Israel: We Are At War

[mikeymikec]

Shouldn't put a terrorist organization inside your building if you don't want to be treated like a military target.

So who are you giving this piece of advice to: an unconscious patient on life support, priests, children, the janitorial staff, reception staff, a delivery person, volunteers helping out during a time of crisis, contracted people of various types...?

Another possibility to consider is that perhaps Hamas simply intimidated the boss of the hospital into compliance.

Another possibility to consider is that the "Hamas is using hospitals" line is just straight-up BS to help justify Israel's mindless destruction of Gaza. Maybe it actually has happened on occasion and now Israel uses it as an excuse not to take any care in avoiding hospitals. I certainly don't believe for a second that Israel has verified that a particular hospital has Hamas fighters in before bombing it or in its proximity.

In any case, I personally don't think the argument of whether Hamas is using hospitals as hide-outs is particularly relevant. IMO generally speaking as soon as a state decides that bombing civilian districts is cool, they've already demonstrated their utter indifference to the value of human lives that aren't theirs.

 

[Timorous]

So who are you giving this piece of advice to: an unconscious patient on life support, priests, children, the janitorial staff, reception staff, a delivery person, volunteers helping out during a time of crisis, contracted people of various types...?

Another possibility to consider is that perhaps Hamas simply intimidated the boss of the hospital into compliance.

Another possibility to consider is that the "Hamas is using hospitals" line is just straight-up BS to help justify Israel's mindless destruction of Gaza. Maybe it actually has happened on occasion and now Israel uses it as an excuse not to take any care in avoiding hospitals. I certainly don't believe for a second that Israel has verified that a particular hospital has Hamas fighters in before bombing it or in its proximity.

In any case, I personally don't think the argument of whether Hamas is using hospitals as hide-outs is particularly relevant. IMO generally speaking as soon as a state decides that bombing civilian districts is cool, they've already demonstrated their utter indifference to the value of human lives that aren't theirs.

Hamas using a hospital or other civilian building for military purposes makes it a military target. It puts the non combatants inside in an awful situation that is not of their doing but the cause is Hamas. Sure in theory Israel could not strike such targets but then they cannot really touch Hamas.

Hamas do this because for them it is a win win. If Israel do not strike these targets then Hamas do not lose their numbers and can stockpile weapons and other supplies for future attacks. If Israel do strike these targets then the headlines and PR look awful because the civilian death toll is substantial.

I cannot blame Israel for wanting Hamas gone and if Hamas were not hiding amongst the civilian population the civilian death toll would be far lower than it is. Hamas operate this way on purpose because they do not care about their own civilians, they just care about making Israel no longer exist no matter the cost.

Now Israel should be far more circumspect in their strikes by only striking targets they can show Hamas are actively using and avoiding anything that Hamas are not using. I would not expect any such evidence to be publicly available but it should be something Israel are sharing with the US / UK and other allies to show that they are not just bombing everything for the revenge.

So yes, the civilian death toll is abhorrent, I am sure Israel can do more to keep it as low as possible but they are fighting an enemy who are actively using tactics to make this number as large as possible.

Also as much as people hate this, what viable paths to peace are there long term? Israel are not going to go anywhere so the land is going to need to be shared in some way and thus far all attempts to propose a split have been rejected. So I am all ears, what is a long term solution to prevent future October 7ths and to stop the bombing campaign?

 

[Jaskalas]

The only viable solution for Gaza is for Israel to fully control its people and its security.
Hamas decides how many need to die before that happens.

 

[Thunder 57]

Then Why fucking post in the first place......

Yea I didn't get that. Basically saying "I'm out, but you all are rubes for arguing and not agreeing with me!".

 

[Thunder 57]

Have to unfollow this thread, was gonna reply to a person, but with all of the Twit/X links, and flat out propaganda wars being waged.
I am seeing things here, that just do not coincide with what these same people "usually post" so there is either some sort of existential media blast going on, or inherent bias IDK. It's like our 9/11, "oh well, we were bad and created bin laden"

It's weird how many avenues people are going down on this one. I'm out.

