Israel/Palestine thread
Think this merits its own thread...
Discuss my fellow 2+2ers..
AM YISRAEL CHAI.
[QUOTE=Crossnerd]Edit: RULES FOR THIS THREAD
Posting guidelines for Politics and Soci...
These are our baselines. We're not reinventing the wheel here. If you aren't sure if something is acceptable to post, its better to ask first. If you think someone is posting something that violates the above guidelines, please report it or PM me rather than responding in kind.
To reiterate some of the points:
1. No personal attacks. This is a broad instruction, but, in general, we want to focus on attacking an argument rather than the poster making it. It is fine to say a post is antisemitic; it is not okay to call someone an antisemite over and over. If you believe someone is making antisemitic posts, report them or PM me. The same goes for calling people "baby killers" and "genocide lovers". You are allowed to argue that an action supports genocide or that the consequences of certain policies results in the death of children, but we are no longer going to be speaking to one another's intentions. It is not productive to the conversation and doesn't further any debate.
2. Racist posts and other bigoted statements that target a particular group or individuals of such groups with derogatory comments are not allowed. This should not need further explanation.
3. Graphic Images need to be in spoilers with a trigger warning.
4. Wishing Harm on other posters will result in an immediate timeout.
5. Genocidal statements such as "Kill 'em all" etc, are no longer permissible in the thread.
If anyone has any questions about the above, please PM me. I don't want a discussion about the rules to derail the content of this thread. If anything needs clarifying, I will do that in this thread.
Please be aware this thread is strictly moderated[/quote]
"all of them are bad" stance too. Like **** off, truly. I'm the first to admit a huge amount of them celebrated Oct 7 and 9/11. But we gotta get off this "all" stuff. These absolutes help nobody.
Well, the issue isn't that all of them are bad. The issue is that for tribal/xenophobic reasons if it is perceived the choice is between supporting Palestinian Jihadis or "collaborating with Zionists", they are always going to choose their own side. And this is irrespective of what the obvious outcome is going to be.
So this gives the uncompromising terrorist faction of their society (Hamas, Lions Den, IJ, etc.) effectively veto power to over-rule any move towards peace.
At this point the majority of Palestinians support armed fight against Israel, and are committed to total conquest of Israel. Even in the hypothetical this changed and the majority wanted peace, it would still be extremely easy for the terrorist faction of society to keep fighting (including attacking Israel and intimidating/assassinating "Zionist collaborators" in the peace process) and derail in any peace.
Because of how Palestinian society is radicalized and structured, and their deep rooted tribalism and racism against Jews, and the perverse incentive structures provided by the UN/Iran/Qatar, it is almost irrelevant whether "they are all bad" or not, because the outcome will be the same as if they were.
I mean you can definitely argue rhetoric and actions should be dialed down because it doesn't' do any good. But the argument there is really no peaceful path forward with Palestinian society structured the way it is is just reality.
ofc they support an armed resistance. nothing else has worked and Israel is now doing genocide.
things change. try telling a korean in 1935 that they would soon be firm allies with the japanese against a different group of koreans
it'll take the total conquest of hamas & allies though. that means no leaders in exile. they all have to go
(if that means doing a deal to free the hostages and then having mossad tie up the loose ends then that's fine)
as long as there occupation there will be resistance. its not hard to understand.
they told Israel to stop the "war". not a cease-fire. they were ordered to literally stop killing Palestinians.
No, they didn't do that. The South Africans failed to get the ceasefire demand they were after. The court simply notified Israel to prevent genocidal actions. This is useful in putting them on notice, with regard to future rulings.
Awkwardly, as the BBC notes, the ICJ being a UN body, there are reports that UN aid workers took part in the crimes of Oct 7.
Because of how Palestinian society is radicalized and structured, and their deep rooted tribalism and racism against Jews, and the perverse incentive structures provided by the UN/Iran/Qatar, it is almost irrelevant whether "they are all bad" or not, because the outcome will be the same as if they were.
I mean you can definitely argue rhetoric and actions should be dialed down because it doesn't' do any good. But the argument there is reall
Except that 'Palestinian society' has been largely created by Israel's actions and policies.
Except that 'Palestinian society' has been largely created by Israel's actions and policies.
