4 ms·

Since Israel is not going to do either, and the US is not going to try and make them, I think we should at least save the lives we can. Imagine asking Germany i

Since Israel is not going to do either, and the US is not going to try and make them, I think we should at least save the lives we can. Imagine asking Germany in the 40s to take better care of Jewish children to turn away refugees, right?

nobodyandproud 1y ago
[flagged]
- Levitz 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - nobodyandproud 1y ago
    Steelman—you know, as the forum rules insist—and ask yourself if there are other reasons. My rationale: First we bring the children; then we appeal to humanitarian grounds and allow then to stay; then we lobby to allow in their parents or relatives. Hamas+Israel are 100% at fault here; and Palestians are not innocent of this. The last time (twenty years ago) when they last had elections, they allowed and enabled this. I’m sorry it’s a shitty situation, but that’s a slippery slope few countries have allowed or want.
    - Levitz 1y ago
      >Palestians are not innocent of this. The last time (twenty years ago) when they last had elections, they allowed and enabled this. Three fourths of the current population couldn't have voted at all. The elections had a participation about about three fourths and Hamas got less than half of the popular vote. Napkin math says for each 100 people in Palestine today, only 25 could have voted at all, of which 19 did, of which 9 voted for Hamas. This whole line of thinking is completely ridiculous.
      - nobodyandproud 1y ago
        Which doesn’t prove that Hamas wouldn’t be elected in again. In fact, Hamas surged in popularity after its October 17th attack: https://themedialine.org/top-stories/the-rise-of-hamas-popularity-in-the-west-bank/ https://themedialine.org/top-stories/the-rise-of-hamas-popul... https://apnews.com/article/israel-hamas-palestinians-opinion-poll-wartime-views-a0baade915619cd070b5393844bc4514 https://apnews.com/article/israel-hamas-palestinians-opinion... “57% of respondents in Gaza and 82% in the West Bank believe Hamas was correct in launching the October attack, the poll indicated. A large majority believed Hamas’ claims that it acted to defend a major Islamic shrine in Jerusalem against Jewish extremists and win the release of Palestinian prisoners. Only 10% said they believed Hamas has committed war crimes, with a large majority saying they did not see videos showing the militants committing atrocities.” Even articles like https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/polls-show-majority-gazans-were-against-breaking-ceasefire-hamas-and-hezbollah https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/polls-sh... which try to downplay the support—“In fact, Gazan frustration with Hamas governance is clear; most Gazans expressed a preference for PA administration and security officials over Hamas ”—have to caveat as follows: ‘But it is organizations like Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) and Lion’s Den that receive the most widespread popular support in Gaza. About three quarters of Gazans express support for both groups, including 40% who see the Lion’s Den in a “very positive” light, an attitude shared by a similar percentage of West Bank residents.’ These are more militant than Hamas. So you’re right: What would get elected in isn’t Hamas, but something far worse. Thanks, but no.
        Levitz 1y ago
        Sorry to be crude but that's just a very long winded concession to my initial point.
        nobodyandproud 1y ago
        Crude and wrong. It’s not a concession, when it contradicts your position. You believe Palestinians aren’t accountable because most of them didn’t vote. I just showed you that not only is Hamas still popular, more militant orgs with zero tolerance for two-state are far more popular. Until you forced me to research, I wouldn’t have known that the younger Palestinians were even more violent than the public is lead to believe.
- zetsurin 1y ago
  https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/feb/07/israel-weapons-sale-gaza https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/feb/07/israel-weapo... Yeah! No USA involvement there... take a second and imagine it was you and your family getting bombed and starved. stop being such a horrible person.
