Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
(Thread IKs: Main Paineframe)
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Civilized Fishbot
Apr 3, 2011

VitalSigns posted:

Magic isn't real, so a guy who could fly and walk on water and talk to plants or maybe just fig trees is probably fake op

Historians generally agree that the simplest explanation for the available evidence is that there was a real first-century Judean Jew who preached an apocalyptic message and was executed by the Roman Empire.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Civilized Fishbot
Apr 3, 2011

nvrgrls posted:

To whomever said they don't understand why the US supports Israel:

In general,

- Nobody likes Jews
- Nobody likes Palestinians

People in the US hate Palestinians more than Jews so they're gonna elect pro-Israel politicians.

The outcomes of US elections do not cohere to the claim that "nobody likes Jews." 1 in 20 members of Congress are Jewish, compared to about 1 in 50 Americans. Gentiles vote for us constantly.

The US supports Israel because it's an outpost of our empire. As our President said, “If there were not an Israel, we would have to invent one to make sure our interests were preserved." Those interests - monetary and military - drive the ideology, not the other way around.

I find it reductive to say "nobody likes Jews" as if Americans see American Jews and Israeli Jews the same way - they do not. Americans love Israel and Israeli Jews, because our politicians all love it and because we buy into the militarist/Christian Zionist vision of a Holy Land free of Muslims or weak, degenerate, diasporic Jews.

Civilized Fishbot fucked around with this message at 13:08 on May 13, 2021

Civilized Fishbot
Apr 3, 2011

DarkCrawler posted:

Oh man, a blast from the past



Pretty much always timely, though.

I wish they'd put the whole Israeli flag there and not just the Magen David. I think this comic encourages the terrible misconception that the Magen David is itself a symbol of Israel; I pay my $18/mo to Jewish Voice for Peace every month and I'm wearing no less than 3 Magens David right now.

Civilized Fishbot
Apr 3, 2011

DarkCrawler posted:

Far right appropriating national/religious symbols is sadly part of the parcel.

I don't think the guy who edited that Dry Bones cartoon was far-right.

Civilized Fishbot
Apr 3, 2011

CommieGIR posted:

I'd find that hard to believe because he espouses a lot of racism and bigotry that aligns perfectly with them.

Yeah, the far-right is well known for their deep sympathy for Palestinians and opposition to Israel.

What are you talking about? The schmuck who writes and "draws" Dry Bones is far-right, it's very obvious that this cartoon was edited by a left-wing detractor.

DarkCrawler posted:

I mean if I had to go for "a symbol of Jewish supremacy" or any supremacy for that matter it would be a religious/national symbol because that is how the far right rolls :shrug: regardless of my own personal beliefs.

You're right, we should uncritically adopt this far-right framing. The Magen David symbolizes both Jews and the State of Israel because they're the same thing, and therefore Jews bear collective responsibility for whatever the State of Israel does.

If someone can't distinguish between the Magen David and the flag of Israel, I wonder how well they are able to distinguish between Jews and the State of Israel, and if they can't distinguish between those things, they are antisemitic and stupid as hell.

Civilized Fishbot fucked around with this message at 15:33 on May 13, 2021

Civilized Fishbot
Apr 3, 2011
Zionism was basically the most intuitive possible solution to the problem of Jewish subjugation throughout Christian Europe (and, at generally lesser severity, throughout Muslim North Africa/West Asia).

Life in a subjugated ethnoreligious caste is terrible, and the options on the table were:

1. Totally abandon our ethnoreligious identities and traditions and beg for assimilation. Might work over the course of several generations at the cost of the entire Jewish way of life, but there's profit to be made from the existence of a subjugated ethnoreligious caste so it probably won't ever really succeed

2. Establish a state where Jews are not a subjugated ethnoreligious caste.

3. Hope that throughout the 20th century, by the power of capitalism/communism, Jews cease to be a subjugated ethnoreligious caste. Eventually this kinda worked out, somewhat along the lines of #1 but not as severe.

