Gaza War, Part 3

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another woman was found dead today. Murdered by Hamas.

Very few twenty-something women were released in the latest hostage swap.

All you pro-Hamas posters are just misogynist pigs. What is wrong with you?

Agree that is horrific. IDF killed an average of 1000 children/week for the last two months. All you pro-IDF posters are just child murderers. What is wrong with you?

You're ridiculous.

Just pointing out that two can play this game. It's stupid to accuse those of us who are horrified by the IDF's rapid killing of thousands of children as pro-Hamas. Yes, the rape and murder of women in war is terrible. But it's utterly disingenuous when a pro-Israeli poster claims horror for the rapes of women but shows little sympathy, or even tries to justify, the slaughter of thousands of children. The IDF, one of the best, most advanced militaries in the world, deliberately chose to use dumb bombs in extremely dense urban areas. They killed babies in NICUs and families seeking refuge in churches rather than chose a military strategy that would be more precise.

You're right about Israel's conduct--I think that they've made some terrible strategic/tactical decisions. But there are also limits to exactly how "precise" a military campaign can be.

But you're also being disingenuous (or perhaps are legitimately unaware?) about exactly who's opposing Israel and their motives.

For example, are you aware that polling shows that 57% of American Muslims think Hamas was at least " somewhat justified" on 10/7?

Wanna guess what polling of Palestinians shows WRT the existence of Israel, violence vs. nonviolence, etc.?

You don't understand the audience. To you, the Existence of Israel as a Jewish State is a sacred cow, and everything and everyone must bow to it. To you, the original expulsions of 1947-48, the oppression, the unequal rights, the land grab, the settlement expansion, the imprisonment, the stripping of civil rights, the unrestrained killing by IDF are all unfortunate but minor events that must be discounted because Existence of Israel. Well guess what, American Muslims don't see it that way and Palestinians DEFINITELY don't see it that way. They don't agree with wholesale dismissal of what happened to them as "unfortunate but whatever". They don't agree it is a minor thing. They may not all agree that violence is entirely unjustified in response to oppression. And they don't see why they should just stop caring about what happened and what is happening to them today because Existence of Israel.

Your alliances and sympathies are with Israel because you understand them and feel closer to them. They don't. Okay.

This is very well-stated. I admit I fell into the "Existence of Israel" faction for much of my life. It was just the default view, so part of it was laziness. I thought if I didn't think that way, I might be considered antisemitic, so part of it was cowardice. I knew very little about the Palestinian experience or the history of the region, so part of it was ignorance. I felt Jews deserved compensation for the Holocaust, so part of it was misguided compassion that overlooked the rights of indigenous Palestinians. However, it's become increasingly difficult to ignore Israel's outrageous behavior and its appalling crimes against humanity. For me, it began with discomfort over settler violence in the West Bank. As I've delved further, my stance has shifted radically. Israel was built on terrorism and a fundamentalist interpretation of ancient texts that are almost certainly not historically valid and are not legally binding. Israel is currently a cynical, manipulative, and racist state that, unfortunately, has far too much in common with Nazi Germany. Like Nazi Germany, it is a technically advanced power that is determined to remove or exterminate people it finds "inferior" and inconvenient. Israel has become morally abhorrent and opposes 21st-century values of inclusion. I would prefer a Gandhi or Martin Luther King Jr. to Hamas, but terrorism has historically always been part of overthrowing colonialism. It is absolutely beyond the pale that the United States is propping up this fascist state and forcing its citizens to subsidize genocide.

Or, israel is a sovereign state with a very right wing government (a fact I agree is regrettable), living next door to radical jihadists. Hamas is not your friendly neighborhood victim.

Your views have indeed shifted and are quite radical.

Also, regarding your flawed comparison to Nazi germany, Germany did not cease to exist, as you seem to imply Israel should, after the end of the third Reich.

You've extended my analogy with Nazi Germany to post-Nazi Germany. The real question is whether pre-1948 Palestine should cease to exist, as you seem to imply it should. Zionists ethnically cleansed the area of Palestinians and, in some cases, massacred them (e.g., the Tantura massacre). Only Russia did some of that to Germany after it lost WW2. In what is now Israel, Palestinians had lived for generations on land that was later acquired by rich settlers from the U.S. So we should really be looking at whether lands conquered by the Nazis should remain under German control after WW2. IMO, Poland should no more have remained part of the Reich than Israel should remain part of Palestine.

You are ignoring the many native Israelis in Israel and their ancestral ties to the land. And you are glossing over the mass sale of land from Palestinians to Jewish people in the 1800 and 1900s- those Palestinians essentially sold their birthright. What is obvious to me is that there are two native peoples inhabiting the same land and the practical solution to the dispute would be a two state solution, since they largely cannot peacefully co-exist.

Oh they could do-exist is Israel was a secular country. Israel must drop the Jew state.

That’s absurd. Palestinians want an Islamic state, so you dear, are a hypocrite.

So? Gulf monarchies are Islamic states, and Israel is chomping at the bit to normalize relations with them. I guess the right to have an Islamic state is just like the right of self defense - available only to the right people?

Dude. That's what normalizing relations means. It means now I trust you to stop trying to kill me all the time, so we can live peacefully and have trade that benefits us both. It means both sides give up something - trying to kill you, encouraging others not to have normalized relations with you - because that way we both get something.

Do you expect Hamas to enjoy normalized relations with the people they just slaughtered en masse?

You people are just such dumb idiots when it comes to understanding how compromise and negotiation works. Ceasefire, you screech, so we can kill you! You're so BAD for not letting us just kill you some more!

I am one who never says "you people", but the individuals who think along these lines think they are so clever and that their words have power. They call for ceasefire beacuse of "the children", and they really think that the rest of us do not know and understand that the violence will continue after a ceasefile.

Aw, “feelings” person who thinks the U.S. will never, ever reevaluate its relationship with Israel!

DP.

I’d LOVE for someone to explain why it’s in our national interest to reevaluate our relationship with Israel.

I see no upside at all.

We’d lose intelligence, the region’s most effective military (and only one with nuclear capability), and a counterbalance to Iran.

Not only would we lose these advantages, but Israel would undoubtedly respond by seeking a new patron—either Russia or China.

Bad for us all around.

And for what advantage? No material gain with ME govts (they DGAF), no new allies, no new intelligence, and an unconstrained Iran.

I don’t see any argument that another course is better for the US.

The U.S. has a military industrial complex problem. Israel is a big part of that problem, on multiple levels.

Israel also provides intelligence that is, at best, unreliable; and at worst, fundamentally self-serving and essentially worthless. They don’t permit the U.S. to use their airspace, they intentionally attacked a U.S. naval vessel and murdered American sailors, and they persistently attempt to bind the U.S. to their geopolitical conflicts. They also repeatedly spy on our elected officials, and they don’t honor extradition requests.

As for the IDF, they are hardly effective, even with the vast advantage of U.S. training and weaponry. Without it, they are a bunch of awkward misfits with strabismus who are scared of their own shadow without the cover of the massive U.S. military advantage. Trigger-happy goons who couldn’t shoot straight to save their own lives.

Counterbalance to Iran? Like Syria and most other supposed hostile actors in the region, the U.S.’s relationship with Israel is THE sole reason a supposed counterbalance is even a credible excuse. Without U.S. foreign policy failures associated with blind, unconditional support of Israel, though, the hostilities have no further fuel. And no, nobody is buying the “they hate our way of life!” nonsense any longer, so don’t bother.

Cold War and Sinophobia boogeyman don’t carry water, either. The U.S. shouldn’t be cowed into supporting a foreign nation state on the unfounded basis that its own security is jeopardized if it doesn’t - that’s irrational and disgusting, frankly. It’s how mob protection works. Pay me or maybe lightning strikes and the fire burns down your business.

You wouldn’t want that, Uncle Sam, would you?

Lastly, you want to know the advantage? How about just knowing that we stand essentially alone on the global stage by blindly supporting Israel without condition? This happens over and over and over again, but we saw it again just last week: 100+ countries voted in favor of a ceasefire resolution, and the U.S. stubbornly drew the ire of all of them by once again doing the blocking and tackling on Israel’s behalf. Maybe just the advantage of improved cooperation with 100+ other countries is enough of an advantage on its own.

I think so. I’m sure plenty of other people think so, too.

The U.S. relationship with Israel isn’t etched in stone. I know those who purport to be American but only care about Israel will insist otherwise, but the tide may eventually turn at some point. If it does, that pendulum swings really fast - just ask Iran.

PP here.

I have to say that I don't find your post convincing. IMO, it reads like it's emotion-driven rather than logic-driven.

That said, a few points:

1. Relationship with Iran: issues go FAR beyond Israel. I think you're over/misstating the case here.

2. Russia and China present real threats to US interests. It's not a matter of being "cowed", it's a matter of prudently looking after our own interests. That's our job.

Would losing our alliance with Israel lead to the destruction of the US? No.

Would it make us less safe WRT Russia and China? Almost certainly yes.

3. Standing alone on a global stage. Sounds awful, but I can't figure out any real world repercussions whatsoever for us. Nations will act out of their own interests; they're not going to change relations with the US based on a conflict that doesn't affect them directly in any way (see, eg, the Iraq war).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another woman was found dead today. Murdered by Hamas.

Very few twenty-something women were released in the latest hostage swap.

All you pro-Hamas posters are just misogynist pigs. What is wrong with you?

Agree that is horrific. IDF killed an average of 1000 children/week for the last two months. All you pro-IDF posters are just child murderers. What is wrong with you?

You're ridiculous.

Just pointing out that two can play this game. It's stupid to accuse those of us who are horrified by the IDF's rapid killing of thousands of children as pro-Hamas. Yes, the rape and murder of women in war is terrible. But it's utterly disingenuous when a pro-Israeli poster claims horror for the rapes of women but shows little sympathy, or even tries to justify, the slaughter of thousands of children. The IDF, one of the best, most advanced militaries in the world, deliberately chose to use dumb bombs in extremely dense urban areas. They killed babies in NICUs and families seeking refuge in churches rather than chose a military strategy that would be more precise.

You're right about Israel's conduct--I think that they've made some terrible strategic/tactical decisions. But there are also limits to exactly how "precise" a military campaign can be.

But you're also being disingenuous (or perhaps are legitimately unaware?) about exactly who's opposing Israel and their motives.

For example, are you aware that polling shows that 57% of American Muslims think Hamas was at least " somewhat justified" on 10/7?

Wanna guess what polling of Palestinians shows WRT the existence of Israel, violence vs. nonviolence, etc.?

You don't understand the audience. To you, the Existence of Israel as a Jewish State is a sacred cow, and everything and everyone must bow to it. To you, the original expulsions of 1947-48, the oppression, the unequal rights, the land grab, the settlement expansion, the imprisonment, the stripping of civil rights, the unrestrained killing by IDF are all unfortunate but minor events that must be discounted because Existence of Israel. Well guess what, American Muslims don't see it that way and Palestinians DEFINITELY don't see it that way. They don't agree with wholesale dismissal of what happened to them as "unfortunate but whatever". They don't agree it is a minor thing. They may not all agree that violence is entirely unjustified in response to oppression. And they don't see why they should just stop caring about what happened and what is happening to them today because Existence of Israel.

