arab majority, but everyone with their voice represented, all living in peace and harmony.
Single state is a construct of few people with far-left views. They already tried something like that in USSR where they put for example Armenians and Azerbaijanians in the same state (and many other smaller examples within USSR). Look what happened.
I don't see even a single chance this will ever work, also it has zero support on the ground by both sides.
Prior to modern day Israel, there was 1200 years of war, conquest, slavery, ethnic cleansing, genocide, and apartheid - the caliphate, in the form of the Islamic Empire and then the Ottoman Empire.
Not saying that this justifies anything, but the bloodshed for the past 100 years needs to be put into context of 1200 years of systemic oppression.
And yes, 100 years. The modern middle east should be looked at from 1920/1924 when the caliphate, one of the worlds largest, most powerful, and most impactful empires, was finally defeated. 1948 was just one of the significant events since that time.