You didn't have to be a weirdo or self-hating Jew to think that #2 is the best option on that table by far. It wasn't worth doing the Nakba or setting up an apartheid state, but "I would like a country where I won't be progromed" isn't a Kapo idea.

Civilized Fishbot fucked around with this message at 17:41 on Jan 30, 2023

Civilized Fishbot
Apr 3, 2011

Zulily Zoetrope posted:

Israel is colonialist project that shouldn't have ever existed, though.

"An ethnostate, but for us this time" is one thing, but "built on top of another existing population" was categorically never the answer.

I'm sure there were a variety of interests at play and a lot of early settlers were fleeing persecution or oppression, and it's a lot harder to fault the individuals, but the project was to build an ethnostate and that was never going to become a fair or just society.

Theodor Herzl actually wrote a novel about Zionism as he'd like to see it done - "The Old New Land", and there are two key points here:

1. In Herzl's imagination, Palestine really is "a land without a people," a blank canvas with only a few Arabs hopping around who welcome the Jews, because there's more than enough land for anyone and it just needs industrial capital and labor.

2. In Herzl's imagination, in the new state in Palestine, religion doesn't have a legal status, it's basically a regular liberal democracy in which plenty of people happen to be Jewish. He actually ends the book with a politician-rabbi demanding that the state grant citizenship to Jews exclusively; both Herzl and Herzl's fictional voters reject this guy as a anachronistic nutcase.

I bring up this book to say that many early Zionists did not want or imagine an ethnostate or apartheid state, they figured that an idealized liberal democracy would be sufficient to prevent antisemitic abuses because Jews would make up either the majority or the plurality of voters.

But when the Israel project had to confront the reality of 1.5-2 million Palestinians in the area, they had to decide between becoming a vulnerable ethnoreligious minority in Palestine (the same situation they were trying to escape) or reducing the number of Palestinians in the area and politically subjugating the rest (the Nakba and the eventual establishment of an apartheid state).

VitalSigns posted:

Did these 19th century Zionists imagine the Jewish State being built somewhere other than Palestine?
Many were very open to it, many were insistent on Palestine because of its cultural and religious significance. Herzl came to the Zionist Congress with a proposal to settle the Mau Escarpment in Kenya (then Uganda), which of course would've taken place without the input of the locals there, but this proposal didn't catch on because so many were dedicated to the settlement of Palestine in particular.

There were both first-order concerns ("Eretz Yisroel is the cultural and religious home of the Jewish people, we need it") and second-order concerns ("It will be easier for us to rhetorically promote and defend the project if we do it in a place where Jews are already seen as natural residents.")

VitalSigns posted:

Because I don't see how going to someone else's home and saying ok we want to make this a state for us now is self-determination, kinda sounds like conquest

Why are self-determination and conquest mutually exclusive here?

Civilized Fishbot fucked around with this message at 18:10 on Jan 30, 2023

Civilized Fishbot
Apr 3, 2011

Argas posted:

It's about expressing hate. It's almost like they don't care that there's an exception for consuming pork if it's the difference between life and death.

This exception also applies in Judaism, and in neither religion would it apply to this ghastly threat because proximity to a pig is not itself prohibited. If there's any Sharia issue here it's the indefinite postponement of the body's proper Muslim burial.

It's not supposed to be "haha we are making you violate your religion via your corpse," just a grievous cultural insult (more grievous because it functions in both cultures) and very literal dehumanization.

Civilized Fishbot
Apr 3, 2011

Nucleic Acids posted:

So either Palestinians are allowed the same right to self defense as anyone else, or they should just accept their deaths.

Retaliatory mass murder isn't self-defense. We are going to see much more of it this week, and it won't be self defense, it will still be an atrocity

Civilized Fishbot
Apr 3, 2011

Red and Black posted:

Quick question, if take a house by violently expelling its current occupants, and those occupants try to retake the house and kill me in the process, are the former occupants guilty of war crimes? Did they kill a civilian?

Or perhaps does the fact that I live on stolen land, in a stolen house, drinking stolen water, and benefiting from the physical and spiritual immiseration of the previous occupants make me something different than a civilian?

