ADVERTISEMENT

Israel under attack from Hamas

IUCrazy2 said:
Even saying she doesn't support them, what exactly is Progressive or Leftist about Hamas and Hezbollah outside of viewing them through the "oppressor/oppressed" lens (And Hezbollah doesn't even fit that mold, they are the "oppressors" in Lebanon)
Click to expand...

Butler in Goat's link writes she approves of the Hamas and Hezbollah objection to imperialism, but completely writes them off due to their violent resistence tactics.

One of readings about Butler is that she is strong advocate of Judaism and it's traditions while at the same time not accepting some of the actions of the Israeli government. Hardly a case of being anti- Semitic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UncleMark, BradStevens and TheOriginalHappyGoat
Spartans9312 said:
I doubt they care…frankly we (White House) shouldn’t care or meddle if that is the more appropriate term
Click to expand...
Oh, I'm sure they don't care. We probably should, though. Probably just a little bit. It's a tough balancing act we need to do. We have to support Israel, but also try to act like we are tempering their worst impulses. But then, on top of that, we have to make it not look like we are restraining them. It's basically a physically-impossible three-sided coin.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BradStevens
TheOriginalHappyGoat said:
Oh, I'm sure they don't care. We probably should, though. Probably just a little bit. It's a tough balancing act we need to do. We have to support Israel, but also try to act like we are tempering their worst impulses. But then, on top of that, we have to make it not look like we are restraining them. It's basically a physically-impossible three-sided coin.
Click to expand...
We will see how it plays out. The administration has a lot of pro-Iran employees. Those employees develop our policy for the Middle East
 
I don't know exactly what time it is on the so-called "Doomsday Clock," but it's got to be damned close to midnight.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DANC and 76-1
  • Like
Reactions: Spartans9312
TheOriginalHappyGoat said:
Oh, I'm sure they don't care. We probably should, though. Probably just a little bit. It's a tough balancing act we need to do. We have to support Israel, but also try to act like we are tempering their worst impulses. But then, on top of that, we have to make it not look like we are restraining them. It's basically a physically-impossible three-sided coin.
Click to expand...

This is precisely the problem with the war on terrorism and/or guerilla fighters in general. You cannot show restraint for an enemy that doesn't abide by or use conventional tactics. If it were a [insert any military organization, whether state-recognized or not] fighting by attacking military installations, it would be one thing. But indiscriminate attacks on civilians need to be met with purpose and finality. Neither of those is possible if any country (US, Israel, Europeans, etc.) are hamstrung.

That's the biggest challenge with Islamic fundamentalism. They don't give a fvck about the GEneva convention, but anyone who fights against them has to. That's not right or fair IMO.

EDITED: sorry, I've been pounding Wassails since trick or treating started, not my best post
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: DANC and BradStevens
JamieDimonsBalls said:
This is precisely the problem with the war on terrorism and/or guerilla fighters in general. You cannot show restraint for an enemy that doesn't abide by or use conventional weapons. If it were a [insert any military organization, whether state-recognized or not] fighting by attacking military installations, it would be one thing. But indiscriminate attacks on civilians need to be met with purpose and finality. Neither of those is possible if any country (US, Israel, Europeans, etc.) are hamstrung.

That's the biggest challenge with Islamic fundamentalism. They don't give a fvck about the GEneva convention, but anyone who fights against them has to. That's not right or fair IMO.
Click to expand...
DANC wrote earlier (can't remember if it was in this thread or not) that human nature hasn't changed.

But this is a good example of where it has: 2000 years ago, if some province pulled this crap with Rome, you know what Rome does? Destroys the place and either kills all the people or scatters them. Later, you do this to other empires, they do the same. Oh, the horrors the Mongols would've inflicted.

But somewhere along the way, we changed. EVERYONE agrees its wrong to do this kind of thing now. Well, everyone but Hamas.
 
  • Like
Reactions: larsIU, 76-1, jet812 and 2 others
JamieDimonsBalls said:
This is precisely the problem with the war on terrorism and/or guerilla fighters in general. You cannot show restraint for an enemy that doesn't abide by or use conventional tactics. If it were a [insert any military organization, whether state-recognized or not] fighting by attacking military installations, it would be one thing. But indiscriminate attacks on civilians need to be met with purpose and finality. Neither of those is possible if any country (US, Israel, Europeans, etc.) are hamstrung.

That's the biggest challenge with Islamic fundamentalism. They don't give a fvck about the GEneva convention, but anyone who fights against them has to. That's not right or fair IMO.