Your alliances and sympathies are with Israel because you understand them and feel closer to them. They don't. Okay.

This is very well-stated. I admit I fell into the "Existence of Israel" faction for much of my life. It was just the default view, so part of it was laziness. I thought if I didn't think that way, I might be considered antisemitic, so part of it was cowardice. I knew very little about the Palestinian experience or the history of the region, so part of it was ignorance. I felt Jews deserved compensation for the Holocaust, so part of it was misguided compassion that overlooked the rights of indigenous Palestinians. However, it's become increasingly difficult to ignore Israel's outrageous behavior and its appalling crimes against humanity. For me, it began with discomfort over settler violence in the West Bank. As I've delved further, my stance has shifted radically. Israel was built on terrorism and a fundamentalist interpretation of ancient texts that are almost certainly not historically valid and are not legally binding. Israel is currently a cynical, manipulative, and racist state that, unfortunately, has far too much in common with Nazi Germany. Like Nazi Germany, it is a technically advanced power that is determined to remove or exterminate people it finds "inferior" and inconvenient. Israel has become morally abhorrent and opposes 21st-century values of inclusion. I would prefer a Gandhi or Martin Luther King Jr. to Hamas, but terrorism has historically always been part of overthrowing colonialism. It is absolutely beyond the pale that the United States is propping up this fascist state and forcing its citizens to subsidize genocide.

Or, israel is a sovereign state with a very right wing government (a fact I agree is regrettable), living next door to radical jihadists. Hamas is not your friendly neighborhood victim.

Your views have indeed shifted and are quite radical.

Also, regarding your flawed comparison to Nazi germany, Germany did not cease to exist, as you seem to imply Israel should, after the end of the third Reich.

You've extended my analogy with Nazi Germany to post-Nazi Germany. The real question is whether pre-1948 Palestine should cease to exist, as you seem to imply it should. Zionists ethnically cleansed the area of Palestinians and, in some cases, massacred them (e.g., the Tantura massacre). Only Russia did some of that to Germany after it lost WW2. In what is now Israel, Palestinians had lived for generations on land that was later acquired by rich settlers from the U.S. So we should really be looking at whether lands conquered by the Nazis should remain under German control after WW2. IMO, Poland should no more have remained part of the Reich than Israel should remain part of Palestine.

You are ignoring the many native Israelis in Israel and their ancestral ties to the land. And you are glossing over the mass sale of land from Palestinians to Jewish people in the 1800 and 1900s- those Palestinians essentially sold their birthright. What is obvious to me is that there are two native peoples inhabiting the same land and the practical solution to the dispute would be a two state solution, since they largely cannot peacefully co-exist.

I'm very skeptical about the "ancestral ties" claim. Yes, the Romans drove out the Jews a couple of millennia ago, but the indigenous people who remained have lived there for thousands of years, while many of the Jews who left mingled with Europeans, North Africans, and people in the Iberian peninsula. I am, in large part, an Ashkenazi Jew, and I have blue eyes, fair skin, and red-blond hair, as do my children. This comes from our central European ancestry. I could probably find a way to claim some land in what is now Israel, but I find that idea immoral. My "ancestral ties" to Europe are at least as strong as they are to what is now Israel, and after thousands of years of my family's absence, I have no claim on that land. I could just as well demand a piece of Poland! The same is true for many of those who have settled in Israel.

The other "ancestral tie" is based on God's supposed promise to Abraham. However, you can follow any of the three major monotheistic religions and nevertheless believe that Adam, Eve, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Moses never existed and were literary creations that reflect human efforts to understand the divine. A literal interpretation of ancient scriptures is an all-around losing proposition for everyone. It says more about the thought processes of ancient and primitive people than it does about any God or gods. Modern theological movements generally move toward the abstract and pro-social and away from the literal and tribal.

The real reasons for Jewish claims of land in "Israel" are extremely selfish. The thug who said of stealing a Palestinian home, "If I don't steal it, someone else is gonna steal it," was right. These people absolutely are stealing. He was a New Yorker! What "ancestral tie" did he have that the person whose home he stole did not? These people have no morals, and their only allegiance is to feathering their own nests. They operate from narcissism and sociopathy, and that is why Israel has developed into a state that has no problem committing genocide. The U.S. should not be subsidizing this evil.



.

Well, your skepticism is irrelevant. That said, your assertions were reasonable-seeming enough until your last paragraph.

My skepticism will become relevant when/if it is widely shared by the voting public. Attitudes toward Israel are changing very quickly from the old default of support to general disgust.

As to the reasonableness of my last paragraph, I think history will support my assertion that Israel is committing genocide. It will be interesting to revisit this topic 20 years from now.

History will not support this assertion because the assertion is wrong. Will the moronic attitudes of younger voters become the norm? Maybe, maybe not. But if they do, this country will have a heckuva lot more to worry about than just policy toward Israel.

I am and I know many older Jewish voters who feel antipathy toward Israel right now, and for the past several years. We know how we were indoctrinated as kids. So, no, it isn't about media, or Tik Tok or anything. But we aren't dumb enough to not vote for Biden.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another woman was found dead today. Murdered by Hamas.

Very few twenty-something women were released in the latest hostage swap.

All you pro-Hamas posters are just misogynist pigs. What is wrong with you?

Agree that is horrific. IDF killed an average of 1000 children/week for the last two months. All you pro-IDF posters are just child murderers. What is wrong with you?

You're ridiculous.

Just pointing out that two can play this game. It's stupid to accuse those of us who are horrified by the IDF's rapid killing of thousands of children as pro-Hamas. Yes, the rape and murder of women in war is terrible. But it's utterly disingenuous when a pro-Israeli poster claims horror for the rapes of women but shows little sympathy, or even tries to justify, the slaughter of thousands of children. The IDF, one of the best, most advanced militaries in the world, deliberately chose to use dumb bombs in extremely dense urban areas. They killed babies in NICUs and families seeking refuge in churches rather than chose a military strategy that would be more precise.

You're right about Israel's conduct--I think that they've made some terrible strategic/tactical decisions. But there are also limits to exactly how "precise" a military campaign can be.

But you're also being disingenuous (or perhaps are legitimately unaware?) about exactly who's opposing Israel and their motives.

For example, are you aware that polling shows that 57% of American Muslims think Hamas was at least " somewhat justified" on 10/7?

Wanna guess what polling of Palestinians shows WRT the existence of Israel, violence vs. nonviolence, etc.?

You don't understand the audience. To you, the Existence of Israel as a Jewish State is a sacred cow, and everything and everyone must bow to it. To you, the original expulsions of 1947-48, the oppression, the unequal rights, the land grab, the settlement expansion, the imprisonment, the stripping of civil rights, the unrestrained killing by IDF are all unfortunate but minor events that must be discounted because Existence of Israel. Well guess what, American Muslims don't see it that way and Palestinians DEFINITELY don't see it that way. They don't agree with wholesale dismissal of what happened to them as "unfortunate but whatever". They don't agree it is a minor thing. They may not all agree that violence is entirely unjustified in response to oppression. And they don't see why they should just stop caring about what happened and what is happening to them today because Existence of Israel.

Your alliances and sympathies are with Israel because you understand them and feel closer to them. They don't. Okay.

This is very well-stated. I admit I fell into the "Existence of Israel" faction for much of my life. It was just the default view, so part of it was laziness. I thought if I didn't think that way, I might be considered antisemitic, so part of it was cowardice. I knew very little about the Palestinian experience or the history of the region, so part of it was ignorance. I felt Jews deserved compensation for the Holocaust, so part of it was misguided compassion that overlooked the rights of indigenous Palestinians. However, it's become increasingly difficult to ignore Israel's outrageous behavior and its appalling crimes against humanity. For me, it began with discomfort over settler violence in the West Bank. As I've delved further, my stance has shifted radically. Israel was built on terrorism and a fundamentalist interpretation of ancient texts that are almost certainly not historically valid and are not legally binding. Israel is currently a cynical, manipulative, and racist state that, unfortunately, has far too much in common with Nazi Germany. Like Nazi Germany, it is a technically advanced power that is determined to remove or exterminate people it finds "inferior" and inconvenient. Israel has become morally abhorrent and opposes 21st-century values of inclusion. I would prefer a Gandhi or Martin Luther King Jr. to Hamas, but terrorism has historically always been part of overthrowing colonialism. It is absolutely beyond the pale that the United States is propping up this fascist state and forcing its citizens to subsidize genocide.

Or, israel is a sovereign state with a very right wing government (a fact I agree is regrettable), living next door to radical jihadists. Hamas is not your friendly neighborhood victim.

Your views have indeed shifted and are quite radical.

Also, regarding your flawed comparison to Nazi germany, Germany did not cease to exist, as you seem to imply Israel should, after the end of the third Reich.

You've extended my analogy with Nazi Germany to post-Nazi Germany. The real question is whether pre-1948 Palestine should cease to exist, as you seem to imply it should. Zionists ethnically cleansed the area of Palestinians and, in some cases, massacred them (e.g., the Tantura massacre). Only Russia did some of that to Germany after it lost WW2. In what is now Israel, Palestinians had lived for generations on land that was later acquired by rich settlers from the U.S. So we should really be looking at whether lands conquered by the Nazis should remain under German control after WW2. IMO, Poland should no more have remained part of the Reich than Israel should remain part of Palestine.

You are ignoring the many native Israelis in Israel and their ancestral ties to the land. And you are glossing over the mass sale of land from Palestinians to Jewish people in the 1800 and 1900s- those Palestinians essentially sold their birthright. What is obvious to me is that there are two native peoples inhabiting the same land and the practical solution to the dispute would be a two state solution, since they largely cannot peacefully co-exist.

Oh they could do-exist is Israel was a secular country. Israel must drop the Jew state.

That’s absurd. Palestinians want an Islamic state, so you dear, are a hypocrite.

So? Gulf monarchies are Islamic states, and Israel is chomping at the bit to normalize relations with them. I guess the right to have an Islamic state is just like the right of self defense - available only to the right people?

Dude. That's what normalizing relations means. It means now I trust you to stop trying to kill me all the time, so we can live peacefully and have trade that benefits us both. It means both sides give up something - trying to kill you, encouraging others not to have normalized relations with you - because that way we both get something.

Do you expect Hamas to enjoy normalized relations with the people they just slaughtered en masse?

You people are just such dumb idiots when it comes to understanding how compromise and negotiation works. Ceasefire, you screech, so we can kill you! You're so BAD for not letting us just kill you some more!

I am one who never says "you people", but the individuals who think along these lines think they are so clever and that their words have power. They call for ceasefire beacuse of "the children", and they really think that the rest of us do not know and understand that the violence will continue after a ceasefile.

Aw, “feelings” person who thinks the U.S. will never, ever reevaluate its relationship with Israel!

DP.

I’d LOVE for someone to explain why it’s in our national interest to reevaluate our relationship with Israel.

I see no upside at all.

