5 ms·

Is there anyone else who doesn't support either side of this conflict? They've been fighting each other for over 100 years. They both want the same piece of lan

Is there anyone else who doesn't support either side of this conflict? They've been fighting each other for over 100 years. They both want the same piece of land. It's on them to figure it out. People around the world don't need to 'pick a side'. We can protest for both sides to sort their shit out, and not drag the rest of us into it.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
qarl 2y ago
Yeah, I'm totally with you. At this point it's like the Hatfields and the McCoys. I don't care what was the last thing the other guy did - he did it to get back at you for the second to last thing you did. On the other hand, killing children is always wrong. Fucking stop it.
- kelthuzad 2y ago
  It's not a "cycle of violence" - "both sides" scenario for anyone who has actually put in the effort to study the history in detail. Since you brought up the "cycle of violence" argument, I remember Shaun making an excellent video[1] on the topic and also addressing that specific talking point. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xottY-7m3k&t=10s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xottY-7m3k&t=10s
  - qarl 2y ago
    I'm afraid we're just going to have to agree to disagree.
    - kelthuzad 2y ago
      You can disagree all you want, some people even disagree on if the holocaust happened but no one takes them seriously. The history of Zionism and its goal to colonize Palestine (long before the holocaust even happened) and their ruthless methods of colonization are thoroughly documented[0][1]. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irgun https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irgun [1] The History of "Socialist" Zionism | Leftist Zionists did the Nakba & founded Israel https://youtu.be/ehp9PZo4UR0 https://youtu.be/ehp9PZo4UR0
      - qarl 2y ago
        > You can disagree all you want. Thanks!
- underdeserver 2y ago
  A man comes into your house. His 2-year old is in a baby carrier on his chest. He has a gun and is firing at you. Your wife and 5 year old son are behind you on the couch, and you have a gun too. Do you shoot back? Did you just hesitate? A bullet just scraped your wife on the side of the leg. Hesitated again? Son just got a bullet in his arm. You fire three bullets. The baby is dead and so is the intruder. Are you in the wrong here? --- I'm not saying this is the same as what's happening in Israel and Gaza. But "always wrong", like many views on this conflict, is sorely lacking in nuance. With thousands of Israelis and tens of thousands of Palestinians killed, ignoring nuance is disrespectful to their memories and will not lead to realistic progress.
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    > baby is dead and so is the intruder....Are you in the wrong here? Yes, what was done is wrong. It might be justified, even forgivable. But it's still wrong.
    - underdeserver 2y ago
      On that we agree. It is wrong. But you're either wrong or dead.
      - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
        > It is wrong. But you're either wrong or dead. In your example, yes. Reality is more complicated; that usually gives reasonable people room to disagree.
  - qarl 2y ago
    HEH. I'm afraid we're just going to have to agree to disagree. Killing children is always wrong.
TillE 2y ago
I'd say quite a lot of people are not particularly invested in any "side" but are repulsed by obvious war crimes. What makes this situation uniquely toxic is how America and most of its allies vehemently insist on total impunity for the crimes of one side.
- baumy 2y ago
  I think what really makes the situation uniquely toxic is that after reading your comment, I genuinely have no idea which side you're referring to that you think is getting total impunity. Note: You don't need to reply and specify which. Apparently you've picked a side, as have I. No point debating that here I think. But each side would claim that the other is committing war crimes and inhuman acts and not being held to account.
- knallfrosch 2y ago
  I think it's less the impunity and more the active supporting. The US is building a floating pier and air-dropping aid instead of simply pressuring Israel's government to let trucks through.
  - patrickmay 2y ago
    Israel lets more aid through now than before the October 7th atrocities. That aid is intercepted by Hamas and does not reach the intended recipients.
    - lightbritefight 2y ago
      > Israel lets more aid through now than before the October 7th atrocities. That aid is intercepted by Hamas and does not reach the intended recipients. No, they do not. There are still less full aid trucks even after the murder of the World kitchen volunteers massively increased international pressure on Israel to let aid in. Northern Gaza is now in full blown famine as defined by top US officials that define famine, with southern Gaza on the brink of famine, as all farming infastructure inside gaza gas has now been destroyed. They need drastically more full trucks than the the 500/day that was the norm before the war started, not drastically fewer. https://www.timesofisrael.com/un-aid-coordinator-says-israel-still-restricting-relief-despite-tepid-improvement/ https://www.timesofisrael.com/un-aid-coordinator-says-israel...
itscodingtime 2y ago
I agree with that line of thought too, but one side is sort of represented a terrorist organization who have the ability to murder 1200 people and kidnap others while the other is a western democracy that has the ability kill 30k people as collateral damage level. The collateral damage is so high but people like Sam Harris is saying Israel is engaging in a restrained manner compared to other powers previous retaliatory actions to terrorism.
TaylorAlexander 2y ago
It’s worthwhile learning the history of intervention in this conflict by the US and UK. It’s not just two groups fighting amongst themselves. It’s western governments putting their thumbs on the scales to massively help one side destroy the other. The Hundred Years War on Palestine by Rashid Khalidi is an excellent book on the subject with a good audiobook on audible. It’s remarkable how one sided this conflict has been with western support since the beginning.
mongol 2y ago
I think it is not the kind of conflict where you pick a side. There are legitimate and illegitimate claims on both sides. As a bystander I try to evaluate specific actions, not choose a favorite.
- bottlepalm 2y ago
  I agree with you. What I'm saying is that all I see are people who have picked a side and no one in the middle saying, 'you are both wrong. figure it out'
Beefin 2y ago
AJ is far from bipartisan wrt to the conflict. they employ high journalistic standards for just about everything except israeli news, for that they become rapid dogs. example: https://www.jpost.com/israel-hamas-war/article-793560 https://www.jpost.com/israel-hamas-war/article-793560
haunter 2y ago
Honestly I couldn't care less. If anything I'd want to see less current politics on HN
arp242 2y ago
I think lots of people don't really have a "side", other than the side of just not wanting to see people suffer. I don't think that closing your eyes to that is neutral. Sometimes "do nothing" is an act of evil. In Northern Ireland and the Balkans international intervention almost certainly saved lives and helped bring about peace and relative stability. How long had they been fighting? There's probably some more examples. So I'd argue that it's not useless either. And Jewish and Israeli (and by extension, Palestinian) history is strongly connected to the history of 19th and 20th century Europe in all sorts of ways, and I don't think you can just cleanly separate that. Of course on a personal level I can imagine people reading the news, feeling powerless to change anything, and just not being interested. That's fine. But on a governmental/policy level, I do think we (the world) needs to stay engaged. Not just here, but also elsewhere with long-running issues. It's not our problem to solve, no, but we can facilitate and help.
- bottlepalm 2y ago
  That's kind of what I'm getting at. I don't support either side because both are wrong. Stopping the suffering means compromise and concessions on both sides. The best the world can do is make that clear and not get caught up protesting for one side or the other - again, both are wrong. Their current path will only lead to another 100 years of suffering.
  - arp242 2y ago
    > I don't support either side because both are wrong. That's only true if you view the "Israeli government" and "Hamas" as the only sides that exist. That is not the case; you don't need to choose either of them. Now, of course it's true that everyone has legitimate grievances here for all sorts of reasons, an it's also true that forever banging on about every little thing anyone has ever done wrong will lead to another 100 years of suffering. But that doesn't mean we (broad international community) can't and shouldn't try. Even if it fails, I think it was worth the effort to try.
    - bottlepalm 2y ago
Der_Einzige 2y ago
Ah yes, the zero state solution! Give the whole damn region back to turkey and recreate the Ottoman Empire!