EDITED: sorry, I've been pounding Wassails since trick or treating started, not my best post
Click to expand...
I'm trying to look long-term. Unless we're going to completely obliterate the entire Arab world - and we're absolutely not going to do that - I think there is some value in Israel behaving like the responsible party, here. Now, granted, I also don't think Israel is in a position where its survival is remotely challenged. As long as they have US support (and at this point, maybe even if they don't), they can probably defend themselves against just about anyone who might want to attack them. So "behaving like the responsible party" as I labeled it above is also in part a luxury that one doesn't always have.
 
  • Like
Reactions: larsIU and BradStevens
BradStevens said:
DANC wrote earlier (can't remember if it was in this thread or not) that human nature hasn't changed.

But this is a good example of where it has: 2000 years ago, if some province pulled this crap with Rome, you know what Rome does? Destroys the place and either kills all the people or scatters them. Later, you do this to other empires, they do the same. Oh, the horrors the Mongols would've inflicted.

But somewhere along the way, we changed. EVERYONE agrees its wrong to do this kind of thing now. Well, everyone but Hamas.
Click to expand...

It's a good example, but even think back less than 100 years ago. Compare the willingness of the Allies to bomb German and/or Japanese citizens as a means to accomplish objectives, including protecting homeland and military.

If Israeli citizens are being directly threatened (and they have been for decades), Israel should have ZERO obligation to give a shit how many Palestinians it has to take out to eliminate the threat on its people. The same goes for any sovereign nation. It shouldn't matter if it's a direct state-related attack or a rebel agency that a foreign state is responsible for.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DANC, 76-1 and jet812
TheOriginalHappyGoat said:
I'm trying to look long-term. Unless we're going to completely obliterate the entire Arab world - and we're absolutely not going to do that - I think there is some value in Israel behaving like the responsible party, here. Now, granted, I also don't think Israel is in a position where its survival is remotely challenged. As long as they have US support (and at this point, maybe even if they don't), they can probably defend themselves against just about anyone who might want to attack them. So "behaving like the responsible party" as I labeled it above is also in part a luxury that one doesn't always have.
Click to expand...

The real question is - do you think the U.S. would actually engage if Israel is directly attacked by Iran? We aren't even willing to answer to the recent attacks on U.S. bases and troops by iranian-sponsored terrorist groups.

Also, why do you thin there is actually long-term value? Do you really think Muslims are going to progress? If anything, they've become more radicalized in recent years and more hostile towards Western cultures.
 
TheOriginalHappyGoat said:
I'm trying to look long-term. Unless we're going to completely obliterate the entire Arab world - and we're absolutely not going to do that - I think there is some value in Israel behaving like the responsible party, here. Now, granted, I also don't think Israel is in a position where its survival is remotely challenged. As long as they have US support (and at this point, maybe even if they don't), they can probably defend themselves against just about anyone who might want to attack them. So "behaving like the responsible party" as I labeled it above is also in part a luxury that one doesn't always have.
Click to expand...
This.

Israel is hopefully going to be neighbors with Arabs/Palestinians for a long time. Now isn't a winning hearts and minds phase, but it's not a bad strategy to avoid actively losing them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UncleMark
JamieDimonsBalls said:
It's a good example, but even think back less than 100 years ago. Compare the willingness of the Allies to bomb German and/or Japanese citizens as a means to accomplish objectives, including protecting homeland and military.

If Israeli citizens are being directly threatened (and they have been for decades), Israel should have ZERO obligation to give a shit how many Palestinians it has to take out to eliminate the threat on its people. The same goes for any sovereign nation. It shouldn't matter if it's a direct state-related attack or a rebel agency that a foreign state is responsible for.
Click to expand...
I think that goes too far.

They certainly aren't limited in the number of deaths they can inflict by the number of civilians Hamas murdered. But at some point, they can't say "hey we can't be safe unless we kill all 2 million of these Gazans" and wipe them all out. They have to target missions that will increase their military chances of success, without intentionally targeting civilians or causing "excessive" civilian casualties.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Baller23Boogie, UncleMark, larsIU and 2 others
JamieDimonsBalls said:
If Israeli citizens are being directly threatened (and they have been for decades), Israel should have ZERO obligation to give a shit how many Palestinians it has to take out to eliminate the threat on its people. The same goes for any sovereign nation. It shouldn't matter if it's a direct state-related attack or a rebel agency that a foreign state is responsible for.
Click to expand...
That's a great way to put it, and gives rise to a good example of what I'm talking about: "a rebel agency that a foreign state is responsible for" is a great description of a number of the rebel groups that were (or in some cases still are) fighting against the Assad regime in Syria. So by the logic you provide for Israel, Assad shouldn't have had any obligation to give a shit about how many civilians he killed while protecting his regime. But you'd never see any of us (I hope) actually defending the guy. I think we'd all agree that the entirety of his rule has been basically one giant crime against humanity.
 
hoosboot said:
This.

