Protests on college campuses

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:American students brutalized and American doctors left to starve to death. The legacy of a nihilistic power class.

Surely Biden will do something?

He is trying. Hamas has agreed to return hostages and a cease fire. Netanyahu has rejected repeatedly, because he needs the war to stay in power.

If Israel is our ally, then he can lean on them to supply the hospital. If they are not our ally, then there are thousands of American soldiers able to pull them out.

[Anonymous]

Harvard reaches agreement with protesters to end encampment, there will be discussion of divestment and they will reinstate suspended students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Harvard reaches agreement with protesters to end encampment, there will be discussion of divestment and they will reinstate suspended students.

Good decision. I am all for ensuring the safety of Jewish students but you can’t say there should be no protesting because it makes Jewish students “uncomfortable “. Frankly, if they can’t handle the real world then maybe they should stay home.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harvard reaches agreement with protesters to end encampment, there will be discussion of divestment and they will reinstate suspended students.

Good decision. I am all for ensuring the safety of Jewish students but you can’t say there should be no protesting because it makes Jewish students “uncomfortable “. Frankly, if they can’t handle the real world then maybe they should stay home.

Many of the students were harassing Jewish students, and no, calling for obliteration of a country of 7 million Jews isn’t something Jewish students should have to “get comfortable with.”

Maybe protestors shouldn’t go to schools whose ideals they don’t align with. They can go to school in Syria.

Clearly, their ideals align with the school and that’s why they have reached an agreement. Maybe the students who are “uncomfortable” should go to school in Tel Aviv.

No, they terrorized the school and the school stood for it, which is shameful and a result of wokeism gone too far. It’s going to bite them in the ass that they are pandering to moronic Hamas supporters

Should we call all Israel supporters- genocide supporters? Is that the road you want to go down?

[Anonymous]

The students are getting a fantastic education. They are getting to really know the owner class.

[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:I miss Obama era progressives, who understood how to deal with terrorists. By droning them into little splatters.

Remember when Obama ordered a drone hit on American Anwar al Awlaki? He was the son of a PhD Fulbright scholar. He went to GWU, like a lot of the pro-Hamas protestors. He died in a splat next to his 16 year old son, who was also American. And then his branch of al Qaeda atrophied and no one thinks about them anymore. It's hard to even remember that stuff. I suspect that some of these campus Hamas losers will go the same way. And inshallah they will meet the same fate, if they do.

+1. I feel like I am going insane watching people try to justify letting Hamas (and other terrorist organizations) recruit on our college campuses and convert our young students to their radical Islamic worldview.

Pretty horrifying to celebrate the killing of a child, no matter who's son he was. You are a ghoul. I also don't celebrate government killing of Americans through drone strikes.

I'm the pp that wrote about how the left used to drone terrorists all the time, blasting terrorist a$$ into next week. I'm not the one expressing shock at how college students are now terrorist sympathizers.

It's good that you think I'm a ghoul. Remember that most of GenX and above are all about killing terrorists. If they don't want their teenage kids killed, they shouldn't launch attacks. It's that simple. Terrorists use murder and violence to try to defeat their enemies. You're okay with Hamas doing it because you think it's a righteous cause to murder families to punish Israel. We aren't required to be pacifists. Hamas hates us. We need to crush them now while they are weak. I think Israel is being far too cautious and protective of Palestinians. They should rain fire in the skies until there is nothing, but peace.

OK, so you support genocide. Thanks for clarifying.

You call it genocide, I call it justice.

DP

Killing babies in NICU units constitutes justice? For whom?

Hamas deliberately set up its operational HQ in the basement of a hospital because they know that Israel would blink, that they would not want to bomb the hospital. And they did issue warnings for several days that they were going to bomb the hospital so people would leave.

Hamas does this stuff on purpose because they want to exploit our sense of what's right and just. And this is who Palestinians voted in to office. They choose to be represented by people who expose their NICU babies to danger by using them as shields.

What's fascinating is that it is Hamas who violated the Geneva Convention protocols, not Israel. Militaries are expressly prohibited from using civilians as shields. But once they do, its within bounds to attack them and the civilians are collateral damage.