We’d lose intelligence, the region’s most effective military (and only one with nuclear capability), and a counterbalance to Iran.

Not only would we lose these advantages, but Israel would undoubtedly respond by seeking a new patron—either Russia or China.

Bad for us all around.

And for what advantage? No material gain with ME govts (they DGAF), no new allies, no new intelligence, and an unconstrained Iran.

I don’t see any argument that another course is better for the US.

The U.S. has a military industrial complex problem. Israel is a big part of that problem, on multiple levels.

Israel also provides intelligence that is, at best, unreliable; and at worst, fundamentally self-serving and essentially worthless. They don’t permit the U.S. to use their airspace, they intentionally attacked a U.S. naval vessel and murdered American sailors, and they persistently attempt to bind the U.S. to their geopolitical conflicts. They also repeatedly spy on our elected officials, and they don’t honor extradition requests.

As for the IDF, they are hardly effective, even with the vast advantage of U.S. training and weaponry. Without it, they are a bunch of awkward misfits with strabismus who are scared of their own shadow without the cover of the massive U.S. military advantage. Trigger-happy goons who couldn’t shoot straight to save their own lives.

Counterbalance to Iran? Like Syria and most other supposed hostile actors in the region, the U.S.’s relationship with Israel is THE sole reason a supposed counterbalance is even a credible excuse. Without U.S. foreign policy failures associated with blind, unconditional support of Israel, though, the hostilities have no further fuel. And no, nobody is buying the “they hate our way of life!” nonsense any longer, so don’t bother.

Cold War and Sinophobia boogeyman don’t carry water, either. The U.S. shouldn’t be cowed into supporting a foreign nation state on the unfounded basis that its own security is jeopardized if it doesn’t - that’s irrational and disgusting, frankly. It’s how mob protection works. Pay me or maybe lightning strikes and the fire burns down your business.

You wouldn’t want that, Uncle Sam, would you?

Lastly, you want to know the advantage? How about just knowing that we stand essentially alone on the global stage by blindly supporting Israel without condition? This happens over and over and over again, but we saw it again just last week: 100+ countries voted in favor of a ceasefire resolution, and the U.S. stubbornly drew the ire of all of them by once again doing the blocking and tackling on Israel’s behalf. Maybe just the advantage of improved cooperation with 100+ other countries is enough of an advantage on its own.

I think so. I’m sure plenty of other people think so, too.

The U.S. relationship with Israel isn’t etched in stone. I know those who purport to be American but only care about Israel will insist otherwise, but the tide may eventually turn at some point. If it does, that pendulum swings really fast - just ask Iran.

PP here.

I have to say that I don't find your post convincing. IMO, it reads like it's emotion-driven rather than logic-driven.

That said, a few points:

1. Relationship with Iran: issues go FAR beyond Israel. I think you're over/misstating the case here.

2. Russia and China present real threats to US interests. It's not a matter of being "cowed", it's a matter of prudently looking after our own interests. That's our job.

Would losing our alliance with Israel lead to the destruction of the US? No.

Would it make us less safe WRT Russia and China? Almost certainly yes.

3. Standing alone on a global stage. Sounds awful, but I can't figure out any real world repercussions whatsoever for us. Nations will act out of their own interests; they're not going to change relations with the US based on a conflict that doesn't affect them directly in any way (see, eg, the Iraq war).

Emotion-driven? No. That’s just an overused tactic to undermine the message. You couldn’t use “hysterical” because that would have tipped your hand, but the tactic shined through in your OP and response anyway.

But more to the point, there’s clearly nothing that will convince you, so it seems. I think the Occam’s razor explanation for that is that you have a deep bias toward the status quo, for whatever reason.

That being the case, I guess there’s no further need to waste time with back and forth. You seem to think the relationship is etched in stone and beneficial to the U.S., yet you seem not to have any examples of the benefit that cannot be picked apart by any AP World History student. I just don’t agree with efforts to preserve the destructive status quo based on boogeyman and mob boss threats. I don’t see anything else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another woman was found dead today. Murdered by Hamas.

Very few twenty-something women were released in the latest hostage swap.

All you pro-Hamas posters are just misogynist pigs. What is wrong with you?

Agree that is horrific. IDF killed an average of 1000 children/week for the last two months. All you pro-IDF posters are just child murderers. What is wrong with you?

You're ridiculous.

Just pointing out that two can play this game. It's stupid to accuse those of us who are horrified by the IDF's rapid killing of thousands of children as pro-Hamas. Yes, the rape and murder of women in war is terrible. But it's utterly disingenuous when a pro-Israeli poster claims horror for the rapes of women but shows little sympathy, or even tries to justify, the slaughter of thousands of children. The IDF, one of the best, most advanced militaries in the world, deliberately chose to use dumb bombs in extremely dense urban areas. They killed babies in NICUs and families seeking refuge in churches rather than chose a military strategy that would be more precise.

You're right about Israel's conduct--I think that they've made some terrible strategic/tactical decisions. But there are also limits to exactly how "precise" a military campaign can be.

But you're also being disingenuous (or perhaps are legitimately unaware?) about exactly who's opposing Israel and their motives.

For example, are you aware that polling shows that 57% of American Muslims think Hamas was at least " somewhat justified" on 10/7?

Wanna guess what polling of Palestinians shows WRT the existence of Israel, violence vs. nonviolence, etc.?

You don't understand the audience. To you, the Existence of Israel as a Jewish State is a sacred cow, and everything and everyone must bow to it. To you, the original expulsions of 1947-48, the oppression, the unequal rights, the land grab, the settlement expansion, the imprisonment, the stripping of civil rights, the unrestrained killing by IDF are all unfortunate but minor events that must be discounted because Existence of Israel. Well guess what, American Muslims don't see it that way and Palestinians DEFINITELY don't see it that way. They don't agree with wholesale dismissal of what happened to them as "unfortunate but whatever". They don't agree it is a minor thing. They may not all agree that violence is entirely unjustified in response to oppression. And they don't see why they should just stop caring about what happened and what is happening to them today because Existence of Israel.

Your alliances and sympathies are with Israel because you understand them and feel closer to them. They don't. Okay.

This is very well-stated. I admit I fell into the "Existence of Israel" faction for much of my life. It was just the default view, so part of it was laziness. I thought if I didn't think that way, I might be considered antisemitic, so part of it was cowardice. I knew very little about the Palestinian experience or the history of the region, so part of it was ignorance. I felt Jews deserved compensation for the Holocaust, so part of it was misguided compassion that overlooked the rights of indigenous Palestinians. However, it's become increasingly difficult to ignore Israel's outrageous behavior and its appalling crimes against humanity. For me, it began with discomfort over settler violence in the West Bank. As I've delved further, my stance has shifted radically. Israel was built on terrorism and a fundamentalist interpretation of ancient texts that are almost certainly not historically valid and are not legally binding. Israel is currently a cynical, manipulative, and racist state that, unfortunately, has far too much in common with Nazi Germany. Like Nazi Germany, it is a technically advanced power that is determined to remove or exterminate people it finds "inferior" and inconvenient. Israel has become morally abhorrent and opposes 21st-century values of inclusion. I would prefer a Gandhi or Martin Luther King Jr. to Hamas, but terrorism has historically always been part of overthrowing colonialism. It is absolutely beyond the pale that the United States is propping up this fascist state and forcing its citizens to subsidize genocide.

Or, israel is a sovereign state with a very right wing government (a fact I agree is regrettable), living next door to radical jihadists. Hamas is not your friendly neighborhood victim.

Your views have indeed shifted and are quite radical.

Also, regarding your flawed comparison to Nazi germany, Germany did not cease to exist, as you seem to imply Israel should, after the end of the third Reich.

You've extended my analogy with Nazi Germany to post-Nazi Germany. The real question is whether pre-1948 Palestine should cease to exist, as you seem to imply it should. Zionists ethnically cleansed the area of Palestinians and, in some cases, massacred them (e.g., the Tantura massacre). Only Russia did some of that to Germany after it lost WW2. In what is now Israel, Palestinians had lived for generations on land that was later acquired by rich settlers from the U.S. So we should really be looking at whether lands conquered by the Nazis should remain under German control after WW2. IMO, Poland should no more have remained part of the Reich than Israel should remain part of Palestine.

You are ignoring the many native Israelis in Israel and their ancestral ties to the land. And you are glossing over the mass sale of land from Palestinians to Jewish people in the 1800 and 1900s- those Palestinians essentially sold their birthright. What is obvious to me is that there are two native peoples inhabiting the same land and the practical solution to the dispute would be a two state solution, since they largely cannot peacefully co-exist.

Oh they could do-exist is Israel was a secular country. Israel must drop the Jew state.

That’s absurd. Palestinians want an Islamic state, so you dear, are a hypocrite.

So? Gulf monarchies are Islamic states, and Israel is chomping at the bit to normalize relations with them. I guess the right to have an Islamic state is just like the right of self defense - available only to the right people?

Dude. That's what normalizing relations means. It means now I trust you to stop trying to kill me all the time, so we can live peacefully and have trade that benefits us both. It means both sides give up something - trying to kill you, encouraging others not to have normalized relations with you - because that way we both get something.

Do you expect Hamas to enjoy normalized relations with the people they just slaughtered en masse?

You people are just such dumb idiots when it comes to understanding how compromise and negotiation works. Ceasefire, you screech, so we can kill you! You're so BAD for not letting us just kill you some more!

I am one who never says "you people", but the individuals who think along these lines think they are so clever and that their words have power. They call for ceasefire beacuse of "the children", and they really think that the rest of us do not know and understand that the violence will continue after a ceasefile.

Aw, “feelings” person who thinks the U.S. will never, ever reevaluate its relationship with Israel!

DP.

I’d LOVE for someone to explain why it’s in our national interest to reevaluate our relationship with Israel.

I see no upside at all.

We’d lose intelligence, the region’s most effective military (and only one with nuclear capability), and a counterbalance to Iran.

Not only would we lose these advantages, but Israel would undoubtedly respond by seeking a new patron—either Russia or China.

Bad for us all around.

And for what advantage? No material gain with ME govts (they DGAF), no new allies, no new intelligence, and an unconstrained Iran.

I don’t see any argument that another course is better for the US.

The U.S. has a military industrial complex problem. Israel is a big part of that problem, on multiple levels.

Israel also provides intelligence that is, at best, unreliable; and at worst, fundamentally self-serving and essentially worthless. They don’t permit the U.S. to use their airspace, they intentionally attacked a U.S. naval vessel and murdered American sailors, and they persistently attempt to bind the U.S. to their geopolitical conflicts. They also repeatedly spy on our elected officials, and they don’t honor extradition requests.

As for the IDF, they are hardly effective, even with the vast advantage of U.S. training and weaponry. Without it, they are a bunch of awkward misfits with strabismus who are scared of their own shadow without the cover of the massive U.S. military advantage. Trigger-happy goons who couldn’t shoot straight to save their own lives.

