Only brown and Muslim people and communists are capable of war crimes. westerners bring freedom and liberal democracy and civilization, those are love filled bombs, they bring with them the love of Jesus Christ , yes they might kill you now, but will save you later.
Israel over the last 20 years has slaughtered so many Gazans it makes the recent Hamas attacks kind of look puny. Neither one of them is justified. And yes I’m sure this is just basic verifiable facts that everyone who’s been paying attention knows.
Why did you switch your argument from “Israel is worse because they are not only killing but also humiliating Palestinians when compared to hamas who only kill” to “Israel has killed more Palestinians than got Israeli people killed”? It’s only natural to have Israel less casualties because Israel actually tries to protect its citizens before and during attacks, when compared to Palestine.
I literally didn’t change my argument. I think you’re reading comprehension is failing.
I got no problem with Israel trying to protect their citizens. What I do have a problem with. Is them running an open air genocide camp. Giving people little option but to host or tolerate Hamas. And killing indiscriminately. Israel could be doing things differently. Should be doing things differently. But people like yourself don’t care and we’ll defend them to the death. Refusing to give them any valid critique.
By “them” you surely mean Israel. What if I tell you the same about hamas? They said they will not stop their attacks until they destroy Israel, that’s about 9 million lifes. I give a valid critique to this: fuck them, it’s valid for any country to intervene and try to stop hamas. Would be great of they could educate Palestinians properly after that, but removing such a threat is a priority.
Gee, I wonder how you get rid of an extremist resistance organization built out of the hatred of a people that has been subject to horrific apartheid conditions for their entire lives. Maybe undermining that hatred by treating palestinians like human beings is worth a shot? Or we can go ahead and keep killing their families, I’m sure that’ll get rid of hamas.
Can you explain at least in a few sentences what do you mean by “been subject to horrific apartheid conditions for their entire lives”? It’s not like Palestinians live underground and get bombed every day. What exactly makes their lifes a hell that you mention and how do you see it. Be specific, provide examples (it’s okay if they are not sourced, but they have to explain the picture at least).
Most gazans have been restricted to the gaza strip under a blockade for as long as they can remember. They’ve been unable to import certain foods and materials for their entire lives (even pasta wasn’t allowed until more recently). Sometimes, hamas or pij launches a few rockets, and maybe they kill or injure a few people if any. Israel responds by bombing the shit out of Gaza, destroying homes and killing families. When they try to peacefully protest, hundreds of them, including children medics and journalists, are killed by snipers, and tens of thousands are injured.
“58% of Gaza Strip residents required humanitarian assistance with 29% of Gazan households living in extreme or catastrophic conditions, the top two tiers of severity, against 10% in 2022.”
In the west bank, Palestinians are forced out of their homes. They aren’t allowed to use certain roads. They regulary are abused and killed by settlers (who aren’t supposed to be there under international law), and the idf backs the settlers up. It’s apartheid according to international organizations.
If I was in those conditions, and my friends or family were killed by settlers or an airstrike, I would probably want to join hamas/pij/PFLP too.
Most gazans have been restricted to the gaza strip under a blockade for as long as they can remember.
Is it so bad to be able to live on the land you were born at? Or do you go “I can’t be a tourist so I have to kill Israeli”?
They’ve been unable to import certain foods and materials for their entire lives (even pasta wasn’t allowed until more recently).
“If I can’t eat certain food it’s justified to kill Israeli”?
Sometimes, hamas or pij launches a few rockets, and maybe they kill or injure a few people if any.
Thanks to Israel’s defenses.
Israel responds by bombing the shit out of Gaza, destroying homes and killing families.
Thanks to hamas launching rockets from civillians objects. And thanks to Gaza’s (absense of) defenses. Go on, blame Israel for the fact that certain people build rockets and launch them from certain places, instead of building defenses.
When they try to peacefully protest, hundreds of them, including children medics and journalists, are killed by snipers, and tens of thousands are injured.
Those “peaceful protests” more than likely included people using slingshots. Do not fuck with an army, especially if it’s an army of a different country.
“58% of Gaza Strip residents required humanitarian assistance with 29% of Gazan households living in extreme or catastrophic conditions, the top two tiers of severity, against 10% in 2022.”
It almost looks like they could spend those humanitarian funds on improving their households. But not after they use enough to build tons of rockets, naturally.
In the west bank, Palestinians are forced out of their homes.
How does this work? There was a house where you lived, then someone comes and tells you “this is no longer your house”? Or “even if we never created a proper country, we always thought these were out territories, and then someone came and developed stuff of them, and we got sad and angry”?
They aren’t allowed to use certain roads.
Roads that are crucial to be able to live properly? I don’t suggest to stay still while you get restricted. But you gotta think what can be done about it, instead of doing terrorism. Especially when the world shows signs of caring about you. For many years too.
If I was in those conditions, and my friends or family were killed by settlers or an airstrike, I would probably want to join hamas/pij/PFLP too.
You would probably want to join people who practice launching missiles from other families’ places so they get killed, and do the same. That’s not smart.
Yes, I don’t think terrorism is always bad. Would you condemn the ANC, the Native Americans, the Viet Cong, Nat Turner, and the Algerians for doing what they had to do to fight oppression?
Seriously, what do you propose? Israel doesn’t want to spend resources on war. Hamas doesn’t want to spend resources on anything but war. Israel will not liv
And you still didn’t explain exactly what’s happening to Palestinians that would suggest their choices are justified. Maybe if they’d be forced to live near an active volcano or something I’d consider stuff. But as it is now, they are being thrown to get killed, by hamas and not anyone else.
The native Americans and nat turner lost, the Viet Cong, the ANC, and the algerians won.
I did explain what conditions justified revolutionary violence and you said apartheid is ok actually. If you aren’t willing to listen, I’m just gonna stop responding.
Did any of them practice terrorist attacks on peaceful citizens, took hostages, broke their limbs, beheaded them and let their citizens spit on their bodies? Which exact part of strategies like that worked for them?
I did explain what conditions justified revolutionary violence
No, your explanation is literally “they lost homes and were getting killed” with no specifics. It doesn’t add up with anything: how it was (not) exposed in media for years, how those deaths are only a result of specific acts of violence from Palestinians themselves, how they live in a “total isolation” that allows them to get work permits in Israel (whose numbers were increasing too), how hamas produces tons of fake news to appear more of a victim, how there is no evidence of systematic hate from the Israel side and tons of evidence of systematic hate from Palestinians’ side.