This is not genocide. Turnabout is fairplay, even if it's dirty business. War is hell, it's kind of bizarre to me that college protestors don't expect that war creates casualties. Most likely we are headed to war in the Middle East, possibly the South China Sea and/or Europe. These young people are the people who will fight it, and they are going to find out that the rule of war is that you kill or be killed.

DP

That response demonstrates that there is no mercy in the pro-Israel perspective, including for innocent non-combatants like newborn infants. Given that, it seems really odd that pro-Israel posters expect others to rush to their defense in the face of what they claim are their own existential threats. If they think others are trying to annihilate them, by their own logic, so what?

I don’t agree with that logic, but what am I missing that you find those two conflicting views acceptable? “We can kill all of them because we argue that combatants cannot be separated from non-combatants, but they’re trying to annihilate us!”

Palestinians elected their government and are protecting Hamas. That is the difference. If a terrorist attack on Americans happened in let’s say France the French government would work to find and oust the terrorist group and cooperate with the US. The Palestinians seem to welcome their actions. There was no Palestinian government apology or offer to work with Israel to find Hamas and bring justice to the situation. That’s how they ended up in war.

It’s been said that over 60% of Gaza’s population wasn’t even born yet (or of the age to vote) the last time an election was held. It’s also been said, credibly, that the ones who were alive and of voting age at the time of the last election were faced with what amounted to a non-democratic process that was endorsed by both Israel and the U.S.

I mean, these people are refugees. I don’t think there is enough official government apparatus that could even extend an apology or offer to help, right?

This brings a new question. For how long and for how many generations can a group of people be considered refugees? Do you consider every Palestinian a refugee? If 60% of the population was not alive during the election these people , even if underage are not really refugees especially if they are seeking to become a legitimate country and are multiple generations after the so called Nakba.

The refugee status persists because Israel is unwilling to extend full citizenship rights to these indigenous people and they are unwilling to emigrate from their homeland.

That’s why a resolution of some kind is eventually going to be necessary, either a truly democratic one-state solution or a two-state solution where the Palestinian state is afforded more independence than Israel has ever been willing to recognize in past talks.

There are only four paths, the latter two obviously grim and unacceptable to reasonable minds: one-state, two-state, Palestinian genocide, or Israeli genocide.

I mean, can't imagine why Israel doesn't want to turn the only Jewish homeland in the world into a place where the biggest population is people who want them dead. Really boggles the mind!

You mean to say that Israel wants to continue expropriating land that unfortunately still has people in it? I mean it is welcome to get the hell out of West Bank, and that will solve the problem of hostile population, no? Otherwise you're in a classic colonizer dilemma of "I want your land but not your people."

[Anonymous]

Yes, Hamas is evil. Giving them millions (Netanyahu) was a really bad idea, yes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harvard reaches agreement with protesters to end encampment, there will be discussion of divestment and they will reinstate suspended students.

Good decision. I am all for ensuring the safety of Jewish students but you can’t say there should be no protesting because it makes Jewish students “uncomfortable “. Frankly, if they can’t handle the real world then maybe they should stay home.

Many of the students were harassing Jewish students, and no, calling for obliteration of a country of 7 million Jews isn’t something Jewish students should have to “get comfortable with.”

Maybe protestors shouldn’t go to schools whose ideals they don’t align with. They can go to school in Syria.

Clearly, their ideals align with the school and that’s why they have reached an agreement. Maybe the students who are “uncomfortable” should go to school in Tel Aviv.

No, they terrorized the school and the school stood for it, which is shameful and a result of wokeism gone too far. It’s going to bite them in the ass that they are pandering to moronic Hamas supporters

Should we call all Israel supporters- genocide supporters? Is that the road you want to go down?

