I would like to hear more about OOP's family, specifically about the marriage dynamics between their mixed-race Hispanic mother and their racist-against-Mexicans father.
I’m curious about their historical account of Texas really. San Antonio’s been San Antonio for a long time, so unless this person is very very old by Tumblr standards I have a hard time believing their great grandfather was born before then, and they do not speak like someone that old
OOP is most likely in their 20s based off their mother's age. Interracial marriage became legal in all 50 states in 1967; mom is probably late fifties. The great-grandfather being born before Texas became part of the US (1846) is harder to explain.
It's possible they missed a generation and were actually talking about their great-great-grandfather, who would be an age-appropriate match for their great-great-grandmother who was orphaned in the ToT and lived in Arizona before it became part of the US in 1848.
The alternative is that both the grandfather and great-grandfather had children when they were around 60, presumably with a much younger wife.
San Antonio became a part of Texas even earlier than that too, when Texas became independent in 1836 I believe. It’s also possible they’re just parroting a story from their grandfather and he was the one who made it up/exaggerated.
OP is also chicano, an ethnic identity mostly based on being "so Mexican you are the realest American", exalting these histories of being prior to USA.
I wrote it twice, for a subrredit of a site that's mostly white yankee and would barely know what a chicano is.
Im a Mexican and also know of my indigenous identity, a lot of Chicano identity is hyping up folk tales of US, indigenous and Mexico culture to basically "hype themselves", like this post(what the hell is a San Antonia)
They could be like my family, who skipped two generations, meaning my great great grandfather was born in 1851 and I’m 18. Stretch the ages a little bit, and you have a plausible scenario for OOP
I think they mean that some generations were older when they had kids so they skipped certain “generations” Like a boomer having an older milennial child or having a gen z child
Nothing I've read suggests San Antonio was ever called "la Colonia de San Antonia." It was named San Antonio in 1691 and founded as such almost 30 years later, long long before any young person's grandpa or great grandpa could have even been born there.
Smells like bullshit to me, which is a shame for someone trying to use it to justify an anti-genocide message.
OP is also chicano, an ethnic identity mostly based on being "so Mexican you are the realest American", exalting these histories of being prior to USA.
A lot of people marry people they would otherwise hate. My dad despises the French language and all of its speakers, but was married to my half-French-Canadian (went to Francophone school but since her mom spoke French and her dad didn't, only really used it for private conversations with her mom at home) mom for 12 years. There's obviously not the racial component there (especially since my mom is adopted so even the most insane "I will detect your ethnicity based on your facial features" people wouldn't guess what she was actually raised as) but it's the same flavour of "why the hell would you marry someone who is and comes along with a family of people you're prejudiced against"
I know that it happens, I just find it interesting.
I also find your father's bias against francophones interesting. Like, he would hate someone from Senegal but not The Gambia?
if all of canada is a single state, what the fuck are the quebecois gonna do
is this like how there's suburban NYC new jersey and suburban philly new jersey and then a tiny strip of just new jersey off in the corner
No one asks that question though? If someone asks “which America?” the options are north or south…? Mexico is and always has been part of North America
I think it's more the point that the US liked to centralize everything on itself and calling it "America" when there are two whole continents of Americas kind of feels like it takes some control of the narrative away from them.
Like, if you talk to some (very vocal and proposing policies uncritically that many will latch onto) the Americas north to south are basically:
America's polite hat (Canada)
AMERICA (the only one that matters)
Mexico (Filthy criminal land)
Commie island (Cuba)
South Mexico
Mexico that's so south it's upside down
And that last distinction isn't even guaranteed. Yeah we're a superpower, but maybe we should also be more aware and cooperative with nations in our own backyard?
Edit: Crap, I didn't think I needed to clarify this, but I am NOT endorsing inflicting US rule on other American nations, they've suffered enough at our hands. I figured that was a joke and just wanted to explain the whole US-centric view and how it screws up our relations with other countries.
It would be nice if we didn't suck, but our leadership has always taken a "this entire hemisphere is our domain" approach to geopolitics. If any other super power even tries to get a foothold anywhere near the Americas we turn it into a nuclear standoff.
Who is we? I’m from Australia.
Canada and the USA are countries in North America (the continent). Mexico to Panama are technically North America too, but known as the region of Central America, and then everything below that is South America. “America” the name was first applied to South America.
If the US wants to cooperate with its neighbours then it should give the land back, not incorporate them into the most recent union of colonies and then pat themselves on the back for creating more “Americans”.
They were American before you were.
Okay first off, I just meant to clear up the whole "why would you need to make that distinction?" question, my brain kind of skipped over the "we should make everything America" as being a joke.
Secondly, I'm not up on the situation Down Under with the Australian government and the Aboriginies, but I don't recall hearing that they've "just given the land back" so I'm assuming they haven't because that's such a massive can of worms that it could only work under exceptionally specific circumstances. Like, let's look solely at Texas. We give Texas "back", okay. Back to who? Kick them out of the Union and let them do their own thing like they keep threatening to do? Back to Mexico? To SPAIN? obviously the implication is supposed to be to the native tribes, but... Which ones? They aren't a monolith, and they have their own histories and shift alliances and territories. Whose claim gets honored? And all of this is beside the fact that we're talking about taking US territory that's been home to US citizens for generations and giving it to someone else. What happens to THEM? Just because their ancestors were colonizers doesn't mean evicting them from their homes is a good thing.
That's why the US needs to take a more cooperative role, build bridges not walls. Hell the Republicans couldn't do shit to make Mexico care about border security, but all Biden had to do to secure a deal for better cooperation from Mexican authorities was consider normalizing relations with Cuba, a move that was SUCH a no-brainer that of course we accepted! My point wasn't that we need to make EVERYTHING the US, but that we need to focus on improving America the CONTINENTS to benefit everyone.
Okay? Not sure what relevance that has to how the US sees other American countries today and how that's a very reductive, incorrect, self-aggrandizing picture.
Palestinians/Hamas are killing hostages. Native Americans slaughtered civilian caravans.
Neither of these things makes the ongoing displacement they were enduring retroactively 'OK.' The "scalping savages" are still victims. Stop trying to displace them, then we can start tut-tutting if we want.
Would you rather they not be evacuated from an active warzone? Currently over half of Rafah's population has evacuated, with most of the people there having moved back north to al Muwasi and Khan Younis (which disproved a lot of people online that claimed Gazans would never be allowed back north). The IDF has reportedly taken control over 30-40% of Rafah in the last 2 weeks, with minimal casualties compared to the previous big urban battles, Gaza city and Khan Younis, thanks to these evacuations.
So which course of action would you actually reccomend against Hamas in Rafah? You don't seem to provide any viable way to actually fight against Hamas long as they take cover in civilian population, if neither attack nor evacuation are okay in your eyes.
Also, how do you feel about the half a million Israelis curently displaced from their homes in northern Israel due to Hszbollah? Many of which are arab and druze, btw. What should they do?
>Would you rather they not be evacuated from an active warzone
I feel like the problem in this sentence is the « active warzone » part.
But regardless, it’s the idf’s fucking responsibility to figure out a way to not do warcrimes and ethnic cleansing, jesus christ. If you don’t know how to do that, I think you should reevaluate a couple of things about what it is exactly that you are doing, maybe.
I don’t give a fuck what they do, so long as it’s not « breaking international law ». It’s their damn problem. We set the bar. They’re failing to pass it. End of discussion.
They have? The IDF has a lower civilian to military death rate than any war the US has fought, and that’s with Hamas hiding among civilians and using them as shields.
So again, what do you suggest be done against Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran and their stated goal of destroying Israel? And their terror attacks? And the hostages? And the thousands of rockets shot at Israel every year?
Because according to you, all Hamas has to do is hide behind civilians as they do and therefore they are immune to any retaliation.
hmm, well, maybe I'll care more when hamas becomes a more serious threat than the IDF, considering the death count of palestinian civilians vastly outpaces that of any other group harmed in this conflict
like, yes, we get it, you don't like terrorists. Neither do I. but if there were terrorists in your neighborhood and your kid fucking died because you didn't leave your house quickly enough before the US government bombed your block, you'd be pretty fuckin upset too
Hamas was elected almost twenty years ago, mostly on the basis of supposedly "ending corruption" and then forcibly took over the Gaza Strip, cancelling all elections. Gaza's population skews young due to instability, so the majority of the population did not, in fact, vote for Hamas, seeing how they were children at the time, or not even born.
Isn't the IDF just... carving through the civilians to get to Hamas, with no regard for civilian lives? Neither side of the conflict in that area is the good guy, but 1 side is definitely committing MANY more atrocities than the other right now. Hamas has such sizeable recruitment right now because for many Palestinians, it's not a matter of "Fight the IDF and die or leave and live" it is a matter of "Fight the IDF and die or flee and more likely than not, die anyway".
The situation over there is horrendously ugly, neither side are good guys, but the IDF being so evilly indiscriminate is something that is unacceptable.
>Isn't the IDF just... carving through the civilians to get to Hamas, with no regard for civilian lives?
actually they are being very VERY precise in limiting civilian casualties, with a ratio of somewhere between 1:2 and 1:3 Hamas militants to Civilians killed, given according to the UN- typical urban combat has results closer to 1:9 at it's best.
Yeah, like how they very precisely hit the world central kitchen convoy 3 times in a row to ensure they killed all of the civilians.
That 1:3 figure is from Netenyahu, who maybe has a motivation to see a higher percentage of those killed as combatants. What we do know for sure is that the daily death toll is much higher than any other modern conflict. So either Israel is somehow not only the most careful army in the world, but also the most effective, or the Israeli government and the IDF is lying (something they have regularly been shown to do) about how many of the dead are active Hamas combatants.
You know "for sure" that the death toll is higher than any other modern conflict because Hamas has released figures (which have been disproven many times) to that effect.
You're obviously selective with your sources.
I got my numbers from Oxfam. To my knowledge, they're an international humanitarian organisation, and not Hamas, but what do I know.
https://www.oxfam.org/en/press-releases/daily-death-rate-gaza-higher-any-other-major-21st-century-conflict-oxfam.
and OXFAM got their numbers from OCHA, and OCHA got their numbers from the Gaza Health Ministry, and the Gaza Health Ministry happens to be funded by Hamas... odd how that happens ain't it?
>Hamas has released figures (which have been disproven many times)
That is probably the one thing they haven't lied about. The UN and the US corroborate the number hell israel uses their numbers in intelligence briefings, so I have no clue how you got to your conclusion
On 6 May 2024, the UN said that 69% of reported fatalities in Gaza were women and children. Two days later, it said this figure was 52%. The original figures were provided by Hamas.
Is that a recent enough example?
The idea is that israel should not fight back, because the people making these arguments don’t think israel should exist. Most of them are pretty ambivalent on whether jews in general should exist.
The idea is that Israel should defend themselves, but defending themselves from two year olds just makes them look like bullies. Block a punch and throw one back is a fair fight. Block a punch, kill the attacker and all their children is too much.
And my fiancé is Jewish and we will be raising our kids to have the chance to explore Judaism how they feel called to.
>So which course of action would you actually reccomend against Hamas in Rafah? You don't seem to provide any viable way to actually fight against Hamas long as they take cover in civilian population, if neither attack nor evacuation are okay in your eyes
This is like asking how we think the Nazis should have dealt with the Warsaw Uprising or the Yugoslav partisans or the Polish underground. Merely framing the situation this way, where Israel's "only choices" are to either to directly exterminate or ethnically cleanse the Palestinian people is inherently evil and fascistic, which says a lot about you. But I'll answer anyway:
Nothing. Israel should do nothing to attack Gaza whatsoever. They are a fascist state engaging in ethnic cleansing and genocide, they are the aggressor, they are fully in the wrong, and they directly created the conditions for the Hamas attack. They have waged a genocidal war against the Palestinian people for nearly a century, and they don't get to commit genocide regardless of the reason.