Palestinians’/hamas’ desire to destroy Israel is ungrounded, irresponsible, and idiotic, which basically means their violence is unprovoked. Israel is the opposite. Same as Putin with his idiotic reasoning for violence, hamas with their idiotic reasoning for violence should either surrender or be defeated as aggressors.
Yes, the ANC used to put suspected collaborators in tires and burn them alive. They also took civilian hostages and killed civilians in bombings. The Viet Cong killed about 150k civilians. The algerians killed French people regardless of their combatant status.
If we go back in history, Israel was built on ethnically cleansed land. In 1948, hundreds of thousands of Palestinians were ethnically cleansed by the Zionists militaries. Since then they’ve continuously been oppressed, and their land has continued to be stolen. Currently, they live under apartheid conditions according to human rights organizations.
Yes, the ANC used to put suspected collaborators in tires and burn them alive. They also took civilian hostages and killed civilians in bombings. The Viet Cong killed about 150k civilians. The algerians killed French people regardless of their combatant status.
Why do I have a feeling all these parties still have much less in common with hamas?
If we go back in history
If we do we’ll surely find that many other people lived there, not just these 2. But some people still want to judge a land by it’s past when it benefits them.
Again you didn’t explain how exactly this affects their lives to an extent that they see violence as the only option.
This justifies armed resistance.
I would even agree with that. If only it would look even remotely as a resistance. As something that would eventually give a chance to anyone to get whatever they call “freedom”. But it’s just not that. It’s a suicide. Hamas can’t defeat Israel with terrorism, and even in a strange course of events it would, I can’t see how it can become a proper country anyway. They would lose all support and wouldn’t be able to sustain themselves.
If we do we’ll surely find that many other people lived there, not just these 2. But some people still want to judge a land by it’s past when it benefits them.
Interestingly, Palestinians (muslims christians and jews) can trace their ancestry to the Caananites mostly, which in turn decended partially from Neolithic farmers that lived in the area and partially from immigration. So it really has just been 1 people genetically and the differences are mostly just made up. If we look to today, their land is still being stolen. Israel continues to build illegal settlements in the west bank. Palestinians are denied a right to return, while people from New York are allowed to kick a Palestinian out of their home and take it. The Nakba was 75 years ago, people who were kicked out as children are still alive.
Again you didn’t explain how exactly this affects their lives to an extent that they see violence as the only option.
Again, I’ll point you to human rights organizations describing the current conditions as Apartheid. They see violence as the only option, since when they peacefully protest (eg. great march of return), they get shot. And no, throwing stones does not justify that. Israeli soldiers got at most a few bruises.
There is continues settler colonialism in the West Bank, with regular violence against Palestinians living there (journalists and children included). Israel regularly overreacts to violence from Gaza by leveling civilian infrastructure without providing proof that it’s being used by Hamas. In 2006, they tried to starve the population of Gaza (not to death, just to the point where they started suffering) to try and force Hamas out. Over 1000 palestinians are being held in Israeli prisons without any charges against them. Some children in prisons are held in solitary confinement (torture). A while ago it came out that Israel used to harvest organs from dead Palestinians, and currently they haven’t given back a few hundred bodies iirc. And human rights organizations have describes Gaza as an open air prison. It does a garbage job keeping weapons out, but it does do a great job hurting everyday Palestinian civilians (collective punishment, a war crime).
Hamas can’t defeat Israel with terrorism
I agree with you that it seems improbable for Palestinians to beat a huge military power like Israel, but plenty of things seemed impossible yet still happened. A lot of people thought the Viet Cong couldn’t win but they did. All that needs to happen is enough violence to force Israel to the bargaining table. Preferably the western world would do a BDS campaign against Israel, like we did with South Africa, but that also seems unlikely considering how much money the defense industry makes from them.
They would lose all support and wouldn’t be able to sustain themselves.
This is just speculation, we don’t know what it would look like if the Palestinians won. Some post colonial states did ok for themselves, others didn’t. They’re surrounded by other Arab countries, so even if the western powers decide to sanction them, they’ll still have some trading partners, but they would definitely be behind for a bit. Worth it in my opinion, if it means that there is relative peace.
So it really has just been 1 people genetically and the differences are mostly just made up.
As with the whole Earth population. I couldn’t find proofs that Palestinians have deeper or bigger presence over time there than Israeli.
But either way, this is something I refuse to accept as an argument. Nations move. Some not but it doesn’t mean they are unable to. I’d check out specific reasons like natural disasters, resources etc. But I see no such arguments - everyone just scream “this is our land and we must take it back”. Humans don’t work like that and there is no need to spend tons of resources to fight for it. Adaptation is how everyone lives. Sure, spend some resources on figuring out diplomacy, but terrorism is beyond the adequate line.
I’ll point you to human rights organizations describing the current conditions as Apartheid
And I thought the current condition is war.
They see violence as the only option, since when they peacefully protest (eg. great march of return), they get shot. And no, throwing stones does not justify that. Israeli soldiers got at most a few bruises.
If there was anything like throwing stones with slongshots then it wasn’t a peaceful protest. We know palestinians are raised with “gotta kill a jew to become a hero and make my parents proud” thought, and it’s easy to realize those were aggression actions masked as “protests”. Before you judge an army for shooting them, you have to consider palestinian “protesters” would not be judged if they manage to kill anyone with a stone, they would be praised instead.
Israel regularly overreacts to violence from Gaza
“Chill up Israel, it’s just a child’s play”?
by leveling civilian infrastructure without providing proof that it’s being used by Hamas
Maybe we should ask hamas to provide proofs that they fire missiles at military objects in Israel?
Over 1000 palestinians are being held in Israeli prisons without any charges against them. Some children in prisons are held in solitary confinement (torture)
You really can compare that to (and justify) what happend at October 7? At this point I’ll kindly ask you to agree that you are applying different judgement systems for 2 nations. You allow palestinians be bloody monsters but you require that israeli would not touch them no matter what happens.
A while ago it came out that Israel used to harvest organs from dead Palestinians, and currently they haven’t given back a few hundred bodies iirc.
Spooky. Any investigations of that at all?
And human rights organizations have describes Gaza as an open air prison.
It’s just a nice word. If you can build rockets surely you can build something more useful, and it can’t happen in a prison.
considering how much money the defense industry makes from them
There is a contradiction when people first expect the western world to take the side of Gaza in order to save lifes, and then say that the same western world really sell defense equipment for profit only and not to save lifes.
This is just speculation, we don’t know what it would look like if the Palestinians won.
Basically, it would look like there is no more Israel, and a lot more of “Allahu Akbar” screams everyday all over the world, probably.