Counterbalance to Iran? Like Syria and most other supposed hostile actors in the region, the U.S.’s relationship with Israel is THE sole reason a supposed counterbalance is even a credible excuse. Without U.S. foreign policy failures associated with blind, unconditional support of Israel, though, the hostilities have no further fuel. And no, nobody is buying the “they hate our way of life!” nonsense any longer, so don’t bother.

Cold War and Sinophobia boogeyman don’t carry water, either. The U.S. shouldn’t be cowed into supporting a foreign nation state on the unfounded basis that its own security is jeopardized if it doesn’t - that’s irrational and disgusting, frankly. It’s how mob protection works. Pay me or maybe lightning strikes and the fire burns down your business.

You wouldn’t want that, Uncle Sam, would you?

Lastly, you want to know the advantage? How about just knowing that we stand essentially alone on the global stage by blindly supporting Israel without condition? This happens over and over and over again, but we saw it again just last week: 100+ countries voted in favor of a ceasefire resolution, and the U.S. stubbornly drew the ire of all of them by once again doing the blocking and tackling on Israel’s behalf. Maybe just the advantage of improved cooperation with 100+ other countries is enough of an advantage on its own.

I think so. I’m sure plenty of other people think so, too.

The U.S. relationship with Israel isn’t etched in stone. I know those who purport to be American but only care about Israel will insist otherwise, but the tide may eventually turn at some point. If it does, that pendulum swings really fast - just ask Iran.

PP here.

I have to say that I don't find your post convincing. IMO, it reads like it's emotion-driven rather than logic-driven.

That said, a few points:

1. Relationship with Iran: issues go FAR beyond Israel. I think you're over/misstating the case here.

2. Russia and China present real threats to US interests. It's not a matter of being "cowed", it's a matter of prudently looking after our own interests. That's our job.

Would losing our alliance with Israel lead to the destruction of the US? No.

Would it make us less safe WRT Russia and China? Almost certainly yes.

3. Standing alone on a global stage. Sounds awful, but I can't figure out any real world repercussions whatsoever for us. Nations will act out of their own interests; they're not going to change relations with the US based on a conflict that doesn't affect them directly in any way (see, eg, the Iraq war).

Emotion-driven? No. That’s just an overused tactic to undermine the message. You couldn’t use “hysterical” because that would have tipped your hand, but the tactic shined through in your OP and response anyway.

But more to the point, there’s clearly nothing that will convince you, so it seems. I think the Occam’s razor explanation for that is that you have a deep bias toward the status quo, for whatever reason.

That being the case, I guess there’s no further need to waste time with back and forth. You seem to think the relationship is etched in stone and beneficial to the U.S., yet you seem not to have any examples of the benefit that cannot be picked apart by any AP World History student. I just don’t agree with efforts to preserve the destructive status quo based on boogeyman and mob boss threats. I don’t see anything else.

Or perhaps the Occam's razor suggests that you haven't made a particularly compelling case.

I've presented tangible (albeit imperfect) advantages for the US in the status quo. You've presented no tangible benefit to change (even the hypothetical advantages like "improved cooperation" are strikingly intangible).

That said, I certainly don't see the relationship as "etched in stone".

Would be interesting if either Iran or KSA or even Turkey offered something (positive) to affect the situation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another woman was found dead today. Murdered by Hamas.

Very few twenty-something women were released in the latest hostage swap.

All you pro-Hamas posters are just misogynist pigs. What is wrong with you?

Agree that is horrific. IDF killed an average of 1000 children/week for the last two months. All you pro-IDF posters are just child murderers. What is wrong with you?

You're ridiculous.

Just pointing out that two can play this game. It's stupid to accuse those of us who are horrified by the IDF's rapid killing of thousands of children as pro-Hamas. Yes, the rape and murder of women in war is terrible. But it's utterly disingenuous when a pro-Israeli poster claims horror for the rapes of women but shows little sympathy, or even tries to justify, the slaughter of thousands of children. The IDF, one of the best, most advanced militaries in the world, deliberately chose to use dumb bombs in extremely dense urban areas. They killed babies in NICUs and families seeking refuge in churches rather than chose a military strategy that would be more precise.

You're right about Israel's conduct--I think that they've made some terrible strategic/tactical decisions. But there are also limits to exactly how "precise" a military campaign can be.

But you're also being disingenuous (or perhaps are legitimately unaware?) about exactly who's opposing Israel and their motives.

For example, are you aware that polling shows that 57% of American Muslims think Hamas was at least " somewhat justified" on 10/7?

Wanna guess what polling of Palestinians shows WRT the existence of Israel, violence vs. nonviolence, etc.?

You don't understand the audience. To you, the Existence of Israel as a Jewish State is a sacred cow, and everything and everyone must bow to it. To you, the original expulsions of 1947-48, the oppression, the unequal rights, the land grab, the settlement expansion, the imprisonment, the stripping of civil rights, the unrestrained killing by IDF are all unfortunate but minor events that must be discounted because Existence of Israel. Well guess what, American Muslims don't see it that way and Palestinians DEFINITELY don't see it that way. They don't agree with wholesale dismissal of what happened to them as "unfortunate but whatever". They don't agree it is a minor thing. They may not all agree that violence is entirely unjustified in response to oppression. And they don't see why they should just stop caring about what happened and what is happening to them today because Existence of Israel.

Your alliances and sympathies are with Israel because you understand them and feel closer to them. They don't. Okay.

This is very well-stated. I admit I fell into the "Existence of Israel" faction for much of my life. It was just the default view, so part of it was laziness. I thought if I didn't think that way, I might be considered antisemitic, so part of it was cowardice. I knew very little about the Palestinian experience or the history of the region, so part of it was ignorance. I felt Jews deserved compensation for the Holocaust, so part of it was misguided compassion that overlooked the rights of indigenous Palestinians. However, it's become increasingly difficult to ignore Israel's outrageous behavior and its appalling crimes against humanity. For me, it began with discomfort over settler violence in the West Bank. As I've delved further, my stance has shifted radically. Israel was built on terrorism and a fundamentalist interpretation of ancient texts that are almost certainly not historically valid and are not legally binding. Israel is currently a cynical, manipulative, and racist state that, unfortunately, has far too much in common with Nazi Germany. Like Nazi Germany, it is a technically advanced power that is determined to remove or exterminate people it finds "inferior" and inconvenient. Israel has become morally abhorrent and opposes 21st-century values of inclusion. I would prefer a Gandhi or Martin Luther King Jr. to Hamas, but terrorism has historically always been part of overthrowing colonialism. It is absolutely beyond the pale that the United States is propping up this fascist state and forcing its citizens to subsidize genocide.

Or, israel is a sovereign state with a very right wing government (a fact I agree is regrettable), living next door to radical jihadists. Hamas is not your friendly neighborhood victim.

Your views have indeed shifted and are quite radical.

Also, regarding your flawed comparison to Nazi germany, Germany did not cease to exist, as you seem to imply Israel should, after the end of the third Reich.

You've extended my analogy with Nazi Germany to post-Nazi Germany. The real question is whether pre-1948 Palestine should cease to exist, as you seem to imply it should. Zionists ethnically cleansed the area of Palestinians and, in some cases, massacred them (e.g., the Tantura massacre). Only Russia did some of that to Germany after it lost WW2. In what is now Israel, Palestinians had lived for generations on land that was later acquired by rich settlers from the U.S. So we should really be looking at whether lands conquered by the Nazis should remain under German control after WW2. IMO, Poland should no more have remained part of the Reich than Israel should remain part of Palestine.

You are ignoring the many native Israelis in Israel and their ancestral ties to the land. And you are glossing over the mass sale of land from Palestinians to Jewish people in the 1800 and 1900s- those Palestinians essentially sold their birthright. What is obvious to me is that there are two native peoples inhabiting the same land and the practical solution to the dispute would be a two state solution, since they largely cannot peacefully co-exist.

Oh they could do-exist is Israel was a secular country. Israel must drop the Jew state.

That’s absurd. Palestinians want an Islamic state, so you dear, are a hypocrite.

So? Gulf monarchies are Islamic states, and Israel is chomping at the bit to normalize relations with them. I guess the right to have an Islamic state is just like the right of self defense - available only to the right people?

Dude. That's what normalizing relations means. It means now I trust you to stop trying to kill me all the time, so we can live peacefully and have trade that benefits us both. It means both sides give up something - trying to kill you, encouraging others not to have normalized relations with you - because that way we both get something.

Do you expect Hamas to enjoy normalized relations with the people they just slaughtered en masse?

You people are just such dumb idiots when it comes to understanding how compromise and negotiation works. Ceasefire, you screech, so we can kill you! You're so BAD for not letting us just kill you some more!

I am one who never says "you people", but the individuals who think along these lines think they are so clever and that their words have power. They call for ceasefire beacuse of "the children", and they really think that the rest of us do not know and understand that the violence will continue after a ceasefile.

Aw, “feelings” person who thinks the U.S. will never, ever reevaluate its relationship with Israel!

DP.

I’d LOVE for someone to explain why it’s in our national interest to reevaluate our relationship with Israel.

I see no upside at all.

We’d lose intelligence, the region’s most effective military (and only one with nuclear capability), and a counterbalance to Iran.

Not only would we lose these advantages, but Israel would undoubtedly respond by seeking a new patron—either Russia or China.

Bad for us all around.

And for what advantage? No material gain with ME govts (they DGAF), no new allies, no new intelligence, and an unconstrained Iran.

I don’t see any argument that another course is better for the US.

The U.S. has a military industrial complex problem. Israel is a big part of that problem, on multiple levels.

Israel also provides intelligence that is, at best, unreliable; and at worst, fundamentally self-serving and essentially worthless. They don’t permit the U.S. to use their airspace, they intentionally attacked a U.S. naval vessel and murdered American sailors, and they persistently attempt to bind the U.S. to their geopolitical conflicts. They also repeatedly spy on our elected officials, and they don’t honor extradition requests.

As for the IDF, they are hardly effective, even with the vast advantage of U.S. training and weaponry. Without it, they are a bunch of awkward misfits with strabismus who are scared of their own shadow without the cover of the massive U.S. military advantage. Trigger-happy goons who couldn’t shoot straight to save their own lives.

Counterbalance to Iran? Like Syria and most other supposed hostile actors in the region, the U.S.’s relationship with Israel is THE sole reason a supposed counterbalance is even a credible excuse. Without U.S. foreign policy failures associated with blind, unconditional support of Israel, though, the hostilities have no further fuel. And no, nobody is buying the “they hate our way of life!” nonsense any longer, so don’t bother.

Cold War and Sinophobia boogeyman don’t carry water, either. The U.S. shouldn’t be cowed into supporting a foreign nation state on the unfounded basis that its own security is jeopardized if it doesn’t - that’s irrational and disgusting, frankly. It’s how mob protection works. Pay me or maybe lightning strikes and the fire burns down your business.

You wouldn’t want that, Uncle Sam, would you?

Lastly, you want to know the advantage? How about just knowing that we stand essentially alone on the global stage by blindly supporting Israel without condition? This happens over and over and over again, but we saw it again just last week: 100+ countries voted in favor of a ceasefire resolution, and the U.S. stubbornly drew the ire of all of them by once again doing the blocking and tackling on Israel’s behalf. Maybe just the advantage of improved cooperation with 100+ other countries is enough of an advantage on its own.