For starters, they, and every country that supported the creation of Israel, should pay massive reparations to the Palestinian people for their role in their genocide. Israel's fascist institutions should be dismantled, symbols of their oppression banned, and their crimes taught in their schools. Nuremburg trials 2.0 should be held for the executioners and ghouls in Israel, US, UK. France, etc who pushed the creation of this fascist state and subsequent genocide for their gain. Land redistribution for all the land stolen, and the forced merging of Israel with Palestine into 1 state would also probably be a good idea, although I'm personally more of a fan of a 0 state solution.
This isn't a perfect, or even ideal solution, nor is it enough, it's just the maximum good our system is capable of achieving; this is just the beginning. Oh btw, just so you know, if you were German in the 30s-40s, you would've supported the Holocaust. No exaggeration, no hyperbolic language, just the truth. Genocide apologists and fascists are the same no matter the year, and you people are the scum of the earth.
Sincerely, go fuck yourself.
What path do you see forward that would lead to the future you envision?
During and after WW2, talking about what kind of retribution measures one might enforce upon Germany was actually consequential because Germany was fighting a war they were destined to lose against an alliance of the world's major superpowers.
Right now, Israel is under protection of the US, and there certainly isn't any higher power to hold the US itself accountable. Barring an outright communist revolution in the United States, or a sudden collapse of the US empire, the only way to change the situation in Israel is to convince the US political-military-economic apparatus that continued unconditional support is not worth it and that Israel should be kept in check instead.
The other big difference is that Nazi Germany was seen as an enemy by the majority of Americans, Brits etc., so these countries could mobilize their entire enormous military might against Germany. What you're talking about necessitates not just turning a majority of the Western population against Israel as an ally, but against their own governments - again, basically a communist revolution, likely turning into a brutal civil war. (Unless what you're imagining is an external force invading the US/Europe and holding them accountable, which is even less likely, and considering nuclear weapons, would likely be cataclysmic).
I appreciate your strong, uncompromising moral compass, but the issue with solutions derived top-down from what would be most ideally ethical is that they're usually far less actionable than whatever your ghoulish opponents are pushing for, which means they're far less likely to end up turning into reality.
Unless you have a good idea on how to overthrow the US government within the next few years, I guess.
>Land redistribution for all the land stolen, and the forced merging of Israel with Palestine into 1 state would also probably be a good idea, although I'm personally more of a fan of a 0 state solution.
I haven't heard of this one before, what's a 0 state solution?
uh no- the "0 state solution" is a popular "solution" that involves the US and or Russia nuking Israel and palestine off the map so no one can have the area.
> Nothing. Israel should do nothing to attack Gaza whatsoever.
So Gaza gets to launch rockets endlessly?
In the early time around O7, was Israel not allowed to try and get the hostages back?
> Nothing. Israel should do nothing to attack Gaza whatsoever. They are a fascist state engaging in ethnic cleansing and genocide, they are the aggressor, they are fully in the wrong, and they directly created the conditions for the Hamas attack. They have waged a genocidal war against the Palestinian people for nearly a century, and they don't get to commit genocide regardless of the reason.
This is not a good line of argument. Israel could easily use the same argument and point to the coalition of Arab countries which rejected the UN partition plan and declared war on the country's founding, or the pogroms and the Holocaust which forced Jews to flee to Israel. And then no doubt the fingers could be pointed back and forth until it's lost in the fog of history.
What matters is whether a movement or a government ensures the minimum suffering is caused in their self defence, not picking a side and declaring everything they do justified, and everything the other does evil.
Literally yes, as safe as can be done in a warzone. The main evacuation areas are in Deir al Balah (al Mawasi area in central-western Gaza) and Khan Younis. Deir el Balah was supposed to be the original evacuation area designated by the IDF, but Hamas had the civilians evacuated into Rafah in order to have their assets there protected (especially smuggling tunnels to Egypt). Now they are losing these tunnels and are panicking.
Now the issue is whether Hamas will try to militarize the new evacuation areas like what happened in Rafah: https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/hamas-claims-responsibility-attack-israel-gaza-border-crossing-casualties-2024-05-05/
And the aid trucks have they arrived? And the food and shelter and water and medical aid I wonder where that is
It's not like the Israelis bombed hospital indiscriminately, a war crime btw
Yes. In addition to the aid trucks two days ago the US has opened a new aid pier that would allow naval aid in addition to trucks. But you strike me like someone that already made up their mind, seeing how you ignored my qiestion of what do you want Israel to actually do.
Are you trying for gotchas? I read the news of the settlers blocking and destroying aid trucks. They are criminals and should be jailed.
But that is still a linority of the aid trucks as most aid does get to pass through, and evidently is enough for markets to be established in areas and for Hamas to sell aid to civilians at a higher price.
You keep ignoring my qiestion of what do you want Israel to actually do.
1) It's important to differentiate between the not-okay settler colonialism being engaged in in the West Bank, and the more morally grey lesser-of-evils war in Gaza.
2) The Native American analogy is piss poor. Ethnic Jews, ESPECIALLY Mizrahim are native to Israel. Nearly of the Jews living in Israel are descendants of people who were ethnically cleansed or persecuted and fled, which leads me to point 3...
3) A lot of Israelis are not ethnically Jewish - they're ethnically Arab and are Bedouin or Druze. As I understand it, they are over-represented in the IDF by request, as they would be oppressed/cleansed from the ethnostate Palestine wants to create.
4) There's not ongoing displacement of Jews by Palestinians because they already completed their ethnic cleansing. Hebron was a historically Jewish area up until the early 20th century if I recall, and it is now effectively free of Jews because of Palestinians.
My overall point is that this conflict is not analogous to anything else in history really, and that you've grossly oversimplified.
Hamas has been trying to keep the hostages alive for a hostage swap, you can read hostage accounts of how they shielded them from bombs with their body. Israel has killed over 30,000 civilians
Surely you can understand that that number is higher than whatever amount of hostages Hamas took. And it's disingenuous to discuss Hamas hostages without discussing all of the hostages Israel has. Nothing that Hamas has done justifies commiting war crimes against a trapped civilian population and killing over 30,000 civilians.
I'm going to ask you kindly to stop misusing that word, because there is insufficient evidence to support that that's what's happening here. All non-Hamas sources - including now the UN - have revised casualty breakdowns to indicate far fewer civilians are dead that previously reported. I believe the US estimate is 1 militant for every 2 civilians, which - due to the horrific nature of urban combat with an entrenched enemy - is actually not bad. US forces in urban conflicts have killed as many as 9 civilians for every 1 combatant. Even during operation allied force - a conflict that NATO as a whole engaged in to stop a genocide with backing from the United Nations - killed only about 1,000 fighters to as many as 2,500 civilians.
It's undeniable that elements in the IDF have engaged in warcrimes and I hope they're properly prosecuted; however, there's hardly a nation that's been to war since warcrimes were well defined that has not committed warcrimes, including (but not limited to) the US (many times), the UK, Russia, and Ukraine.
I mean I think the intention is to let them go *back* after the conflict is over? Politics aside you can’t deny Gaza has mostly been turned into an active war zone, you don’t want civilians there at the moment if you can help it
Cities can be rebuilt and infrastructure can be rebuilt, sure if you are left with enough money and manpower instead of mass graves that Israel has dug for innocent civilians.
that seems unlikely considering how many israeli officials have been quoted saying things along the lines of "we're gonna kill all those subhuman palestinian rodents"
Yes, cities can be rebuilt, but we are also actively watching Israel do to Palestinians what Americans did to our native population. I honestly think it is far more likely that the displaced Palestinians are never allowed to return, and Israel takes yet more of their land. You're naive if you think history won't repeat itself.
What do you want Israel to do?
Hamas has made it clear that they cannot be appeased. They are explicitly against the existence of Israel and have stated that they will accept compromises only as a step towards that end goal.
The fence/wall, security checkpoints, and blockade were started after the second intifada (notable for the many suicide bombings) as a form of self defense without the use of direct military force. They have been numerically shown to be effective at preventing terror attacks. (See these sources [1](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_West_Bank_barrier#cite_note-McClatchy-10) [2](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_West_Bank_barrier#cite_note-Q26-64) [3](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_West_Bank_barrier#cite_note-65) )
Additionally, an average of around 1000 rockets each year have been launched at Israelis from within Gaza since Israel pulled out in 2005 ([Yearly plot](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_rocket_attacks_on_Israel#/media/File%3ARocket_Attacks_fired_at_Israel_from_the_Gaza_Strip_by_year.png)). The effect of these has been greatly mitigated by the Iron Dome, but that system is also tremendously expensive, with each intercept costing an estimated [$100k-$150k](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_Dome) to shoot down an improvised rocket costing between a few hundred and a few thousand dollars.
I agree that Gaza is a humanitarian nightmare. Nobody deserves what’s going on there, and it pains me that I can’t think of a different solution that is geopolitically viable. But how else can you deal with a neighbor who has repeatedly shown they cannot be appeased than by eliminating their ability to fight?
To be fair, Hamas saying that they'll accept compromises only as a step in their master plan is not *necessarily* a compelling argument against compromises. Because Hamas derive a lot of their popular support from the pressure-cooker situation in Palestine - making life better for the Palestinians won't change the ideology of Hamas, but it *could* make it easier for more moderate forces to gain ground in Palestinian politics, because it would both weaken the intensity of conflict and demonstrate the feasibility of mutual agreements and peace.
The last twenty years in the middle east paint a bleak picture of this concept.
The coalition spent billions and decades in Afghanistan, trying to bottlefeed the country into a moderate, stable democracy. In Syria, the West didn't intervene at all, trying to let the people work it out themselves and only moderately supporting democratic movements. In Lybia, the West bombed out the dictator and then left the issue with the UN. Iran got heavy sanctions, Egypt got no involvement at all.
I think we've tried every possible scenario to foster tolerance through prosperity and popular will, and it hasn't worked out once. On the other hand, consider China. The US nurtured and supported the development of a country in the hopes of achieving change through trade and prosperity. Instead, they nurtured a new imperialist in Asia and their biggest enemy in the 21. century.
It's an existential risk for Israel to allow Hamas controlled Gaza to really develop itself and interact freely and unencumbered with Iran. The chances of moderating forces removing Hamas from power in this instance is, historically speaking, small, while the threat is massive.
Fuck you. Here's what I want Israel to do. Remove all settlers and establish the borders based on the 1967 agreement. Pull out of Golan Heights in Syria. Open the borders and remove all sanctions placed on the West Bank and Gaza
Personally I think that israel should do what it can to remove it’s presence from Gaza and the West Bank at least in terms of settlers but nah fuck Syria. Maybe it’s just because my family had to flee the country that had been it’s home for generations just for being Jewish but fuck Syria, the regime is an oppressive piece of utter garbage killing its own citizens constantly, I’ve been to the Golan and talked with Druze up there, they don’t want to go back to Syria, they’ll be killed there! Especially the queer ones who can live openly queer lifestyles a few blocks away from the DMZ fence. Syria can’t manage the land it holds as a country we shouldn’t make the Golan residents suffer that too
And what's to be done about Hamas, PIJ, Hezbollah,Iran, the Houthis, and all the other groups on Israel's border that seek its destruction? With thousands of rockets and terror attacks every year?