Worth it in my opinion, if it means that there is relative peace.
Worth it to get rid of Israel? Or worth it to leave a terrorist organization in power of 2 million people alone?
if it means that there is relative peace
And I thought people learned a lesson from the WW2, from the Ukraine war. Once you appease the aggressor there is no way back. And certainly no way for a peace.
You really can compare that to (and justify) what happend at October 7? At this point I’ll kindly ask you to agree that you are applying different judgement systems for 2 nations. You allow palestinians be bloody monsters but you require that israeli would not touch them no matter what happens.
No, that isn’t the only justification. You are ignoring the apartheid and settler colonialism and focusing on one or two other things I said.
Maybe we should ask hamas to provide proofs that they fire missiles at military objects in Israel?
I mean any rocket at tel aviv could be aimed at a military target, the IDF headquarters is in the middle of a densely populated area. But yeah, a lot of those rockets are simply to hurt anyone they can. Again, do I need to point you at the people killed by the various other organizations that used terror to fight for freedom? It’s horrible, yes, but the way to stop it is by giving people their freedom.
There is a contradiction when people first expect the western world to take the side of Gaza in order to save lifes, and then say that the same western world really sell defense equipment for profit only and not to save lifes.
I can expect someone to do the right thing, but also recognize that they have no morals and so they won’t do it.
Worth it to get rid of Israel? Or worth it to leave a terrorist organization in power of 2 million people alone?
I don’t think you understand what it would be like if the Palestinians won. Even in the best case scenario for the Palestinians, it wouldn’t be Hamas completely taking over Israel. That is definitely physically impossible. It would be both groups come together and negotiate, and either Israel turns into a secular state and swallows the west bank and gaza, or a new secular state is formed that encompasses the whole area. That’s what “from the river to the sea” means.
I'm not sure what the ANC is, but the Viet Cong were absolutely not justified in their actions. They were part of an attempt to force communism on South Vietnam. In effect, they used force of arms in lieu of democracy to get what they wanted. They committed atrocities and were unjustified in their actions.
Any group that rejects political and democratic solutions to its problems in favor of violence is unjustified. Violence is a last resort.
Any group that rejects political and democratic solutions to its problems in favor of violence is unjustified.
Nice, we should have just voted the Nazis out then. Algeria and Vietnam should have just voted out the colonial powers. The ANC should have just voted out South African apartheid. Violence is a last resort sure, and Palestinians (along with those other groups) are at a point where they have to turn to it.
Resorting to violence when democracy fails is different to outright rejecting democracy and going straight for violence, which is what Hamas and other Islamist terror groups in that region do. Hamas (and, I guess all Palestinians, since you're lumping them together?) have rejected political solutions to their conflict with Israel because they do not desire to coexist, they want to eject all Israeli Jews from the region, or, if possible, slaughter them. They don't desire peace. They desire war and terror and the genocide of the Jews.
I guess all Palestinians, since you’re lumping them together?
There’s a difference between saying that all Palestinians are Hamas and saying that the only option Palestinians have left is violence.
Resorting to violence when democracy fails is different to outright rejecting democracy and going straight for violence, which is what Hamas and other Islamist terror groups in that region do.
Can you explain how you expect them to negotiate with Israel peacefully when Israel has shown that it is not interested in peace by continuing to build illegal settlements in the west bank, effectively killing a two state solution? They can’t peacefully protest, they’d get shot. They can’t vote Israel out, they aren’t citizens of Israel. The only options left for them is violence. And out of the organizations there, the secular ones like the PFLP and DFLP aren’t as powerful as they used to be so Hamas is the only viable one left.
If there was a way for Palestinians to achieve liberation peacefully, that would be awesome for everyone, but I’m struggling to see how that’s possible.
Hamas killed the two-state solution. Israel bent over backwards to try to compromise with and accommodate the Palestinians, which it had no legal obligation to do, and Hamas and its ilk rejected those offers because they didn't want two states--they wanted one state, sans Jews.
I'm not a fan of what Israel has been doing in the West Bank, but don't lie to me and act like those actions are why a two-state solution isn't working. Palestine didn't want to exist in a world that included Israel.
don’t lie to me and act like those actions are why a two-state solution isn’t working.
Do you understand how it makes a 2 state solution physically impossible? That’s Israel’s doing. You can’t have a solution that displaces 700,000 people, so you can’t have a 2 state solution.
Israel has never offered a solution that gave Palestinians a right to return. The people displaced in the Nakba and later, and the people born into refugee camps, deserve this right. Israel’s proposed peace solutions are all garbage and unfair, and it is insane to expect Palestinians to be ok with making huge compromises regarding land that they were cleansed from.
they wanted one state, sans Jews.
Hamas? Sure. But don’t pretend that the various secular organizations wanted to ethnically cleanse jews from the area, they didn’t. They supported a secular state solution.
Well then, they should oust Hamas and the Palestinian Authority. Then they can return to the bargaining table, but they shouldn't expect to receive the same generous concessions that were offered previously, imo. I don't see Israel being so willing to put its national security up for compromise as it did before.
they shouldn’t expect to receive the same generous concessions that were offered previously
Cmon dude. The deals offered were not generous. They were bullshit and insulting. Israel has left them with only one option, violence. It really fucking sucks, and innocent people are dying, but it’s because Israel doesn’t want peace, not because the Palestinians don’t.
Tell yourself whatever helps you sleep at night, bud. Hopefully the fact that you support terrorism is overcome by the propaganda you dogmatically cling to.
You are ignoring the apartheid and settler colonialism
I’m ignoring it because it bleaks when compared to terrorism. Another reason is like I said, I can’t see how territorial confinement could affect adequate people to the point they would prefer suicide over trying to live further. Either there is some horrible details about the apartheid that I don’t know (and tons of media don’t tell, only mentioning “losing homes” and “unable to use certain roads”) or they are not exactly adequate.
I mean any rocket at tel aviv could be aimed at a military target
These rockets apparently don’t have enough accuracy for anyone to be able to aim them anywhere.
Again, do I need to point you at the people killed by the various other organizations that used terror to fight for freedom? It’s horrible, yes
It’s not as horrible as the way hamas uses its civilians to act as both living shield and terrorist recruits. Children are being told they need to kill jews from the tv, and parents tell them they would be proud of they become “heroes” that way.
I can expect someone to do the right thing, but also recognize that they have no morals and so they won’t do it.
Especially when they have a record, right? Those other conflicts you mentioned were ended when they recognized and supported the oppressed parties, if I get it right. But at the same time they have no morals, sure.