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

qarl 2y ago

Yeah, I'm totally with you. At this point it's like the Hatfields and the McCoys. I don't care what was the last thing the other guy did - he did it to get back at you for the second to last thing you did. On the other hand, killing children is always wrong. Fucking stop it.

kelthuzad 2y ago
It's not a "cycle of violence" - "both sides" scenario for anyone who has actually put in the effort to study the history in detail. Since you brought up the "cycle of violence" argument, I remember Shaun making an excellent video[1] on the topic and also addressing that specific talking point. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xottY-7m3k&t=10s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xottY-7m3k&t=10s
- qarl 2y ago
  I'm afraid we're just going to have to agree to disagree.
  - kelthuzad 2y ago
    You can disagree all you want, some people even disagree on if the holocaust happened but no one takes them seriously. The history of Zionism and its goal to colonize Palestine (long before the holocaust even happened) and their ruthless methods of colonization are thoroughly documented[0][1]. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irgun https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irgun [1] The History of "Socialist" Zionism | Leftist Zionists did the Nakba & founded Israel https://youtu.be/ehp9PZo4UR0 https://youtu.be/ehp9PZo4UR0
    - qarl 2y ago
      > You can disagree all you want. Thanks!
underdeserver 2y ago
A man comes into your house. His 2-year old is in a baby carrier on his chest. He has a gun and is firing at you. Your wife and 5 year old son are behind you on the couch, and you have a gun too. Do you shoot back? Did you just hesitate? A bullet just scraped your wife on the side of the leg. Hesitated again? Son just got a bullet in his arm. You fire three bullets. The baby is dead and so is the intruder. Are you in the wrong here? --- I'm not saying this is the same as what's happening in Israel and Gaza. But "always wrong", like many views on this conflict, is sorely lacking in nuance. With thousands of Israelis and tens of thousands of Palestinians killed, ignoring nuance is disrespectful to their memories and will not lead to realistic progress.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > baby is dead and so is the intruder....Are you in the wrong here? Yes, what was done is wrong. It might be justified, even forgivable. But it's still wrong.
  - underdeserver 2y ago
    On that we agree. It is wrong. But you're either wrong or dead.
    - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
      > It is wrong. But you're either wrong or dead. In your example, yes. Reality is more complicated; that usually gives reasonable people room to disagree.
- qarl 2y ago
  HEH. I'm afraid we're just going to have to agree to disagree. Killing children is always wrong.