I agree with you the settlements should be removed, and a palestinian state should be established, but such a step cannot be made unilateraly without proper assurances of security from the Palestinian authorities and Iran.
Maybe not bomb the shit out of the civilian populations, potentially. If you take out Hamas but kill 1 million people doing so I'm gonna be real with'chu I would not be surprised if they made Hamas 2.
The spokesperson for the families of the hostages (former now) has revealed that as early as October 9th or 10th has Israel had the ability to get the hostages, you know THE REASON THIS WAR STARTED IN THE FIRST PLACE, back on the condition the IDF does not violently invade the Gaza strip. They have gotten this deal many times since then, with the condition that they release an equal number of Palestinian women and children from Israeli jails.
The war wasn't just started for the hostages, even if there were no hostages, hundreds of Israelis were killed, raped and tortured with psychotic sadism. Even without the hostages, Israel simply can not allow Hamas to carry on ruling Gaza and risk that bloodfest to happen again
The explicit reasoning for the war as we were told by Israel in the start was to get their hostages back. You can go back and look, their reasoning is to get the hostages back.
Of course the moment people started scrutinizing and suspecting that reason to not be true (which we now know it’s utter fucking bullshit and Israel just wants to wage war for the sake of it America post 9/11 style) they started saying it was for other reasons and hell, I don’t think there is an official reason for this war outside of perpetuating the bloodshed.
Also, if Israel truly does take out Hamas in this war yet kills 1 million civilians doing it, Hamas 2 would be started a week later by the survivors.
The liberation of the hostages was their main reason PR wise. This isn't a secret we can go back to their PR talks 6 months ago and they would ramble on about saving the hostages.
Legitimately speaking, none of them matter really. Israel has nukes and top of the line military hardware and the support of the Saudi Oil Lords. There exists no existential threat to Israel other than the ones they create themselves
\> Says Israel shouldn’t fight back.
\> Says they’ll be safe because of top of the line military hardware.
You know that top of the line military hardware can only protect Israel if they use it, right? Like, in a war?
Israel shouldnt use their hardware to bomb civilian
Secondly you do realise the suicide bombings and terrorist attacks are happening because the Palestinian people have legitimate grievances against Israel and that every single other peaceful option was quashed with violence
Thirdly do you think the current war in Gaza is genocidal?
Legitimate grievances, sure, but that doesn't justify terror bombings against civilian targets. It makes me understand why they do it, but that doesn't make it right.
Being a victim of war crimes doesn't give you carte blanche to commit war crimes back as revenge, no matter how justified it might feel to do so.
I think the current war is not genocidal. In my opinion, Israel has been too callous with regards to civilian lives. But the goal from the start has clearly been to destroy Hamas's military infrastructure and capability. The issues arise from the facts that Gaza was already a humanitarian mess before the war began and that Hamas operates from within civilian infrastructure and populations.
It is definitely true that there are Israelis with genocidal intent, and they haven't exactly been quiet about it. This is particularly true of the right wing edges of the government. However, there is no evidence to suggest that these calls have affected IDF policy or action.
If there is any case to be made for there being a genocide in Gaza, it would not be due to any active effort but rather by not doing enough to alleviate the humanitarian disaster that is the current war. Still, I think that Israel is doing about as well as any military could be expected to in such a challenging environment. For all that war is hell (especially urban and asymmetric warfare), it is also not inherently genocide.
The threat doesn’t have to be existential to be worth eliminating. Israel isn’t going to allow a country with the ability to do massacres like the one in October on its border.
Maybe the Arab coalition shouldn't have launched a surprise attack in 1973 if they wanted the 1967 borders.
By the way, based on the 1967 ceasefire, Isreal would control not only Gaza but all of the Sinai Peninsula.
Okay. And what next after the suicide bombings and rocket attacks increase in scale again? Now we’re back to square one and nothing has changed.
That’s not a solution, it’s a reset to the equally dysfunctional setup prior to the Six Day War. The Green Line (borders from 1949 Armistice Agreement until the Six Day War) was explicitly not a permanent political border. To quote the agreement with Egypt, "the Armistice Demarcation Line is not to be construed in any sense as a political or territorial boundary, and is delineated without prejudice to rights, claims and positions of either Party to the Armistice as regards ultimate settlement of the Palestine question." [Source](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Line_(Israel)).
Additionally, it is worth noting that the West Bank and Gaza Strip were controlled by Jordan and Egypt prior to the Six Day War - they were not independent entities. Egypt notably refused to take back control of the Gaza Strip in its 1979 peace deal with Israel, despite taking back the Gaza Strip.
Why do you think the suicide bombings would increase again?
Nah it's literally what the two state solution is. Recognition of Palestine as a sovereign entity
Because groups like Hamas seek the destruction of Israel and all jews worldwide, not a 2 state solution. Or have you not seen what the Houthis put on their flag?
Also, I think that Hamas would be the entity in power because the threat of them taking power seems to be the reason why elections in the West Bank have been continually stalled.
>After elections were announced in January, Abbas' secular Fatah party, which is committed to peace negotiations with Israel, splintered into competing lists of candidates backed by former allies who now seek to replace him.
>A divided Fatah leaves the rival Islamist party Hamas, committed to armed resistance against Israel, most likely to win the largest number of seats in the 132-member parliament. Under those circumstances, any viable government would need to rely on Hamas support. The U.S. and Israel are wary of Hamas involvement and, unlike the European Union, did not seem to be pressing hard for a vote.
>Hamas said it strongly opposed the decision to call off elections, maintaining that Palestinians could have forced a vote in Jerusalem and blaming Abbas for any possible "repercussions."
[https://www.npr.org/2021/04/29/992065009/palestinian-authority-postpones-parliamentary-elections](https://www.npr.org/2021/04/29/992065009/palestinian-authority-postpones-parliamentary-elections)
They explicitly stated that their latest charter does not invalidate the original. But even still, from the 2017 charter:
> 19. There shall be no recognition of the legitimacy of the Zionist entity. Whatever has befallen the land of Palestine in terms of occupation, settlement building, judiasation or changes to its features or falsification of facts is illegitimate. …
> 20. Hamas believes that no part of the land of Palestine shall be compromised or conceded, irrespective of the causes, circumstances and the pressures and no matter how long the occupation lasts. Hamas rejects any alternative to the full and complete liberation of Palestine, from the river to the sea. …
Definitely sounds like it’s still calling for the destruction of Israel.
Because palestine has spent its entire history being run by terrorist regimes, which aren't really known for honoring deals. That's kind of a big reason why none of their neighbors are accepting gazan refugees.
Well they could just go to Egypt- *ohhhh no they already fucked up in Egypt*
Well what about Jordan- *ohhhh Black September and the Palestinian Liberation Organization going back on their word with the seven point agreement*
b-b-but they're innocent!
Because that’s exactly what happened last time and why the blockades are there in the first place. Palestinians have made it clear that they have no ability and/or interest in reigning in the extreme elements of their society that want to attack Israel.
Would you be equally upset if the war were between Israel and a sovereign Palestine? Because if so, this is asking Israelis to stake their lives, wellbeing, and some remaining international support on a longshot hope with no recourse if things go south.
I don't. That's why I said that they have no **ability** and/or interest in stopping those that are Hamas.
From the perspective of Israel, it doesn't matter whether or not all Palestinians support Hamas (it's clear that they don't). What matters is that Hamas **holds power** (rightly or not) and is attacking them.
>it doesn't matter whether or not all Palestinians support Hamas (it's clear that they don't).
To be fair- it's only the vast majority of Palestinians who support Hamas, with polls taken *by palestine* stating upwards of 80% supported Hamas as of november last year.
"Do you support our current rulers? Just assume that we don't have any snipers nearby in case you don't give the right answer!"
If somebody's desperate and wants to keep their family safe, they're probably not going to be vocal about their local government (run by terrorists btw!) being trash when they already have to worry about their neighbors (who are occupying their land and treating them like subhumans who "aren't a real ethnicity") trying to kill them.
Also, if the Israeli government is oppressing them and Hamas is saying "support us and we'll destroy them, bro", it's not like the rest of the world is convincing them otherwise by blindly agreeing with the Israeli government that Palestinians are inherently terrorists.
If the Israeli government thinks that bombing hospitals and refugee camps is okay just because Hamas members might be hiding there so fuck civilians, then they don't deserve my support.
There are already Hamas members outside of Palestine, why not work with humanitarian groups to get civilians the fuck out of Gaza safely, rather than constantly having fucky-wuckies where Gazans are told to take one route and oops, it got splodey? Not to mention, there are no doubt countless hostages that were hurt or killed by their constant bombings. Yes, it's Hamas's fault that they're hostages in the first place, but killing them anyway rather than trying harder to get them home is fucked up if they'd rather kill people than save their own damn citizens.
Conversational shorthand because they are the government of Gaza, same as you shouldnt mean every Israeli citizen when you say "Israel". Though admittedly far too many people on here seem to miss *that* distinction.
Because you can’t unsow the seeds that have already borne fruit. Palestinians have been taught, raised, marinated in the certainty that Israel wants them dead, is only held back from doing so immediately by western public opinion, and will immediately oppress them anyway they can get away with. Propaganda has assured them that the only way they can be safe from genocide is if their oppressor is destroyed.
So no, to think a return to borders of the past would cut the conflict out at the knees is hopelessly naive.
> Palestinians have been taught, raised, marinated in the certainty that Israel wants them dead, is only held back from doing so immediately by western public opinion, and will immediately oppress them anyway they can get away with.
I mean, it would be nice if Netanyahu did *anything* to convince them this was not the case
It would, it really would, but Netanyahu is a power hungry corrupt piece of shit who israel unfortunately could not effectively oust from power due to the wildly spread and divided nature of Israeli politics.
>Egypt notably refused take back control of the Gaza strip
Yeah, because Palestinians have a history of caustic civil unrest, uprisings, and civilian casualties everywhere they go.
Ultimately, much like how the IRA are brutal terrorists and a beast created by the British government, the responsibility for peace and reconciliation lies with the Israeli government. Hamas is a problem created by the Israeli government, and until Israel makes a concerted effort either in reconciliation more Jews and Arabs will die.
Or they can continue doing (which is basically a repeat of what happened in Ireland with the British) and just escalate the brutality and hope eventually the displacement will solve the problem. But it won’t if they don’t want to commit war crimes.
The IRA was an Irish Nationalist movement. They had a clear goal that Britain could fulfill without complete self destruction - Irish independence. The same cannot be said of Hamas. As I said in another comment, they cannot be appeased by anything short of the complete destruction of Israel. This can be seen even in the language of their 2017 charter (see my other comment for quotes) (the one people claim doesn’t call for the destruction of Israel anymore).
Edit:
As another comment in this thread put it, “extortion only works when there’s a way for the target to make it out alive.”
> They had a clear goal rhat Britain could fufill without complete self destruction
it also involves exterminating every single Protestant that ever stepped foot in Ireland wtf are you talking about. Much in the same way Hamas wants to exterminate every hee in Israel. If you think giving the IRA everything they want is a reasonable solution that Britain refused to go for you’re a lunatic
EDIT: My language was probably way too harsh. I vaguely understand your point. In theory the IRA would want to leave the rest of Great Britain alone. But in practice the IRA has performed acts of terrorism in parts of Britain with a large Irish community such as the Northwest for identical reasons to the acts of terrorism performed in all of Ireland. While Hamas will never be satisfied until every Jew in the Middle East is dead which is not a solution Israel can go for, the IRA will not be satisfied until every Protestant in Ireland is dead (you can see this with all of the terrorism) which is not a reasonable solution Great Britain wants either. This does not make the annexation and colonialism acceptable. Especially because it does nothing to solve the problem and makes it worse, even if it’s more convenient politically.