It would be both groups come together and negotiate
I don’t think you understand that odds of that happening. I can imagine Israel saying “sure, you killed quite many our people and we won’t forget that, but we are ready to negotiate if it means end of terrorism”. But can I imagine hamas saying anything like “sure, we vowed to destroy Israel and trained terrorists just for that for generations, but if it means we won’t need to do it anymore, and if we get some land we always asked for, we are ready to negotiate”? No. Because these people never showed that they even cared for their own population, and negotiations would mean they would need to actually work towards establishing a proper state and take care of themselves. If they couldn’t do the same before that, they will never do it properly. Not hamas.
Here’s a UN article regarding the settler colonialism. Settler colonialism is effectively a slow invasion and ethnic cleansing. news.un.org/en/story/2022/10/1129942
It’s not as horrible as the way hamas uses its civilians to act as both living shield and terrorist recruits. Children are being told they need to kill jews from the tv, and parents tell them they would be proud of they become “heroes” that way.
Ok lets look at this claim. The main radicalizing factor isn’t TV, it’s bombs killing children’s families, and those bombs are a million times more effective at turning people into terrorists than antisemetic TV shows. Hamas only has ~25,000 soldiers though, while Israel propagandizes its civilians and forces most of them into either jail or military service when they reach military age. They also put military infrastructure in crowded civilian areas just like Hamas. If you’re worried about turning people into terrorists and using them as human shields, this is obviously worse right?
Also, I notice you brought up Russia earlier. Ukraine set up bases in civilian areas, including schools. But we still consider Russia the bad guys, for obvious reasons.
Especially when they have a record, right? Those other conflicts you mentioned were ended when they recognized and supported the oppressed parties, if I get it right. But at the same time they have no morals, sure.
Sure man, I don’t really think its worth talking about it. We might decide to sacrifice profits for a moral high ground, who knows. That would be great, but I personally don’t think its likely.
I don’t think you understand that odds of that happening.
No I’m aware that it’s very very very low.
Because these people never showed that they even cared for their own population, and negotiations would mean they would need to actually work towards establishing a proper state and take care of themselves.
They literally did. How do you think Hamas got elected over Fatah. It wasn’t because Palestinians love terrorism or any racist shit like that. Straight from the wikipedia page:
In the 1990s, some 85% of its budget was allocated to the provision of social services. Hamas has been called perhaps the most significant social services actor in Palestine. By 2000, Hamas or its affiliated charities ran roughly 40% of the social institutions in the West Bank and Gaza and, with other Islamic charities, by 2005, was supporting 120,000 individuals with monthly financial support in Gaza. Part of the appeal of these institutions is that they fill a vacuum in the administration by the PLO of the Palestinian territories, which had failed to cater to the demand for jobs and broad social services, and is widely viewed as corrupt. As late as 2005, the budget of Hamas, drawing on global charity contributions, was mostly tied up in covering running expenses for its social programmes, which extended from the supply of housing, food and water for the needy to more general functions such as financial aid, medical assistance, educational development and religious instruction.
And how long do you mean by generations, cause Hamas has only resorted to terrorism against civilians from the 1990s. Hamas literally has in its charter that it is willing to accept a 2 state solution on the 1967 lines, so yes it would absolutely be willing to negotiate.
There is something wrong with the subject if it needs those for anyone to understand the bad nature. You don’t need that with terrorism. Hamas kills -> people die -> hamas must be stopped.
The main radicalizing factor isn’t TV
Then how come it needs to be about how everyone should kill jews?
while Israel propagandizes its civilians and forces most of them into either jail or military service when they reach military age
An army is very different from what terrorists do.
They also put military infrastructure in crowded civilian areas just like Hamas.
Well they also put meaningful effort into protecting all of that. I wouldn’t imagine anyone would do that otherwise.
Ukraine set up bases in civilian areas, including schools. But we still consider Russia the bad guys, for obvious reasons.
Is that sarcasm? Do I need to explain how Russia knowingly bombs non-military targets with no military personnel?
They literally did. How do you think Hamas got elected over Fatah.
It was mentioned (here too I think) that those elections were not exactly what you’d expect from proper elections, and yet you want to use this as an argument…
Straight from the wikipedia page
Well look at how things changed. What was the moment hamas decided to go full terrorist and spend resources on arming up, and how did Palestinians feel about that?
Hamas literally has in its charter that it is willing to accept a 2 state solution on the 1967 lines, so yes it would absolutely be willing to negotiate.
Straight from the wikipedia page:
Destroying Israel and establishing an Islamic theocracy in Palestine is essential;
Negotiated resolutions of Jewish and Palestinian claims to the land are unacceptable.
Ok. Settler colonialism is bad because it is slow ethnic cleansing, and ethnic cleansing is bad. This alone justifies armed resistance, but the settler colonialism is enforced by an apartheid system that treats Palestinians as less than Jewish settlers and restricts their access to their own land with checkpoints, walls, and armed guards. This justifies armed resistance even more.
Hamas kills -> people die -> hamas must be stopped
That’s bullshit lmao. Israel kills -> people die -> Israel must be stopped. The north during the civil war kills -> people die -> the union must be stopped. Americans kill germans and japanese people in ww2 -> people die -> the US must be stopped.
See how I can also massively oversimplify the situation.
Then how come it needs to be about how everyone should kill jews?
If I had to guess, it just changes the focus of the hate from Israel to all jews, but again the main factor that leads to the hate is the horrific conditions they live in. Nothing else can come close to that. But again, if you really cared about turning kids into terrorists you would be criticizing the Israeli practices of conscripting people and sending them to the west bank.
An army is very different from what terrorists do.
How so. Shouldn’t an oppresive state actor with backing from the US be held to a higher standard than a resistance movement consisting of a bunch of angry zoomers led by some rich guys in qatar? Yet if you look at the actual actions that they take, Israel tends to be worse in a lot of ways.
Is that sarcasm? Do I need to explain how Russia knowingly bombs non-military targets with no military personnel?
No, it’s not sarcasm, and you don’t have to explain that. I know that Russia purposefully kills civilians. You do however have to show me evidence that every single one of the hospitals and schools that Israel has bombed is a valid military target (spoiler alert: there is none in most cases), and explain why when Russia does it, its bad, but when Israel targets civilians, its fine actually and it isn’t terrorism.
It was mentioned (here too I think) that those elections were not exactly what you’d expect from proper elections, and yet you want to use this as an argument…
It wasn’t a proper election sure, and Hamas should have won far fewer seats based on the percent of votes, but the point is that they had a large amount of public support.
