4 ms·

It's often accompanied by cheerful comments whenever an israeli soldier dies in gaza, killed by hamas. I think it's pretty clear those people are on the terrori

by bsaul 3y ago

It's often accompanied by cheerful comments whenever an israeli soldier dies in gaza, killed by hamas. I think it's pretty clear those people are on the terrorists side on this war.

ethanbond 3y ago
Like most arguments in controversial topics, there are good versions of the argument and bad ones. It behooves everyone not to use the bad arguments to outright dismiss the good ones.
- bsaul 3y ago
  I agree with your point, however in this case i think it's important to pinpoint the hypocrisy of some people. You can't blame israel for oct 7, ask them to stop their ongoing operations in gaza, not call for the release of hostages, not say a word about the women raped by hamas and gaza civilians, AND pretend to "just want to spare the civilians population". Those people are in practice siding for the hamas, even if they deny it.
  - ethanbond 3y ago
    At the dialogue level, I don’t think it’s practical to require people to give a full accounting of every related topic while speaking on a subject. There are infinite facts that are related to any one fact. Anyone can win any argument by including one more related fact and saying “well without stating your opinion on this I can discard your opinion on that.” We’ll all get nowhere. At the actual substance level, I also don’t think it’s fair or honest to take “silence” on a topic as evidence of support for it. In this particular case, I would bet fewer than 0.00001% of the people you’re arguing with are actually okay with (or supportive of) keeping hostages in Hamas’ custody or raping people. You’re battling a cartoon villain that you drew yourself.
    - bsaul 3y ago
      I think you grant protesters far too much common sense. What i'm saying isn't theoretical : as a recent example, here in paris a feminist movement protesting in support of palestinians women under bombing explicitly rejected from the march women that came to protest against the raping of israelis women ( and hostages ). Another recent example in Paris as well is the number of people removing "free the hostages" posters in the streets. And i won't even mention twitter.. This isn't something i've imagined, it's the sad reality. Those people are actively hostile to israelis even if that means supporting the most terrible atrocities commited by hamas.
      - ethanbond 3y ago
        Okay let’s take the protest example. There are a few possible explanations. 1. These protestors are actually pro raping Israelis 2. These protestors want a single, specific priority for the protest they organized And you believe not just that (1) is more likely, but that there’s so little possibility of (2) that you can just discard their entire perspective and accuse them of supporting rape of Israelis without even asking them? What if a group of men’s rights activists showed up advocating for the men under bombardment? Would the protestors have been wrong to exclude them? Maybe! Arguably! But would their excluding those men’s rights activists have indicated that they are positively “okay with” or perhaps even supportive of the men of Gaza dying? Absolutely not. That just seems blatantly dishonest. You don’t have the information you think you have. To be clear: there are people who have the beliefs you’re talking about. Obviously (October 7th speaks for itself). I just think those people are far fewer than you’re perceiving, and it is absolutely necessary for people to be engaging with good criticisms on complex issues like this one with so many lives at stake.
        bsaul 3y ago
        I believe 3/ those people are caught in their own self contradictions. They hate israel so much that they're actually sorting between women that got killed for the wrong reasons and women that got killed and raped because they somehow deserved it. Which is an absolutely horrible stance for a feminist organization. But that's where ideology leads to.
  - ImPostingOnHN 3y ago
    More to the point, Israel can't indiscriminately kill tens of thousands of civilians (including Israeli civilians) and torture civilian hostages while claiming they care about civilian lives, and still remain plausible to the world. Indeed, this hypocrisy is even more important to point out. Do you believe Israeli civilians bear collective guilt for Israel's ongoing war crimes, like you believe Palestinian civilians do?
    - bsaul 3y ago
      [flagged]
      - ImPostingOnHN 3y ago
        [flagged]
faeriechangling 3y ago
I think the sentiment is more that Israel fucked around and found out. It’s less that Hamas is good and more that Hamas was inevitable given Israel’s conduct. Back from that time, George W Bush literally said you are either with us or you are with the terrorists, so I feel people are pretty inoculated against allegations that they are supporting the terrorists if they don’t support the military force fighting terrorists. The “America deserved 9/11” crowd generally believes Bin Laden did 9/11 to provoke the Americans into attacking so as to create more terrorists and weaken America. This was supported by how the GWOT kept creating more terrorists after every new counter insurgency operation. This isn’t maybe, a totally unbiased way to see things, but the point is that the sentiment generally isn’t “Hamas is great because they kill the IDF”, the sentiment is more commonly “Screw that soldier, they’re a pawn that is playing into the hands of Hamas”.

