50 years to the day

[MultiVerse]

I literally called it a “terrorist hotbed”

It’s also part of an “occupied territory.” Make of that what you will.

Fair enough on “terrorist hotbed.” I was referring to your copy-and-past. 7-percent of the budget of the Palestinian Authority, for example, goes to the pay the murderers of Israelis. Attempting to draw differences between Hamas and its population in Gaza or between Hamas and Fatah ignores grim reality.

From the previous page: The fact is the horrendous 10/7 terrorist attack came from Gaza, which Israel ceased to occupy in 2005. So the idea of unilateral withdrawal has been discredited by Hamas. Israel tried everything. So now you see permanent ongoing IDF operations.

Which means it's up to Palestinians to show trading land for peace can work. They have to show peaceful resolve first. There's no majority in Israel that wants to annex three million Palestinians from the West Bank into Israel. Most Israelis would gladly hand over Gaza and the West Bank if it truly meant peace. The problem is there's also no longer a majority in Israel that believes in two-state solution, unilateral withdrawal, bilateral withdrawals, etc.

[JimmyCarter]

which Israel ceased to occupy in 2005.

“Ceased to occupy” really doesn’t mean much in light of the blockade

[MultiVerse]

The so called blockade came *after* Hamas smuggled weapons and began attacking Israel. People always leave that part out when bringing up that particular talking point. Israel recently unearthed more than 50 tunnels in Rafah going into Egypt, among the more than 700 tunnels discovered so far in Rafah.

[JimmyCarter]

The so called blockade came *after* Hamas smuggled weapons and began attacking Israel. People always leave that part out when bringing up that particular talking point. Israel recently unearthed more than 50 tunnels in Rafah going into Egypt

“So called”????? Jesus Christ

[MultiVerse]

Yes, so called. Israel wasn't starving Gaza. Commodities and other essential items were allowed. It was a repeating pattern of Israel loosening restrictions, Hamas attacking Israel, followed by Israel clamping down and then loosening again. It's unrealistic to demand Israel participate in its own destruction.

[JimmyCarter]

Yes, so called. Israel wasn't starving Gaza. Commodities and other essential items were allowed.

I don’t think you know what blockade means

[MultiVerse]

I know you don't. Or geography for that matter. Gaza was not permanently sealed off to prevent goods or people from entering or leaving. In fact, up until recently it would have been impossible for Israel to blockade Gaza because Gaza shared an unoccupied border with Egypt. Israel periodically closed its own borders with Gaza after being attacked.

[leroy jenkins]

The targeted killing of civilians is never OK. The targeted raping of women is never OK. The targeted killing of children is never OK. None of that is justified, no matter what happened previously. Period. Full stop. Cannot be justified no matter what.


There is an argument to be made for Hamas to attack the Israeli military installations. I think there is even an argument to be made for Hamas to launch unguided rockets at israeli military installations that then fall on civilian areas- it could fall under the label of "collateral damage". However, +95% of the events on Oct 7th were completely unjustifiable. Period.

ok, but if it's 2000lb bombs dropped on civilian targets, thats ok? just as long as the kids arent specifically targeted? That inclusion of 'targeted' is just so weird.

Like, killing kids is wrong right? Remove that targeted word, and suddenly, you're describing both sides of the conflict.

[leroy jenkins]

Not only that, but these people who argue Hamas is bad but that Hamas's actions are justified are actual useful idiots. I don't know, maybe they just want to signal empathy. The first rule of understanding an issue however: it's not enough that your beliefs are intended to help fix some problem. Those beliefs must actually help fix it. And you can't take this for granted, because the easiest laziest beliefs mostly don't.

I don't know anyone saying hamas is justified, but I do know people say they are basically as justified as Israel, which is also not justified intheir killing civilians.


Really not rocket surgery to understand that, but I get you live in a world where one plus one has to equal three.

[leroy jenkins]

The so called blockade came *after* Hamas smuggled weapons and began attacking Israel. People always leave that part out when bringing up that particular talking point. Israel recently unearthed more than 50 tunnels in Rafah going into Egypt, among the more than 700 tunnels discovered so far in Rafah.

why did hamas begin attacking israel? Just, anti semitic? just boredom a tuesday? Surely, israelis must have been doing SOMETHING right? Hmm , wisdespread state sanctioned illegal evictions of palestinian families is just not a concern to you cus fuck them right?