I think so. I’m sure plenty of other people think so, too.

The U.S. relationship with Israel isn’t etched in stone. I know those who purport to be American but only care about Israel will insist otherwise, but the tide may eventually turn at some point. If it does, that pendulum swings really fast - just ask Iran.

PP here.

I have to say that I don't find your post convincing. IMO, it reads like it's emotion-driven rather than logic-driven.

That said, a few points:

1. Relationship with Iran: issues go FAR beyond Israel. I think you're over/misstating the case here.

2. Russia and China present real threats to US interests. It's not a matter of being "cowed", it's a matter of prudently looking after our own interests. That's our job.

Would losing our alliance with Israel lead to the destruction of the US? No.

Would it make us less safe WRT Russia and China? Almost certainly yes.

3. Standing alone on a global stage. Sounds awful, but I can't figure out any real world repercussions whatsoever for us. Nations will act out of their own interests; they're not going to change relations with the US based on a conflict that doesn't affect them directly in any way (see, eg, the Iraq war).

Emotion-driven? No. That’s just an overused tactic to undermine the message. You couldn’t use “hysterical” because that would have tipped your hand, but the tactic shined through in your OP and response anyway.

But more to the point, there’s clearly nothing that will convince you, so it seems. I think the Occam’s razor explanation for that is that you have a deep bias toward the status quo, for whatever reason.

That being the case, I guess there’s no further need to waste time with back and forth. You seem to think the relationship is etched in stone and beneficial to the U.S., yet you seem not to have any examples of the benefit that cannot be picked apart by any AP World History student. I just don’t agree with efforts to preserve the destructive status quo based on boogeyman and mob boss threats. I don’t see anything else.

Or perhaps the Occam's razor suggests that you haven't made a particularly compelling case.

I've presented tangible (albeit imperfect) advantages for the US in the status quo. You've presented no tangible benefit to change (even the hypothetical advantages like "improved cooperation" are strikingly intangible).

That said, I certainly don't see the relationship as "etched in stone".

Would be interesting if either Iran or KSA or even Turkey offered something (positive) to affect the situation.

The “tangible” benefits you’ve proffered don’t hold water because nobody who isn’t already blindly committed to the relationship (and thus, biased) believes that the U.S. realizes any material intelligence advantage, or that we enjoy regional military or hegemonic advantage IN EXCHANGE FOR our support.

Israel is a (meager) bulwark against supposed Russian or Chinese influence in the region because we make it so, and for no other reason. If we instead diverted the military and political might and insurmountable leverage to almost any other country in the region, that country would very quickly become just as effective - actually, it would probably be much more effective because it’s an unnaturally tall order for a supposed ally to be as disloyal as Israel has proven to be to the U.S.

As for the perception of U.S. foreign policy, LITERALLY any course correction at this point would result in an uptick of global goodwill toward America’s interests.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another woman was found dead today. Murdered by Hamas.

Very few twenty-something women were released in the latest hostage swap.

All you pro-Hamas posters are just misogynist pigs. What is wrong with you?

Agree that is horrific. IDF killed an average of 1000 children/week for the last two months. All you pro-IDF posters are just child murderers. What is wrong with you?

You're ridiculous.

Just pointing out that two can play this game. It's stupid to accuse those of us who are horrified by the IDF's rapid killing of thousands of children as pro-Hamas. Yes, the rape and murder of women in war is terrible. But it's utterly disingenuous when a pro-Israeli poster claims horror for the rapes of women but shows little sympathy, or even tries to justify, the slaughter of thousands of children. The IDF, one of the best, most advanced militaries in the world, deliberately chose to use dumb bombs in extremely dense urban areas. They killed babies in NICUs and families seeking refuge in churches rather than chose a military strategy that would be more precise.

You're right about Israel's conduct--I think that they've made some terrible strategic/tactical decisions. But there are also limits to exactly how "precise" a military campaign can be.

But you're also being disingenuous (or perhaps are legitimately unaware?) about exactly who's opposing Israel and their motives.

For example, are you aware that polling shows that 57% of American Muslims think Hamas was at least " somewhat justified" on 10/7?

Wanna guess what polling of Palestinians shows WRT the existence of Israel, violence vs. nonviolence, etc.?

You don't understand the audience. To you, the Existence of Israel as a Jewish State is a sacred cow, and everything and everyone must bow to it. To you, the original expulsions of 1947-48, the oppression, the unequal rights, the land grab, the settlement expansion, the imprisonment, the stripping of civil rights, the unrestrained killing by IDF are all unfortunate but minor events that must be discounted because Existence of Israel. Well guess what, American Muslims don't see it that way and Palestinians DEFINITELY don't see it that way. They don't agree with wholesale dismissal of what happened to them as "unfortunate but whatever". They don't agree it is a minor thing. They may not all agree that violence is entirely unjustified in response to oppression. And they don't see why they should just stop caring about what happened and what is happening to them today because Existence of Israel.

Your alliances and sympathies are with Israel because you understand them and feel closer to them. They don't. Okay.

This is very well-stated. I admit I fell into the "Existence of Israel" faction for much of my life. It was just the default view, so part of it was laziness. I thought if I didn't think that way, I might be considered antisemitic, so part of it was cowardice. I knew very little about the Palestinian experience or the history of the region, so part of it was ignorance. I felt Jews deserved compensation for the Holocaust, so part of it was misguided compassion that overlooked the rights of indigenous Palestinians. However, it's become increasingly difficult to ignore Israel's outrageous behavior and its appalling crimes against humanity. For me, it began with discomfort over settler violence in the West Bank. As I've delved further, my stance has shifted radically. Israel was built on terrorism and a fundamentalist interpretation of ancient texts that are almost certainly not historically valid and are not legally binding. Israel is currently a cynical, manipulative, and racist state that, unfortunately, has far too much in common with Nazi Germany. Like Nazi Germany, it is a technically advanced power that is determined to remove or exterminate people it finds "inferior" and inconvenient. Israel has become morally abhorrent and opposes 21st-century values of inclusion. I would prefer a Gandhi or Martin Luther King Jr. to Hamas, but terrorism has historically always been part of overthrowing colonialism. It is absolutely beyond the pale that the United States is propping up this fascist state and forcing its citizens to subsidize genocide.

Or, israel is a sovereign state with a very right wing government (a fact I agree is regrettable), living next door to radical jihadists. Hamas is not your friendly neighborhood victim.

Your views have indeed shifted and are quite radical.

Also, regarding your flawed comparison to Nazi germany, Germany did not cease to exist, as you seem to imply Israel should, after the end of the third Reich.

You've extended my analogy with Nazi Germany to post-Nazi Germany. The real question is whether pre-1948 Palestine should cease to exist, as you seem to imply it should. Zionists ethnically cleansed the area of Palestinians and, in some cases, massacred them (e.g., the Tantura massacre). Only Russia did some of that to Germany after it lost WW2. In what is now Israel, Palestinians had lived for generations on land that was later acquired by rich settlers from the U.S. So we should really be looking at whether lands conquered by the Nazis should remain under German control after WW2. IMO, Poland should no more have remained part of the Reich than Israel should remain part of Palestine.

You are ignoring the many native Israelis in Israel and their ancestral ties to the land. And you are glossing over the mass sale of land from Palestinians to Jewish people in the 1800 and 1900s- those Palestinians essentially sold their birthright. What is obvious to me is that there are two native peoples inhabiting the same land and the practical solution to the dispute would be a two state solution, since they largely cannot peacefully co-exist.

I'm very skeptical about the "ancestral ties" claim. Yes, the Romans drove out the Jews a couple of millennia ago, but the indigenous people who remained have lived there for thousands of years, while many of the Jews who left mingled with Europeans, North Africans, and people in the Iberian peninsula. I am, in large part, an Ashkenazi Jew, and I have blue eyes, fair skin, and red-blond hair, as do my children. This comes from our central European ancestry. I could probably find a way to claim some land in what is now Israel, but I find that idea immoral. My "ancestral ties" to Europe are at least as strong as they are to what is now Israel, and after thousands of years of my family's absence, I have no claim on that land. I could just as well demand a piece of Poland! The same is true for many of those who have settled in Israel.

The other "ancestral tie" is based on God's supposed promise to Abraham. However, you can follow any of the three major monotheistic religions and nevertheless believe that Adam, Eve, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Moses never existed and were literary creations that reflect human efforts to understand the divine. A literal interpretation of ancient scriptures is an all-around losing proposition for everyone. It says more about the thought processes of ancient and primitive people than it does about any God or gods. Modern theological movements generally move toward the abstract and pro-social and away from the literal and tribal.

The real reasons for Jewish claims of land in "Israel" are extremely selfish. The thug who said of stealing a Palestinian home, "If I don't steal it, someone else is gonna steal it," was right. These people absolutely are stealing. He was a New Yorker! What "ancestral tie" did he have that the person whose home he stole did not? These people have no morals, and their only allegiance is to feathering their own nests. They operate from narcissism and sociopathy, and that is why Israel has developed into a state that has no problem committing genocide. The U.S. should not be subsidizing this evil.



.

Well, your skepticism is irrelevant. That said, your assertions were reasonable-seeming enough until your last paragraph.

My skepticism will become relevant when/if it is widely shared by the voting public. Attitudes toward Israel are changing very quickly from the old default of support to general disgust.

As to the reasonableness of my last paragraph, I think history will support my assertion that Israel is committing genocide. It will be interesting to revisit this topic 20 years from now.

It is interesting that the younger voters who do not watch or get their news from the mainstream/corporate media sources (that are very pro Israel) do not support Israel.

Yes. Younger voters also generally don't have the knee-jerk paternalism toward people who are "not quite white," like Palestinians. They are quick to identify and reject racism, oppression, and colonialism. With the Holocaust now 78+ years in the past and most of their Jewish friends living relatively safe and privileged lives in the U.S., they also don't have the reflexive sympathy toward Zionism that their elders had. Young Jewish people are often among Israel's biggest critics.

Young people are also much less formally religious than their elders, so they don't buy into the fundamentalist Christian idea that we're all going to be raptured when all the Jews are in Israel or that God promised the Holy Land to the Jews. Forty percent of millennials are "nones," and of those that aren't, many of them are more academic and philosophical about religion than conventional or traditional.

Younger people aren't as religious as their parents. And that's a good thing.

But they still need to know their history. And they don't. Genuine dumbasses. They also don't seem to have a great sense of right and wrong. Very influenced and guided by social media.

Not the bestest generation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Trust me if Israel promised men safety for their families and money , Palestinians would go with guns themselves to find Hamas for Israel.

I’m not saying the American way is right but we did for better or worse use Afghans and Iraqis to fight and find terrorists with us. Israel doesn’t do this. They just bomb churches, hospitals, and schools foolishly . That’s not a humane war at all nor does it make things safe for Israel at all to be honest . Hamas pt 2 in 20 years will be the Orphans from this war and then what?

Are you seriously using Iraq and Afghanistan as examples of effective warfare? With all the corruption that “motivating the locals” has spawned?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another woman was found dead today. Murdered by Hamas.