Username is "Red and Black," posts are about how property rights are worth killing over.

The fact that someone is depends on stolen goods to survive, that obviously doesn't justify murdering them.

Nobody is closer to liberation because of what happened today, but a lot of people are dead. It's another predictable horrible outcome of the colonial project here, there's no gain in it.

Civilized Fishbot
Apr 3, 2011

SeANMcBAY posted:

being expelled to Italy wouldn’t be the worst thing in the world.

Have you been following the news about how Italy receives refugees?


Red and Black posted:

It never stops. If your parents steal a house, and then they die and you inherit the house, you are still living on stolen land. Therefore the crime is not solely of the “original settlers”. For as long as the land is stolen and as long as there is an indigenous claim, your relation is a settler relation. The crime of settlement doesn’t so much pass onto you, as the original criminal passes away and a new criminal takes up the torch and continues the crime.

Israeli and Jewish goons will recognize the worship of historical property rights that also underlies religious Zionism.

Ultimately Red and Black you sound like a Zionist, not an anarchist - for you there's a war between two nations is basically analogous to a confrontation between individuals, one reasonable and one a thief, and of course reasonable people are allowed to kill thieves.

If you think about Israel as a colonial project which has structured various ethnic and economic classes at war with each other to facilitate mass exploitation, you see it differently. This is the prisoners mass-murdering the prison guards and their families, now the army's going to come in and kill a lot of the prisoners, it's the system reaching its peak of brutality and bloodshed it's not any kind of victory for anyone unless you just want to see/sell a lot of murder.

Civilized Fishbot fucked around with this message at 16:05 on Oct 7, 2023

Civilized Fishbot
Apr 3, 2011

Red and Black posted:

I am not saying that Israeli deaths are by and of themself a good thing. I am not cheering on Israeli death. I am saying the Palestinians have a right to resist Israeli occupation, and if settlers die in the process so be it. If settlers have a problem with that, they should evaluate their position as a colonizer and how they’ve made such confrontations inevitable

It is actually disturbing and disheartening to see posts like this one that sound exactly like the most callous religious Zionists but with the national identities swapped. "Well, that's how it is, maybe for us to reclaim all our stolen property, all the squatters and thieves have to die."

Civilized Fishbot
Apr 3, 2011

AreWeDrunkYet posted:

And on top of that, someone in a Navajo reservation can legally move to and work in Albuquerque whenever they want to. It doesn't make the circumstances not lovely, but if native americans were not allowed to leave reservations or have contact with the outside world that the US didn't approve (as was the case not that long ago), it wouldn't be too surprising if a police station in the southwest blew up now and then.

To complete the analogy, suppose that the US government resettled refugees in that development, and the refugees didn't have US citizenship and couldn't leave, and their kids couldn't either, and their grandkids, and then one day a bomb killed some of the refugees and a lot of their kids and grandkids.

The average Israeli Jewish worker is stuck, like the average White American worker, with a violent bourgeois state that exploits them, exploits others horribly more, and violently punishes all resistance. Most lack any tools to escape or resist. That's the reality, and it means when they die they're casualties of the colonial process.

Fat-Lip-Sum-41.mp3 posted:

Do you think that, in the absence of a State (which, for our purposes here, is at best absent and at worst in active opposition), this right does not exist?

Yeah I don't think nations have rights at all. And if I thought national property claims justified violence, I'd be a Zionist.

Civilized Fishbot fucked around with this message at 16:38 on Oct 7, 2023

Civilized Fishbot
Apr 3, 2011

Red and Black posted:

Every second in this thread we move closer to a settler both sidesing wounded knee

I don't know if it's both-sidesing but many of the posts here read exactly like right-wing Zionists every time the IDF commits an atrocity.

"Yes it's a shame whenever people die, but we have to reclaim our stolen property, there is no way to avoid killing innocents to protect ourselves against the thief nation, we have to teach them to respect us, it is what it is. And maybe they're not really innocent anyway, many of them are sympathetic to the terrorists..."

