3 ms·

I’m not going to claim a side in this, but I do have a question to pose. When you have two ideologies which are so diametrically opposed to each other that they

I’m not going to claim a side in this, but I do have a question to pose. When you have two ideologies which are so diametrically opposed to each other that they cannot coexist in the same space at the same time, what is the alternative outcome? One must destroy the other for peace to exist - this is the nature of war. To think that there is some world where everyone comes away from this with a handshake and an agreement is just naive. I’ll ask again: What is the alternative?

rexpop 1y ago
> two ideologies which are so diametrically opposed to each other that they cannot coexist Ideologies aren't platonic solids. They must be constantly refurbished in the minds of the avowed. Every moment of every day informs them—reinforces or depletes them. Changes their character. It's guaranteed that these minds will, eventually, change. Who survives to bare this change remains to be seen. Keep in mind, also, that Israel vs. Gaza is in some ways just a proxy war between US/Europe and Iran/Russia who support Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis. Ideological differences, frankly, are only a surface patina on the same old economic games. Lastly, consider a third framing: that Israel/Gaza is only the hottest segment of a conflict that encircles the globe: the border between imperial powers and colonized peoples, like US/Mexico etc. Borders, passports, and citizenship are a worldwide system of privileges and protections that Westphalian Nationstates collude to maintain. I'm not sure what ideologies you refer to. Islam and Judaism? Not really relevant to the discussion, I don't think.
- exodust 1y ago
  > "surface patina" Tell that to the victims of gleeful brutality under the guidance of fundamentalist ideology, like that engrained in Islamist governance and extremist militant groups. Your post reads like the come-down from intellectual pill-popping. Your attempt to dilute a serious problem in the world to "patinas" and reduce the problem to imperial vs colonized peoples, sounds like a manifesto from the lawns of a university activist encampment. Consider the framing, you ask. I considered it and reject it, The subjugation of "infidels" under expansionist oppressive religious groups with the intent to bring "peace" is an imperialism all of its own, but much worse. Peace... at the cost of freedom, autonomy, expression, equality.
  - rexpop 1y ago
    > Consider the framing, you ask. I considered it and reject it Thank you for taking the time. I won't argue with your point that Islamist nations are, on the whole, far more brutal than Israel has yet had a chance to be. There is no Judaic Daesh, for example, and none of the well-documented atrocities of the IDF come close. > sounds like a manifesto from the lawns of a university activist encampment I'm a technology professional without a university degree, only a passion for my craft and a pride in my handiwork. I happen to be a Torah scholar, as well, and it's through that lens I condemn Israel's complicity in the maintainance of the international caste system. On the other hand, what choice do they have? To make an enemy of capital, with no allies? Israel is a bit of a kapo. But at least it's not a Saud.
    - runarberg 1y ago
      > There is no Judaic Daesh, for example, and none of the well-documented atrocities of the IDF come close. Ideologically there is an argument to be had that the most extreme versions of Zionism (e.g. Kahanism) is just as bad as the fundamentalist (and racist) ideology of ISIS. Behaviorally the IDF is far worse then ISIS ever had a chance to be. The total number of atrocities, the impunity of their actions, the systematic nature of them, the backing of the entire state apparatus behind those atrocities, the number of victims, and the concentrated location of those victims makes the IDF far far worse. Of course it is very silly to compare atrocities, one should try not to do that, as one set of victims deserve justice just as equally as any other set of victims.
  - keutoi 1y ago
    >The subjugation of "infidels" under expansionist oppressive religious groups with the intent to bring "peace" is an imperialism all of its own, but much worse. Peace... at the cost of freedom, autonomy, expression, equality. Are you arguing for or against Israel?
    - rexpop 1y ago
      Very clever! But Islamist countries are far more brutal than Israel—and far more Muslim than Israel is Jewish.
exodust 1y ago
[flagged]
- keutoi 1y ago
  If it the right thing to do, why isn't Israel embracing and announcing the said genocide? Is the only wrong thing Hitler did is to not make a few false flag attacks on the Germans before announcing the 'Final solution'?
- chimineycricket 1y ago
  >Israel wouldn't attack Gaza if the terrorists who run that place didn't have a constitutional ambition to destroy Israel. Really? The > 750,000 Palestinians pushed out of their homes in 1948, when "Israelis" showed up for the first time, backed up by guns, were Hamas? News to me.
  - mhb 1y ago
    History doesn't begin in 1948.
    - deleted 1y ago
      [deleted]
edanm 1y ago
I disagree that there are two driving ideologies here that are diametrically opposed. Hamas's ideology is certainly opposed to Israel existing, but they are not the only Palestinians, and other ideologies can take hold and be supported by the populace (I hope). The Palestinian Authority has been working together with Israel since its founding, after all, and with all the problems it has, it still represents a model that could work, in theory, and they pursue largely diplomatic ways to gain recognition.
jopsen 1y ago
> One must destroy the other for peace to exist - this is the nature of war. Wars generally don't end with genocide. Conquered people don't cease to exist. Worst case they are subjugated, but these days they just assimilated/absorbed. The alternative is perpetual war, or some sort of compromise. If Hamas surrendered unconditionally tomorrow, what would Israel do?
- mk89 1y ago
  > Wars generally don't end with genocide. I agree with you that this is not actually the nature of War. However, it's also true that it depends on the type of war being fought. It's not uncommon to see in history that when a country/village/group of people can't/doesn't want to be subjugated or it's strategically difficult to "keep" them, it gets wiped off. In the Ancient Rome entire Celtic tribes wiped off, while during Charlemagne's empire it was the Saxons, and more recently during the the Ottoman Empire it was the Greeks, Armenians, and today the Curds. Unfortunately such things do happen and sadly enough will always happen. Not justifying in any way, I am just saying that we're so used to believe that this is something new, when it actually it isn't, and we also believe we are better than back then, while we actually aren't. :(