  - nobodyandproud 1y ago
    What’s horrible is that some want to bring the horrible here. My family came here decades ago to escape oppression and chaos, not bring it here. And we don’t. Every action I’ve seen from activists—both by Zionists and Palestinian hardliners—have been to sow discord for their own ends. The children here don’t deserve it. If you want to be decent? Then convince neighbors like SA or the UAE to provide medical aid.
    - UncleMeat 1y ago
      Are there other ways in which I should be disallowed from aiding suffering children?
      - nobodyandproud 1y ago
        You’re allowed to aid; but you refuse to believe a nation is allowed to say “not here”. If your aim is to help, then the elected government has said find a different way so what’s your next move? As a lifelong Democrat, I’m forced to conclude this appeal from a certain segment of hardline liberals isn’t in good faith. You may not like it and it’s shitty, but Hamas’ attack last year changed things for me; and I’m guessing I’m not the only silent centrist who thinks this. Every lie of omission by extremist liberals deepens my suspicions.
        UncleMeat 1y ago
        A nation can say "not here" to suffering people in need of medical aid, driven by a self described "proud Islamophobe". I personally think that is monstrous.
- seadan83 1y ago
  You're repeating the same lies as laura loomer. Quoting the article: "Loomer wrote, before falsely stating that “95% of GAZANS voted for HAMAS.” "In fact, Hamas got 44% of party list votes in the 2006 Palestinian legislative elections across Gaza and the West Bank, and lost three of the five districts in Gaza to the secular Fatah party. There has been no election since then."
  - nobodyandproud 1y ago
    Plurality, not majority. The conservatives lie by saying majority. Liberals lie by saying that it wasn’t a majority; yet omitting a key detail: Yes Hamas won, with 44%. And if you’re gonna quote wikipedia: “ Tensions between Fatah and Hamas began to rise in 2005 after the death of Yasser Arafat in November 2004. After the legislative election on 25 January 2006, which resulted in a Hamas victory, relations were marked by sporadic factional fighting. This became more intense after the two parties repeatedly failed to reach a deal to share government power, escalating in June 2007 and resulting in Hamas' takeover of Gaza.[35]”
    - seadan83 1y ago
      I quoted the article. The median age in gaza is estimated to be 18. Half of the population was not even born the last time there was an election. Consider hamas lost 3 of 5, it was neither a plurality. It's not about how liberals or conservatives lie, what was written is a lie. A plurality of gazans did not vote for Hamas because half of them were not even yet born. They had no vote.
      - nobodyandproud 1y ago
        No. You shifted the goalpost. What’s terrifying is that what would be elected is far worse.
        seadan83 1y ago
        Unless I made a terrible copy/paste error, I 100% quoted the guardian article that we are discussing. In other words, "did you read the article?" To your other point: The goal post is the statement (I'm paraphrasing here): "It was not a majority of Gazans that voted for Hamas, but instead a plurality". My rebuttal is that for sure half of the country did not vote for Hamas because the last election is before the median age of the country (half the country was not even born yet). Could you explain how I shifted goal posts? I think you might be assuming that we "know" without elections that the majority of the current population is "radicalized". The evidence of pluralities and majorities is given through elections, we don't have evidence for the current population. Maybe that is what you perceive as shifting the goal posts? If you're going off of something other than elections as evidence for support of hamas at a plurality level of current Gazans - please share the data you are using to be "terrifi[ed] of .. what would be elected" (quoting you @nobodyandpround with slight paraphrase to make the grammar work). The population is roughly 2M people, it's difficult to get to any answer other than "we don't know" without a full blown and free election.