PLS don't quote me.

Too bad you're getting quoted.

I posted this link way earlier in this thread:

Report: Netanyahu says 9/11 terror attacks good for Israel

According to Ma'ariv, Netanyahu said Israel is 'benefiting from attack' as it 'swung American public opinion.'

www.haaretz.com

Netanyahu was thrilled on 9/11. All of that US aid to Israel that they clearly didn't need. It invited many to despise the US.

What those fuckers did was beyond words. But if the US kept more to itself and not prop up convenient states around the world for the MIC to get rich on would 9/11 have even happened? Perhaps it would've remained a ME problem that has been going on forever.

 

[mikeymikec]

Hamas using a hospital or other civilian building for military purposes makes it a military target.

Now Israel should be far more circumspect in their strikes by only striking targets they can show Hamas are actively using and avoiding anything that Hamas are not using.

So what you're saying is, you think it's OK to bomb a hospital full of civilians provided that you think (because that's what a lot of military intelligence comes down to, but if it makes you feel better, I can use the word 'know' because it doesn't make any difference to my argument) your opponent is using it.

I completely disagree.

Also, your argument is open to further moral corruption because war is about infinite shades of moral greyness, and about people who exploit moral greyness.

Also bear in mind that whatever mental gymnastics you use to justify killing Palestinian civilians "because maybe Hamas" should then be applied to Israeli civilians and you should be perfectly fine with that.

Also as much as people hate this, what viable paths to peace are there long term?

I can assure you that bombing civilian districts to dust is not a path to peace. Murdering civilians on some pretext that you believe that they constitute a valid military target does not encourage a mood of peacemaking. It's a path to unending conflict.

 

[Zor Prime]

PSA: I wouldn't get too worked up over this. It's easy to do, but consider and expect this shit to continue in one form or another for even more multi-thousands of years after we're dead. All the technology in the world to this point has not remedied the insanity.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

PSA: I wouldn't get too worked up over this. It's easy to do, but consider and expect this shit to continue in one form or another for even more multi-thousands of years after we're dead. All the technology in the world to this point has not remedied the insanity.

No, but the difference is, now my tax money helps fund it. Around $10/yr worth, to be exact. For $10/yr, Israel commits war crimes on Palestinians.

How much aid does the US give to Israel? - USAFacts

Israel has received more foreign aid from the US than any other country since WWII.

usafacts.org

 

[amenx]

Too bad you're getting quoted.

I posted this link way earlier in this thread:

Report: Netanyahu says 9/11 terror attacks good for Israel

According to Ma'ariv, Netanyahu said Israel is 'benefiting from attack' as it 'swung American public opinion.'

www.haaretz.com

Netanyahu was thrilled on 9/11. All of that US aid to Israel that they clearly didn't need. It invited many to despise the US.

What those fuckers did was beyond words. But if the US kept more to itself and not prop up convenient states around the world for the MIC to get rich on would 9/11 have even happened? Perhaps it would've remained a ME problem that has been going on forever.

Peoples memories may not go as far back as 1982, but it was then when Israel invaded Lebanon on the flimsiest of pretexts (the attempted assassination of Israels ambassador to the UK). This invasion also resulted in the carpet bombing of heavily populated areas in Lebanon, including Beirut resulting in many 1000s of deaths of civilians, women and children.

Bin Laden used this as his reason that spurred him to commit the 9-11 terror attacks. From his video-taped address to the American people after the event:

"And the events that affected me directly were that of 1982 and the events that followed - when America allowed the Israelis to invade Lebanon...

As I watched the destroyed towers in Lebanon, it occurred to me punish the unjust the same way [and] to destroy towers in America so it could taste some of what we are tasting and to stop killing our children and women..."