rexpop 1y ago

> two ideologies which are so diametrically opposed to each other that they cannot coexist Ideologies aren't platonic solids. They must be constantly refurbished in the minds of the avowed. Every moment of every day informs them—reinforces or depletes them. Changes their character. It's guaranteed that these minds will, eventually, change. Who survives to bare this change remains to be seen. Keep in mind, also, that Israel vs. Gaza is in some ways just a proxy war between US/Europe and Iran/Russia who support Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis. Ideological differences, frankly, are only a surface patina on the same old economic games. Lastly, consider a third framing: that Israel/Gaza is only the hottest segment of a conflict that encircles the globe: the border between imperial powers and colonized peoples, like US/Mexico etc. Borders, passports, and citizenship are a worldwide system of privileges and protections that Westphalian Nationstates collude to maintain. I'm not sure what ideologies you refer to. Islam and Judaism? Not really relevant to the discussion, I don't think.

exodust 1y ago
> "surface patina" Tell that to the victims of gleeful brutality under the guidance of fundamentalist ideology, like that engrained in Islamist governance and extremist militant groups. Your post reads like the come-down from intellectual pill-popping. Your attempt to dilute a serious problem in the world to "patinas" and reduce the problem to imperial vs colonized peoples, sounds like a manifesto from the lawns of a university activist encampment. Consider the framing, you ask. I considered it and reject it, The subjugation of "infidels" under expansionist oppressive religious groups with the intent to bring "peace" is an imperialism all of its own, but much worse. Peace... at the cost of freedom, autonomy, expression, equality.
- rexpop 1y ago
  > Consider the framing, you ask. I considered it and reject it Thank you for taking the time. I won't argue with your point that Islamist nations are, on the whole, far more brutal than Israel has yet had a chance to be. There is no Judaic Daesh, for example, and none of the well-documented atrocities of the IDF come close. > sounds like a manifesto from the lawns of a university activist encampment I'm a technology professional without a university degree, only a passion for my craft and a pride in my handiwork. I happen to be a Torah scholar, as well, and it's through that lens I condemn Israel's complicity in the maintainance of the international caste system. On the other hand, what choice do they have? To make an enemy of capital, with no allies? Israel is a bit of a kapo. But at least it's not a Saud.
  - runarberg 1y ago
    > There is no Judaic Daesh, for example, and none of the well-documented atrocities of the IDF come close. Ideologically there is an argument to be had that the most extreme versions of Zionism (e.g. Kahanism) is just as bad as the fundamentalist (and racist) ideology of ISIS. Behaviorally the IDF is far worse then ISIS ever had a chance to be. The total number of atrocities, the impunity of their actions, the systematic nature of them, the backing of the entire state apparatus behind those atrocities, the number of victims, and the concentrated location of those victims makes the IDF far far worse. Of course it is very silly to compare atrocities, one should try not to do that, as one set of victims deserve justice just as equally as any other set of victims.
- keutoi 1y ago
  >The subjugation of "infidels" under expansionist oppressive religious groups with the intent to bring "peace" is an imperialism all of its own, but much worse. Peace... at the cost of freedom, autonomy, expression, equality. Are you arguing for or against Israel?
  - rexpop 1y ago
    Very clever! But Islamist countries are far more brutal than Israel—and far more Muslim than Israel is Jewish.

exodust 1y ago

[flagged]

keutoi 1y ago
If it the right thing to do, why isn't Israel embracing and announcing the said genocide? Is the only wrong thing Hitler did is to not make a few false flag attacks on the Germans before announcing the 'Final solution'?
chimineycricket 1y ago
>Israel wouldn't attack Gaza if the terrorists who run that place didn't have a constitutional ambition to destroy Israel. Really? The > 750,000 Palestinians pushed out of their homes in 1948, when "Israelis" showed up for the first time, backed up by guns, were Hamas? News to me.
- mhb 1y ago
  History doesn't begin in 1948.
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]

edanm 1y ago

I disagree that there are two driving ideologies here that are diametrically opposed. Hamas's ideology is certainly opposed to Israel existing, but they are not the only Palestinians, and other ideologies can take hold and be supported by the populace (I hope). The Palestinian Authority has been working together with Israel since its founding, after all, and with all the problems it has, it still represents a model that could work, in theory, and they pursue largely diplomatic ways to gain recognition.

jopsen 1y ago

> One must destroy the other for peace to exist - this is the nature of war. Wars generally don't end with genocide. Conquered people don't cease to exist. Worst case they are subjugated, but these days they just assimilated/absorbed. The alternative is perpetual war, or some sort of compromise. If Hamas surrendered unconditionally tomorrow, what would Israel do?

mk89 1y ago
> Wars generally don't end with genocide. I agree with you that this is not actually the nature of War. However, it's also true that it depends on the type of war being fought. It's not uncommon to see in history that when a country/village/group of people can't/doesn't want to be subjugated or it's strategically difficult to "keep" them, it gets wiped off. In the Ancient Rome entire Celtic tribes wiped off, while during Charlemagne's empire it was the Saxons, and more recently during the the Ottoman Empire it was the Greeks, Armenians, and today the Curds. Unfortunately such things do happen and sadly enough will always happen. Not justifying in any way, I am just saying that we're so used to believe that this is something new, when it actually it isn't, and we also believe we are better than back then, while we actually aren't. :(