3 ms·
Hatred for your oppresors is rational. The desire to continue attacks that intentionally maximise civilian casualties as part of a war you are doomed to lose i
by TOMDM 3y ago
Hatred for your oppresors is rational.
The desire to continue attacks that intentionally maximise civilian casualties as part of a war you are doomed to lose is not.
If Palestine could end its attacks on Israel, almost all international support for Israel would dry up within 6 months.
The symmetric attacks that justify the next are doomed to continue forever until both sides can hold back.
Hamas will never be that partner in peace for Israel.
Egypt and Jordan both managed to fight with Israel and come to a lasting peace, and I feel like insisting that Palestinians are incapable of the same robs them of any agency.
I of course give Israel the same accountability. The settlements are unjustifiable. The response to Oct 7 needs a huge amount of investigation in order ensure all has been done to minimise civilian casualties.
The same way Palestine needs to stop firing rockets for a lasting peace to be possible, Israel will likely need to take a couple terrorist attacks on the chin once a feasible partner for peace in Palestine has been found.
- jedimind 3y ago>If Palestine could end its attacks on Israel, almost all international support for Israel would dry up within 6 months. That's a blatant lie and you know it. Since Israel can murder 14K+ children and still receive support as we are witnessing, your proposed strategy most certainly will not yield the claimed results. >Hamas will never be that partner in peace for Israel. So why did Israel finance and support Hamas? That's because Israel had never any real interest in peace, it's a settler colonial project which wants all of the land with ideally no Palestinians in it, for which there is more than enough evidence. >Egypt and Jordan both managed to fight with Israel and come to a lasting peace, and I feel like insisting that Palestinians are incapable of the same robs them of any agency. The framing of this is just outright laughable. Israel holds all of the power and thus bears the prime responsibility. >I of course give Israel the same accountability. The settlements are unjustifiable. The response to Oct 7 needs a huge amount of investigation in order ensure all has been done to minimise civilian casualties. I'm not even going to entertain this utter dishonesty for a second. They've murdered 14K+ children, you can keep roleplaying as hard as you want but anyone who has seen a fraction of the evidence knows that there is plenty of genocidal intent documented by south africa's ICJ documents and they acted upon that. >The same way Palestine needs to stop firing rockets for a lasting peace to be possible, Israel will likely need to take a couple terrorist attacks on the chin once a feasible partner for peace in Palestine has been found. You are confusing cause & effect, but you already know that. The rockets are being fired because Israel has brutally oppressed, murdered and ethnically cleansed Palestinians for 75+ years with near impunity. Give me a break with your soft zionist BS manipulation.
- int_19h 3y agoBut what effect does firing rockets - or, for that matter, massacring a thousand civilians in their homes - actually has on the outcome of this conflict? It's one thing to justify something as military necessity, but it's hard to see any in Hamas' actions. It certainly doesn't get them any closer to getting what they want. But it does cost them support that they would otherwise have. Furthermore, realistically, the best that Palestinians can hope for is some form of two-state solutions - "from the river to the sea" is not going to happen. But it's that much harder to argue for a Palestinian state if Hamas are the ones running it, given the kind of governance they have demonstrated internally, and the kind of brutality we've seen on Oct 7.
- jedimind 3y ago>But what effect does firing rockets - or, for that matter, massacring a thousand civilians in their homes - actually has on the outcome of this conflict? Why do you feel the need to lie about what happened if you're convinced about what you are saying? They did certainly not massacre a thousand civilians in "their homes"(stolen land & homes of Palestinians living next to their concentration camps). IDF soliders are not civilians, reservists who are armed and ready to fight are not civilians, settlers who engage in belligerent occupation are not civilians. If you subtract all of these legitimate military targets including those who were killed by the IDF itself, you have the clear evidence that a bunch of resistance fighters have an infinitely better ratio than the Israel which is on trial for having committed genocide. >It's one thing to justify something as military necessity, but it's hard to see any in Hamas' actions. You say that unironically about khamas, but don't apply the same criticism of Israel, who engaged in barbarism and the kind of evil that makes hamas look like angels in comparison. What "military necessity" was there for israel to murder 14k children and starve them to death? > It certainly doesn't get them any closer to getting what they want. The world has now woken up to Israel's evil and most people recognize it for what it is, a genocidal apartheid ethno-state hellbent on destroying the natives by any means. Zionists have lost control of the narrative, so I'd say that does indeed get the resistance somewhat closer to getting what they want. >Furthermore, realistically, the best that Palestinians can hope for is some form of two-state solutions - "from the river to the sea" is not going to happen. Speculative, dismissed. Israel is a paper tiger, so I'd say there is a very realistic chance of "from the river to the sea" happening. >But it's that much harder to argue for a Palestinian state if Hamas are the ones running it, given the kind of governance they have demonstrated internally, and the kind of brutality we've seen on Oct 7. So let me get this straight: After a single day of inflicting on the brutal settler colonialists a fraction of the pain which Israel has been inflicting on Palestinians for 75+ years, you claim "it's hard to argue for a Palestinians state" but you see no problem in granting that to Israel!? You are NOT a serious person.
- lupusreal 3y ago> If Palestine could end its attacks on Israel, almost all international support for Israel would dry up within 6 months. Public opinion polling shows that the lionshare of support for Israel in America, where it matters most, comes from Evangelical Christians. They support Israel because they believe it is necessary to reincarnate their Messiah. Their support is unconditional, not rational, so what you propose is nonsense.
- TOMDM 3y agoReligious justifications for support of Israel can only continue for as long as geopolitical justifications align with them. As we've seen in Ukraine, thankfully conservative thought currently does not dominate the US's foreign policy.
- lupusreal 3y agoIt will continue until the boomers (and to a considerably lesser extent, gen-x) die. Then Israel will have lost their support base in America and meaningful change might be possible. Until then, it is important to keep the pressure on to make sure younger generations don't fall down this same radical path.