It's actually dissapointing to see someone with a username like "Red and Black," so you'd expect an anarchist perspective, one grounded in how people are trapped in various classes of a colonial project, and not "there's a good nation and a bad nation and sometimes what the good nation does to the bad nation won't be so pretty, deal with it"

emanresu tnuocca posted:

Yeah, that's a myth.

It is insane blood-and-soil stuff to think it matters either way, as if inviolable roperty rights are inheritable by blood or ethno-cultural tradition.

As if we have to find which land rightfully belongs to which nation, based on some neutral historical survey, and that'll achieve justice for us today. The only solution is to give up the idea that nations are entitled to land, and hold on to the idea that people shouldn't be kicked out of their houses.

Civilized Fishbot fucked around with this message at 17:02 on Oct 7, 2023

Civilized Fishbot
Apr 3, 2011

Fat-Lip-Sum-41.mp3 posted:

You did not answer the question.

I did, you just don't like the answer, which is no. Nations don't have rights. They don't have property rights and they don't have any right to kill people in pursuit of land, whether the land once "belonged" to that nation or not.

Palestinians have every right to right to resist a state that's ruthlessly exploiting them by violence and superveillance. It's a very serious mistake to confuse that with nationalist revanchism.

Your line of thought really lines up with the more right-wing Zionists I knew growing up. Most of them are less right-wing now.

A world of nations where nations have the same rights as people do under liberal capitalism - property, reclaiming property, self-defense - and the good nation is just trying to safely reclaim their stolen property from a violent thief nation. It's very right wing in the way it centers national identity and property, not the welfare or rights of the actual people who have inherited inescapable roles in this violent machine.

Civilized Fishbot fucked around with this message at 17:39 on Oct 7, 2023

Civilized Fishbot
Apr 3, 2011
Pentecoastal Elites is obviously being sarcastic.

This sort of smarmy "well, what else do you expect, there's no alternative" justification for mass murder pops up with every IDF atrocity. I really was hoping to see some discussion without callous cheerleading for the mass murder that'll take place tomorrow, but here it's just callous cheerleading for the mass murder that already took place instead.

Most of the posts here are perfectly indistinguishable, in logic and in rhetoric, from the kind of Zionist who believes Peter Beinart is basically a kapo now.

Civilized Fishbot
Apr 3, 2011

Pentecoastal Elites posted:

I see. Surely the conscientious objections of these men and women have done a great deal to dissuade the Israeli state from engaging in acts of what must be clearly unpopular aggression. Perhaps the Palestinians can learn from their example, and not resort to this awful indiscriminate violence!

I'm sorry, but violence is never acceptable. As Israel is a democratic state it is incumbent upon the Palestinians to utilize the nonviolent vehicle of democratic politics to argue for their cause. The first thing they ought to do is raise awareness of their situation by nonviolent means. One idea could be to hold a nonviolent demonstration or march at a regular time, perhaps every Friday, for instance. That would go a long way to informing Israelis that Palestinian voices are being under-represented in Israeli politics.

I'm sorry but it is inappropriate to "lmao" at the idea of people being killed, even (perhaps especially!) if you disagree with them. If your grandparents moved to Israel and you were forced into the military (or face jail time), how could it be "your fault", and thus make you "ok to kill" (a hideous string of words to even write). I personally believe that no one is "ok to kill", least of all people who were not able to choose where they were born or if their government was going to force them to spend time in military service!

I know a lot of Zionists who sound like you - the endless sarcastic mockery of anyone who thinks mass murder is awful - and it's not less obnoxious on this flavor.

If you think that what happened today did or didn't accomplish something positive, you should just say so, if you think these people did or didn't deserve to die,.you should just say so. But it's obnoxious to pretend anyone here doesn't realize that every nonviolent attempt to prevent or resist colonialism in Palestine has ultimately failed.

Civilized Fishbot fucked around with this message at 18:08 on Oct 7, 2023

Civilized Fishbot
Apr 3, 2011

Sri.Theo posted:

People are talking about civilian causalities as if social media’s not filled with a video a of a stripped naked young women’s dead body being paraded around. What’s the advantage of that?