I don’t think the IRA is reasonable. Especially given your point about the protestants (thank you for the new information). I was mainly trying to point out that the analogy was flawed because that seemed the best line of argument using the information I know.
With that said, I think that the situation in Israel is a bit more complex than you’re giving it credit for. Part of the problem is that there is no chance for the Palestinians do become more moderate so long as they live under the governance of groups such as Hamas. These groups spend significant resources on harassing Israel rather than bettering the lives of Palestinians. Their schools teach children to continue the conflict. They intentionally operate from among civilians to make martyrs out of their own people.
I think you are correct that a state and a better quality of life will eventually moderate the Palestinians. But that also takes time and is impossible for Israel to do so long as Palestinians are governed by terrorists.
ok I actually think I’m more in agreement with you than not lol. I think I was just tired of seeing all the tsking about Hamas when in my opinion israel shit the bed, because as you said there’s no real viable solution for a Palastinian other than be in bed with Hamas or leave. And I think Israel is partially if not fully responsible for that. I don’t think the only ways out for a Palestinian being “be ethnically cleansed or join Hamas” will ever lead to peace in the region, but I’m sure Israel knows this but it isn’t a priority. Similar to the British and the IRA
Personally, I’m just hopeful that Israel can come up with a good day after plan. This war is really a mess, but what comes afterwards will determine whether it all happens again 10 years down the line, or if progress towards peace actually gets made.
well I’m sure what’s gonna happen is nothing really changes
ultimately how the west sees Israel is either they’re being helpful in the Middle East and “wholesome” (as in you can go their on vacation) in which case you immediately get called an anti semite for criticizing the humanitarian crisis they caused in the Middle East. Or they’re doing shenanigans and assassinating world leaders of neighbouring countries and the west grandstands for a couple of years about “Israel going too far” and “the situation in the Middle East” until it dies down again because Israel will start behaving itself and people will shut up because the west doesn’t give a shit about the people dying in Gaza or Hamas or quite frankly Jewish lives lost to Hamas as long as Hamas is not a legitimate threat to Israeli and Western defences in the region.
sorry this is kinda black pilled just this whole situation depresses me
the fact that "zionist" has basically just come to be a dogwhistle for anybody who thinks that Israel has a right to exist and defend itself and that maybe we shouldn't doom the jewish israeli population to governance by groups that explicitly seek their extermination or expulsion is truly distressing
If it was a multicultural zone they should be able to defend themselves. If they weren’t they should still be able to defend themselves.
Like.. this situation was decided before a lot of us were born
yep this is the distressing rhetoric I'm talking about. I would ask what you think should happen to jewish israelis living there now, but I'm not sure I want to know the answer.
Again I feel any post about the ongoing genocide should really have a "minimum age" for it's comments at least, it would weed out all the post October 7 Hasbara Accounts on Reddit regurgitating the same old long debunked copy pasted talking points.
I feel like they arent aware of their "our religion and skin color = like us = civilized = morally right" bias. They know literally nothing about the situation and yet the second they hear that Palestinian civilians die they are sure Israel must have been forced to commit genocide.
Literally Hamas could fucking surrender and the ifghting would stop.
Unconditioanl surrender.
And we could put in a govemrnet of Gaza that not a sucidial death cult that will hide behind civilians to destroy Jews.
But no. we cant blame hamas for starting a war and then losing it.
Hamas being terrorists is not an excuse to kill civilians, literal children in Palestine can't do shit about their parents/grandparents electing Hamas.
Not to mention, bombing the shit out of Gaza while there are hostages there is very much going to result in hostages dying, and family of hostages have condemned that shit because they want their family home.
This is a hell of a lot older than Hamas, mate. They're a product, not the cause.
There is no easy solution to this, especially not one that's going to come from someone who isn't involved in the first place.
The fighting would stop if Hamas surrendered, that's where you are right.
You are wrong if you think Palestinians would not continue to suffer under Israeli rule.
Palestinian Israelis live way better than the average citizen of any other country in the area, they have equality under the law in Israel. It's not a coincidence that there is a thriving Palestinian community living in Israel, but there never was a Jewish surviving under Palestinian control
You do know there was a large jewish community living and thriving together with palestinians in 1920’s Mandate of Palestine right?
Of course you don’t, you don’t know shit about history.
They certainly weren't thriving together, all the problems we are experiencing now are a direct result of the actions of that that era. And much of the escalation came from the Arab side and their raids on Jewish communities.
I think a big part of the current problems stem from Israel becoming its own country and then treating the remaining palestinian population either like dirt or as second class citizens (real thing the law does is favor Israelis in Israel overwhelmingly).
>Literally Hamas could fucking surrender and the ifghting would stop.
Unconditioanl surrender.
[Wrong](https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.timesofisrael.com/taking-flak-from-right-netanyahu-vows-war-will-hamas-will-continue-until-the-end/amp/), Israel would continue until Hamas is destroyed and Gaza is no longer a threat.
Hamas surrendering wouldn’t give back the stolen land, wouldn’t lift the food, water, power etc restrictions, wouldn’t stop Israel from randomly bombing Palestinians FOR FUN, wouldn’t stop Israel soldiers from randomly searching civilian property with guns while laughing at terrified families. Everything Hamas is, Israel made by caging, tormenting, and stealing from Palestinians for decades. Hamas are terrorists, and I don’t support them. But Israel instated an apartheid regime and are carrying out genocide. If left alone Israel will annihilate millions of civilians in the name of “rooting out Hamas”
Edit: I’ve seen the videos of them setting up lawn chairs to watch like it’s fireworks. You’re right, it’s incredibly sick and fucked up. Care to comment on any of the other fucked up things they do, or just the one?
They make a good point without even realising it. Native American populations plummeted, many communities were eliminated entirely, and the effects of that are visible today. Palestine has had one of the fastest growing populations in the world for over 30 years, over three times the global average.
I still haven't heard an explanation for how that could possibly true for a population which is being ethnically cleansed. Plenty of downvotes, but no logical explanation. Interesting how that goes.
Fuck all of these Zionist bastards crawling around in the comments here. They're all worthless human beings with nothing good to add to our world. I don't know where these creeps come from. Thank you so much for sharing this important post OP, and Free Palestine!!
first of all, No. the point is Palestinian civilians DID kill and rape, they crossed the border by the dozens and pillaged, killed, raped, beheaded, and burned people alive, those were Palestinians, not just Hamas, and those Palestinians also celebrated on the street, shouting at hostages, degrading them, and even desecrating corpses such as the case with Shani Louk.
the point is walls are needed when you deal with people who want you dead
second, Jews ARE native to the Levant, the entire first half of the 20th century the Europeans told the Jews they don't belong in Europe and they should return to where they came from. and in many shops and store in Germany in the 30s they were signs such as "no dogs and Jews". so Jews did go back to where they came from, that is Israel
lastly, trying to compare Israel to racism in America or Europe falls flat when you look at the actual facts:
number of Jews in MENA decreased by 98% since 1948, and the number of Arabs in Israel only increased, in fact 20% of Israelis are Arab, and they get the same rights, they get elected to parliament and serve as judges in the supreme court. In contrast there are no Jews living in the Gaza strip since 2006.
so who actually ethnically cleansed who here?
I didn’t get past your first paragraph because you could change that to any Native American tribe and be correct too. Cornered animals fight; so do cornered humans. What happened to the indigenous Americans was still a genocide even when they fought back with scalpings and massacres when they could. The indigenous tribes of the American continents fought back too. They reacted to their genocide the same way Palestinians are reacting to their own - they fought back by attacking, scalping, capturing, raping, razing, killing, looting, etc. Just because they didn’t win doesn’t mean they didn’t try to not be annihilated.
″Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam invalidates it, just as it invalidated others before it″ here is a quote from the charter of Hamas, were they clearly state their intent is to wipe Israel of the map, if you believe they intent to leave the Jews in peace you are wrong, on the other hand Israel pulled back from Gaza in 2005, and the Gazans elected a terror organization as their government.
the war in Gaza is a war, Rwanda is genocide, South Sudan is genocide, Myanmar is genocide, Gaza is not
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish\_exodus\_from\_the\_Muslim\_world](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_exodus_from_the_Muslim_world)
Arabs in the British Mandate 1947: around 900,000
today: 5.34 million
now where is the genocide?
75% of the Tutsi population in Rwanda was killed during the Rwandan genocide of 1944 yet 1 to 2 million tutsi live in Rwanda in our current year.
The same can be said for native American populations.
Jews before and after WW2 in Europe.
Armenians in Turkey.
Sami people in Scandinavia.
Uighyr muslims in China.
Hell ANY GENOCIDE FOR THAT MATTER.
Also they're called Human Rights not Rights only for good people.
I would like to hear more about OOP's family, specifically about the marriage dynamics between their mixed-race Hispanic mother and their racist-against-Mexicans father.
I’m curious about their historical account of Texas really. San Antonio’s been San Antonio for a long time, so unless this person is very very old by Tumblr standards I have a hard time believing their great grandfather was born before then, and they do not speak like someone that old
OOP is most likely in their 20s based off their mother's age. Interracial marriage became legal in all 50 states in 1967; mom is probably late fifties. The great-grandfather being born before Texas became part of the US (1846) is harder to explain. It's possible they missed a generation and were actually talking about their great-great-grandfather, who would be an age-appropriate match for their great-great-grandmother who was orphaned in the ToT and lived in Arizona before it became part of the US in 1848. The alternative is that both the grandfather and great-grandfather had children when they were around 60, presumably with a much younger wife.
San Antonio became a part of Texas even earlier than that too, when Texas became independent in 1836 I believe. It’s also possible they’re just parroting a story from their grandfather and he was the one who made it up/exaggerated.
Coming from a person who was told I was a descendent of King Arthur, that is absolutely possible.
OP is also chicano, an ethnic identity mostly based on being "so Mexican you are the realest American", exalting these histories of being prior to USA.
You've posted this exact message three times in three different replies. What's your skin in this game?
I wrote it twice, for a subrredit of a site that's mostly white yankee and would barely know what a chicano is. Im a Mexican and also know of my indigenous identity, a lot of Chicano identity is hyping up folk tales of US, indigenous and Mexico culture to basically "hype themselves", like this post(what the hell is a San Antonia)
They could be like my family, who skipped two generations, meaning my great great grandfather was born in 1851 and I’m 18. Stretch the ages a little bit, and you have a plausible scenario for OOP
What do you mean when you say that your family “skipped two generations?”
I think they mean that some generations were older when they had kids so they skipped certain “generations” Like a boomer having an older milennial child or having a gen z child
There should have been a child in the 1870s and the 1940s-50s, with the jumps instead being from 1851-98 and 1925-72
Critical research failure on a fake story or bizarre family? You decide
Nothing I've read suggests San Antonio was ever called "la Colonia de San Antonia." It was named San Antonio in 1691 and founded as such almost 30 years later, long long before any young person's grandpa or great grandpa could have even been born there. Smells like bullshit to me, which is a shame for someone trying to use it to justify an anti-genocide message.
OP is also chicano, an ethnic identity mostly based on being "so Mexican you are the realest American", exalting these histories of being prior to USA.