So you’re saying the protestors don’t support Hamas. They don’t support Israel. And yet they want to “free Gaza” from Israel’s war on Hamas, but not hamas itself. They are terrorizing American universities and demanding that they somehow make a stance to delegitimize Israel. How does that make any logical sense if they don’t support Hamas? This is a war. One side is Hamas - terrorists - and the other is a democratic country that was attacked by the terrorists. It’s pretty black and white. If you are supporting “Palestine” and “globalizing and intifada” you are supporting terrorists organizations like Hamas, who want to obliterate Israel entirely. Show me one poster from a protest that said “we need a two state solution” and not “from the river to the sea”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harvard reaches agreement with protesters to end encampment, there will be discussion of divestment and they will reinstate suspended students.

Good decision. I am all for ensuring the safety of Jewish students but you can’t say there should be no protesting because it makes Jewish students “uncomfortable “. Frankly, if they can’t handle the real world then maybe they should stay home.

Many of the students were harassing Jewish students, and no, calling for obliteration of a country of 7 million Jews isn’t something Jewish students should have to “get comfortable with.”

Maybe protestors shouldn’t go to schools whose ideals they don’t align with. They can go to school in Syria.

Annihilation. Obliteration.

Does it ever trouble your conscience that you cite words that are never used by the people you accuse of wrongdoing?

"From the River to the Sea" (which, admittedly, I'm seeing less of now than in the beginning), "Globalize the Intifada" (intifada being a call to exterminate Jews), "Go back to Poland" (where the Jews were systematically murdered en masse).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harvard reaches agreement with protesters to end encampment, there will be discussion of divestment and they will reinstate suspended students.

Good decision. I am all for ensuring the safety of Jewish students but you can’t say there should be no protesting because it makes Jewish students “uncomfortable “. Frankly, if they can’t handle the real world then maybe they should stay home.

Many of the students were harassing Jewish students, and no, calling for obliteration of a country of 7 million Jews isn’t something Jewish students should have to “get comfortable with.”

Maybe protestors shouldn’t go to schools whose ideals they don’t align with. They can go to school in Syria.

Clearly, their ideals align with the school and that’s why they have reached an agreement. Maybe the students who are “uncomfortable” should go to school in Tel Aviv.

No, they terrorized the school and the school stood for it, which is shameful and a result of wokeism gone too far. It’s going to bite them in the ass that they are pandering to moronic Hamas supporters

Should we call all Israel supporters- genocide supporters? Is that the road you want to go down?

So you’re saying the protestors don’t support Hamas. They don’t support Israel. And yet they want to “free Gaza” from Israel’s war on Hamas, but not hamas itself. They are terrorizing American universities and demanding that they somehow make a stance to delegitimize Israel. How does that make any logical sense if they don’t support Hamas? This is a war. One side is Hamas - terrorists - and the other is a democratic country that was attacked by the terrorists. It’s pretty black and white. If you are supporting “Palestine” and “globalizing and intifada” you are supporting terrorists organizations like Hamas, who want to obliterate Israel entirely. Show me one poster from a protest that said “we need a two state solution” and not “from the river to the sea”

Why is Israel allowed to say "from the river to the sea" and Palestinians aren't?

[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:I miss Obama era progressives, who understood how to deal with terrorists. By droning them into little splatters.

Remember when Obama ordered a drone hit on American Anwar al Awlaki? He was the son of a PhD Fulbright scholar. He went to GWU, like a lot of the pro-Hamas protestors. He died in a splat next to his 16 year old son, who was also American. And then his branch of al Qaeda atrophied and no one thinks about them anymore. It's hard to even remember that stuff. I suspect that some of these campus Hamas losers will go the same way. And inshallah they will meet the same fate, if they do.

+1. I feel like I am going insane watching people try to justify letting Hamas (and other terrorist organizations) recruit on our college campuses and convert our young students to their radical Islamic worldview.

Pretty horrifying to celebrate the killing of a child, no matter who's son he was. You are a ghoul. I also don't celebrate government killing of Americans through drone strikes.

I'm the pp that wrote about how the left used to drone terrorists all the time, blasting terrorist a$$ into next week. I'm not the one expressing shock at how college students are now terrorist sympathizers.