10/6 was a prison riot. Notsaying it was right, but it was a prison riot.

[leroy jenkins]

From the previous page: The fact is the horrendous 10/7 terrorist attack came from Gaza, which Israel ceased to occupy in 2005. So the idea of unilateral withdrawal has been discredited by Hamas. Israel tried everything. So now you see permanent ongoing IDF operations.

Isarael has never tried respecting the palestinian people as humans, and stopping the illegal evictions and land grabs. If israel wasn't expansionist, this could have ended long ago.

[Cono Este]

Isarael has never tried respecting the palestinian people as humans, and stopping the illegal evictions and land grabs. If israel wasn't expansionist, this could have ended long ago.

Totally, only the Arabs invaded before any of that ever happened.

[m2711c]

Uh oh…





go git ‘em leroy!.!.





fact.

[MultiVerse]

why did hamas begin attacking israel? Just, anti semitic? just boredom a tuesday? Surely, israelis must have been doing SOMETHING right? Hmm , wisdespread state sanctioned illegal evictions of palestinian families is just not a concern to you cus fuck them right?

I don't know anyone saying hamas is justified, but I do know people say they are basically as justified as Israel, which is also not justified intheir killing civilians.

lol, shocked to see Leroy the dumb extremist who believes civil in war America is an acceptable way to settle political differences is also totally OK with Hamas achieving their goals too. It's not like Hamas's genocidal intentions are a secret:

- The complete destruction of Israel as an essential condition for the liberation of Palestine and the establishment of a theocratic state based on Islamic law (Sharia),

- The need for both unrestrained and unceasing holy war (jihad) to attain the above objective,

- The deliberate disdain for, and dismissal of, any negotiated resolution or political settlement of Jewish and Muslim claims to the Holy Land, and

-The reinforcement of historical anti-Semitic tropes and calumnies married to sinister conspiracy theories.

-Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it.

- Nothing in nationalism is more significant or deeper than in the case when an enemy should tread Moslem land. Resisting and quelling the enemy becomes the individual duty of every Moslem [sic], male or female

https://www.theatlantic.com/internat...nocide/675602/

Isarael has never tried respecting the palestinian people as humans, and stopping the illegal evictions and land grabs. If israel wasn't expansionist, this could have ended long ago.

An absolute lie, told by someone steeped in online conspiracy theories and Hamas propaganda

[Dexter Rutecki]

I would say that it’s clear at this point that they’re not accepting collateral damage as only a last resort.

The fact that they still warn of strikes to move civilians away, when possible, and use the smallest possible munitions contradicts that, so no, it's not at all clear. In fact, the opposite remains the case.

The fact that the US won’t supply them with 2000lb bombs, and the UK won’t supply them with offensive arms suggest that they share a similar view.

No, it suggests that politicians are susceptible to public pressure and a media environment that has largely followed an anti-Israel bias emanating from international organizations that are openly anti-Israel, and always have been (for lots of reasons I won't go into).

And the point about American Jewish support of a ceasefire is that saying Israel is being held to a different standard here, and that people wouldn’t be complaining if they weren’t Jewish, is belied by the fact that a very large chunk of the Jewish population here is critical of Israel right now, and their issue is obviously not due to Israel being majority Jewish.

Again I will disagree. Jews are no different in forming their opinions than anyone else. Most people who form an opinion on this aren't aware of why they're receiving the information that they do--media and politicians that rely on UN sources, for example, which are not only dependent on Hamas for information and access but which tend to actively support Hamas (UNWRA is basically an arm of Hamas, in many respects, as are the other NGO's--employees tend to be former and even current Hamas members which obviously shapes how they approach their jobs and their UNWRA work). So when NYT runs a story about 90 civilians being killed which in its initial version doesn't mention that one of the top two Hamas commanders who led the October 7 massacre was the target in a tunnel beneath civilians (and the target was killed in the strike), it tends to help form the public perception, which poorly informed Jews are also influenced by (and of course when the correction appears to clarify that a large percentage of supposed 90 civilians killed were actually also Hamas militants it's too late to change the impression that was made).