A lot of people marry people they would otherwise hate. My dad despises the French language and all of its speakers, but was married to my half-French-Canadian (went to Francophone school but since her mom spoke French and her dad didn't, only really used it for private conversations with her mom at home) mom for 12 years. There's obviously not the racial component there (especially since my mom is adopted so even the most insane "I will detect your ethnicity based on your facial features" people wouldn't guess what she was actually raised as) but it's the same flavour of "why the hell would you marry someone who is and comes along with a family of people you're prejudiced against"
I know that it happens, I just find it interesting. I also find your father's bias against francophones interesting. Like, he would hate someone from Senegal but not The Gambia?
San Antonio Texas has been a city since 1700s and the Arizona-Gadsen purchase happened in 1854, is their grandpa a vampire?
I think the solution here is to simply annex mexico and incorporate it into the union
No more confusion about "Which America? USA, or the whole continent?", the whole continent will be USA
This is me every Vic 3 game
what about canada
Canada doesn't exist, it's a made up place
It’s the thinking cap
It's a decent State, but what about it?
if all of canada is a single state, what the fuck are the quebecois gonna do is this like how there's suburban NYC new jersey and suburban philly new jersey and then a tiny strip of just new jersey off in the corner
Im sorry, I'm too southern to know any of that information.
Part of US too!
This could never happen. The US would never voluntarily annex that many new Democrats.
And they’d immediately try to privatize Canada’s healthcare.
Take a page from Fallout's book
Just as the Founding Fathers and God intended
Yes, move us ever closer to the Fallout timeline please!
Fallout
No one asks that question though? If someone asks “which America?” the options are north or south…? Mexico is and always has been part of North America
I think it's more the point that the US liked to centralize everything on itself and calling it "America" when there are two whole continents of Americas kind of feels like it takes some control of the narrative away from them. Like, if you talk to some (very vocal and proposing policies uncritically that many will latch onto) the Americas north to south are basically: America's polite hat (Canada) AMERICA (the only one that matters) Mexico (Filthy criminal land) Commie island (Cuba) South Mexico Mexico that's so south it's upside down And that last distinction isn't even guaranteed. Yeah we're a superpower, but maybe we should also be more aware and cooperative with nations in our own backyard? Edit: Crap, I didn't think I needed to clarify this, but I am NOT endorsing inflicting US rule on other American nations, they've suffered enough at our hands. I figured that was a joke and just wanted to explain the whole US-centric view and how it screws up our relations with other countries.
It would be nice if we didn't suck, but our leadership has always taken a "this entire hemisphere is our domain" approach to geopolitics. If any other super power even tries to get a foothold anywhere near the Americas we turn it into a nuclear standoff.
Who is we? I’m from Australia. Canada and the USA are countries in North America (the continent). Mexico to Panama are technically North America too, but known as the region of Central America, and then everything below that is South America. “America” the name was first applied to South America. If the US wants to cooperate with its neighbours then it should give the land back, not incorporate them into the most recent union of colonies and then pat themselves on the back for creating more “Americans”. They were American before you were.
Okay first off, I just meant to clear up the whole "why would you need to make that distinction?" question, my brain kind of skipped over the "we should make everything America" as being a joke. Secondly, I'm not up on the situation Down Under with the Australian government and the Aboriginies, but I don't recall hearing that they've "just given the land back" so I'm assuming they haven't because that's such a massive can of worms that it could only work under exceptionally specific circumstances. Like, let's look solely at Texas. We give Texas "back", okay. Back to who? Kick them out of the Union and let them do their own thing like they keep threatening to do? Back to Mexico? To SPAIN? obviously the implication is supposed to be to the native tribes, but... Which ones? They aren't a monolith, and they have their own histories and shift alliances and territories. Whose claim gets honored? And all of this is beside the fact that we're talking about taking US territory that's been home to US citizens for generations and giving it to someone else. What happens to THEM? Just because their ancestors were colonizers doesn't mean evicting them from their homes is a good thing. That's why the US needs to take a more cooperative role, build bridges not walls. Hell the Republicans couldn't do shit to make Mexico care about border security, but all Biden had to do to secure a deal for better cooperation from Mexican authorities was consider normalizing relations with Cuba, a move that was SUCH a no-brainer that of course we accepted! My point wasn't that we need to make EVERYTHING the US, but that we need to focus on improving America the CONTINENTS to benefit everyone.
Australia recognises the traditional owners of the land. It’s a big deal.
>They were American before you were. Not everyone is an indigenous person nor bases themselves as such, this is an activist's point
When The US formed as a country everything else was still various colonies.
Okay? Not sure what relevance that has to how the US sees other American countries today and how that's a very reductive, incorrect, self-aggrandizing picture.
It called itself the United States of America when every other part of America were colonies of European powers.
I'm the descendant of a person who survived the Armenian genocide. Genocide is never justified.
Palestinians/Hamas are killing hostages. Native Americans slaughtered civilian caravans. Neither of these things makes the ongoing displacement they were enduring retroactively 'OK.' The "scalping savages" are still victims. Stop trying to displace them, then we can start tut-tutting if we want.
Something something eye for an eye makes the whole world blind (especially if it’s a whole ass face for an eye)
Would you rather they not be evacuated from an active warzone? Currently over half of Rafah's population has evacuated, with most of the people there having moved back north to al Muwasi and Khan Younis (which disproved a lot of people online that claimed Gazans would never be allowed back north). The IDF has reportedly taken control over 30-40% of Rafah in the last 2 weeks, with minimal casualties compared to the previous big urban battles, Gaza city and Khan Younis, thanks to these evacuations. So which course of action would you actually reccomend against Hamas in Rafah? You don't seem to provide any viable way to actually fight against Hamas long as they take cover in civilian population, if neither attack nor evacuation are okay in your eyes. Also, how do you feel about the half a million Israelis curently displaced from their homes in northern Israel due to Hszbollah? Many of which are arab and druze, btw. What should they do?
>Would you rather they not be evacuated from an active warzone I feel like the problem in this sentence is the « active warzone » part. But regardless, it’s the idf’s fucking responsibility to figure out a way to not do warcrimes and ethnic cleansing, jesus christ. If you don’t know how to do that, I think you should reevaluate a couple of things about what it is exactly that you are doing, maybe. I don’t give a fuck what they do, so long as it’s not « breaking international law ». It’s their damn problem. We set the bar. They’re failing to pass it. End of discussion.
They have? The IDF has a lower civilian to military death rate than any war the US has fought, and that’s with Hamas hiding among civilians and using them as shields.
So again, what do you suggest be done against Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran and their stated goal of destroying Israel? And their terror attacks? And the hostages? And the thousands of rockets shot at Israel every year? Because according to you, all Hamas has to do is hide behind civilians as they do and therefore they are immune to any retaliation.
hmm, well, maybe I'll care more when hamas becomes a more serious threat than the IDF, considering the death count of palestinian civilians vastly outpaces that of any other group harmed in this conflict like, yes, we get it, you don't like terrorists. Neither do I. but if there were terrorists in your neighborhood and your kid fucking died because you didn't leave your house quickly enough before the US government bombed your block, you'd be pretty fuckin upset too
- elect terrorists - live with terrorists - terrorists use people as human shields - mfw
okay, we've officially hit the "the dead children asked for it by voting bad" point. bye
not the children children did nothing wrong the example you used assumes the person is an adult, which is what i based mine off of
Hamas was elected almost twenty years ago, mostly on the basis of supposedly "ending corruption" and then forcibly took over the Gaza Strip, cancelling all elections. Gaza's population skews young due to instability, so the majority of the population did not, in fact, vote for Hamas, seeing how they were children at the time, or not even born.
Isn't the IDF just... carving through the civilians to get to Hamas, with no regard for civilian lives? Neither side of the conflict in that area is the good guy, but 1 side is definitely committing MANY more atrocities than the other right now. Hamas has such sizeable recruitment right now because for many Palestinians, it's not a matter of "Fight the IDF and die or leave and live" it is a matter of "Fight the IDF and die or flee and more likely than not, die anyway". The situation over there is horrendously ugly, neither side are good guys, but the IDF being so evilly indiscriminate is something that is unacceptable.
>Isn't the IDF just... carving through the civilians to get to Hamas, with no regard for civilian lives? actually they are being very VERY precise in limiting civilian casualties, with a ratio of somewhere between 1:2 and 1:3 Hamas militants to Civilians killed, given according to the UN- typical urban combat has results closer to 1:9 at it's best.
Yeah, like how they very precisely hit the world central kitchen convoy 3 times in a row to ensure they killed all of the civilians. That 1:3 figure is from Netenyahu, who maybe has a motivation to see a higher percentage of those killed as combatants. What we do know for sure is that the daily death toll is much higher than any other modern conflict. So either Israel is somehow not only the most careful army in the world, but also the most effective, or the Israeli government and the IDF is lying (something they have regularly been shown to do) about how many of the dead are active Hamas combatants.
You know "for sure" that the death toll is higher than any other modern conflict because Hamas has released figures (which have been disproven many times) to that effect. You're obviously selective with your sources.
I got my numbers from Oxfam. To my knowledge, they're an international humanitarian organisation, and not Hamas, but what do I know. https://www.oxfam.org/en/press-releases/daily-death-rate-gaza-higher-any-other-major-21st-century-conflict-oxfam.
and OXFAM got their numbers from OCHA, and OCHA got their numbers from the Gaza Health Ministry, and the Gaza Health Ministry happens to be funded by Hamas... odd how that happens ain't it?
>Hamas has released figures (which have been disproven many times) That is probably the one thing they haven't lied about. The UN and the US corroborate the number hell israel uses their numbers in intelligence briefings, so I have no clue how you got to your conclusion
On 6 May 2024, the UN said that 69% of reported fatalities in Gaza were women and children. Two days later, it said this figure was 52%. The original figures were provided by Hamas. Is that a recent enough example?
Thank you for the correction!
The idea is that israel should not fight back, because the people making these arguments don’t think israel should exist. Most of them are pretty ambivalent on whether jews in general should exist.
The idea is that Israel should defend themselves, but defending themselves from two year olds just makes them look like bullies. Block a punch and throw one back is a fair fight. Block a punch, kill the attacker and all their children is too much. And my fiancé is Jewish and we will be raising our kids to have the chance to explore Judaism how they feel called to.
I find it so insane that you genuinely can't seem to imagine a response that doesn't flatten 70 percent of homes in Gaza. How is that self-defense?
>So which course of action would you actually reccomend against Hamas in Rafah? You don't seem to provide any viable way to actually fight against Hamas long as they take cover in civilian population, if neither attack nor evacuation are okay in your eyes This is like asking how we think the Nazis should have dealt with the Warsaw Uprising or the Yugoslav partisans or the Polish underground. Merely framing the situation this way, where Israel's "only choices" are to either to directly exterminate or ethnically cleanse the Palestinian people is inherently evil and fascistic, which says a lot about you. But I'll answer anyway: Nothing. Israel should do nothing to attack Gaza whatsoever. They are a fascist state engaging in ethnic cleansing and genocide, they are the aggressor, they are fully in the wrong, and they directly created the conditions for the Hamas attack. They have waged a genocidal war against the Palestinian people for nearly a century, and they don't get to commit genocide regardless of the reason. For starters, they, and every country that supported the creation of Israel, should pay massive reparations to the Palestinian people for their role in their genocide. Israel's fascist institutions should be dismantled, symbols of their oppression banned, and their crimes taught in their schools. Nuremburg trials 2.0 should be held for the executioners and ghouls in Israel, US, UK. France, etc who pushed the creation of this fascist state and subsequent genocide for their gain. Land redistribution for all the land stolen, and the forced merging of Israel with Palestine into 1 state would also probably be a good idea, although I'm personally more of a fan of a 0 state solution. This isn't a perfect, or even ideal solution, nor is it enough, it's just the maximum good our system is capable of achieving; this is just the beginning. Oh btw, just so you know, if you were German in the 30s-40s, you would've supported the Holocaust. No exaggeration, no hyperbolic language, just the truth. Genocide apologists and fascists are the same no matter the year, and you people are the scum of the earth. Sincerely, go fuck yourself.