nobodyandproud 1y ago

[flagged]

Levitz 1y ago
[flagged]
- nobodyandproud 1y ago
  Steelman—you know, as the forum rules insist—and ask yourself if there are other reasons. My rationale: First we bring the children; then we appeal to humanitarian grounds and allow then to stay; then we lobby to allow in their parents or relatives. Hamas+Israel are 100% at fault here; and Palestians are not innocent of this. The last time (twenty years ago) when they last had elections, they allowed and enabled this. I’m sorry it’s a shitty situation, but that’s a slippery slope few countries have allowed or want.
  - Levitz 1y ago
    >Palestians are not innocent of this. The last time (twenty years ago) when they last had elections, they allowed and enabled this. Three fourths of the current population couldn't have voted at all. The elections had a participation about about three fourths and Hamas got less than half of the popular vote. Napkin math says for each 100 people in Palestine today, only 25 could have voted at all, of which 19 did, of which 9 voted for Hamas. This whole line of thinking is completely ridiculous.
    - nobodyandproud 1y ago
      Which doesn’t prove that Hamas wouldn’t be elected in again. In fact, Hamas surged in popularity after its October 17th attack: https://themedialine.org/top-stories/the-rise-of-hamas-popularity-in-the-west-bank/ https://themedialine.org/top-stories/the-rise-of-hamas-popul... https://apnews.com/article/israel-hamas-palestinians-opinion-poll-wartime-views-a0baade915619cd070b5393844bc4514 https://apnews.com/article/israel-hamas-palestinians-opinion... “57% of respondents in Gaza and 82% in the West Bank believe Hamas was correct in launching the October attack, the poll indicated. A large majority believed Hamas’ claims that it acted to defend a major Islamic shrine in Jerusalem against Jewish extremists and win the release of Palestinian prisoners. Only 10% said they believed Hamas has committed war crimes, with a large majority saying they did not see videos showing the militants committing atrocities.” Even articles like https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/polls-show-majority-gazans-were-against-breaking-ceasefire-hamas-and-hezbollah https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/polls-sh... which try to downplay the support—“In fact, Gazan frustration with Hamas governance is clear; most Gazans expressed a preference for PA administration and security officials over Hamas ”—have to caveat as follows: ‘But it is organizations like Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) and Lion’s Den that receive the most widespread popular support in Gaza. About three quarters of Gazans express support for both groups, including 40% who see the Lion’s Den in a “very positive” light, an attitude shared by a similar percentage of West Bank residents.’ These are more militant than Hamas. So you’re right: What would get elected in isn’t Hamas, but something far worse. Thanks, but no.
      - Levitz 1y ago
        Sorry to be crude but that's just a very long winded concession to my initial point.
        nobodyandproud 1y ago
        Crude and wrong. It’s not a concession, when it contradicts your position. You believe Palestinians aren’t accountable because most of them didn’t vote. I just showed you that not only is Hamas still popular, more militant orgs with zero tolerance for two-state are far more popular. Until you forced me to research, I wouldn’t have known that the younger Palestinians were even more violent than the public is lead to believe.
zetsurin 1y ago
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/feb/07/israel-weapons-sale-gaza https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/feb/07/israel-weapo... Yeah! No USA involvement there... take a second and imagine it was you and your family getting bombed and starved. stop being such a horrible person.
- nobodyandproud 1y ago
  What’s horrible is that some want to bring the horrible here. My family came here decades ago to escape oppression and chaos, not bring it here. And we don’t. Every action I’ve seen from activists—both by Zionists and Palestinian hardliners—have been to sow discord for their own ends. The children here don’t deserve it. If you want to be decent? Then convince neighbors like SA or the UAE to provide medical aid.
  - UncleMeat 1y ago
    Are there other ways in which I should be disallowed from aiding suffering children?
    - nobodyandproud 1y ago
      You’re allowed to aid; but you refuse to believe a nation is allowed to say “not here”. If your aim is to help, then the elected government has said find a different way so what’s your next move? As a lifelong Democrat, I’m forced to conclude this appeal from a certain segment of hardline liberals isn’t in good faith. You may not like it and it’s shitty, but Hamas’ attack last year changed things for me; and I’m guessing I’m not the only silent centrist who thinks this. Every lie of omission by extremist liberals deepens my suspicions.
      - UncleMeat 1y ago
        A nation can say "not here" to suffering people in need of medical aid, driven by a self described "proud Islamophobe". I personally think that is monstrous.
seadan83 1y ago
You're repeating the same lies as laura loomer. Quoting the article: "Loomer wrote, before falsely stating that “95% of GAZANS voted for HAMAS.” "In fact, Hamas got 44% of party list votes in the 2006 Palestinian legislative elections across Gaza and the West Bank, and lost three of the five districts in Gaza to the secular Fatah party. There has been no election since then."
- nobodyandproud 1y ago
  Plurality, not majority. The conservatives lie by saying majority. Liberals lie by saying that it wasn’t a majority; yet omitting a key detail: Yes Hamas won, with 44%. And if you’re gonna quote wikipedia: “ Tensions between Fatah and Hamas began to rise in 2005 after the death of Yasser Arafat in November 2004. After the legislative election on 25 January 2006, which resulted in a Hamas victory, relations were marked by sporadic factional fighting. This became more intense after the two parties repeatedly failed to reach a deal to share government power, escalating in June 2007 and resulting in Hamas' takeover of Gaza.[35]”
  - seadan83 1y ago
    I quoted the article. The median age in gaza is estimated to be 18. Half of the population was not even born the last time there was an election. Consider hamas lost 3 of 5, it was neither a plurality. It's not about how liberals or conservatives lie, what was written is a lie. A plurality of gazans did not vote for Hamas because half of them were not even yet born. They had no vote.
    - nobodyandproud 1y ago
      No. You shifted the goalpost. What’s terrifying is that what would be elected is far worse.
      - seadan83 1y ago
        Unless I made a terrible copy/paste error, I 100% quoted the guardian article that we are discussing. In other words, "did you read the article?" To your other point: The goal post is the statement (I'm paraphrasing here): "It was not a majority of Gazans that voted for Hamas, but instead a plurality". My rebuttal is that for sure half of the country did not vote for Hamas because the last election is before the median age of the country (half the country was not even born yet). Could you explain how I shifted goal posts? I think you might be assuming that we "know" without elections that the majority of the current population is "radicalized". The evidence of pluralities and majorities is given through elections, we don't have evidence for the current population. Maybe that is what you perceive as shifting the goal posts? If you're going off of something other than elections as evidence for support of hamas at a plurality level of current Gazans - please share the data you are using to be "terrifi[ed] of .. what would be elected" (quoting you @nobodyandpround with slight paraphrase to make the grammar work). The population is roughly 2M people, it's difficult to get to any answer other than "we don't know" without a full blown and free election.