Very few twenty-something women were released in the latest hostage swap.

All you pro-Hamas posters are just misogynist pigs. What is wrong with you?

Agree that is horrific. IDF killed an average of 1000 children/week for the last two months. All you pro-IDF posters are just child murderers. What is wrong with you?

You're ridiculous.

Just pointing out that two can play this game. It's stupid to accuse those of us who are horrified by the IDF's rapid killing of thousands of children as pro-Hamas. Yes, the rape and murder of women in war is terrible. But it's utterly disingenuous when a pro-Israeli poster claims horror for the rapes of women but shows little sympathy, or even tries to justify, the slaughter of thousands of children. The IDF, one of the best, most advanced militaries in the world, deliberately chose to use dumb bombs in extremely dense urban areas. They killed babies in NICUs and families seeking refuge in churches rather than chose a military strategy that would be more precise.

You're right about Israel's conduct--I think that they've made some terrible strategic/tactical decisions. But there are also limits to exactly how "precise" a military campaign can be.

But you're also being disingenuous (or perhaps are legitimately unaware?) about exactly who's opposing Israel and their motives.

For example, are you aware that polling shows that 57% of American Muslims think Hamas was at least " somewhat justified" on 10/7?

Wanna guess what polling of Palestinians shows WRT the existence of Israel, violence vs. nonviolence, etc.?

You don't understand the audience. To you, the Existence of Israel as a Jewish State is a sacred cow, and everything and everyone must bow to it. To you, the original expulsions of 1947-48, the oppression, the unequal rights, the land grab, the settlement expansion, the imprisonment, the stripping of civil rights, the unrestrained killing by IDF are all unfortunate but minor events that must be discounted because Existence of Israel. Well guess what, American Muslims don't see it that way and Palestinians DEFINITELY don't see it that way. They don't agree with wholesale dismissal of what happened to them as "unfortunate but whatever". They don't agree it is a minor thing. They may not all agree that violence is entirely unjustified in response to oppression. And they don't see why they should just stop caring about what happened and what is happening to them today because Existence of Israel.

Your alliances and sympathies are with Israel because you understand them and feel closer to them. They don't. Okay.

This is very well-stated. I admit I fell into the "Existence of Israel" faction for much of my life. It was just the default view, so part of it was laziness. I thought if I didn't think that way, I might be considered antisemitic, so part of it was cowardice. I knew very little about the Palestinian experience or the history of the region, so part of it was ignorance. I felt Jews deserved compensation for the Holocaust, so part of it was misguided compassion that overlooked the rights of indigenous Palestinians. However, it's become increasingly difficult to ignore Israel's outrageous behavior and its appalling crimes against humanity. For me, it began with discomfort over settler violence in the West Bank. As I've delved further, my stance has shifted radically. Israel was built on terrorism and a fundamentalist interpretation of ancient texts that are almost certainly not historically valid and are not legally binding. Israel is currently a cynical, manipulative, and racist state that, unfortunately, has far too much in common with Nazi Germany. Like Nazi Germany, it is a technically advanced power that is determined to remove or exterminate people it finds "inferior" and inconvenient. Israel has become morally abhorrent and opposes 21st-century values of inclusion. I would prefer a Gandhi or Martin Luther King Jr. to Hamas, but terrorism has historically always been part of overthrowing colonialism. It is absolutely beyond the pale that the United States is propping up this fascist state and forcing its citizens to subsidize genocide.

Or, israel is a sovereign state with a very right wing government (a fact I agree is regrettable), living next door to radical jihadists. Hamas is not your friendly neighborhood victim.

Your views have indeed shifted and are quite radical.

Also, regarding your flawed comparison to Nazi germany, Germany did not cease to exist, as you seem to imply Israel should, after the end of the third Reich.

You've extended my analogy with Nazi Germany to post-Nazi Germany. The real question is whether pre-1948 Palestine should cease to exist, as you seem to imply it should. Zionists ethnically cleansed the area of Palestinians and, in some cases, massacred them (e.g., the Tantura massacre). Only Russia did some of that to Germany after it lost WW2. In what is now Israel, Palestinians had lived for generations on land that was later acquired by rich settlers from the U.S. So we should really be looking at whether lands conquered by the Nazis should remain under German control after WW2. IMO, Poland should no more have remained part of the Reich than Israel should remain part of Palestine.

You are ignoring the many native Israelis in Israel and their ancestral ties to the land. And you are glossing over the mass sale of land from Palestinians to Jewish people in the 1800 and 1900s- those Palestinians essentially sold their birthright. What is obvious to me is that there are two native peoples inhabiting the same land and the practical solution to the dispute would be a two state solution, since they largely cannot peacefully co-exist.

I'm very skeptical about the "ancestral ties" claim. Yes, the Romans drove out the Jews a couple of millennia ago, but the indigenous people who remained have lived there for thousands of years, while many of the Jews who left mingled with Europeans, North Africans, and people in the Iberian peninsula. I am, in large part, an Ashkenazi Jew, and I have blue eyes, fair skin, and red-blond hair, as do my children. This comes from our central European ancestry. I could probably find a way to claim some land in what is now Israel, but I find that idea immoral. My "ancestral ties" to Europe are at least as strong as they are to what is now Israel, and after thousands of years of my family's absence, I have no claim on that land. I could just as well demand a piece of Poland! The same is true for many of those who have settled in Israel.

The other "ancestral tie" is based on God's supposed promise to Abraham. However, you can follow any of the three major monotheistic religions and nevertheless believe that Adam, Eve, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Moses never existed and were literary creations that reflect human efforts to understand the divine. A literal interpretation of ancient scriptures is an all-around losing proposition for everyone. It says more about the thought processes of ancient and primitive people than it does about any God or gods. Modern theological movements generally move toward the abstract and pro-social and away from the literal and tribal.

The real reasons for Jewish claims of land in "Israel" are extremely selfish. The thug who said of stealing a Palestinian home, "If I don't steal it, someone else is gonna steal it," was right. These people absolutely are stealing. He was a New Yorker! What "ancestral tie" did he have that the person whose home he stole did not? These people have no morals, and their only allegiance is to feathering their own nests. They operate from narcissism and sociopathy, and that is why Israel has developed into a state that has no problem committing genocide. The U.S. should not be subsidizing this evil.



.

Well, your skepticism is irrelevant. That said, your assertions were reasonable-seeming enough until your last paragraph.

My skepticism will become relevant when/if it is widely shared by the voting public. Attitudes toward Israel are changing very quickly from the old default of support to general disgust.

As to the reasonableness of my last paragraph, I think history will support my assertion that Israel is committing genocide. It will be interesting to revisit this topic 20 years from now.

It is interesting that the younger voters who do not watch or get their news from the mainstream/corporate media sources (that are very pro Israel) do not support Israel.

Yes. Younger voters also generally don't have the knee-jerk paternalism toward people who are "not quite white," like Palestinians. They are quick to identify and reject racism, oppression, and colonialism. With the Holocaust now 78+ years in the past and most of their Jewish friends living relatively safe and privileged lives in the U.S., they also don't have the reflexive sympathy toward Zionism that their elders had. Young Jewish people are often among Israel's biggest critics.

Younger voters are also looking at a significantly different israel than their parents were.

Support for a scrappy socialist country actually under repeated attack by their neighbors is simply a different ask than support for a country currently engaged in occupation and annexation. A country with time to photo shop dangerous pictures of women out of photographs and have gender- segregated sidewalks is just a different ask.

And please before someone says “Hamas also gender-segregates!” No one supports Hamas.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another woman was found dead today. Murdered by Hamas.

Very few twenty-something women were released in the latest hostage swap.

All you pro-Hamas posters are just misogynist pigs. What is wrong with you?

Agree that is horrific. IDF killed an average of 1000 children/week for the last two months. All you pro-IDF posters are just child murderers. What is wrong with you?

You're ridiculous.

Just pointing out that two can play this game. It's stupid to accuse those of us who are horrified by the IDF's rapid killing of thousands of children as pro-Hamas. Yes, the rape and murder of women in war is terrible. But it's utterly disingenuous when a pro-Israeli poster claims horror for the rapes of women but shows little sympathy, or even tries to justify, the slaughter of thousands of children. The IDF, one of the best, most advanced militaries in the world, deliberately chose to use dumb bombs in extremely dense urban areas. They killed babies in NICUs and families seeking refuge in churches rather than chose a military strategy that would be more precise.

You're right about Israel's conduct--I think that they've made some terrible strategic/tactical decisions. But there are also limits to exactly how "precise" a military campaign can be.

But you're also being disingenuous (or perhaps are legitimately unaware?) about exactly who's opposing Israel and their motives.

For example, are you aware that polling shows that 57% of American Muslims think Hamas was at least " somewhat justified" on 10/7?

Wanna guess what polling of Palestinians shows WRT the existence of Israel, violence vs. nonviolence, etc.?

You don't understand the audience. To you, the Existence of Israel as a Jewish State is a sacred cow, and everything and everyone must bow to it. To you, the original expulsions of 1947-48, the oppression, the unequal rights, the land grab, the settlement expansion, the imprisonment, the stripping of civil rights, the unrestrained killing by IDF are all unfortunate but minor events that must be discounted because Existence of Israel. Well guess what, American Muslims don't see it that way and Palestinians DEFINITELY don't see it that way. They don't agree with wholesale dismissal of what happened to them as "unfortunate but whatever". They don't agree it is a minor thing. They may not all agree that violence is entirely unjustified in response to oppression. And they don't see why they should just stop caring about what happened and what is happening to them today because Existence of Israel.

Your alliances and sympathies are with Israel because you understand them and feel closer to them. They don't. Okay.

This is very well-stated. I admit I fell into the "Existence of Israel" faction for much of my life. It was just the default view, so part of it was laziness. I thought if I didn't think that way, I might be considered antisemitic, so part of it was cowardice. I knew very little about the Palestinian experience or the history of the region, so part of it was ignorance. I felt Jews deserved compensation for the Holocaust, so part of it was misguided compassion that overlooked the rights of indigenous Palestinians. However, it's become increasingly difficult to ignore Israel's outrageous behavior and its appalling crimes against humanity. For me, it began with discomfort over settler violence in the West Bank. As I've delved further, my stance has shifted radically. Israel was built on terrorism and a fundamentalist interpretation of ancient texts that are almost certainly not historically valid and are not legally binding. Israel is currently a cynical, manipulative, and racist state that, unfortunately, has far too much in common with Nazi Germany. Like Nazi Germany, it is a technically advanced power that is determined to remove or exterminate people it finds "inferior" and inconvenient. Israel has become morally abhorrent and opposes 21st-century values of inclusion. I would prefer a Gandhi or Martin Luther King Jr. to Hamas, but terrorism has historically always been part of overthrowing colonialism. It is absolutely beyond the pale that the United States is propping up this fascist state and forcing its citizens to subsidize genocide.

Or, israel is a sovereign state with a very right wing government (a fact I agree is regrettable), living next door to radical jihadists. Hamas is not your friendly neighborhood victim.