Well look at how things changed. What was the moment hamas decided to go full terrorist and spend resources on arming up, and how did Palestinians feel about that?
Starting in the 1990s they did more and more terrorism. And since the elections were in 2006, obviously a lot of Palestinians didn’t care too much about that.
Destroying Israel and establishing an Islamic theocracy in Palestine is essential; Negotiated resolutions of Jewish and Palestinian claims to the land are unacceptable.
Straight from the wikipedia page:
Hamas began negotiating with Israel and the 1967 borders in the agreements it signed with Fatah in 2005, 2006 and 2007.[71] In 2017, Hamas released a new charter that supported a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders without recognizing Israel.[72][73][74][75] Hamas’s repeated offers of a truce (for a period of 10–100 years[76]) based on the 1967 borders are seen by many as being consistent with a two-state solution,[77][78][79][80] while others state that Hamas retains the long-term objective of establishing one state in former Mandatory Palestine.
So yes, they are willing to negotiate. And some people think that they aren’t willing to accept a 2 state solution, but that doesn’t mean Israel shouldn’t at least try to negotiate for peace. If hamas keeps attacking, Israel has the military power to make things go right back to the way it was before. The reason Israel doesn’t negotiate is because it isn’t interested in peace, it is interested in cleansing all palestinians from the west bank and gaza and taking their land.
Settler colonialism is bad because it is slow ethnic cleansing, and ethnic cleansing is bad.
It is bad but you have to include context. The context may show that it may be not a cleansing at all.
This alone justifies armed resistance, but the settler colonialism is enforced by an apartheid system that treats Palestinians as less than Jewish settlers and restricts their access to their own land with checkpoints, walls, and armed guards. This justifies armed resistance even more.
Sigh. I want to support logic. I want to support countries who define such logic. But sometimes it’s badly defined. When you say “apartheid justifies armed resistance” I want to agree, but why would anyone use it in real life when in real life it can interpreted as “if someone makes you homeless and surrounds you by fire in a 10x10 meters area, it is okay to take a knife and ask them to stop” AND “if someone builds something on an empty land that you thought was yours, it’s okay to take rifles and kill anyone on a land they believe is theirs, to take hostages, break their limbs, spit on their bodies and sing songs about how glorious your god is while you fire missiles at an angle that roughly should land them on their cities”? This is why I asked for details.
That’s bullshit lmao. Israel kills -> people die -> Israel must be stopped. The north during the civil war kills -> people die -> the union must be stopped. Americans kill germans and japanese people in ww2 -> people die -> the US must be stopped. See how I can also massively oversimplify the situation.
I needed to describe what I mean in more detail, sorry. Like I said, this is why I asked for details. My assumption in such logic chains is that the first object has no substance or meaningful reasons. Terrorism rarely has them, and this case is, in my opinion, is not much better. Unless Gaza has been bombed heavily first (unprovoked, which seems was never a case with Israel), it should not have reacted by planning that October 7 attack for months and possibly years.
There is data that show:
how it was not only military trained people who invaded Israel, it was quite ordinary Palestinians too, in good quantities.
how they shot anyone indiscriminately, including on a festival event, shooting even in every toilet stand, to not leave anyone alive.
how they called their parents and said something like “hey dad check WhatsApp, I sent you videos of how I killed jews, I’m calling you from the phone I took from them, I’m a hero” and getting a reply like “Allahu Akbar, kill them more”.
how they faked a lot of videos with “victims” of Israel attacks.
etc.
And what do we have on Israel? The long territory dispute is not of my interest. I know it’s very complex, and both parties have enough to support their claims on that land (Gaza refusing to do stuff properly, Israel paying for land etc.).
Apartheid? Gaza is quite tight, yes, but it’s not exactly Kowloon. How exactly could they show the world that they badly need more land? Israel didn’t destroy anything on a land before occupying/populating it, did they? Or do we have records of it doing basically the same terrorist stuff in order to capture a land that was never theirs?
Ethnic cleansing? You go and tell Israeli about that. Israel is populated by arabs who are welcomed to use arabic. At some point there were big populations of jews in arab countries, and now there is no such thing. Isn’t that what would we call cleansing? I’m not seeing any record that would show Jews/Israeli are somehow driven by a desire to destroy a certain nation. There would be at least some emotion to it or something, but instead Israel’s attacks seem instrumental and logical. It’s the opposite with Gaza.
the hate is the horrific conditions they live in. Nothing else can come close to that.
I think I saw a Palestinian with dental crowns. I can imagine one or two countries live in much more horrific conditions.
How so. Shouldn’t an oppresive state actor with backing from the US be held to a higher standard than a resistance movement consisting of a bunch of angry zoomers led by some rich guys in qatar? Yet if you look at the actual actions that they take, Israel tends to be worse in a lot of ways.
Not sure what you’re talking about. Not seeing signs of Israeli army being overall incompetent.
You do however have to show me evidence that every single one of the hospitals and schools that Israel has bombed is a valid military target (spoiler alert: there is none in most cases), and explain why when Russia does it, its bad, but when Israel targets civilians, its fine actually and it isn’t terrorism.
I’m not here to show such evidence, but my understanding and expectation is that Israel will proceed to be transparent about its actions, and will respond to war crime allegations properly, if not now then eventually. Because Israel is quite involved with other countries, is a part of the community that tries to be adequate and show this to everyone. This is where it’s different from Russia. It’s not Israel you should compare Russia to, it’s Hamas. You wouldn’t expect Palestinian terrorists to be judged properly because Gaza has neither institutions nor the will for that, and it’s the same with Russian murderers.
doesn’t mean Israel shouldn’t at least try to negotiate for peace. If hamas keeps attacking, Israel has the military power to make things go right back to the way it was before. The reason Israel doesn’t negotiate is because it isn’t interested in peace, it is interested in cleansing all palestinians from the west bank and gaza and taking their land.
I don’t think it’s okay to put the burden on Israel while it should be Hamas who could show everyone they are not mindless monsters first. And again, I don’t see any evidence that would show Israel has such intentions. If it did, it would be much more effective to spend all those resources on absolute destruction of Gaza years ago, instead of that expensive iron dome stuff. If it did, we’d see many more signs of intolerance. Perhaps most importantly, we’d see some kind of logic behind those intentions. And it doesn’t seem at all that Israel needs that little extra land for any reason.
It is bad but you have to include context. The context may show that it may be not a cleansing at all.
