4 ms·

Some do, but reliable percentage data on this topic seems to be hard to come by. And many Israelis (and the current extremist regime) want the exact reverse of

Some do, but reliable percentage data on this topic seems to be hard to come by. And many Israelis (and the current extremist regime) want the exact reverse of course. And make no apologies for this fact.

tptacek 2y ago
That's true, regarding the fringe neo-Kahanist "Greater Israel" coalition Netanyahu assembled. But as you know, it's also true of Hamas; that's the "some" you're referring to. Issue polling is tricky, but it's likely that a majority of Israelis oppose the positions of Netayahu's coalition. (It's probably true that a majority of Gazans at this point oppose the Hamas program; it's very difficult to know, because both Israel and Hamas have done their best to make sure that the opinions of ordinary Gazans are suppressed).
- racional 2y ago
  Not to quibble, but because you like to nerd out on these things: Maximalist land claims from the Israeli side go back much further than the Kahanist movement - specifically to the Revisionist Zionism movement founded circa 1925. Which arguably became the de-facto position of Israel after the 1967 war up to the current day (basically: "We weren't really planning to grab all this territory, but being as things somehow ended up that way we might as well keep it, because after all it's ours anyway.") And in any case was explicitly the ideology of the Herut Party, which eventually morphed into Likud. Hamas's own position in regard to inverse claims is less clear, given the (somewhat) conflicting language in the key passage everyone cites (Paragraph 20) from the 2017 Charter. By my own reading, that paragraph is actually quite straightforward, and tilts decisively towards the "formula of national consensus" re: 1967 borders. Then again, that was the Hamas of 7 years ago. Given their penchant for piling up civilian corpses the minute their fighters assemble on enemy territory in sufficient numbers to do so; and that "explanations" for their actions have been terse and sparse since then -- I'm not sure what they currently believe.
  - tptacek 2y ago
    Hamas is an overtly genocidal organization; their charter says it in plain language, and their deliberate massacre of civilians on October 7 ratifies it. There's no argument to have here. Say that Gazans aren't Hamas, and cannot be collectively punished for the actions of a psychotic millenarian military cult, and I'll agree wholeheartedly with you.
    - racional 2y ago
      Hamas is an overtly genocidal organization; their charter says it in plain language The 2017 Charter absolutely does not, and if you think it does you'll have to cite specific paragraphs to back up this view. In fact it specifically rejects antisemitism and goes on further to say: Hamas rejects the persecution of any human being or the undermining of his or her rights on nationalist, religious or sectarian grounds.
      - tptacek 2y ago
        They just launched a genocidal attack on Israeli women, children, and grandparents. I don't have to parse the distinctions between their overtly genocidal charter, which they didn't disavow, and their new document. They re-avowed the original charter on October 7. Only on Twitter is this a live debate. You know what else happened with Hamas in 2017? A huge internal conflict and series of purges that left Yehya Sinwar, who is a literal Bond villain, in charge of the organization. It's wild to see anybody try to rehabilitate Hamas with "2017". (We're still just nerding out on this, I assume).
        racional 2y ago
        [dead]
  - weatherlite 2y ago
    Zionists accepted the 1947 partition plan (and as far as I know Peel's 1937 plan to a much smaller territory). The Palestinian leadership rejected both outright. In addition Zionists proposed the 2 state solution twice (Camp David 2001, Olmert's plan in 2008) to be rejected twice. To this day there hasn't been a clear consent by a Palestinian leader to let go of the Palestinian right of return, nor has there been a prominent Palestinian leader that accepted any kind of border resolution before the Palestinian Nakba. I've never seen it, would be glad to be shown otherwise. So it's pretty much a long trend of Palestinian rejectionism for any kind of solution. You are cherry picking the facts that agree with your world view and ignoring the rest.

tptacek 2y ago

That's true, regarding the fringe neo-Kahanist "Greater Israel" coalition Netanyahu assembled. But as you know, it's also true of Hamas; that's the "some" you're referring to. Issue polling is tricky, but it's likely that a majority of Israelis oppose the positions of Netayahu's coalition. (It's probably true that a majority of Gazans at this point oppose the Hamas program; it's very difficult to know, because both Israel and Hamas have done their best to make sure that the opinions of ordinary Gazans are suppressed).

racional 2y ago
Not to quibble, but because you like to nerd out on these things: Maximalist land claims from the Israeli side go back much further than the Kahanist movement - specifically to the Revisionist Zionism movement founded circa 1925. Which arguably became the de-facto position of Israel after the 1967 war up to the current day (basically: "We weren't really planning to grab all this territory, but being as things somehow ended up that way we might as well keep it, because after all it's ours anyway.") And in any case was explicitly the ideology of the Herut Party, which eventually morphed into Likud. Hamas's own position in regard to inverse claims is less clear, given the (somewhat) conflicting language in the key passage everyone cites (Paragraph 20) from the 2017 Charter. By my own reading, that paragraph is actually quite straightforward, and tilts decisively towards the "formula of national consensus" re: 1967 borders. Then again, that was the Hamas of 7 years ago. Given their penchant for piling up civilian corpses the minute their fighters assemble on enemy territory in sufficient numbers to do so; and that "explanations" for their actions have been terse and sparse since then -- I'm not sure what they currently believe.
- tptacek 2y ago
  Hamas is an overtly genocidal organization; their charter says it in plain language, and their deliberate massacre of civilians on October 7 ratifies it. There's no argument to have here. Say that Gazans aren't Hamas, and cannot be collectively punished for the actions of a psychotic millenarian military cult, and I'll agree wholeheartedly with you.
  - racional 2y ago
    Hamas is an overtly genocidal organization; their charter says it in plain language The 2017 Charter absolutely does not, and if you think it does you'll have to cite specific paragraphs to back up this view. In fact it specifically rejects antisemitism and goes on further to say: Hamas rejects the persecution of any human being or the undermining of his or her rights on nationalist, religious or sectarian grounds.
    - tptacek 2y ago
      They just launched a genocidal attack on Israeli women, children, and grandparents. I don't have to parse the distinctions between their overtly genocidal charter, which they didn't disavow, and their new document. They re-avowed the original charter on October 7. Only on Twitter is this a live debate. You know what else happened with Hamas in 2017? A huge internal conflict and series of purges that left Yehya Sinwar, who is a literal Bond villain, in charge of the organization. It's wild to see anybody try to rehabilitate Hamas with "2017". (We're still just nerding out on this, I assume).
      - racional 2y ago
        [dead]
- weatherlite 2y ago
  Zionists accepted the 1947 partition plan (and as far as I know Peel's 1937 plan to a much smaller territory). The Palestinian leadership rejected both outright. In addition Zionists proposed the 2 state solution twice (Camp David 2001, Olmert's plan in 2008) to be rejected twice. To this day there hasn't been a clear consent by a Palestinian leader to let go of the Palestinian right of return, nor has there been a prominent Palestinian leader that accepted any kind of border resolution before the Palestinian Nakba. I've never seen it, would be glad to be shown otherwise. So it's pretty much a long trend of Palestinian rejectionism for any kind of solution. You are cherry picking the facts that agree with your world view and ignoring the rest.