It's good that you think I'm a ghoul. Remember that most of GenX and above are all about killing terrorists. If they don't want their teenage kids killed, they shouldn't launch attacks. It's that simple. Terrorists use murder and violence to try to defeat their enemies. You're okay with Hamas doing it because you think it's a righteous cause to murder families to punish Israel. We aren't required to be pacifists. Hamas hates us. We need to crush them now while they are weak. I think Israel is being far too cautious and protective of Palestinians. They should rain fire in the skies until there is nothing, but peace.

OK, so you support genocide. Thanks for clarifying.

You call it genocide, I call it justice.

DP

Killing babies in NICU units constitutes justice? For whom?

Hamas deliberately set up its operational HQ in the basement of a hospital because they know that Israel would blink, that they would not want to bomb the hospital. And they did issue warnings for several days that they were going to bomb the hospital so people would leave.

Hamas does this stuff on purpose because they want to exploit our sense of what's right and just. And this is who Palestinians voted in to office. They choose to be represented by people who expose their NICU babies to danger by using them as shields.

What's fascinating is that it is Hamas who violated the Geneva Convention protocols, not Israel. Militaries are expressly prohibited from using civilians as shields. But once they do, its within bounds to attack them and the civilians are collateral damage.

This is not genocide. Turnabout is fairplay, even if it's dirty business. War is hell, it's kind of bizarre to me that college protestors don't expect that war creates casualties. Most likely we are headed to war in the Middle East, possibly the South China Sea and/or Europe. These young people are the people who will fight it, and they are going to find out that the rule of war is that you kill or be killed.

DP

That response demonstrates that there is no mercy in the pro-Israel perspective, including for innocent non-combatants like newborn infants. Given that, it seems really odd that pro-Israel posters expect others to rush to their defense in the face of what they claim are their own existential threats. If they think others are trying to annihilate them, by their own logic, so what?

I don’t agree with that logic, but what am I missing that you find those two conflicting views acceptable? “We can kill all of them because we argue that combatants cannot be separated from non-combatants, but they’re trying to annihilate us!”

Palestinians elected their government and are protecting Hamas. That is the difference. If a terrorist attack on Americans happened in let’s say France the French government would work to find and oust the terrorist group and cooperate with the US. The Palestinians seem to welcome their actions. There was no Palestinian government apology or offer to work with Israel to find Hamas and bring justice to the situation. That’s how they ended up in war.

It’s been said that over 60% of Gaza’s population wasn’t even born yet (or of the age to vote) the last time an election was held. It’s also been said, credibly, that the ones who were alive and of voting age at the time of the last election were faced with what amounted to a non-democratic process that was endorsed by both Israel and the U.S.

I mean, these people are refugees. I don’t think there is enough official government apparatus that could even extend an apology or offer to help, right?

This brings a new question. For how long and for how many generations can a group of people be considered refugees? Do you consider every Palestinian a refugee? If 60% of the population was not alive during the election these people , even if underage are not really refugees especially if they are seeking to become a legitimate country and are multiple generations after the so called Nakba.

The refugee status persists because Israel is unwilling to extend full citizenship rights to these indigenous people and they are unwilling to emigrate from their homeland.

That’s why a resolution of some kind is eventually going to be necessary, either a truly democratic one-state solution or a two-state solution where the Palestinian state is afforded more independence than Israel has ever been willing to recognize in past talks.

There are only four paths, the latter two obviously grim and unacceptable to reasonable minds: one-state, two-state, Palestinian genocide, or Israeli genocide.

I mean, can't imagine why Israel doesn't want to turn the only Jewish homeland in the world into a place where the biggest population is people who want them dead. Really boggles the mind!

You mean to say that Israel wants to continue expropriating land that unfortunately still has people in it? I mean it is welcome to get the hell out of West Bank, and that will solve the problem of hostile population, no? Otherwise you're in a classic colonizer dilemma of "I want your land but not your people."

"Classic colonizer" isn't the insult you think it is. By the way when are you planning on giving your house back to some native Americans?

[jsteele]

I think that it is time to consolidate this thread and the Gaza war thread since they are covering roughly the same topic. I will start a new thread to consolidate both.