Israel is hopefully going to be neighbors with Arabs/Palestinians for a long time. Now isn't a winning hearts and minds phase, but it's not a bad strategy to avoid actively losing them.
Click to expand...
In one sense, I think you're both obviously right.

In another, if I'm an Israeli, I don't want to hear that right now. I want my government doing everything possible to stop that type of attack from ever happening again from anywhere--Hamas, Hezbollah, you name it. Those in government are going to respond to that. If they don't, they'll lose their jobs pretty quickly.
 
JamieDimonsBalls said:
The real question is - do you think the U.S. would actually engage if Israel is directly attacked by Iran? We aren't even willing to answer to the recent attacks on U.S. bases and troops by iranian-sponsored terrorist groups.

Also, why do you thin there is actually long-term value? Do you really think Muslims are going to progress? If anything, they've become more radicalized in recent years and more hostile towards Western cultures.
Click to expand...
As long as we're not going to wipe them all out - and I really don't see that as an option - it doesn't matter whether or not we think they will "progress." They are still going to be Israel's neighbors. And if it weren't for the Palestine question, quite frankly, a number of them might even be Israel's security partners.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BradStevens
BradStevens said:
In one sense, I think you're both obviously right.

In another, if I'm an Israeli, I don't want to hear that right now. I want my government doing everything possible to stop that type of attack from ever happening again from anywhere--Hamas, Hezbollah, you name it. Those in government are going to respond to that. If they don't, they'll lose their jobs pretty quickly.
Click to expand...
Sure. That doesn't make it the best strategy and I'd want my leaders to be thinking past blankly emotional lashing out towards being tactically and strategically pursuing the long-term safety of my family. Creating a great many more long term enemies with clumsy missions that have limited positive impact isn't smart even if it might be doing "everything possible".
 
  • Like
Reactions: BradStevens
hoosboot said:
Sure. That doesn't make it the best strategy and I'd want my leaders to be thinking past blankly emotional lashing out towards being tactically and strategically pursuing the long-term safety of my family. Creating a great many more long term enemies with clumsy missions that have limited positive impact isn't smart even if it might be doing "everything possible".
Click to expand...
It doesn't seem like Israel rushed into Gaza. Took them three weeks to go in on the ground.

But you and Goat are both right: anything Israel does wrong will be broadcast across the Arab world to stoke more hatred; anything that can be spun as wrong (e.g. supposed hospital bombing) will be so spun.
 
BradStevens said:
It doesn't seem like Israel rushed into Gaza. Took them three weeks to go in on the ground.

But you and Goat are both right: anything Israel does wrong will be broadcast across the Arab world to stoke more hatred; anything that can be spun as wrong (e.g. supposed hospital bombing) will be so spun.
Click to expand...
I don't think I suggested that they rushed. I appreciate how deliberate Israel has been for the most part. But, absent a very important strategic objective, bombing a refugee camp has the makings of a strategic blunder that is ultimately counterproductive. Hopefully they achieved that important objective because Israel's ultimate strategy needs to be putting a wedge between Hamas and the majority of Palestinian people. My concern is that today's operations moved us further away from that goal. And that's not spin...it's just reality.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BradStevens
hoosboot said:
I don't think I suggested that they rushed. I appreciate how deliberate Israel has been for the most part. But, absent a very important strategic objective, bombing a refugee camp has the makings of a strategic blunder that is ultimately counterproductive. Hopefully they achieved that important objective because Israel's ultimate strategy needs to be putting a wedge between Hamas and the majority of Palestinian people. My concern is that today's operations moved us further away from that goal. And that's not spin...it's just reality.
Click to expand...
Serious question for you and Goat: do you think the Arabs/Palestinians and Israel will live in peace at some point in the next 100 years?

I was hopeful with the Abraham Accords but am now pretty down on the whole idea. I know this is what the Palestinians were hoping to achieve, but I just don't see how this doesn't radicalize more Israelis. Is it a "they have to, otherwise it's going to be unthinkable" type thinking (which I use sometimes) , or are you basing it on something else (history, something you've seen in the sentiments there, etc.)?
 