'God knows it did not cross our minds to attack the towers'

Excerpts from a speech by Osama bin Laden addressing the American people in a videotape.

www.theguardian.com

The incredible cost to the world, esp the U.S., from Israeli actions, whether in reprisals from terrorists or sucking the US into costly wars is just mind-boggling. But no one in the US media would dare to make these points without risking their careers being destroyed. The massive influence of the Israel lobby over the media and politics is basically the root cause of all this.

 

[Thunder 57]

Peoples memories may not go as far back as 1982, but it was then when Israel invaded Lebanon on the flimsiest of pretexts (the attempted assassination of Israels ambassador to the UK). This invasion also resulted in the carpet bombing of heavily populated areas in Lebanon, including Beirut resulting in many 1000s of deaths of civilians, women and children.

Bin Laden used this as his reason that spurred him to commit the 9-11 terror attacks. From his video-taped address to the American people after the event:

"And the events that affected me directly were that of 1982 and the events that followed - when America allowed the Israelis to invade Lebanon...

As I watched the destroyed towers in Lebanon, it occurred to me punish the unjust the same way [and] to destroy towers in America so it could taste some of what we are tasting and to stop killing our children and women..."

'God knows it did not cross our minds to attack the towers'

Excerpts from a speech by Osama bin Laden addressing the American people in a videotape.

www.theguardian.com

The incredible cost to the world, esp the U.S., from Israeli actions, whether in reprisals from terrorists or sucking the US into costly wars is just mind-boggling. But no one in the US media would dare to make these points without risking their careers being destroyed. The massive influence of the Israel lobby over the media and politics is basically the root cause of all this.

I think that is why we are seeing a lot of not necessarily pro-Palestine protests, but anti-Israel ones. That video not far above about the Hacidic Jews agreeing that Judaism and Zionism are not the same thing.

 

[Timorous]

So what you're saying is, you think it's OK to bomb a hospital full of civilians provided that you think (because that's what a lot of military intelligence comes down to, but if it makes you feel better, I can use the word 'know' because it doesn't make any difference to my argument) your opponent is using it.

I completely disagree.

Also, your argument is open to further moral corruption because war is about infinite shades of moral greyness, and about people who exploit moral greyness.

Also bear in mind that whatever mental gymnastics you use to justify killing Palestinian civilians "because maybe Hamas" should then be applied to Israeli civilians and you should be perfectly fine with that.

I don't see any viable alternative to the position that using civilian infrastructure for military purposes makes it a military target. Using civilian infrastructure for military operations is actually a war crime so this has been considered already.

The idea that civilian infrastructure is off limits sounds nice and does prevent immediate loss of life but long term it would lead to worse outcomes. The sort of people who would use human shields to achieve their goals are 100% not the sort of people you want anywhere near power. Unfortunately if those tactics effectively make them immune from retaliation then they will use it to their advantage to seize power and once they have it they won't let it go.

Giving the totally immoral a guaranteed winning strategy against the moral is just a path to our own demise and does not actually sound moral at all.

This is the difference between Hamas and Israel, Hamas actively use human shields, Israel does not.

I can assure you that bombing civilian districts to dust is not a path to peace. Murdering civilians on some pretext that you believe that they constitute a valid military target does not encourage a mood of peacemaking. It's a path to unending conflict.

So what is a path then?

 

[KMFJD]

I don't see any viable alternative to the position that using civilian infrastructure for military purposes makes it a military target. Using civilian infrastructure for military operations is actually a war crime so this has been considered already.

The idea that civilian infrastructure is off limits sounds nice and does prevent immediate loss of life but long term it would lead to worse outcomes. The sort of people who would use human shields to achieve their goals are 100% not the sort of people you want anywhere near power. Unfortunately if those tactics effectively make them immune from retaliation then they will use it to their advantage to seize power and once they have it they won't let it go.

Giving the totally immoral a guaranteed winning strategy against the moral is just a path to our own demise and does not actually sound moral at all.