TillE 2y ago

I'd say quite a lot of people are not particularly invested in any "side" but are repulsed by obvious war crimes. What makes this situation uniquely toxic is how America and most of its allies vehemently insist on total impunity for the crimes of one side.

baumy 2y ago
I think what really makes the situation uniquely toxic is that after reading your comment, I genuinely have no idea which side you're referring to that you think is getting total impunity. Note: You don't need to reply and specify which. Apparently you've picked a side, as have I. No point debating that here I think. But each side would claim that the other is committing war crimes and inhuman acts and not being held to account.
knallfrosch 2y ago
I think it's less the impunity and more the active supporting. The US is building a floating pier and air-dropping aid instead of simply pressuring Israel's government to let trucks through.
- patrickmay 2y ago
  Israel lets more aid through now than before the October 7th atrocities. That aid is intercepted by Hamas and does not reach the intended recipients.
  - lightbritefight 2y ago
    > Israel lets more aid through now than before the October 7th atrocities. That aid is intercepted by Hamas and does not reach the intended recipients. No, they do not. There are still less full aid trucks even after the murder of the World kitchen volunteers massively increased international pressure on Israel to let aid in. Northern Gaza is now in full blown famine as defined by top US officials that define famine, with southern Gaza on the brink of famine, as all farming infastructure inside gaza gas has now been destroyed. They need drastically more full trucks than the the 500/day that was the norm before the war started, not drastically fewer. https://www.timesofisrael.com/un-aid-coordinator-says-israel-still-restricting-relief-despite-tepid-improvement/ https://www.timesofisrael.com/un-aid-coordinator-says-israel...

itscodingtime 2y ago

I agree with that line of thought too, but one side is sort of represented a terrorist organization who have the ability to murder 1200 people and kidnap others while the other is a western democracy that has the ability kill 30k people as collateral damage level. The collateral damage is so high but people like Sam Harris is saying Israel is engaging in a restrained manner compared to other powers previous retaliatory actions to terrorism.

TaylorAlexander 2y ago

It’s worthwhile learning the history of intervention in this conflict by the US and UK. It’s not just two groups fighting amongst themselves. It’s western governments putting their thumbs on the scales to massively help one side destroy the other. The Hundred Years War on Palestine by Rashid Khalidi is an excellent book on the subject with a good audiobook on audible. It’s remarkable how one sided this conflict has been with western support since the beginning.

mongol 2y ago

I think it is not the kind of conflict where you pick a side. There are legitimate and illegitimate claims on both sides. As a bystander I try to evaluate specific actions, not choose a favorite.

bottlepalm 2y ago
I agree with you. What I'm saying is that all I see are people who have picked a side and no one in the middle saying, 'you are both wrong. figure it out'

Beefin 2y ago

AJ is far from bipartisan wrt to the conflict. they employ high journalistic standards for just about everything except israeli news, for that they become rapid dogs. example: https://www.jpost.com/israel-hamas-war/article-793560 https://www.jpost.com/israel-hamas-war/article-793560

haunter 2y ago

Honestly I couldn't care less. If anything I'd want to see less current politics on HN

arp242 2y ago

I think lots of people don't really have a "side", other than the side of just not wanting to see people suffer. I don't think that closing your eyes to that is neutral. Sometimes "do nothing" is an act of evil. In Northern Ireland and the Balkans international intervention almost certainly saved lives and helped bring about peace and relative stability. How long had they been fighting? There's probably some more examples. So I'd argue that it's not useless either. And Jewish and Israeli (and by extension, Palestinian) history is strongly connected to the history of 19th and 20th century Europe in all sorts of ways, and I don't think you can just cleanly separate that. Of course on a personal level I can imagine people reading the news, feeling powerless to change anything, and just not being interested. That's fine. But on a governmental/policy level, I do think we (the world) needs to stay engaged. Not just here, but also elsewhere with long-running issues. It's not our problem to solve, no, but we can facilitate and help.

bottlepalm 2y ago
That's kind of what I'm getting at. I don't support either side because both are wrong. Stopping the suffering means compromise and concessions on both sides. The best the world can do is make that clear and not get caught up protesting for one side or the other - again, both are wrong. Their current path will only lead to another 100 years of suffering.
- arp242 2y ago
  > I don't support either side because both are wrong. That's only true if you view the "Israeli government" and "Hamas" as the only sides that exist. That is not the case; you don't need to choose either of them. Now, of course it's true that everyone has legitimate grievances here for all sorts of reasons, an it's also true that forever banging on about every little thing anyone has ever done wrong will lead to another 100 years of suffering. But that doesn't mean we (broad international community) can't and shouldn't try. Even if it fails, I think it was worth the effort to try.
  - bottlepalm 2y ago

Der_Einzige 2y ago

Ah yes, the zero state solution! Give the whole damn region back to turkey and recreate the Ottoman Empire!