  • Like
Reactions: DANC
BradStevens said:
Serious question for you and Goat: do you think the Arabs/Palestinians and Israel will live in peace at some point in the next 100 years?

I was hopeful with the Abraham Accords but am now pretty down on the whole idea. I know this is what the Palestinians were hoping to achieve, but I just don't see how this doesn't radicalize more Israelis. Is it a "they have to, otherwise it's going to be unthinkable" type thinking (which I use sometimes) , or are you basing it on something else (history, something you've seen in the sentiments there, etc.)?
Click to expand...
100 years is a long time. But I'm not confident.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BradStevens
BradStevens said:
It doesn't seem like Israel rushed into Gaza. Took them three weeks to go in on the ground.

But you and Goat are both right: anything Israel does wrong will be broadcast across the Arab world to stoke more hatred; anything that can be spun as wrong (e.g. supposed hospital bombing) will be so spun.
Click to expand...
They are going to hate Israel either way and I wouldn’t be concerned. The Middle East is made up of 100s of million Muslims who all hate a nation that is smaller than Jersey. They’re never going to like Israel. It would be like all of us hating Native Americans, because we gave them part of North Dakota. It doesn’t make any sense. Israel only objective should be to destroy as much of Hamas as they can. Barbarians only respect power.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DANC and 76-1
BradStevens said:
Serious question for you and Goat: do you think the Arabs/Palestinians and Israel will live in peace at some point in the next 100 years?

I was hopeful with the Abraham Accords but am now pretty down on the whole idea. I know this is what the Palestinians were hoping to achieve, but I just don't see how this doesn't radicalize more Israelis. Is it a "they have to, otherwise it's going to be unthinkable" type thinking (which I use sometimes) , or are you basing it on something else (history, something you've seen in the sentiments there, etc.)?
Click to expand...
Peace? I don't know. I suspect there are too many people invested in continuing the violence for it to come easy. But, do Americans live in "peace"? Human beings seem to have a perverse desire for conflict and drama, so I'm not sure there will be magical peace around the world in the next 100 years.

But I have friends in L.A. who are Palestinian and we're both good friends with an Israeli family. Both families are horrified by the awful and evil Hamas attack on Israeli civilians and both are concerned about the deaths of innocent Palestinians. Ultimately, peace comes from replicating what happened between them - humans connecting on a human level.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UncleMark, BradStevens and larsIU
theintercept.com

The Senate Condemns Student Groups as Backlash to Pro-Palestinian Speech Grows

“Do we risk losing our careers over an ephemeral social post that doesn’t save a single life in Palestine?”
theintercept.com theintercept.com

www.nature.com

‘I’m a powder keg’: ousted eLife editor on being fired in wake of Israel–Hamas remarks

Debate rages in scientific community over Michael Eisen’s removal from prominent open-access journal.
www.nature.com www.nature.com

www.latimes.com

Maha Dakhil, a top agent at CAA, steps aside from leadership roles after Israel-Hamas post

Maha Dakhil, a top agent at the Creative Artists Agency, whose clients include Tom Cruise, Natalie Portman and Ava DuVernay, stepped away from leadership roles after Israel-Hamas posts on social media.
www.latimes.com www.latimes.com

www.theguardian.com

Sports reporter in Philadelphia loses job over pro-Palestinian comments

Jackson Frank was let go by PhillyVoice.com after he responded ‘Solidarity with Palestine’ to a 76ers tweet condemning Hamas
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com


www.timesofisrael.com

Irish Wix employee fired for inflammatory posts about Israel-Hamas war

Tech company's CEO Nir Zohar says it is 'unfathomable' for Israeli employees to be called terrorists by teammate at work
www.timesofisrael.com www.timesofisrael.com

 
TheOriginalHappyGoat said:
This doesn't help.

www.theguardian.com

Dozens killed after Israeli airstrikes on Gaza refugee camp

Israeli military says it bombed Jabalia camp to target a key Hamas commander, Ibrahim Biari
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
Click to expand...

It said they tried to get him, did they?

If the allies had the location to Goering, Goebbels, Doenitz, Tojo, etc. and he was in a similarly populated area, I expect that attack. Israel said this was a war from the jump. Not one of their former policing actions, a war. Feel bad for any children killed but most of what I saw running around in the video of the aftermath was military aged males....
 
  • Like
Reactions: DANC and 76-1
hoot1 said:
Butler in Goat's link writes she approves of the Hamas and Hezbollah objection to imperialism, but completely writes them off due to their violent resistence tactics.