This is the difference between Hamas and Israel, Hamas actively use human shields, Israel does not.



So what is a path then?

Israel is once again using Palestinians as human shields

Once a standard Israeli military tactic, the practice was made illegal under international law in 2005. But growing evidence shows Israel is using human shields again with impunity

www.middleeasteye.net

Two Israeli soldiers guilty of using human shield in Gaza

An Israeli military court convicts two Israeli soldiers for using a Palestinian child as a human shield during an assault on Gaza in 2009.

www.bbc.com

and yet I see Israel hasn't stopped either....

 

[Timorous]

Israel is once again using Palestinians as human shields

Once a standard Israeli military tactic, the practice was made illegal under international law in 2005. But growing evidence shows Israel is using human shields again with impunity

www.middleeasteye.net

Two Israeli soldiers guilty of using human shield in Gaza

An Israeli military court convicts two Israeli soldiers for using a Palestinian child as a human shield during an assault on Gaza in 2009.

www.bbc.com

and yet I see Israel hasn't stopped either....

That is atrocious.

 

[mikeymikec]

I don't see any viable alternative to the position that using civilian infrastructure for military purposes makes it a military target.

Then maybe you should be quiet rather than advocating the slaughter of innocent civilians.

So what is a path then?

Assuming that Israel is interested in peace, then the first thing they must do is cease fire. Those who are uninterested in peace must be politically marginalised. If Hamas et al are perceived to be in the way of progress towards a lasting peace by the Palestinian people then sympathy for them will drop significantly.

Peace talks must be re-established. What happens next is entirely up to Israel and Palestine.

In my view though, Israel will have to work for *decades* to convince the Palestinian people that they actually want to co-exist with the Palestinians as equals and Israel will have to give at least some of what they've taken from Palestine in order to convince them that this ceasefire isn't just a pause in hostilities on Israel's part in the hope that Palestine fundamentally surrenders to them.

If peace talks fall apart, then assuming that Israel is still interested in a lasting peace, then Israel will have to play a longer game that involves defending themselves from any attacks and making good on an unspoken promise with Palestine to treat the Palestinians as equals. It may take many decades to convince Palestinians that even though Israel was happy to subjugate them, steal their land and bomb their homes into dust that Israel has actually had a change of heart.

Yes, my suggestions are almost exclusively about what Israel can do here, because Palestine holds very few cards in this situation: against Israel's long-term attitude to the present day, Palestine can be slowly bulldozed by Israel or die fighting and achieve the same end faster.

 

[Timorous]

Then maybe you should be quiet rather than advocating the slaughter of innocent civilians.

Pointing out the reality is not the same as advocating for it. Sure I wish reality was different and civilians were not caught in the cross fire but that is not how it is.

Assuming that Israel is interested in peace, then the first thing they must do is cease fire. Those who are uninterested in peace must be politically marginalised. If Hamas et al are perceived to be in the way of progress towards a lasting peace by the Palestinian people then sympathy for them will drop significantly.

Peace talks must be re-established. What happens next is entirely up to Israel and Palestine.

In my view though, Israel will have to work for *decades* to convince the Palestinian people that they actually want to co-exist with the Palestinians as equals and Israel will have to give at least some of what they've taken from Palestine in order to convince them that this ceasefire isn't just a pause in hostilities on Israel's part in the hope that Palestine fundamentally surrenders to them.

If peace talks fall apart, then assuming that Israel is still interested in a lasting peace, then Israel will have to play a longer game that involves defending themselves from any attacks and making good on an unspoken promise with Palestine to treat the Palestinians as equals. It may take many decades to convince Palestinians that even though Israel was happy to subjugate them, steal their land and bomb their homes into dust that Israel has actually had a change of heart.

Yes, my suggestions are almost exclusively about what Israel can do here, because Palestine holds very few cards in this situation: against Israel's long-term attitude to the present day, Palestine can be slowly bulldozed by Israel or die fighting and achieve the same end faster.