Gotcha yea. The context here is that Israel has explicitly stated that it wants to make jews an ethnic majority in certain areas of the West Bank, and in order to do this it has kicked Palestinians out so in this case it is ethnic cleansing.
I get what ur saying about wanting details, but the second case wouldn’t be apartheid or ethnic cleansing if there weren’t people there before. But yeah, I should have just elaborated first. Is the “armed guards, enforced separation, treated as less than settlers on their own land, regularly killed” enough?
Apartheid? Gaza is quite tight, yes, but it’s not exactly Kowloon. How exactly could they show the world that they badly need more land?
Apartheid more accurately describes the West Bank imo, Gaza is more like one long ongoing war crime. The blockade is collective punishment. It prevents Palestinians from receiving certain medical care, and there’s shortages of a ton of things. I know of people who have been banned from lifesaving cancer treatment due to the blockade and have died.
Israel didn’t destroy anything on a land before occupying/populating it, did they?
Are we talking when they first started occupying, or are we talking closer to now? Because yes in both cases they do destroy stuff. They have always burned down villages if they didn’t want them to be there. At first they planted trees on top of them to completely erase any traces of it, I don’t know if they still do that. I don’t think they burned down as much stuff in Gaza, but settlers destroyed some of the stuff in Gaza as they were being pulled out, and Israel bulldozed their airport before that. You have to keep in mind that this was a populated area, Israel forced Palestinians out and build their own stuff on top of it.
And in the west bank, they literally just went in and destroyed roads, monuments, and water infrastructure for the fun of it.
At some point there were big populations of jews in arab countries, and now there is no such thing. Isn’t that what would we call cleansing?
Yes, it was horrific. However the correct response to that is not to ethnically cleanse different people, it’s a military intervention to stop the ethnic cleansing.
I’m not seeing any record that would show Jews/Israeli are somehow driven by a desire to destroy a certain nation.
Jews definitely aren’t. If anyone says that, they’re antisemitic and the proper response is to punch them in the face. Israeli politicians on the other hand, have made it very clear that they intend to have 1 Israeli state with a Jewish majority encompassing all of Palestine. Some Israelis have gone as far as to say they want Lebanon too, which is completely ridiculous because Hezbollah would kick their asses.
I think I saw a Palestinian with dental crowns. I can imagine one or two countries live in much more horrific conditions.
I’m sure if there was a clear cause for their suffering, they would hate that cause much more than the Palestinians have been taught to hate Israel.
Not sure what you’re talking about. Not seeing signs of Israeli army being overall incompetent.
Are we talking about incompetence or the moral standard we hold armies to, I’m confused. If you’re worried about incompetence, I’d say October 7th was a sign that it’s incompetent, as well as its loss against Hezbollah in Lebanon during the Lebanese civil war (Battle of Bint Jbeil, 5,000 IDF soldiers lost to 150 Hezbollah fighters).
but my understanding and expectation is that Israel will proceed to be transparent about its actions, and will respond to war crime allegations properly, if not now then eventually.
Your understanding is wrong unfortunately. Israel commits war crimes all the time and gets away with it. It admitted to killing journalists (with a sniper, not an airstrike). I’m gonna point to the great march of return again. They killed marked medics and children as young as 2 with sniper fire. This is a war crime. In fact they tend to not provide any evidence that their bombing targets are valid military targets.
In fact, because Hamas rockets usually kill so few, and countries have a responsibility during war to not harm civilians and civilian infrastructure in excess of the military advantage expected, I would argue that almost every single Israeli airstrike before October 7th, and most of them afterwards, is also a war crime, even if there were rockets there. And Amnesty International agrees.
I don’t think it’s okay to put the burden on Israel while it should be Hamas who could show everyone they are not mindless monsters first.
Gotcha, and I saw the part about Hamas wanting to destroy Israel. I think back in 1948 Israel showed the Palestinians how horrific they were, but Palestinians were still willing to come to the table since then, so I don’t think Israel can use the october 7th excuse.
If Israel genuinely wants to seek a 2 state solution, and negotiating with Hamas is off the table (I still think its worth a try, but regardless), then they should start by improving conditions in the west bank, getting rid of checkpoints, withdrawing all of the settlers, etc. That would show Palestinians that actually peaceful negotiation can work, and Hamas’s support would collapse and Israel could negotiate with someone else from Gaza.
Or alternatively, they could turn themselves into a secular state instead of an ethnostate. This would also improve conditions in the west bank, it would satisfy the PLO (which includes the PFLP and Fatah), and ultimately it would also result in Hamas’s support collapsing.
They’ve done neither of these, instead building more and more settlements in the west bank, showing that they aren’t interested in peace, and leaving Palestinians with only Hamas/PIJ/PFLP/DFLP/Fatah(militant wing) as options for their liberation.
Even if hundreds were there, maybe they should work with the PLO to get rid of a theoretical common enemy? Nope, oppression of all Palestinians is the real goal of the IDF. They hate all Palestinian groups because they want all of them gone at some point in the future. If they wanted any sort of peace or coexistence, they would be bankrolling Palestinians who oppose Hamas, but they don’t, so they don’t. Those evil fucks willingly endanger their own citizens by empowering reactionary fuckheads like Hamas. It’s awful.
No excuses, but it helps to remember context. People are people, and there are always shitty people in any state. It is what considered acceptable is important. What more do you want from IDF? Execution without investigation?
Also this is honestly goes as nitpicking. Yes, there are always bad apples. But as far as I can see IDF reacts correctly. It is disturbing in my opinion that there is so much anti-Israel propaganda (not even criticism) is ongoing and supported by clearly more than half of the fediverse (judging by upvoting), where even correct behavior is criticized, and completely ignores the realities that Israel has to deal with. Not even criticizing the use of Himan shields by Hamas, for example.
What more do you want from IDF? Execution without investigation?
Oh, heavens no. That’s not what I want from the idf. At this point, that’s what I want for the idf.
It’s worrying for me that you’re confusing anti-israel propaganda with anti-terrorism discussion. At this point, Israel is a terrorist state. It shouldn’t ‘disturb’ you that people discuss about it and find that they don’t agree with their actions. People are rarely alright with mindless murder for any reason, let alone for land-grabbing masked as religion. Bombing civilians and hospitals, humiliating people because you’re holding a gun and get off on being “powerful”, raping people and committing war crimes, ethnically cleansing a region for the past 70 years, holy shit, this is what you see from a terrorist organization masquerading as a legitimate state and you draw the conclusion that it’s disturbing to be against that? Maybe you should be disturbed by your misshapen world view where all of this is acceptable.