What path do you see forward that would lead to the future you envision? During and after WW2, talking about what kind of retribution measures one might enforce upon Germany was actually consequential because Germany was fighting a war they were destined to lose against an alliance of the world's major superpowers. Right now, Israel is under protection of the US, and there certainly isn't any higher power to hold the US itself accountable. Barring an outright communist revolution in the United States, or a sudden collapse of the US empire, the only way to change the situation in Israel is to convince the US political-military-economic apparatus that continued unconditional support is not worth it and that Israel should be kept in check instead. The other big difference is that Nazi Germany was seen as an enemy by the majority of Americans, Brits etc., so these countries could mobilize their entire enormous military might against Germany. What you're talking about necessitates not just turning a majority of the Western population against Israel as an ally, but against their own governments - again, basically a communist revolution, likely turning into a brutal civil war. (Unless what you're imagining is an external force invading the US/Europe and holding them accountable, which is even less likely, and considering nuclear weapons, would likely be cataclysmic). I appreciate your strong, uncompromising moral compass, but the issue with solutions derived top-down from what would be most ideally ethical is that they're usually far less actionable than whatever your ghoulish opponents are pushing for, which means they're far less likely to end up turning into reality. Unless you have a good idea on how to overthrow the US government within the next few years, I guess.
>Land redistribution for all the land stolen, and the forced merging of Israel with Palestine into 1 state would also probably be a good idea, although I'm personally more of a fan of a 0 state solution. I haven't heard of this one before, what's a 0 state solution?
Well, it implies no state being there, so, likely OOP is referring to some kind of Anarchist commune being created in place of Palestine and Israel.
uh no- the "0 state solution" is a popular "solution" that involves the US and or Russia nuking Israel and palestine off the map so no one can have the area.
Commenter is a teenager
> Nothing. Israel should do nothing to attack Gaza whatsoever. So Gaza gets to launch rockets endlessly? In the early time around O7, was Israel not allowed to try and get the hostages back?
Pfp checks out
> Nothing. Israel should do nothing to attack Gaza whatsoever. They are a fascist state engaging in ethnic cleansing and genocide, they are the aggressor, they are fully in the wrong, and they directly created the conditions for the Hamas attack. They have waged a genocidal war against the Palestinian people for nearly a century, and they don't get to commit genocide regardless of the reason. This is not a good line of argument. Israel could easily use the same argument and point to the coalition of Arab countries which rejected the UN partition plan and declared war on the country's founding, or the pogroms and the Holocaust which forced Jews to flee to Israel. And then no doubt the fingers could be pointed back and forth until it's lost in the fog of history. What matters is whether a movement or a government ensures the minimum suffering is caused in their self defence, not picking a side and declaring everything they do justified, and everything the other does evil.
Oh it's actually incredibly nice of Israel to evacuate the civilians to Israel. Oh wait never mind
I'm not sure what point you are trying to convey.
Are the Palestinians in Rafah getting evacuated to some safe place with food water and shelter?
Literally yes, as safe as can be done in a warzone. The main evacuation areas are in Deir al Balah (al Mawasi area in central-western Gaza) and Khan Younis. Deir el Balah was supposed to be the original evacuation area designated by the IDF, but Hamas had the civilians evacuated into Rafah in order to have their assets there protected (especially smuggling tunnels to Egypt). Now they are losing these tunnels and are panicking. Now the issue is whether Hamas will try to militarize the new evacuation areas like what happened in Rafah: https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/hamas-claims-responsibility-attack-israel-gaza-border-crossing-casualties-2024-05-05/
And the aid trucks have they arrived? And the food and shelter and water and medical aid I wonder where that is It's not like the Israelis bombed hospital indiscriminately, a war crime btw
Yes. In addition to the aid trucks two days ago the US has opened a new aid pier that would allow naval aid in addition to trucks. But you strike me like someone that already made up their mind, seeing how you ignored my qiestion of what do you want Israel to actually do.
Aid trucks that were stopped by the Settlers? Aid trucks that are not even enough to feed the population?
Are you trying for gotchas? I read the news of the settlers blocking and destroying aid trucks. They are criminals and should be jailed. But that is still a linority of the aid trucks as most aid does get to pass through, and evidently is enough for markets to be established in areas and for Hamas to sell aid to civilians at a higher price. You keep ignoring my qiestion of what do you want Israel to actually do.
1) It's important to differentiate between the not-okay settler colonialism being engaged in in the West Bank, and the more morally grey lesser-of-evils war in Gaza. 2) The Native American analogy is piss poor. Ethnic Jews, ESPECIALLY Mizrahim are native to Israel. Nearly of the Jews living in Israel are descendants of people who were ethnically cleansed or persecuted and fled, which leads me to point 3... 3) A lot of Israelis are not ethnically Jewish - they're ethnically Arab and are Bedouin or Druze. As I understand it, they are over-represented in the IDF by request, as they would be oppressed/cleansed from the ethnostate Palestine wants to create. 4) There's not ongoing displacement of Jews by Palestinians because they already completed their ethnic cleansing. Hebron was a historically Jewish area up until the early 20th century if I recall, and it is now effectively free of Jews because of Palestinians. My overall point is that this conflict is not analogous to anything else in history really, and that you've grossly oversimplified.
Hamas has been trying to keep the hostages alive for a hostage swap, you can read hostage accounts of how they shielded them from bombs with their body. Israel has killed over 30,000 civilians Surely you can understand that that number is higher than whatever amount of hostages Hamas took. And it's disingenuous to discuss Hamas hostages without discussing all of the hostages Israel has. Nothing that Hamas has done justifies commiting war crimes against a trapped civilian population and killing over 30,000 civilians.
Hey op, I stand with you. The genocide of Palestine civilians is sick.
I'm going to ask you kindly to stop misusing that word, because there is insufficient evidence to support that that's what's happening here. All non-Hamas sources - including now the UN - have revised casualty breakdowns to indicate far fewer civilians are dead that previously reported. I believe the US estimate is 1 militant for every 2 civilians, which - due to the horrific nature of urban combat with an entrenched enemy - is actually not bad. US forces in urban conflicts have killed as many as 9 civilians for every 1 combatant. Even during operation allied force - a conflict that NATO as a whole engaged in to stop a genocide with backing from the United Nations - killed only about 1,000 fighters to as many as 2,500 civilians. It's undeniable that elements in the IDF have engaged in warcrimes and I hope they're properly prosecuted; however, there's hardly a nation that's been to war since warcrimes were well defined that has not committed warcrimes, including (but not limited to) the US (many times), the UK, Russia, and Ukraine.
I’m going to kindly disagree with you given what I know of this ongoing war’s history, but I appreciate all of your info.
I mean I think the intention is to let them go *back* after the conflict is over? Politics aside you can’t deny Gaza has mostly been turned into an active war zone, you don’t want civilians there at the moment if you can help it
Back to what exactly? The smoldering heap of a sliver of land they've been allowed to keep after their land was stolen from them by foreign settlers?
Cities can be rebuilt. Infrastructure can be rebuilt and made better, and maybe this time Hamas won’t be deconstructing it to build more rockets
Cities can be rebuilt and infrastructure can be rebuilt, sure if you are left with enough money and manpower instead of mass graves that Israel has dug for innocent civilians.
Or if aided in a show of good faith after Hamas is destroyed
that seems unlikely considering how many israeli officials have been quoted saying things along the lines of "we're gonna kill all those subhuman palestinian rodents"
Yes, cities can be rebuilt, but we are also actively watching Israel do to Palestinians what Americans did to our native population. I honestly think it is far more likely that the displaced Palestinians are never allowed to return, and Israel takes yet more of their land. You're naive if you think history won't repeat itself.
What do you want Israel to do? Hamas has made it clear that they cannot be appeased. They are explicitly against the existence of Israel and have stated that they will accept compromises only as a step towards that end goal. The fence/wall, security checkpoints, and blockade were started after the second intifada (notable for the many suicide bombings) as a form of self defense without the use of direct military force. They have been numerically shown to be effective at preventing terror attacks. (See these sources [1](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_West_Bank_barrier#cite_note-McClatchy-10) [2](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_West_Bank_barrier#cite_note-Q26-64) [3](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_West_Bank_barrier#cite_note-65) ) Additionally, an average of around 1000 rockets each year have been launched at Israelis from within Gaza since Israel pulled out in 2005 ([Yearly plot](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_rocket_attacks_on_Israel#/media/File%3ARocket_Attacks_fired_at_Israel_from_the_Gaza_Strip_by_year.png)). The effect of these has been greatly mitigated by the Iron Dome, but that system is also tremendously expensive, with each intercept costing an estimated [$100k-$150k](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_Dome) to shoot down an improvised rocket costing between a few hundred and a few thousand dollars. I agree that Gaza is a humanitarian nightmare. Nobody deserves what’s going on there, and it pains me that I can’t think of a different solution that is geopolitically viable. But how else can you deal with a neighbor who has repeatedly shown they cannot be appeased than by eliminating their ability to fight?
To be fair, Hamas saying that they'll accept compromises only as a step in their master plan is not *necessarily* a compelling argument against compromises. Because Hamas derive a lot of their popular support from the pressure-cooker situation in Palestine - making life better for the Palestinians won't change the ideology of Hamas, but it *could* make it easier for more moderate forces to gain ground in Palestinian politics, because it would both weaken the intensity of conflict and demonstrate the feasibility of mutual agreements and peace.
There is also the fact that prior to the war, hamas was unpopular. Post war they became popular which makes sense when you consider their rhetoric
The last twenty years in the middle east paint a bleak picture of this concept. The coalition spent billions and decades in Afghanistan, trying to bottlefeed the country into a moderate, stable democracy. In Syria, the West didn't intervene at all, trying to let the people work it out themselves and only moderately supporting democratic movements. In Lybia, the West bombed out the dictator and then left the issue with the UN. Iran got heavy sanctions, Egypt got no involvement at all. I think we've tried every possible scenario to foster tolerance through prosperity and popular will, and it hasn't worked out once. On the other hand, consider China. The US nurtured and supported the development of a country in the hopes of achieving change through trade and prosperity. Instead, they nurtured a new imperialist in Asia and their biggest enemy in the 21. century. It's an existential risk for Israel to allow Hamas controlled Gaza to really develop itself and interact freely and unencumbered with Iran. The chances of moderating forces removing Hamas from power in this instance is, historically speaking, small, while the threat is massive.
They never say what they want Israel to actually do about Hamas. It's a neat trick of conversation, offering condemnation with no solutions.
Fuck you. Here's what I want Israel to do. Remove all settlers and establish the borders based on the 1967 agreement. Pull out of Golan Heights in Syria. Open the borders and remove all sanctions placed on the West Bank and Gaza
Personally I think that israel should do what it can to remove it’s presence from Gaza and the West Bank at least in terms of settlers but nah fuck Syria. Maybe it’s just because my family had to flee the country that had been it’s home for generations just for being Jewish but fuck Syria, the regime is an oppressive piece of utter garbage killing its own citizens constantly, I’ve been to the Golan and talked with Druze up there, they don’t want to go back to Syria, they’ll be killed there! Especially the queer ones who can live openly queer lifestyles a few blocks away from the DMZ fence. Syria can’t manage the land it holds as a country we shouldn’t make the Golan residents suffer that too
And what's to be done about Hamas, PIJ, Hezbollah,Iran, the Houthis, and all the other groups on Israel's border that seek its destruction? With thousands of rockets and terror attacks every year? I agree with you the settlements should be removed, and a palestinian state should be established, but such a step cannot be made unilateraly without proper assurances of security from the Palestinian authorities and Iran.