Your views have indeed shifted and are quite radical.

Also, regarding your flawed comparison to Nazi germany, Germany did not cease to exist, as you seem to imply Israel should, after the end of the third Reich.

You've extended my analogy with Nazi Germany to post-Nazi Germany. The real question is whether pre-1948 Palestine should cease to exist, as you seem to imply it should. Zionists ethnically cleansed the area of Palestinians and, in some cases, massacred them (e.g., the Tantura massacre). Only Russia did some of that to Germany after it lost WW2. In what is now Israel, Palestinians had lived for generations on land that was later acquired by rich settlers from the U.S. So we should really be looking at whether lands conquered by the Nazis should remain under German control after WW2. IMO, Poland should no more have remained part of the Reich than Israel should remain part of Palestine.

You are ignoring the many native Israelis in Israel and their ancestral ties to the land. And you are glossing over the mass sale of land from Palestinians to Jewish people in the 1800 and 1900s- those Palestinians essentially sold their birthright. What is obvious to me is that there are two native peoples inhabiting the same land and the practical solution to the dispute would be a two state solution, since they largely cannot peacefully co-exist.

I'm very skeptical about the "ancestral ties" claim. Yes, the Romans drove out the Jews a couple of millennia ago, but the indigenous people who remained have lived there for thousands of years, while many of the Jews who left mingled with Europeans, North Africans, and people in the Iberian peninsula. I am, in large part, an Ashkenazi Jew, and I have blue eyes, fair skin, and red-blond hair, as do my children. This comes from our central European ancestry. I could probably find a way to claim some land in what is now Israel, but I find that idea immoral. My "ancestral ties" to Europe are at least as strong as they are to what is now Israel, and after thousands of years of my family's absence, I have no claim on that land. I could just as well demand a piece of Poland! The same is true for many of those who have settled in Israel.

The other "ancestral tie" is based on God's supposed promise to Abraham. However, you can follow any of the three major monotheistic religions and nevertheless believe that Adam, Eve, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Moses never existed and were literary creations that reflect human efforts to understand the divine. A literal interpretation of ancient scriptures is an all-around losing proposition for everyone. It says more about the thought processes of ancient and primitive people than it does about any God or gods. Modern theological movements generally move toward the abstract and pro-social and away from the literal and tribal.

The real reasons for Jewish claims of land in "Israel" are extremely selfish. The thug who said of stealing a Palestinian home, "If I don't steal it, someone else is gonna steal it," was right. These people absolutely are stealing. He was a New Yorker! What "ancestral tie" did he have that the person whose home he stole did not? These people have no morals, and their only allegiance is to feathering their own nests. They operate from narcissism and sociopathy, and that is why Israel has developed into a state that has no problem committing genocide. The U.S. should not be subsidizing this evil.



.

Well, your skepticism is irrelevant. That said, your assertions were reasonable-seeming enough until your last paragraph.

My skepticism will become relevant when/if it is widely shared by the voting public. Attitudes toward Israel are changing very quickly from the old default of support to general disgust.

As to the reasonableness of my last paragraph, I think history will support my assertion that Israel is committing genocide. It will be interesting to revisit this topic 20 years from now.

History will not support this assertion because the assertion is wrong. Will the moronic attitudes of younger voters become the norm? Maybe, maybe not. But if they do, this country will have a heckuva lot more to worry about than just policy toward Israel.

I don't think that's fair at all to younger voters. I think they are smart, well-educated, and think more independently than older voters.

They are not well-educated. And smart - we'll see. If by thinking more independently you mean DoiNG mY OwN reSEArCH then I guess so. But that research is put out by fking morons and grifters and foreign ops on TikTok. So ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I think part of the problem is that all us tired olds bought into that idiotic narrative that the kids were going to save us - they'd fix gun violence and climate change and discrimination. And now instead they are buying up pro-terrorism narratives and we don't know what to do about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another woman was found dead today. Murdered by Hamas.

Very few twenty-something women were released in the latest hostage swap.

All you pro-Hamas posters are just misogynist pigs. What is wrong with you?

Agree that is horrific. IDF killed an average of 1000 children/week for the last two months. All you pro-IDF posters are just child murderers. What is wrong with you?

You're ridiculous.

Just pointing out that two can play this game. It's stupid to accuse those of us who are horrified by the IDF's rapid killing of thousands of children as pro-Hamas. Yes, the rape and murder of women in war is terrible. But it's utterly disingenuous when a pro-Israeli poster claims horror for the rapes of women but shows little sympathy, or even tries to justify, the slaughter of thousands of children. The IDF, one of the best, most advanced militaries in the world, deliberately chose to use dumb bombs in extremely dense urban areas. They killed babies in NICUs and families seeking refuge in churches rather than chose a military strategy that would be more precise.

You're right about Israel's conduct--I think that they've made some terrible strategic/tactical decisions. But there are also limits to exactly how "precise" a military campaign can be.

But you're also being disingenuous (or perhaps are legitimately unaware?) about exactly who's opposing Israel and their motives.

For example, are you aware that polling shows that 57% of American Muslims think Hamas was at least " somewhat justified" on 10/7?

Wanna guess what polling of Palestinians shows WRT the existence of Israel, violence vs. nonviolence, etc.?

You don't understand the audience. To you, the Existence of Israel as a Jewish State is a sacred cow, and everything and everyone must bow to it. To you, the original expulsions of 1947-48, the oppression, the unequal rights, the land grab, the settlement expansion, the imprisonment, the stripping of civil rights, the unrestrained killing by IDF are all unfortunate but minor events that must be discounted because Existence of Israel. Well guess what, American Muslims don't see it that way and Palestinians DEFINITELY don't see it that way. They don't agree with wholesale dismissal of what happened to them as "unfortunate but whatever". They don't agree it is a minor thing. They may not all agree that violence is entirely unjustified in response to oppression. And they don't see why they should just stop caring about what happened and what is happening to them today because Existence of Israel.

Your alliances and sympathies are with Israel because you understand them and feel closer to them. They don't. Okay.

This is very well-stated. I admit I fell into the "Existence of Israel" faction for much of my life. It was just the default view, so part of it was laziness. I thought if I didn't think that way, I might be considered antisemitic, so part of it was cowardice. I knew very little about the Palestinian experience or the history of the region, so part of it was ignorance. I felt Jews deserved compensation for the Holocaust, so part of it was misguided compassion that overlooked the rights of indigenous Palestinians. However, it's become increasingly difficult to ignore Israel's outrageous behavior and its appalling crimes against humanity. For me, it began with discomfort over settler violence in the West Bank. As I've delved further, my stance has shifted radically. Israel was built on terrorism and a fundamentalist interpretation of ancient texts that are almost certainly not historically valid and are not legally binding. Israel is currently a cynical, manipulative, and racist state that, unfortunately, has far too much in common with Nazi Germany. Like Nazi Germany, it is a technically advanced power that is determined to remove or exterminate people it finds "inferior" and inconvenient. Israel has become morally abhorrent and opposes 21st-century values of inclusion. I would prefer a Gandhi or Martin Luther King Jr. to Hamas, but terrorism has historically always been part of overthrowing colonialism. It is absolutely beyond the pale that the United States is propping up this fascist state and forcing its citizens to subsidize genocide.

Or, israel is a sovereign state with a very right wing government (a fact I agree is regrettable), living next door to radical jihadists. Hamas is not your friendly neighborhood victim.

Your views have indeed shifted and are quite radical.

Also, regarding your flawed comparison to Nazi germany, Germany did not cease to exist, as you seem to imply Israel should, after the end of the third Reich.

You've extended my analogy with Nazi Germany to post-Nazi Germany. The real question is whether pre-1948 Palestine should cease to exist, as you seem to imply it should. Zionists ethnically cleansed the area of Palestinians and, in some cases, massacred them (e.g., the Tantura massacre). Only Russia did some of that to Germany after it lost WW2. In what is now Israel, Palestinians had lived for generations on land that was later acquired by rich settlers from the U.S. So we should really be looking at whether lands conquered by the Nazis should remain under German control after WW2. IMO, Poland should no more have remained part of the Reich than Israel should remain part of Palestine.

You are ignoring the many native Israelis in Israel and their ancestral ties to the land. And you are glossing over the mass sale of land from Palestinians to Jewish people in the 1800 and 1900s- those Palestinians essentially sold their birthright. What is obvious to me is that there are two native peoples inhabiting the same land and the practical solution to the dispute would be a two state solution, since they largely cannot peacefully co-exist.

Oh they could do-exist is Israel was a secular country. Israel must drop the Jew state.

That’s absurd. Palestinians want an Islamic state, so you dear, are a hypocrite.

So? Gulf monarchies are Islamic states, and Israel is chomping at the bit to normalize relations with them. I guess the right to have an Islamic state is just like the right of self defense - available only to the right people?

Dude. That's what normalizing relations means. It means now I trust you to stop trying to kill me all the time, so we can live peacefully and have trade that benefits us both. It means both sides give up something - trying to kill you, encouraging others not to have normalized relations with you - because that way we both get something.

Do you expect Hamas to enjoy normalized relations with the people they just slaughtered en masse?

You people are just such dumb idiots when it comes to understanding how compromise and negotiation works. Ceasefire, you screech, so we can kill you! You're so BAD for not letting us just kill you some more!

Then don't pretend it's about an Islamic state. There is nothing wrong with an Islamic states.

Israel has slaughtered more Palestinians, way way way more. Yet it pretends it can normalize but Hamas can't?

You really don't understand the Middle East, at all.

I don't even know what you mean by this. Anyone can "normalize" if they had a partner to "normalize" with. Israel can do this with Saudi Arabia because Saudi Arabia is a willing negotiator. SA sees a benefit to normalizing relations with Israel, and Israel sees a benefit to normalizing relations with SA, and so they can enter into negotiations.

No one wants to normalize relations with Gaza because Hamas is a bunch of insane lunatics who don't even stick with the deals they do make. If Hamas wanted to have normalized relations, they could - but they have to be someone people actually believe they can work with. Do you see any evidence of this being possible? I don't!

[Anonymous]

Yesterday Haaretz and Channel 12 news in Israel published a video taken from a Israeli police helicopter on October 7 showing an Israeli tank firing shells at homes in Kibbutz Be'eri. The article is in Hebrew, but the video is linked below.

Israeli official Mark Regev stated on MSNBC last month that the number of deaths on October 7 were revised down to 1200 from 1400 because the burned bodies that they initially thought were Israeli victims were actually Hamas. The video is posted below, he states this at about 6:45.

It seems pretty clear that many of the deaths on October 7 were due to Israeli fire.

https://www.haaretz.co.il/news/politics/2023-12-19/ty-article/0000018c-7e72-d219-a5bf-7ffac9d00000?utm_source=mivzakimnet&utm_medium=xhtml&utm_campaign=mivzakimnet

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HD-yRuTasHU

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another woman was found dead today. Murdered by Hamas.

Very few twenty-something women were released in the latest hostage swap.

All you pro-Hamas posters are just misogynist pigs. What is wrong with you?