You'll have to clarify what her ethnicity was before the thread can decide whether that's bad because she's a victim, or just what happens to the complicit so-called "civilians" in wartime.

Fat-Lip-Sum-41.mp3 posted:

I did ask you if Palestinians have a right to employ violence to reclaim property. Still wanting on a response.

Again I'm giving you your answer, you just don't like it. Nobody has the right to employ violence to claim property, and that includes re-claiming jt. Property rights are a social construction for managing exploitation which ultimately just reflect the will of whatever ruling class most recently had power for long enough.

We all have the right to fight for decent lives for ourselves and each other. Nobody has the right to fight or kill to pursue their claim on property. Otherwise someone who inherited a lot of property claims has more rights than someone who didn't inherit any. And human rights shouldn't work that way.

Civilized Fishbot fucked around with this message at 18:36 on Oct 7, 2023

Civilized Fishbot
Apr 3, 2011
Don't know if this is "both-sidesism" but it's very true to the discussion here:

quote:

Contrary to what many Israelis are saying, and while the army was clearly caught completely off guard by this invasion, this is not a “unilateral” or “unprovoked” attack. The dread Israelis are feeling right now, myself included, is a sliver of what Palestinians have been feeling on a daily basis under the decades-long military regime in the West Bank, and under the siege and repeated assaults on Gaza. The responses we are hearing from many Israelis today — of people calling to “flatten Gaza,” that “these are savages, not people you can negotiate with,” “they are murdering whole families,” “there’s no room to talk with these people” — are exactly what I have heard occupied Palestinians say about Israelis countless times.

I think this article lays out the reality to the full horrible extent.

https://www.972mag.com/gaza-attack-context-israelis/

Civilized Fishbot
Apr 3, 2011


"Ignore everything, continue to celebrate the holiday, refuse to join the army" is a much more logical and ethical approach than what the Israeli state is doing (killing hundreds of Palestinians, entrenching war for another generation).

It's like how America would be in a much better place, culturally and economically and militarily, if we had ignored 9/11 altogether instead of making two wars out of it.

Civilized Fishbot
Apr 3, 2011

Madkal posted:

Now imagine the argument "it's like how Gaza would be a much better place if they just ignored Israel shelling them all the time"

Today that's objectively true - Gaza is going to be a much worse place tomorrow because of the attacks today.

It's still a stupid thing to say because its impossible for Gazans to ignore this level of violence every day, while the rate of people lost to terror attacks in the US or Israel is comparable to other problems we basically ignore like traffic safety or public health issues.

Civilized Fishbot
Apr 3, 2011

kiminewt posted:

It's easy to say "more people die in car accidents than terror attacks", but terror attacks have many side effects. From the fear of leaving your house to the fear of cowering from a gunman that never leaves your head (from experience), these are quantifiable things that aren't in the death toll. True in both sides in this case. Obviously, policians love an issue they can shoot at.

I think I'm going to stop reading this thread and social media in general. I know this isn't very D&D of me but I just can't deal with reading all of this cooly while being worried about most of my family which lives in Israel or my many friends there. Horror stories I'm reading about won't leave my head. You guys knock yourselves out though

I agree with all of paragraph 1 and sympathize with all of paragraph 2.

Civilized Fishbot
Apr 3, 2011

Google Jeb Bush posted:

This is basically a substantial driver of Hamas' choices to engage in violence, yes - as long as less-violent solutions don't seem to actually be solutions and Israel keeps pummeling Palestine, Hamas needs to show a willingness to resist or they'll get undercut by even bigger assholes, same way they themselves undercut the PA. It's a loving disastrous mess of incentives that can't realistically be resolved by Palestinian action as long as Israel, the side with much more agency and military power, keeps being horrible.

I think you may have misread. Ultra-orthodox Israelis are perfectly fine with other Israelis being conscripted, and aren't exactly forward-thinkers regarding Palestine. This isn't a "service guarantees citizenship" thing, it's a "their opposition to their own conscription is absolutely not grounded in positive moral thinking" thing.