I agree with Bernie, I don't see how you have a ceasefire with Hamas. Partly because it means those uninterested in peace will probably gain more political power within Israel and partly because Hamas won't use it to actually negotiate for peace, they will use it to plan and execute another attack.

Sympathy for Hamas is already low, they are a dictatorship so there is little the civilians can do to budge them out of power, especially given the main leadership is not even in Gaza and they are backed by Iran.

Sounds great, problem is there have been plenty of proposals since the end of the Ottoman empire to share the land and even when Jews in the area and later Israel after it was formed have accepted the Palestinians and neighbours have rejected them.

If Hamas can be removed from power there is the opportunity for Israel to work with a new government to rebuild and help Gaza. It would also hopefully allow for a change of Israel's political climate to be less extreme which could make peace even more likely. The issue of course is that even prior to Hamas proposals and negotiations have led nowhere so it is going to be a long long road, hopefully with the right groups in charge even if it is long it can be done peacefully.

It seems to me step 1 is to remove Hamas and if they are not going to go quietly it is going to be bloody and I don't see a way to avoid that.

 

[mikeymikec]

Pointing out the reality is not the same as advocating for it. Sure I wish reality was different and civilians were not caught in the cross fire but that is not how it is.

Nope, your attitude is "it's regrettable, but necessary": Advocacy.

It seems to me step 1 is to remove Hamas and if they are not going to go quietly it is going to be bloody and I don't see a way to avoid that.

Imagine the scene: Many thousands of Palestinian civilians have been slaughtered and their homes destroyed, the citizens of Gaza living in tents, and then Israel says, "We want peace". That's a situation that you think the citizens of Gaza will say, "Absolutely! You killed three generations of my family, you've destroyed many things I've loved, and now you think we can be friends? Out of curiosity, if I don't want to be friends with you, what then?".

 

[AtenRa]

Then maybe you should be quiet rather than advocating the slaughter of innocent civilians.

It is Hamas that slaughter its own people by using civilian infrastructures that make Israel to attack them.

Assuming that Israel is interested in peace, then the first thing they must do is cease fire.

The first think for peace is for Hamas to release the hostages, one month have past and it is crystal clear that Hamas is just not interested for peace.

Peace talks must be re-established. What happens next is entirely up to Israel and Palestine.

There is no such a thing as Palestine, they had the opportunity to create a country of Palestine in 1948 and instead they decided to go to war. There was never a Palestine country, it was Ottoman, then British and then we had the UN Partition Plan in 1947 that Palestinians rejected.

In my view though, Israel will have to work for *decades* to convince the Palestinian people that they actually want to co-exist with the Palestinians as equals

Israel doesn't have to convince anyone, it is the Palestinians who have to be convinced that their own good is to stop the war and create a Palestinian country that will accept Israel as a country next to them.

Israel will have to give at least some of what they've taken from Palestine in order to convince them that this ceasefire isn't just a pause in hostilities on Israel's part in the hope that Palestine fundamentally surrenders to them.

In 1948 Israel was attacked by 5 Arab countries, Israel came victorious in that war and took land, it has to give nothing of that land back because it was not Israel that started the war. Palestinians can create a new country for them with what they have now, Im sure Israel will not object to that.

If peace talks fall apart, then assuming that Israel is still interested in a lasting peace, then Israel will have to play a longer game that involves defending themselves from any attacks and making good on an unspoken promise with Palestine to treat the Palestinians as equals. It may take many decades to convince Palestinians that even though Israel was happy to subjugate them, steal their land and bomb their homes into dust that Israel has actually had a change of heart.

Once more, repeat after me. It was the Arabs that attacked Israel in 1948 not the other way around. It is Israel right to keep what they took in that war as they were the defenders not the attackers.

Yes, my suggestions are almost exclusively about what Israel can do here, because Palestine holds very few cards in this situation: against Israel's long-term attitude to the present day, Palestine can be slowly bulldozed by Israel or die fighting and achieve the same end faster.