Agree that is horrific. IDF killed an average of 1000 children/week for the last two months. All you pro-IDF posters are just child murderers. What is wrong with you?

You're ridiculous.

Just pointing out that two can play this game. It's stupid to accuse those of us who are horrified by the IDF's rapid killing of thousands of children as pro-Hamas. Yes, the rape and murder of women in war is terrible. But it's utterly disingenuous when a pro-Israeli poster claims horror for the rapes of women but shows little sympathy, or even tries to justify, the slaughter of thousands of children. The IDF, one of the best, most advanced militaries in the world, deliberately chose to use dumb bombs in extremely dense urban areas. They killed babies in NICUs and families seeking refuge in churches rather than chose a military strategy that would be more precise.

You're right about Israel's conduct--I think that they've made some terrible strategic/tactical decisions. But there are also limits to exactly how "precise" a military campaign can be.

But you're also being disingenuous (or perhaps are legitimately unaware?) about exactly who's opposing Israel and their motives.

For example, are you aware that polling shows that 57% of American Muslims think Hamas was at least " somewhat justified" on 10/7?

Wanna guess what polling of Palestinians shows WRT the existence of Israel, violence vs. nonviolence, etc.?

You don't understand the audience. To you, the Existence of Israel as a Jewish State is a sacred cow, and everything and everyone must bow to it. To you, the original expulsions of 1947-48, the oppression, the unequal rights, the land grab, the settlement expansion, the imprisonment, the stripping of civil rights, the unrestrained killing by IDF are all unfortunate but minor events that must be discounted because Existence of Israel. Well guess what, American Muslims don't see it that way and Palestinians DEFINITELY don't see it that way. They don't agree with wholesale dismissal of what happened to them as "unfortunate but whatever". They don't agree it is a minor thing. They may not all agree that violence is entirely unjustified in response to oppression. And they don't see why they should just stop caring about what happened and what is happening to them today because Existence of Israel.

Your alliances and sympathies are with Israel because you understand them and feel closer to them. They don't. Okay.

This is very well-stated. I admit I fell into the "Existence of Israel" faction for much of my life. It was just the default view, so part of it was laziness. I thought if I didn't think that way, I might be considered antisemitic, so part of it was cowardice. I knew very little about the Palestinian experience or the history of the region, so part of it was ignorance. I felt Jews deserved compensation for the Holocaust, so part of it was misguided compassion that overlooked the rights of indigenous Palestinians. However, it's become increasingly difficult to ignore Israel's outrageous behavior and its appalling crimes against humanity. For me, it began with discomfort over settler violence in the West Bank. As I've delved further, my stance has shifted radically. Israel was built on terrorism and a fundamentalist interpretation of ancient texts that are almost certainly not historically valid and are not legally binding. Israel is currently a cynical, manipulative, and racist state that, unfortunately, has far too much in common with Nazi Germany. Like Nazi Germany, it is a technically advanced power that is determined to remove or exterminate people it finds "inferior" and inconvenient. Israel has become morally abhorrent and opposes 21st-century values of inclusion. I would prefer a Gandhi or Martin Luther King Jr. to Hamas, but terrorism has historically always been part of overthrowing colonialism. It is absolutely beyond the pale that the United States is propping up this fascist state and forcing its citizens to subsidize genocide.

Or, israel is a sovereign state with a very right wing government (a fact I agree is regrettable), living next door to radical jihadists. Hamas is not your friendly neighborhood victim.

Your views have indeed shifted and are quite radical.

Also, regarding your flawed comparison to Nazi germany, Germany did not cease to exist, as you seem to imply Israel should, after the end of the third Reich.

You've extended my analogy with Nazi Germany to post-Nazi Germany. The real question is whether pre-1948 Palestine should cease to exist, as you seem to imply it should. Zionists ethnically cleansed the area of Palestinians and, in some cases, massacred them (e.g., the Tantura massacre). Only Russia did some of that to Germany after it lost WW2. In what is now Israel, Palestinians had lived for generations on land that was later acquired by rich settlers from the U.S. So we should really be looking at whether lands conquered by the Nazis should remain under German control after WW2. IMO, Poland should no more have remained part of the Reich than Israel should remain part of Palestine.

You are ignoring the many native Israelis in Israel and their ancestral ties to the land. And you are glossing over the mass sale of land from Palestinians to Jewish people in the 1800 and 1900s- those Palestinians essentially sold their birthright. What is obvious to me is that there are two native peoples inhabiting the same land and the practical solution to the dispute would be a two state solution, since they largely cannot peacefully co-exist.

I'm very skeptical about the "ancestral ties" claim. Yes, the Romans drove out the Jews a couple of millennia ago, but the indigenous people who remained have lived there for thousands of years, while many of the Jews who left mingled with Europeans, North Africans, and people in the Iberian peninsula. I am, in large part, an Ashkenazi Jew, and I have blue eyes, fair skin, and red-blond hair, as do my children. This comes from our central European ancestry. I could probably find a way to claim some land in what is now Israel, but I find that idea immoral. My "ancestral ties" to Europe are at least as strong as they are to what is now Israel, and after thousands of years of my family's absence, I have no claim on that land. I could just as well demand a piece of Poland! The same is true for many of those who have settled in Israel.

The other "ancestral tie" is based on God's supposed promise to Abraham. However, you can follow any of the three major monotheistic religions and nevertheless believe that Adam, Eve, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Moses never existed and were literary creations that reflect human efforts to understand the divine. A literal interpretation of ancient scriptures is an all-around losing proposition for everyone. It says more about the thought processes of ancient and primitive people than it does about any God or gods. Modern theological movements generally move toward the abstract and pro-social and away from the literal and tribal.

The real reasons for Jewish claims of land in "Israel" are extremely selfish. The thug who said of stealing a Palestinian home, "If I don't steal it, someone else is gonna steal it," was right. These people absolutely are stealing. He was a New Yorker! What "ancestral tie" did he have that the person whose home he stole did not? These people have no morals, and their only allegiance is to feathering their own nests. They operate from narcissism and sociopathy, and that is why Israel has developed into a state that has no problem committing genocide. The U.S. should not be subsidizing this evil.



.

Well, your skepticism is irrelevant. That said, your assertions were reasonable-seeming enough until your last paragraph.

My skepticism will become relevant when/if it is widely shared by the voting public. Attitudes toward Israel are changing very quickly from the old default of support to general disgust.

As to the reasonableness of my last paragraph, I think history will support my assertion that Israel is committing genocide. It will be interesting to revisit this topic 20 years from now.

It is interesting that the younger voters who do not watch or get their news from the mainstream/corporate media sources (that are very pro Israel) do not support Israel.

Yes. Younger voters also generally don't have the knee-jerk paternalism toward people who are "not quite white," like Palestinians. They are quick to identify and reject racism, oppression, and colonialism. With the Holocaust now 78+ years in the past and most of their Jewish friends living relatively safe and privileged lives in the U.S., they also don't have the reflexive sympathy toward Zionism that their elders had. Young Jewish people are often among Israel's biggest critics.

Younger voters are also looking at a significantly different israel than their parents were.

Support for a scrappy socialist country actually under repeated attack by their neighbors is simply a different ask than support for a country currently engaged in occupation and annexation. A country with time to photo shop dangerous pictures of women out of photographs and have gender- segregated sidewalks is just a different ask.

And please before someone says “Hamas also gender-segregates!” No one supports Hamas.

I had never heard of gendered separated sidewalks in Israel but just looked this up and it’s true!

To the grumpy poster(s) who think younger people are dumb idiots for getting their news on streaming services, I would say that getting news solely from established news services is also problematic and puts you at risk of learning only bits and pieces of a story.

And to anyone who still is supportive of Israel’s continued attacks (as oppose to supporting a ceasefire or at least a change of tactics to better protect civilians), I wonder if you have ever spoken to a Palestinian, travelled in the Middle East (outside of Israel), or at least watched some of the videos being posted by Palestinians in Gaza about their experiences? Genuine question.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So you have 1 group, known terrorist group. Kills 1200. Commits war crimes. Kills babies. Rapes women.

And you have another group, moralist army. Kills 25,000. Commits war crimes. Kills babies. Shoots their own hostages and survivors sheltering in churches.

Pretty bad when the terrorists somehow sound more reasonable.

But of course they don’t. There’s a good side in this war and, sorry, Hamas ain’t it.

The "good side" is the one that killed 20x more people, including their own hostages, and used snipers to kill women and children hiding in churches?

There are no "good sides" in this war. There are terrorists and murderers. On both sides. There are war crimes/criminals. On both sides. That what the sides are here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So you have 1 group, known terrorist group. Kills 1200. Commits war crimes. Kills babies. Rapes women.

And you have another group, moralist army. Kills 25,000. Commits war crimes. Kills babies. Shoots their own hostages and survivors sheltering in churches.

Pretty bad when the terrorists somehow sound more reasonable.

To be fair, Hamas and its associates probably killed about 600 people. About half of those killed on 10/7 appear to have died by "friendly" fire. Many Israelis are reporting this. Also, Hamas probably did not kill any babies. Certainly, it did not behead 40 babies or hang dead babies on a clothesline, as some propagandists lied. Sadly, Hamas members and/or the attackers that accompanied them probably did rape women, even when you take into account that Israel lies routinely and cannot be trusted. It is unclear why Israel does not allow the Red Cross to conduct an independent investigation into the alleged rapes. I suspect that there were rapes but that the extent of the rapes has been exaggerated.

Good grief. To still be taking this position at this point….

Seems a reasonable position to me. Hamas killed several hundred people. Nobody disputes that Israel killed many of its own people on 10/7, possibly as a result of the Hannibal Directive. The "40 beheaded babies" story was a flat-out lie. This is also not disputed. Rapes almost certainly happened. Israel lies a lot, so it would be naive to take every accusation it makes at face value, but the rape claims appear to be true.

Nope. Unreasonable. Minimizes Hamas’ massacre.

Israel made sure their retribution minimized the massacre, thats for sure. Even if you want to say 1,000 people were massacred by hamas, israel and the idf are at 25x the death toll, the vast majority innocent civilians.

And shooting their own people! Murdering captured israeli hostages! Now thats a massacre.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So you have 1 group, known terrorist group. Kills 1200. Commits war crimes. Kills babies. Rapes women.

And you have another group, moralist army. Kills 25,000. Commits war crimes. Kills babies. Shoots their own hostages and survivors sheltering in churches.

Pretty bad when the terrorists somehow sound more reasonable.

But of course they don’t. There’s a good side in this war and, sorry, Hamas ain’t it.

The "good side" is the one that killed 20x more people, including their own hostages, and used snipers to kill women and children hiding in churches?

There are no "good sides" in this war. There are terrorists and murderers. On both sides. There are war crimes/criminals. On both sides. That what the sides are here.

True believers will never be capable of seeing the truth in this. If Bibi and the ghosts of Begin and Meir arrived on their doorstep and signed a joint declaration outlining the countless atrocities committed by Zionists in the name of Israel over the past 75+ years, they would claim it was Arab trickery and shout down anyone trying to discuss it, and shove aside anyone trying to glance down and read it.