In response to the evidence, the IDF said that “the [soldiers’] conduct that emerges from these scenes is grave and inconsistent with the values of the IDF. The incidents are under investigation. The IDF commanders will hold talks with all the soldiers on the front. One soldier has been dismissed from reserve service.”
Hey look it’s some asshole who didn’t read the fucking article and they’re quoting some other asshole who didn’t read the fucking article and who’s somehow oblivious to the comment from the person I replied to that says “oh I didn’t read the article.” (emphasis added)
Although I’m awed by your commitment to being the dumbest motherfucker on the planet, you could’ve spared yourself getting so upset about this water-is-wet statement of fact by just reading for a minute before opening your dumb mouth.
Your previous comment was pretty vague about what you were responding to. You should have made it clear you were responding to the article and not the comment you actually replied to because that’s what it sounds like. You really don’t have a right to respond this aggressively.
I disagree about the clarity. It’s a thread of replies that begins with a direct quote from the article. Any vagueness could be cleared up by either asking a question or reading the article.
When someone replies directly to me quoting something completely irrelevant and unrelated saying “you suck,” I reserve the right to mock them. Especially when my original comment should be as controversial as saying the article was published in the Times of Israel on November 1st.
I made a single, well-founded assumption that you didn’t read the article. If you did read it, it’s worse. I was giving you the benefit of the doubt that, had you read it, you would have actually replied to what I said and not posted something completely irrelevant.
Care to elaborate on how videos not depicting death of any kind are evidence of murder? Or what the IDF’s very specific response to the very specific crimes shown on these very specific videos has to do with what you quoted? Or what that has to do with my very narrow (and true) statement that the videos in question don’t depict murder?
Remember when they shot a journalist in the head and provided a fake investigation into it that they then took back but still concluded in the end that the journalist was at fault for getting shot?
Remember when they crushed a 23 years old woman from the US to death with a bulldozer because she was protesting the demolition of palestinian homes, then they started an “investigation” where they found out they hadn’t done anything wrong because they didn’t see her even though the woman has been protesting there for hours and the soldiers that were there testified that she was being a nuisance for hours?
Remember the laws they passed that let the IDF destroy palestinian homes if they deem by internal investigation that they’re somehow connected to “terrorism”?
Remember the laws that let IDF soldiers shoot kids if they throw rocks at soldiers in occupied territories?
At the end of the article they point out that they don’t know how many of the reported casualties on the Palestinian side are Hamas fighters, but at the same time don’t do the same with the Israelian casualties, and I believe around 300 were IDF soldiers.
Apart from that I think at least they are reasonable and also seem to be critical to their government’s handling of the crisis.
And it is saddening what is happening in the West bank with the silent approval of authorities and army, that’s called oppression and racism and isn’t a good start for a much needed peaceful process.
There are no Hamas on the West bank I’m told. They are restricted to Gaza and that’s why it was an open air prison. These are just Palestinians that live and work there, but are not connected to Gaza.
Besides that, they moved all the real soldiers and reservists to the frontline and allowed among others, settlers to do the policing in the region with maybe 1 IDF person in charge when shit happens. I truly believe that’s the reason why we’re seeing this. It’s assholes driving around, looking for Palestinians torturing and killing them. Afterwards it’s always in self defense.
Easy don’t acknowledge that anything‘s going on now. I’ve been watching western news media and there is now no coverage of Russia Ukraine situation.l, other then US politicians trying to get an aid package to Ukraine. Unsurprisingly, it’ll be tied to aid for Israel. This way they don’t need to preform mental gymnastics to condemn Russia and not Israel. I think the only story I’ve seen about Ukraine was about a family of 9 that was massacred in their sleep.
The war of Russia against Ukraine is still covered in most news – its just not happening much due to the current stalemate.
The general consensus regarding Israel is the same like before the war: the Settling is breaking international law and needs to stop. At the same time Hamas is a terrorist organization. It’s a classic ‘everybody sucks here – but one side is significantly worse’ and the palestinians are suffering from the conflict between Hamas and Israel.
War in Ukraine is still very much covered in the print/digital news. My two go-tos (the guardian and the bbc) both have dedicated section for the Russian Invasion.
I don’t watch television news, but I can imagine there is less coverage on that simply because there is not much suitable video content to be broadcast and what there is is usually several days, or even weeks old for operational reasons.
Under any solution (one or two state), Hamas will be the ones in power and representing the Palestinian block. Doesn’t matter if they do a good job of it or not.
They are the de facto (and kind of de jure…) government of Gaza. Hell, they run the Health Ministry that provides a lot of the updates.
If this somehow ends with anything short of further subjugation and/or eradication, they will be “heroes”. And they aren’t going to lessen their hold on the Palestinian people.
Popularity doesn’t really matter when they were, and are, the power in charge in Gaza.
And “popularity” will go through the roof if, somehow, they are the ones that get the Israeli Government to stop being genocidal dicks and actually make concessions… by raping and murdering Israeli, German, and UK citizens?
Almost 20 years ago, when the majority of Palestinians alive today were either too young to vote or hadn’t even been born. How long after an election do you assume elected leaders have any real mandate?
My point was that regardless of their ability to do it, they were at one time the elected officials of the geographic location known as Gaza. They’re obviously not a real government in policy and action, but they’re the only thing that exists to even bear the term or concept of governance in the area.
There is no other group to be considered as the government, no matter how awful Hamas is at being a government of any variety.
At one time, yes, but I don’t think we should be holding the Palestinians today to that. That would be like the Dubya era. If he had kept office until now, he would certainly not represent the opinion of Americans.
Hamas is embedded like a parasite, but there’s better ways to point this out.
Like over a decade ago but they havent held elections since. I’ve seen countering articles saying Hamas has overwhelming support by the people, vs actually Hamas murders anyone who goes against them. So who knows. Fog of war and all that.
Fucking deranged tankies man, their Lord and Savior Hasan Abi has been going off about how “baby settlers” are valid military targets. These people yearn to live under a propaganda-military dictatorship.
Bro like literally 90% of Lemmy has a throbbing boner for Hamas and his stated antisemitic terrorists, even in this thread, terrorists apologizers abound
Weird that as a Jew who is pretty damn sensitive to antisemitism since I faced a lot of it growing up in religious Indiana, I haven’t noticed this support for antisemitic terrorists on Lemmy. I’ve seen a lot of support for innocent people being slaughtered because of Israel’s response to antisemitic terrorists, but that’s a separate issue.
People in the U.S. protested the war in Afghanistan. Does that mean they supported Al Qaeda? Because this is some real “you’re either with us or you’re with the terrorists” thinking from my perspective.