One of readings about Butler is that she is strong advocate of Judaism and it's traditions while at the same time not accepting some of the actions of the Israeli government. Hardly a case of being anti- Semitic.
Click to expand...

No, just the typical leftist siding with the bad guys because of their reflexive anti-Western stance. Morons like her are the first ones to die if half the regimes she supports in the world were to take over.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DANC, snarlcakes, jet812 and 1 other person
Spartans9312 said:
theintercept.com

The Senate Condemns Student Groups as Backlash to Pro-Palestinian Speech Grows

“Do we risk losing our careers over an ephemeral social post that doesn’t save a single life in Palestine?”
theintercept.com theintercept.com

www.nature.com

‘I’m a powder keg’: ousted eLife editor on being fired in wake of Israel–Hamas remarks

Debate rages in scientific community over Michael Eisen’s removal from prominent open-access journal.
www.nature.com www.nature.com

www.latimes.com

Maha Dakhil, a top agent at CAA, steps aside from leadership roles after Israel-Hamas post

Maha Dakhil, a top agent at the Creative Artists Agency, whose clients include Tom Cruise, Natalie Portman and Ava DuVernay, stepped away from leadership roles after Israel-Hamas posts on social media.
www.latimes.com www.latimes.com

www.theguardian.com

Sports reporter in Philadelphia loses job over pro-Palestinian comments

Jackson Frank was let go by PhillyVoice.com after he responded ‘Solidarity with Palestine’ to a 76ers tweet condemning Hamas
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com


www.timesofisrael.com

Irish Wix employee fired for inflammatory posts about Israel-Hamas war

Tech company's CEO Nir Zohar says it is 'unfathomable' for Israeli employees to be called terrorists by teammate at work
www.timesofisrael.com www.timesofisrael.com

Click to expand...
It seems not long ago we were aghast people would get in trouble for free speech, now we seem to applaud it?

I have no worries about it personally, but I wonder how far we are willing to go. A celebrity made the text below and has been getting backlash:

“because my heart breaks to see all of the horror, hate, violence and terror that’s going on in the world. People being tortured and killed or any act of hate towards any one group is horrific. We need to protect ALL people, especially children and stop the violence for good.”​
​
Is that statement really controversial? I will gladly state I don't want Israeli or Palestinian children to be killed. Heck, I don't want the adults killed unless they are actually involved in terror.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hookyIU1990
Marvin the Martian said:
It seems not long ago we were aghast people would get in trouble for free speech, now we seem to applaud it?

I have no worries about it personally, but I wonder how far we are willing to go. A celebrity made the text below and has been getting backlash:

“because my heart breaks to see all of the horror, hate, violence and terror that’s going on in the world. People being tortured and killed or any act of hate towards any one group is horrific. We need to protect ALL people, especially children and stop the violence for good.”​
​
Is that statement really controversial? I will gladly state I don't want Israeli or Palestinian children to be killed. Heck, I don't want the adults killed unless they are actually involved in terror.
Click to expand...

Respectfully, these were the rules deployed against conservatives who were accused of "wrong think" throughout COVID or if they were not fully on board with corporate or government DEI initiatives. These rules were also applied against them in online spaces like Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, etc. When conservatives complained they were told that you have freedom of speech but not freedom from consequences of said speech. We told you all this was wrong headed but since it was conservatives getting the shaft, the moderate liberals didn't give a shit.

Well guess what, all these whiny ass kids getting the treatment they gleefully would hand out to people they felt were "anti-trans" is just karma. They have to be made to feel the sting of their rules and maybe after a few of their lives have been upended, we can come back to the position we used to have in this country before the psychopathic left took control of all of the public spaces. Sorry kidd, you don't want to hire "bigots", neither do we.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: DANC and jet812
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

C

First UK. Then France. Now Germany. Canada on the brink.

Replies
147
Views
5K
The Water Cooler
hoot1
hoot1
outside shooter

77 Nobel Prize winners in chemistry, medicine, physics and economics to US Senate: reject RFK Jr.

Replies
96
Views
3K
The Water Cooler
ButHerEmails
B
76-1

Under the heading: Didn't see that one coming...

Replies
1
Views
511
IU Football Board
frikkenfrakken
F
MyTeamIsOnTheFloor

Hezbollah Pagers Exploding?

Replies
175
Views
5K
The Water Cooler
Noodle
Noodle
Ohio Guy

Trump's mass deportations coupled with tariffs would be a disaster for the economy....

Replies
0
Views
851
The Water Cooler
Ohio Guy
Ohio Guy
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back