by bsaul 3y ago

It's often accompanied by cheerful comments whenever an israeli soldier dies in gaza, killed by hamas. I think it's pretty clear those people are on the terrorists side on this war.

ethanbond 3y ago

Like most arguments in controversial topics, there are good versions of the argument and bad ones. It behooves everyone not to use the bad arguments to outright dismiss the good ones.

bsaul 3y ago
I agree with your point, however in this case i think it's important to pinpoint the hypocrisy of some people. You can't blame israel for oct 7, ask them to stop their ongoing operations in gaza, not call for the release of hostages, not say a word about the women raped by hamas and gaza civilians, AND pretend to "just want to spare the civilians population". Those people are in practice siding for the hamas, even if they deny it.
- ethanbond 3y ago
  At the dialogue level, I don’t think it’s practical to require people to give a full accounting of every related topic while speaking on a subject. There are infinite facts that are related to any one fact. Anyone can win any argument by including one more related fact and saying “well without stating your opinion on this I can discard your opinion on that.” We’ll all get nowhere. At the actual substance level, I also don’t think it’s fair or honest to take “silence” on a topic as evidence of support for it. In this particular case, I would bet fewer than 0.00001% of the people you’re arguing with are actually okay with (or supportive of) keeping hostages in Hamas’ custody or raping people. You’re battling a cartoon villain that you drew yourself.
  - bsaul 3y ago
    I think you grant protesters far too much common sense. What i'm saying isn't theoretical : as a recent example, here in paris a feminist movement protesting in support of palestinians women under bombing explicitly rejected from the march women that came to protest against the raping of israelis women ( and hostages ). Another recent example in Paris as well is the number of people removing "free the hostages" posters in the streets. And i won't even mention twitter.. This isn't something i've imagined, it's the sad reality. Those people are actively hostile to israelis even if that means supporting the most terrible atrocities commited by hamas.
    - ethanbond 3y ago
      Okay let’s take the protest example. There are a few possible explanations. 1. These protestors are actually pro raping Israelis 2. These protestors want a single, specific priority for the protest they organized And you believe not just that (1) is more likely, but that there’s so little possibility of (2) that you can just discard their entire perspective and accuse them of supporting rape of Israelis without even asking them? What if a group of men’s rights activists showed up advocating for the men under bombardment? Would the protestors have been wrong to exclude them? Maybe! Arguably! But would their excluding those men’s rights activists have indicated that they are positively “okay with” or perhaps even supportive of the men of Gaza dying? Absolutely not. That just seems blatantly dishonest. You don’t have the information you think you have. To be clear: there are people who have the beliefs you’re talking about. Obviously (October 7th speaks for itself). I just think those people are far fewer than you’re perceiving, and it is absolutely necessary for people to be engaging with good criticisms on complex issues like this one with so many lives at stake.
      - bsaul 3y ago
        I believe 3/ those people are caught in their own self contradictions. They hate israel so much that they're actually sorting between women that got killed for the wrong reasons and women that got killed and raped because they somehow deserved it. Which is an absolutely horrible stance for a feminist organization. But that's where ideology leads to.
- ImPostingOnHN 3y ago
  More to the point, Israel can't indiscriminately kill tens of thousands of civilians (including Israeli civilians) and torture civilian hostages while claiming they care about civilian lives, and still remain plausible to the world. Indeed, this hypocrisy is even more important to point out. Do you believe Israeli civilians bear collective guilt for Israel's ongoing war crimes, like you believe Palestinian civilians do?
  - bsaul 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - ImPostingOnHN 3y ago
      [flagged]

faeriechangling 3y ago

I think the sentiment is more that Israel fucked around and found out. It’s less that Hamas is good and more that Hamas was inevitable given Israel’s conduct. Back from that time, George W Bush literally said you are either with us or you are with the terrorists, so I feel people are pretty inoculated against allegations that they are supporting the terrorists if they don’t support the military force fighting terrorists. The “America deserved 9/11” crowd generally believes Bin Laden did 9/11 to provoke the Americans into attacking so as to create more terrorists and weaken America. This was supported by how the GWOT kept creating more terrorists after every new counter insurgency operation. This isn’t maybe, a totally unbiased way to see things, but the point is that the sentiment generally isn’t “Hamas is great because they kill the IDF”, the sentiment is more commonly “Screw that soldier, they’re a pawn that is playing into the hands of Hamas”.