This is what you get wrong here, it is the Palestinians that need to take their future in their hand, rid off Hamas and create a Palestinian country with what they have know. They can NEVER take back what they could have in 1948, they have to acknowledge that and go forward.
So to stop the bullshit , Palestinians have to stop the Hamas, stop the war against Israel and make peace with Israel and create a new free Palestine with the land they currently own , that is the Gaza strip and the west bank, simple as that.

 

[mikeymikec]

There is no such a think as Palestine, they had the opportunity to create a country of Palestine in 1948 and instead they decided to go to war. There was never a Palestine country, it was Ottoman, then British and then we had the UN Partition Plan in 1947 that Palestinians rejected.

I marvel at the cognitive dissonance in this argument. "Palestine never existed! Some people came along to carve up an area of land and PALESTINIANS REJECTED IT".

The nerve of those Palestinians.

 

[Timorous]

Nope, your attitude is "it's regrettable, but necessary": Advocacy.

Advocacy requires more than pointing out the reality that has to exist to avoid the use of such immoral tactics on a broader scale.

Imagine the scene: Many thousands of Palestinian civilians have been slaughtered and their homes destroyed, the citizens of Gaza living in tents, and then Israel says, "We want peace". That's a situation that you think the citizens of Gaza will say, "Absolutely! You killed three generations of my family, you've destroyed many things I've loved, and now you think we can be friends? Out of curiosity, if I don't want to be friends with you, what then?".

Peace does not require friendship, it just requires that both sides don't want to kill each other. Beyond that if there can be a government of Gaza that is willing to leave in peace then a lot can be done to rebuild.

I marvel at the cognitive dissonance in this argument. "Palestine never existed! Some people came along to carve up an area of land and PALESTINIANS REJECTED IT".

The nerve of those Palestinians.

Ahh, you don't want Israel to exist full stop.

 

[mikeymikec]

Ahh, you don't want Israel to exist full stop.

At no point did I say anything like this. I've in fact said the opposite to you even today, which you would have noticed if you had bothered really taking in the vast majority of my responses to you.

 

[AtenRa]

I marvel at the cognitive dissonance in this argument. "Palestine never existed! Some people came along to carve up an area of land and PALESTINIANS REJECTED IT".

The nerve of those Palestinians.

A bit of History

1516 - The Ottomans invade and occupy the area of Palestine.
After the end of the first World War in 1918, those lands were ruled by the British empire.
So up to 1947 and the UN Partition Plan for Palestine, there was not a Palestine as a free Country.

The British in 1947 wanted to give the land they owned to both the Arabs and create a country for the Israelites , especially after WW II and the holocausts.

Since the Arabs in the Palestine NEVER had a free country since 1516 , they could have a free Palestine with Israel next to them, but they refused and went to war in 1948.
What you and everyone else will have to understand here is that Hamas and all the other Palestinian organizations fight to destroy Israel, they dont fight in order to create a new and free country.

So to stop the bullshit once and for all, it is the Palestinians that need to understand that they can never destroy Israel and occupy all the land for themselves. They need to come to terms with reality and understand that almost all the other Arab countries are beginning to acknowledge Israel as a country in the region and it is only the Palestinians that suffer for almost 70 years with hardship and they have the opportunity to change that. THEY need to make peace with Israel and then create a new Palestine free country that they will live peacefully with every neighbor country in the region including Israel.

 

[mikeymikec]

The British in 1947 wanted to give the land they owned to both the Arabs and create a country for the Israelites

Yes, we're in agreement: The British stole land from the Palestinians and then wanted to "give" it to someone else. The Palestinians at the time had a problem with this, unsurprisingly.

What you and everyone else will have to understand here is that Hamas and all the other Palestinians organizations fight to destroy Israel

Ok, but given that land was taken from Palestinians and Israel continues to take more land from them among other things, does the attitude of such organisations surprise you in the slightest?