I am not making any argument as to how Palestinian society got to where it is at. Maybe you are correct, maybe not. Not sure it actually matters.
My argument is where Palestinian society is at, and what are the prospects it will change going forward under the current incentive structures. And I see no reason to think it will move in any positive direction.
Nation building is actually hard, and most "right-wing" patriarchal, tribally oriented societies really suck at it. The last time this part of the world was self governed was probably historical Israel thousands of years ago. Since then it has been part of large empires governed remotely.
Palestinians have no historical or institutional base to draw from to make a peaceful, functional nation state. And given they rely completely on foreign aid (including actors like Qatar and Iran that incentivize hostility) and their entire society is structured around hatred for Jews, there is no reason to expect they could actually make a functional, peaceful state even in the hypothetical there was the political will to do so.
Hamas rocket count since the attack
No, they didn't do that. The South Africans failed to get the ceasefire demand they were after. The court simply notified Israel to prevent genocidal actions. This is useful in putting them on notice, with regard to future rulings.
Awkwardly, as the BBC notes, there are reports that UN aid workers took part in the crimes of Oct 7.
the court did a lot more than that. it put Israel on trial. it mentioned the genocidal statements of its leaders and tied them to the atrocious conditions. it said the Palestinians are an actual group or people (remember the Hasbara and even mainstream US press outlets often claim they are not a distinct people). and it said that Israel needs to stop killing Gazans and allow aid to the Gazans.
lots of lawyers are claiming that that this is a de-facto "cease-fire". and/or that a cease-fire would never be recommended bc this is not an armed conflict between states.
regardless, if you actually listen to what the judges said, which doesnt take very long, it seems clear that they agreed with South Africa and did not agree with Israel.
Israel to do everything “within its power to prevent and punish the direct and public incitement to commit genocide in relation to members of the Palestinian group in the Gaza Strip,”
That means the war goes on. Just please do all in your power to not kill civilians. Which duh, we're back to square one. Everyone knows.
Israel to do everything “within its power to prevent and punish the direct and public incitement to commit genocide in relation to members of the Palestinian group in the Gaza Strip,”
That means the war goes on. Just please do all in your power to not kill civilians. Which duh, we're back to square one. Everyone knows.
this is a war against civilians. at the very least they need to allow aid, electricity, water etc.
that is to comply with the courts ofc. but we all know that Israel will not comply bc they believe the holocaust gives them cover to do their own genocide.
you think if the courts used the words "cease-fire" that Israel would have obeyed?
this is a war against civilians. at the very least they need to allow aid, electricity, water etc.
that is to comply with the courts ofc. but we all know that Israel will not comply bc they believe the holocaust gives them cover to do their own genocide.
you think if the courts used the words "cease-fire" that Israel would have obeyed?
I'm definitely going to consider this scenario next time I plan to murder a bunch of civilians at a rave. Might just reap what I sow.
this is a war against civilians. at the very least they need to allow aid, electricity, water etc.
that is to comply with the courts ofc. but we all know that Israel will not comply bc they believe the holocaust gives them cover to do their own genocide.
you think if the courts used the words "cease-fire" that Israel would have obeyed?
Even this is antisemitic, lol. And you don't see it.
I'm definitely going to consider this scenario next time I plan to murder a bunch of civilians at a rave. Might just reap what I sow.
this doesnt even make sense. the people who attacked the rave are not being targeted by the genocidal Israeli army. they are killing people who had nothing to do with it.
also, we have no idea how many people killed at the rave were killed by Israel.
Many black people have robbed stores Victor. Does that mean "BLACKS ROB STORES"
This has been your problem in this thread and many others you frequent. You cannot use a minority position and have it speak for da Jus. And that's your constant playbook. If we based our opinions on the fringe everything would be a mess in any issue we look at.
its not speaking for "the Jews." its speaking for the Zionists who support this slaughter.
Isreal and Netanyahu commits genocide and ethnic cleansing in Gaza to the surprise of absolutely nobody.
Article 2 of the Convention defines genocide as
... any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group, as such:
(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
— Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Article 2[7]
We're checking off a, b , and c off the list here.
Court still didn't decree what you asserted.
Please cite verbatim where the actual court which studied the evidence ascertained that. Otherwise...
How is it opinion when the definition fits the act?