Things like that are important to understand. Most of the people on the anti-Israel side are not motivated by antisemitism, but antisemitism is fundamental to why there is the double standard on Israel in the first place (and especially on the left in Europe there is a lot of pronounced antisemitic sentiment which creates an eagerness to adopt any set of questionable facts that demonize Israel).

[Dexter Rutecki]

The problems with this conflict are that:
1) despite what Hamas says, no one thinks they pose an existential threat to Israel. They’re murderous barbaric assholes, but Israel still kills 10x as many of them every year without breaking a sweat.

Between them and Hezbollah maybe 20% of the country is currently uninhabitable. That's an existential threat. Doesn't matter that Israel is more capable in the way you describe.

2) there is nowhere for civilians to go. We’re talking about fencing in the city of Las Vegas with three times as many people and then acting shocked that every Hamas stronghold is surrounded by civilians. It has the appearance of shooting fish in a barrel, which makes the 2,000lb bomb look like ridiculous overkill in that it does not stop any immediate threat, it does not get the hostages back, and it does not appear to make Israel any safer.

I don't know why anyone thinks Israel just lobs projectiles around for fun. Large bombs are used only in very limited cases when they're required. When the target is in an apartment, for example, a 250 pound bomb is often used. Israel could put the 2000 pound on that target as well and take down the whole building, but they don't. I would say Israel becomes safer whenever an important Hamas leader is eliminated. Not much different than when the U.S. hunted down Al Qaeda in Afghanistan (and I'll again point out that 9/11 pales in comparison to 10/7 in terms of deaths and the threat posed).

3) the far right dipshits in charge of Israel and the IDF right now are exactly the types who openly talk about wiping out Palestinians, reclaiming land, settling Gaza, Israels claim to “river to sea”, etc. To quote others in this thread, “why shouldn’t we believe them when they tell us exactly what they want to do?”

https://www.timesofisrael.com/backin...r-the-war/amp/

I wouldn't make much more of what Ben Gvir has to say in terms of assessing general Israeli government sentiment than I would make of what someone like Marjorie Taylor Green says in terms of U.S. government sentiment. Even Netanyahu knows that Israel is never going to make Gaza part of the country. Because of the parliamentary system he's there, but he has very little support within the country and not much influence.

[Dexter Rutecki]

“Ceased to occupy” really doesn’t mean much in light of the blockade

Why was there a blockade?

[Dexter Rutecki]

I don’t think you know what blockade means

Actually you're proving that you don't. And Israel never even touched the southern border. Maybe you want to stop digging this hole?

[J. Barron DeJong]

Ben-Gvir is the National Security Minister, he’s not some backbencher.

[Mazderati]

Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain.

[MultiVerse]

It's noteworthy how Hamas has faced zero condemnation here from the posters above for the heinous act of murdering six hostages. Instead we're seeing push back at Israel’s expense for striking valid military targets while blaming Isreal when it's Hamas, according to their own documents, who are intentionally prolonging the peace process.

No thanks to these useful idiots, Hamas is more self-assured than ever. Even in military defeat they've managed to strategically escalate tensions and internal disagreements in Israel, while also prompting Westerners to act as apologists for their ongoing acts of terror.

[JimmyCarter]

It's noteworthy how Hamas has faced zero condemnation here from the posters above for the heinous act of murdering six hostages. Instead we're seeing push back at Israel’s expense for striking valid military targets while blaming Isreal when it's Hamas, according to their own documents, who are intentionally prolonging the peace process.

No thanks to these useful idiots, Hamas is more self-assured than ever. Even in military defeat they've managed to strategically escalate tensions and internal disagreements in Israel, while also prompting Westerners to act as apologists for their ongoing acts of terror.

Yes, they strategically escalated tensions and internal disagreements. Israel has absolutely no agency. FFS

[MultiVerse]

You are profoundly wrong. When you cast Israel as the oppressor and absolve Hamas of its war crimes, you cross into the territory of sympathizing with terrorists by demanding Israel negotiate on Hamas' terrorist terms.

[highangle]

Pay no attention to that man with an AK behind the baby. Israel's the problem here.

Can't buy it bro.

[JimmyCarter]

You are profoundly wrong. When you cast Israel as the oppressor and absolve Hamas of its war crimes, you cross into the territory of sympathizing with terrorists by demanding Israel negotiate on Hamas' terrorist terms.

Stop with the dichotomous nonsense.