What you say also applies to many Israelis. There is plenty of just cause for ill feeling to go around.

The IRA wanted to kick the UK out of what they perceived to be the entirety of Ireland. Just like with Hamas et al vs Israel, there was no chance on the planet that the IRA were going to succeed in this aim through violence, and the fact of the matter is that Israel is here to stay just as many of the people in Northern Ireland consider themselves to be British and their home is Northern Ireland. A peace process has taken place and many improvements have occurred as a result of compromise on both sides and the general ceasing of hostilities between Ireland and the UK.

If however the British decided to reduce an Irish city to dust every time say the IRA pulled some shit, that peace treaty would never have happened. More people would have joined the IRA and other paramilitary organisations in NI/Ireland, more people would have experienced personal loss at the hands of the British and other belligerents, more distrust, more ill-feeling to overcome.

 

[emperus]

What ia an appropriate way to criticize Israel? By using the truth. When you make serious accusations against any nation, group of people, or even an individual, you need sufficient evidence to back up your allegations. You provided none. An accusation without evidence is a lie, worst than most kinds of lies, I might add. In the law, we call it defamation.

Another poster thinks I was too harsh on you, so I'll take a breath and try it this way. I have two simple questions.

First, in what way did the incident at Harvard prove that the State of Israel lies more than other countries?

Second, since your Harvard example was off point to the topic and didn't seem to relate much to your original comment, are you trying to imply that the 5 fold increase in anti-semitic incidents these past two weeks is not something to be concerned about because all our most have been faked by the Jews? If that is not what you think, fine., I'm just trying to figure out why you thought it was important.

If a serious accusation without evidence is a lie worse than most kinds of lies, what do you consider calling someone a bigot without any evidence to back it up?

There have been numerous examples of the Israeli government lying. I even gave you one when you went on your tangent when the hospital was bombed. I showed you a now deleted tweet by one of Netanyahu's press people claiming credit and giving a rational for bombing the hospital, before the IDF claimed they didn't bomb the hospital. I asked you which one should I believe and you never responded. Or, just go back to how Israel reflexively handled the death of Shireen Abu Akleh. They initially denied they shot her and then they went as far as to manipulate videos to blame Hamas, before backtracking due to public pressure. And she was an American. But, I don't think any evidence of Israel lying would be enough for you. It's odd, this naïve believe that Nation States don't attempt to manipulate public sentiment. I wonder does that belief only hold true for Israel and if so, why?

I think everyone is concerned about the increase of incidents of antisemitism and any associated violence. There are people out there who genuinely do hate Jewish people just for existing. I'm not one. My issue with Israel, is that a powerful country uses it's power to abuse those without and not only isn't held unaccountable by the US, but propped up by the US. And since I'm an American, that means me. I once thought that's what Democrats stood for. And ground zero in that, is the Israeli government arming settlers who still today take Palestinian land and are protected by that same Israeli government. But, I went back to look up the definition of antisemitism and was shocked at the broadness of it. A definition which would seem contrary to Free Speech defined by the constitution. I can say I believe the US was/is a racist country but saying the same about Israel would mean I am antisemitic? Do you think that is appropriate?

Btw, I haven't been keeping up with this thread. Did Netanyahu release the evidence of the 40 beheaded children yet?

 

[Jaskalas]

If Hamas can be removed from power there is the opportunity for Israel to work with a new government to rebuild and help Gaza.

That is a logical fallacy.
New government? Does not and will not exist.

A true resolution to the war Hamas started is for Gaza to become a provenience of Israel. Absorb the people and rebuild under Israeli security, rather than Hamas terrorism. There is no peaceful alternative.

 

[hal2kilo]

That is a logical fallacy.
New government? Does not and will not exist.

A true resolution to the war Hamas started is for Gaza to become a provenience of Israel. Absorb the people and rebuild under Israeli security, rather than Hamas terrorism. There is no peaceful alternative.

2 wrongs don't make a right.