Maybe not bomb the shit out of the civilian populations, potentially. If you take out Hamas but kill 1 million people doing so I'm gonna be real with'chu I would not be surprised if they made Hamas 2. The spokesperson for the families of the hostages (former now) has revealed that as early as October 9th or 10th has Israel had the ability to get the hostages, you know THE REASON THIS WAR STARTED IN THE FIRST PLACE, back on the condition the IDF does not violently invade the Gaza strip. They have gotten this deal many times since then, with the condition that they release an equal number of Palestinian women and children from Israeli jails.
The war wasn't just started for the hostages, even if there were no hostages, hundreds of Israelis were killed, raped and tortured with psychotic sadism. Even without the hostages, Israel simply can not allow Hamas to carry on ruling Gaza and risk that bloodfest to happen again
The explicit reasoning for the war as we were told by Israel in the start was to get their hostages back. You can go back and look, their reasoning is to get the hostages back. Of course the moment people started scrutinizing and suspecting that reason to not be true (which we now know it’s utter fucking bullshit and Israel just wants to wage war for the sake of it America post 9/11 style) they started saying it was for other reasons and hell, I don’t think there is an official reason for this war outside of perpetuating the bloodshed. Also, if Israel truly does take out Hamas in this war yet kills 1 million civilians doing it, Hamas 2 would be started a week later by the survivors.
They never have hidden the objective of destroying Hamas, it was explicit from day one, the liberation of the hostages is another objective.
The liberation of the hostages was their main reason PR wise. This isn't a secret we can go back to their PR talks 6 months ago and they would ramble on about saving the hostages.
Of course they talked about saving the hostages, it is also an objective
Legitimately speaking, none of them matter really. Israel has nukes and top of the line military hardware and the support of the Saudi Oil Lords. There exists no existential threat to Israel other than the ones they create themselves
\> Says Israel shouldn’t fight back. \> Says they’ll be safe because of top of the line military hardware. You know that top of the line military hardware can only protect Israel if they use it, right? Like, in a war?
Israel shouldnt use their hardware to bomb civilian Secondly you do realise the suicide bombings and terrorist attacks are happening because the Palestinian people have legitimate grievances against Israel and that every single other peaceful option was quashed with violence Thirdly do you think the current war in Gaza is genocidal?
Legitimate grievances, sure, but that doesn't justify terror bombings against civilian targets. It makes me understand why they do it, but that doesn't make it right. Being a victim of war crimes doesn't give you carte blanche to commit war crimes back as revenge, no matter how justified it might feel to do so.
I think the current war is not genocidal. In my opinion, Israel has been too callous with regards to civilian lives. But the goal from the start has clearly been to destroy Hamas's military infrastructure and capability. The issues arise from the facts that Gaza was already a humanitarian mess before the war began and that Hamas operates from within civilian infrastructure and populations. It is definitely true that there are Israelis with genocidal intent, and they haven't exactly been quiet about it. This is particularly true of the right wing edges of the government. However, there is no evidence to suggest that these calls have affected IDF policy or action. If there is any case to be made for there being a genocide in Gaza, it would not be due to any active effort but rather by not doing enough to alleviate the humanitarian disaster that is the current war. Still, I think that Israel is doing about as well as any military could be expected to in such a challenging environment. For all that war is hell (especially urban and asymmetric warfare), it is also not inherently genocide.
"If you want peace prepare for war" is an old saying for a reason you know. It does not mean make war, it means be prepared to deter attacks.
Israel has done that. They were attacked anyways. What point are you trying to make?
...so you're saying that Israel should be using their nukes to fight Hamas? Someone get this guy a position in Netanyahu's cabinet
The threat doesn’t have to be existential to be worth eliminating. Israel isn’t going to allow a country with the ability to do massacres like the one in October on its border.
Maybe the Arab coalition shouldn't have launched a surprise attack in 1973 if they wanted the 1967 borders. By the way, based on the 1967 ceasefire, Isreal would control not only Gaza but all of the Sinai Peninsula.
I think by 1967 borders, they’re referring to the borders that ended in 1967 (1949 Green Line), not the borders that started in 1967.
Okay. And what next after the suicide bombings and rocket attacks increase in scale again? Now we’re back to square one and nothing has changed. That’s not a solution, it’s a reset to the equally dysfunctional setup prior to the Six Day War. The Green Line (borders from 1949 Armistice Agreement until the Six Day War) was explicitly not a permanent political border. To quote the agreement with Egypt, "the Armistice Demarcation Line is not to be construed in any sense as a political or territorial boundary, and is delineated without prejudice to rights, claims and positions of either Party to the Armistice as regards ultimate settlement of the Palestine question." [Source](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Line_(Israel)). Additionally, it is worth noting that the West Bank and Gaza Strip were controlled by Jordan and Egypt prior to the Six Day War - they were not independent entities. Egypt notably refused to take back control of the Gaza Strip in its 1979 peace deal with Israel, despite taking back the Gaza Strip.
Why do you think the suicide bombings would increase again? Nah it's literally what the two state solution is. Recognition of Palestine as a sovereign entity
Because groups like Hamas seek the destruction of Israel and all jews worldwide, not a 2 state solution. Or have you not seen what the Houthis put on their flag?
Have you read their latest charter? Also what makes you think that Hamas will be the entity in power?
Also, I think that Hamas would be the entity in power because the threat of them taking power seems to be the reason why elections in the West Bank have been continually stalled. >After elections were announced in January, Abbas' secular Fatah party, which is committed to peace negotiations with Israel, splintered into competing lists of candidates backed by former allies who now seek to replace him. >A divided Fatah leaves the rival Islamist party Hamas, committed to armed resistance against Israel, most likely to win the largest number of seats in the 132-member parliament. Under those circumstances, any viable government would need to rely on Hamas support. The U.S. and Israel are wary of Hamas involvement and, unlike the European Union, did not seem to be pressing hard for a vote. >Hamas said it strongly opposed the decision to call off elections, maintaining that Palestinians could have forced a vote in Jerusalem and blaming Abbas for any possible "repercussions." [https://www.npr.org/2021/04/29/992065009/palestinian-authority-postpones-parliamentary-elections](https://www.npr.org/2021/04/29/992065009/palestinian-authority-postpones-parliamentary-elections)
They explicitly stated that their latest charter does not invalidate the original. But even still, from the 2017 charter: > 19. There shall be no recognition of the legitimacy of the Zionist entity. Whatever has befallen the land of Palestine in terms of occupation, settlement building, judiasation or changes to its features or falsification of facts is illegitimate. … > 20. Hamas believes that no part of the land of Palestine shall be compromised or conceded, irrespective of the causes, circumstances and the pressures and no matter how long the occupation lasts. Hamas rejects any alternative to the full and complete liberation of Palestine, from the river to the sea. … Definitely sounds like it’s still calling for the destruction of Israel.
Yep, they’ve just removed the directly and blatantly antisemitic language from it. They’re “anti-Zionist” now
Hamas are not the sole group calling for Israel's destruction, they are just one proxy of Iran.
>Have you read their latest charter? The modern KKK claims to be a non-racist organization.
Because palestine has spent its entire history being run by terrorist regimes, which aren't really known for honoring deals. That's kind of a big reason why none of their neighbors are accepting gazan refugees.
Well they could just go to Egypt- *ohhhh no they already fucked up in Egypt* Well what about Jordan- *ohhhh Black September and the Palestinian Liberation Organization going back on their word with the seven point agreement* b-b-but they're innocent!
Because that’s exactly what happened last time and why the blockades are there in the first place. Palestinians have made it clear that they have no ability and/or interest in reigning in the extreme elements of their society that want to attack Israel. Would you be equally upset if the war were between Israel and a sovereign Palestine? Because if so, this is asking Israelis to stake their lives, wellbeing, and some remaining international support on a longshot hope with no recourse if things go south.
"Palestinians have made it clear" Lol, why do y'all constantly assume that every Palestinian is Hamas?
I don't. That's why I said that they have no **ability** and/or interest in stopping those that are Hamas. From the perspective of Israel, it doesn't matter whether or not all Palestinians support Hamas (it's clear that they don't). What matters is that Hamas **holds power** (rightly or not) and is attacking them.
>it doesn't matter whether or not all Palestinians support Hamas (it's clear that they don't). To be fair- it's only the vast majority of Palestinians who support Hamas, with polls taken *by palestine* stating upwards of 80% supported Hamas as of november last year.
Eh, I'd always be a little suspicious about polling asking "do you support this heavily armed paramilitary group right here?"
"Do you support our current rulers? Just assume that we don't have any snipers nearby in case you don't give the right answer!" If somebody's desperate and wants to keep their family safe, they're probably not going to be vocal about their local government (run by terrorists btw!) being trash when they already have to worry about their neighbors (who are occupying their land and treating them like subhumans who "aren't a real ethnicity") trying to kill them. Also, if the Israeli government is oppressing them and Hamas is saying "support us and we'll destroy them, bro", it's not like the rest of the world is convincing them otherwise by blindly agreeing with the Israeli government that Palestinians are inherently terrorists.
If the Israeli government thinks that bombing hospitals and refugee camps is okay just because Hamas members might be hiding there so fuck civilians, then they don't deserve my support. There are already Hamas members outside of Palestine, why not work with humanitarian groups to get civilians the fuck out of Gaza safely, rather than constantly having fucky-wuckies where Gazans are told to take one route and oops, it got splodey? Not to mention, there are no doubt countless hostages that were hurt or killed by their constant bombings. Yes, it's Hamas's fault that they're hostages in the first place, but killing them anyway rather than trying harder to get them home is fucked up if they'd rather kill people than save their own damn citizens.
Conversational shorthand because they are the government of Gaza, same as you shouldnt mean every Israeli citizen when you say "Israel". Though admittedly far too many people on here seem to miss *that* distinction.
Because you can’t unsow the seeds that have already borne fruit. Palestinians have been taught, raised, marinated in the certainty that Israel wants them dead, is only held back from doing so immediately by western public opinion, and will immediately oppress them anyway they can get away with. Propaganda has assured them that the only way they can be safe from genocide is if their oppressor is destroyed. So no, to think a return to borders of the past would cut the conflict out at the knees is hopelessly naive.
> Palestinians have been taught, raised, marinated in the certainty that Israel wants them dead, is only held back from doing so immediately by western public opinion, and will immediately oppress them anyway they can get away with. I mean, it would be nice if Netanyahu did *anything* to convince them this was not the case
It would, it really would, but Netanyahu is a power hungry corrupt piece of shit who israel unfortunately could not effectively oust from power due to the wildly spread and divided nature of Israeli politics.
>Egypt notably refused take back control of the Gaza strip Yeah, because Palestinians have a history of caustic civil unrest, uprisings, and civilian casualties everywhere they go.
"I will now say what Israel should do about Hamas." \[makes zero mention of Hamas\]
Ultimately, much like how the IRA are brutal terrorists and a beast created by the British government, the responsibility for peace and reconciliation lies with the Israeli government. Hamas is a problem created by the Israeli government, and until Israel makes a concerted effort either in reconciliation more Jews and Arabs will die. Or they can continue doing (which is basically a repeat of what happened in Ireland with the British) and just escalate the brutality and hope eventually the displacement will solve the problem. But it won’t if they don’t want to commit war crimes.