Not to condone their actions, but what would Hamas care about getting supporters? Palestine situation hasn’t been helped much at all by international supporters, so it’s not like they care about that.
The two are linked together. When aid has been sent to Palestine, to help Palestinians, Hamas has taken it for themselves. There was an EU project I believe to build water infrastructure, and Hamas took it apart to make into rockets.
I don’t think it’s possible to provide material support to the Palestinians. Hamas just takes it all. It’s so fucked.
Palestine is dependent on foreign aid to continue its war fighting. Specifically aid from western nations. They need supporters to feed, fuel and supply it’s military and populace.
It’s deliberate. If you don’t support Israel’s apartheid of Palestine, you are apparently antisemitic and want Israel destroyed.
Hamas is not helping things. They are bunch of murderous religious nutters. They do want Israel gone. Just like how Israel’s nutters want Palestine gone.
But Hamas are not Palestine anymore than Israel is its religious nutters.
The only issue I see are the dumbasses that cant tell the difference, supporting Palestinians doesn’t mean support for Hamas. But if you don’t think they need some sort of military support in one way or another you don’t need to be making comments about it and need to instead go back and read a little history about the Israelie Occupation and Crimes Against Humanity thats taken place. Hell you wouldn’t even have to go back in time very far but a year maybe less, but I suggest to get the full picture and decent understanding to allow yourself to come and discuss world topics with other adults that you start from the beginning.
I support the innocent Palestinian people who are being slaughtered. Does that mean I support Hamas? Because I think Hamas is an Iranian puppet that wants a Palestinian caliphate run under Sharia law. I don’t think they help the Palestinian people either. So am I a Hamas supporter? By your definition, apparently.
They shouldn’t have any fucking supporters. This is the shit all the anti-Israel people are supporting. I’m no fan of Netanyahu but wtf do they expect Israel to do? It’s like everyone forgot what prompted this and thinks Israel just woke up one morning and decided to raze everything because they were bored.
It’s a disproportionate response, and misdirected. But it is definitely a response to something real, which the more rabid anti-Israel types seem to gloss over.
Yes it’s a humanitarian disaster through and through, and the government response is internationally humiliating for Israel. I felt the same way when the USA started carpet bombing Baghdad after 9/11, although that was far worse and made much less sense.
I’m not arrogant enough to think I have sufficient knowledge or access to reliable enough information to make that judgement. I can certainly say it’s a humanitarian disaster and tragedy.
What did you expect? Do you think that hitting a wasp nest with a rod just once means you’ll only be stung once because you only hit it once? There’s no rule stating that the wasps must respond with equal magnitude. If people are now getting hurt, it’s because someone provoked the wasps. The notion that reactions must be proportionate to the offense is quite naive.
Idk what’s more hilarious here, the implication that a Palestinian baby deserves to die because of what Hamas did or the implication that Jews are hyperaggressive animals that are completely incapable of moral reasoning.
Are you focusing solely on the casualties involving children? Does that mean any location with children is off-limits for retaliation, providing a shield for adversaries because children are present? This is not a simple game of hide and seek, nor is it your idealistic world where a slap is met with a turned cheek.
It’s a common misconception that supporters of Israel are indifferent to the death of children or any civilian, for that matter, and you seem to be perpetuating this narrative. You choose the most objectionable point about an opponent to make an accusation, and, much like someone obstinately arguing without listening to reason, you consider yourself morally superior and in the right.
What, in your opinion, would be a suitable response to an attack from Hamas? Would peaceful protests, international condemnation, or sanctions suffice?
If you’ve discarded your spine, don’t assume everyone else has done the same. An entity without the ability to react appropriately can only succumb.
Your narrative would hold if it weren’t flawed; it’s an oversimplification. Let’s take your perspective where Hamas is the bees that stung Israel, and now Israel is retaliating against the land harboring the bee nest. (I use ‘bees’ here to distinguish from my earlier wasp analogy).
If your neighbor disliked the bees as much as you and agreed the nest was a problem, then certainly, destroying it with care to avoid collateral damage would be wise. However, the situation changes if your neighbor is a beekeeper who shields the bees in his home to protect them from you. If those bees become aggressive and harm your family, naturally, you’d first request the neighbor to remove the bees. Should they refuse, you’d have every right to seek external help. But what if the authorities do little, leaving you to suffer the stings while your neighbor faces minimal consequences? Rather than passively endure this, you might feel compelled to act independently to prevent future stings and deter the beekeeper from maintaining this threat.
Okay, then let’s hypothetically say Israel forms a terrorist organization that doesn’t overlap with the Israeli government itself, would they then have the right to attack Gaza? This organization would essentially be in the same position relative to Israel as Hamas is to the Palestinians.
The way you debate reminds me of someone who might have abandoned their education prematurely. Are you going to complain to the teacher because you cannot acknowledge that your reasoning is flawed, incomplete, and biased? Your approach to this discussion is quite frankly, absurd.
Well, that not totally incorrect. The settlers starting moving in (before the nation was a thing) and started killing and displacing the existing inhabitants. It’s been bad from the start, though they have had periods that are better than others. People excuse Israel for what Hamas has done, but rarely do those same people forgive Hamas for what the Jewish settlers have done.
Personally, I don’t make a judgment on Hamas. They are a much weaker force against a much stronger force. If they fight a conventional war then they don’t stand a chance. Gorilla warfare/terrorism is the only viable option for them. Israel uses terrorism every day, but it’s only bad when Hamas does it?
I do judge Israel. They are a strong force, and more importantly are getting support from many other powerful nations. Until my country (the US) stops sending support, I will criticize their actions. I do not condone my money going towards what they do.
it isn’t, actually. they have a government with a prime minister and a president which oppose hamas and which netanyahu wants nobody to pay attention to because they are the legitimate path to statehood
Well then Netanyahu is doing a great job because I heard that Hamas was elected by the palestinians and I never heard about another Palestinian government.
Didn’t Netanyahu prop up Hamas? That’s all the info I need to know. That and one conversation with a Zionist, they are out of their mind and will straight up say that Palestinians don’t deserve to live. That conversation was over a decade ago and it still gives me the creepy crawlys… it was like talking to a proud Nazi that firmly believed in his ideology.
Zionists fall under the category of most religious extremeist- stupid and dangerous. If we could drop all zionists in a hunger games scenario with all members of hamas, maybe throw the Catholic Church in there too.
Except nobody wins we just burn it down when they’re done killing each other like they’re going to do anyway.
timesofisrael.com
Hot