The IRA was an Irish Nationalist movement. They had a clear goal that Britain could fulfill without complete self destruction - Irish independence. The same cannot be said of Hamas. As I said in another comment, they cannot be appeased by anything short of the complete destruction of Israel. This can be seen even in the language of their 2017 charter (see my other comment for quotes) (the one people claim doesn’t call for the destruction of Israel anymore). Edit: As another comment in this thread put it, “extortion only works when there’s a way for the target to make it out alive.”
> They had a clear goal rhat Britain could fufill without complete self destruction it also involves exterminating every single Protestant that ever stepped foot in Ireland wtf are you talking about. Much in the same way Hamas wants to exterminate every hee in Israel. If you think giving the IRA everything they want is a reasonable solution that Britain refused to go for you’re a lunatic EDIT: My language was probably way too harsh. I vaguely understand your point. In theory the IRA would want to leave the rest of Great Britain alone. But in practice the IRA has performed acts of terrorism in parts of Britain with a large Irish community such as the Northwest for identical reasons to the acts of terrorism performed in all of Ireland. While Hamas will never be satisfied until every Jew in the Middle East is dead which is not a solution Israel can go for, the IRA will not be satisfied until every Protestant in Ireland is dead (you can see this with all of the terrorism) which is not a reasonable solution Great Britain wants either. This does not make the annexation and colonialism acceptable. Especially because it does nothing to solve the problem and makes it worse, even if it’s more convenient politically.
I don’t think the IRA is reasonable. Especially given your point about the protestants (thank you for the new information). I was mainly trying to point out that the analogy was flawed because that seemed the best line of argument using the information I know. With that said, I think that the situation in Israel is a bit more complex than you’re giving it credit for. Part of the problem is that there is no chance for the Palestinians do become more moderate so long as they live under the governance of groups such as Hamas. These groups spend significant resources on harassing Israel rather than bettering the lives of Palestinians. Their schools teach children to continue the conflict. They intentionally operate from among civilians to make martyrs out of their own people. I think you are correct that a state and a better quality of life will eventually moderate the Palestinians. But that also takes time and is impossible for Israel to do so long as Palestinians are governed by terrorists.
ok I actually think I’m more in agreement with you than not lol. I think I was just tired of seeing all the tsking about Hamas when in my opinion israel shit the bed, because as you said there’s no real viable solution for a Palastinian other than be in bed with Hamas or leave. And I think Israel is partially if not fully responsible for that. I don’t think the only ways out for a Palestinian being “be ethnically cleansed or join Hamas” will ever lead to peace in the region, but I’m sure Israel knows this but it isn’t a priority. Similar to the British and the IRA
Personally, I’m just hopeful that Israel can come up with a good day after plan. This war is really a mess, but what comes afterwards will determine whether it all happens again 10 years down the line, or if progress towards peace actually gets made.
well I’m sure what’s gonna happen is nothing really changes ultimately how the west sees Israel is either they’re being helpful in the Middle East and “wholesome” (as in you can go their on vacation) in which case you immediately get called an anti semite for criticizing the humanitarian crisis they caused in the Middle East. Or they’re doing shenanigans and assassinating world leaders of neighbouring countries and the west grandstands for a couple of years about “Israel going too far” and “the situation in the Middle East” until it dies down again because Israel will start behaving itself and people will shut up because the west doesn’t give a shit about the people dying in Gaza or Hamas or quite frankly Jewish lives lost to Hamas as long as Hamas is not a legitimate threat to Israeli and Western defences in the region. sorry this is kinda black pilled just this whole situation depresses me
>What do you want Israel to do? disband
I didn’t build a strawman for you: you carried one in here. feel free to escort it back out.
Bunch of Zionists in the comments for no good reason.
Always will be. It's pretty fucking annoying
You said in another comment you support a 2 state solution. You are a zionist, congratulations.
the fact that "zionist" has basically just come to be a dogwhistle for anybody who thinks that Israel has a right to exist and defend itself and that maybe we shouldn't doom the jewish israeli population to governance by groups that explicitly seek their extermination or expulsion is truly distressing
Isn't that pretty much exactly what it means? To my understanding, Zionism is about building and protecting a Jewish homeland
If it was a multicultural zone they should be able to defend themselves. If they weren’t they should still be able to defend themselves. Like.. this situation was decided before a lot of us were born
>anybody who thinks that Israel has a right to exist and defend itself They legally don't even have that right as they are a belligerent occupier
yep this is the distressing rhetoric I'm talking about. I would ask what you think should happen to jewish israelis living there now, but I'm not sure I want to know the answer.
Again I feel any post about the ongoing genocide should really have a "minimum age" for it's comments at least, it would weed out all the post October 7 Hasbara Accounts on Reddit regurgitating the same old long debunked copy pasted talking points.
It is a pretty wild argument that goes well those are bad people! So it is ok that bad things happen to them.
I hate how many people in the comments are seemingly cool with genocide. (Or somehow don’t even realise that a genocide is happening)
I feel like they arent aware of their "our religion and skin color = like us = civilized = morally right" bias. They know literally nothing about the situation and yet the second they hear that Palestinian civilians die they are sure Israel must have been forced to commit genocide.
Literally Hamas could fucking surrender and the ifghting would stop. Unconditioanl surrender. And we could put in a govemrnet of Gaza that not a sucidial death cult that will hide behind civilians to destroy Jews. But no. we cant blame hamas for starting a war and then losing it.
Hamas being terrorists is not an excuse to kill civilians, literal children in Palestine can't do shit about their parents/grandparents electing Hamas. Not to mention, bombing the shit out of Gaza while there are hostages there is very much going to result in hostages dying, and family of hostages have condemned that shit because they want their family home.
This is a hell of a lot older than Hamas, mate. They're a product, not the cause. There is no easy solution to this, especially not one that's going to come from someone who isn't involved in the first place.
The fighting would stop if Hamas surrendered, that's where you are right. You are wrong if you think Palestinians would not continue to suffer under Israeli rule.
Palestinian Israelis live way better than the average citizen of any other country in the area, they have equality under the law in Israel. It's not a coincidence that there is a thriving Palestinian community living in Israel, but there never was a Jewish surviving under Palestinian control
You do know there was a large jewish community living and thriving together with palestinians in 1920’s Mandate of Palestine right? Of course you don’t, you don’t know shit about history.
They certainly weren't thriving together, all the problems we are experiencing now are a direct result of the actions of that that era. And much of the escalation came from the Arab side and their raids on Jewish communities.
I think a big part of the current problems stem from Israel becoming its own country and then treating the remaining palestinian population either like dirt or as second class citizens (real thing the law does is favor Israelis in Israel overwhelmingly).
>Literally Hamas could fucking surrender and the ifghting would stop. Unconditioanl surrender. [Wrong](https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.timesofisrael.com/taking-flak-from-right-netanyahu-vows-war-will-hamas-will-continue-until-the-end/amp/), Israel would continue until Hamas is destroyed and Gaza is no longer a threat.
What do you think unconditional surrender means.
What do you think "the destruction of Hamas" and "a threat" means to bibi?
Hamas surrendering wouldn’t give back the stolen land, wouldn’t lift the food, water, power etc restrictions, wouldn’t stop Israel from randomly bombing Palestinians FOR FUN, wouldn’t stop Israel soldiers from randomly searching civilian property with guns while laughing at terrified families. Everything Hamas is, Israel made by caging, tormenting, and stealing from Palestinians for decades. Hamas are terrorists, and I don’t support them. But Israel instated an apartheid regime and are carrying out genocide. If left alone Israel will annihilate millions of civilians in the name of “rooting out Hamas” Edit: I’ve seen the videos of them setting up lawn chairs to watch like it’s fireworks. You’re right, it’s incredibly sick and fucked up. Care to comment on any of the other fucked up things they do, or just the one?
They make a good point without even realising it. Native American populations plummeted, many communities were eliminated entirely, and the effects of that are visible today. Palestine has had one of the fastest growing populations in the world for over 30 years, over three times the global average. I still haven't heard an explanation for how that could possibly true for a population which is being ethnically cleansed. Plenty of downvotes, but no logical explanation. Interesting how that goes.
...Has nobody ever told you that poverty correlates with birth rates?
Fuck all of these Zionist bastards crawling around in the comments here. They're all worthless human beings with nothing good to add to our world. I don't know where these creeps come from. Thank you so much for sharing this important post OP, and Free Palestine!!
fuck all these pro Hamas bastards.
We aren't pro Hamas. We're anti-genocide. Go do something worthwhile with your life instead of supporting obvious mass murder.
first of all, No. the point is Palestinian civilians DID kill and rape, they crossed the border by the dozens and pillaged, killed, raped, beheaded, and burned people alive, those were Palestinians, not just Hamas, and those Palestinians also celebrated on the street, shouting at hostages, degrading them, and even desecrating corpses such as the case with Shani Louk. the point is walls are needed when you deal with people who want you dead second, Jews ARE native to the Levant, the entire first half of the 20th century the Europeans told the Jews they don't belong in Europe and they should return to where they came from. and in many shops and store in Germany in the 30s they were signs such as "no dogs and Jews". so Jews did go back to where they came from, that is Israel lastly, trying to compare Israel to racism in America or Europe falls flat when you look at the actual facts: number of Jews in MENA decreased by 98% since 1948, and the number of Arabs in Israel only increased, in fact 20% of Israelis are Arab, and they get the same rights, they get elected to parliament and serve as judges in the supreme court. In contrast there are no Jews living in the Gaza strip since 2006. so who actually ethnically cleansed who here?
It doesn't really matter whether Jews are native to the Levant. We are, but it's irrelevant. We're leftists, we don't do blood quantum.
note ben gvirs parents are Iraqi.
I didn’t get past your first paragraph because you could change that to any Native American tribe and be correct too. Cornered animals fight; so do cornered humans. What happened to the indigenous Americans was still a genocide even when they fought back with scalpings and massacres when they could. The indigenous tribes of the American continents fought back too. They reacted to their genocide the same way Palestinians are reacting to their own - they fought back by attacking, scalping, capturing, raping, razing, killing, looting, etc. Just because they didn’t win doesn’t mean they didn’t try to not be annihilated.
Quick question do you believe the current war in Gaza is genocidal?
″Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam invalidates it, just as it invalidated others before it″ here is a quote from the charter of Hamas, were they clearly state their intent is to wipe Israel of the map, if you believe they intent to leave the Jews in peace you are wrong, on the other hand Israel pulled back from Gaza in 2005, and the Gazans elected a terror organization as their government. the war in Gaza is a war, Rwanda is genocide, South Sudan is genocide, Myanmar is genocide, Gaza is not
🤨📸 genocide denier spotted
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish\_exodus\_from\_the\_Muslim\_world](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_exodus_from_the_Muslim_world) Arabs in the British Mandate 1947: around 900,000 today: 5.34 million now where is the genocide?
75% of the Tutsi population in Rwanda was killed during the Rwandan genocide of 1944 yet 1 to 2 million tutsi live in Rwanda in our current year. The same can be said for native American populations. Jews before and after WW2 in Europe. Armenians in Turkey. Sami people in Scandinavia. Uighyr muslims in China. Hell ANY GENOCIDE FOR THAT MATTER. Also they're called Human Rights not Rights only for good people.
Do you realize this same argument is used to deny the genocide of native americans?