Yeah I didn't mean to imply that Haredim are enlightened pacifists, just that they happen to be doing the moral thing by choosing strict religious observance over contribution to the colony.

Civilized Fishbot
Apr 3, 2011
I see headlines suggesting that Netanyahu might not survive this and I just can't buy that. Every time he's been in trouble, he's organized a campaign to distract, and now he's had one served up to him. Like Bush with 9/11, I feel like he couldn't ask for a better crisis

Civilized Fishbot
Apr 3, 2011

Kwolok posted:

Hi I'm of the tribe and have family is Israel.

Ultra orthodox are the biggest bunch of entitled arrogant hateful dickheads to ever grace Israel. They believe absolutely everyone and everything should bend to their insanely restrictive and regressive idealogies. They are only continuing their religious festivities in the face of the emergency because they are religious zealots and not because they don't want to partake in the massacre. They are also probably the single most hateful and anti-palestinian group in Israel (save for one odd pacifist faction that gets a lot of coverage but is a tiny minority). They are more than happy to celebrate every single palestinian death and they really view all of palestinians as subhuman.

They would absolutely love to kill Palestinians. They simply don't want to be told what to do in any fashion.

So from the bottom of my heart, gently caress these guys.

Yeah I meant it as a "stopped clock is right twice a day" coincidence, I probably shouldn't've said anything about it.

How's your family/what are you hearing?

Civilized Fishbot
Apr 3, 2011

mannerup posted:

Stating that it was an ‘inevitable consequence of material reality’ implies that the behavior of those perpetrating the murder and kidnapping of ravers is fait accompli. I think broadly painting a group of people as predestined murders and kidnappers of civilians ignores their individual agency in undertaking what is clearly abhorrent.

Not just abhorrent, ignores Israel's role in promoting right-wing psychos like Hamas over secular/socialist parties with much fewer civilian casualties in their militant resistance. This isn't just what happens when prisoners break free, it's what happens when prisoners break free after the guards encourage the authority of "no-such-thing-as-a-civilian" religious extremists within the prison.

Civilized Fishbot
Apr 3, 2011

Willo567 posted:

The U.S. would likely tell Israel not to use tactical nukes if they were stupid enough to consider it, correct?

Yes, these are dumb questions

Civilized Fishbot
Apr 3, 2011
"goading Israel into an escalation severe enough to invite international condemnation" has never worked, and I think it obviously deters international condemnation if you frame the attack with wanton sexual violence and mass shootings of civilians.

I think the violence here is really as simple as: every army has men who just want to do hideous violence against the weak, you need an extremely disciplined and organized army to keep them from doing it in broad daylight, Hamas doesn't have those tools or any incentive to develop them.

Civilized Fishbot
Apr 3, 2011

Adenoid Dan posted:

Nothing the Palestinians do will gain them sympathy from people who see them as subhuman. This has been demonstrated to them by the world for decades.

After they supposed to die slowly like good little martyrs? Oops, tried that, snipers were gloating about how many they maimed.

I think you shouldn't strip a dead woman naked and defile her corpse, whether you'll earn sympathy for it or not.

I don't think the choice is between defiling that dead woman's corpse and "die slowly like good little martyrs"

You sound exactly like right-wing Israelis who say "the nations will hate us regardless, so why *shouldn't* we just kill them all? What, should we just give up and die gently for the PR?"

Civilized Fishbot
Apr 3, 2011

Captain Oblivious posted:

The point is that people in slow grinding no win situations that inevitably end in extermination probably aren't gonna make Rational Decisions (tm) my dude.


Like you get that right?

The problem isn't that the decision is irrational, it's that it's intrinsically disgusting.

Do you get that, that when a normal, healthy person sees a truck full of men stripping a corpse naked and defiling it, the normal reaction is to say that it's very wrong and evil.

And in this thread, any expression of disgust toward it is met by "oh, you don't think Palestinians get to fight back?"

What happened to that woman wasn't fighting back, it was rapists and thrill-killers using the war as an opportunity to satisfy their fetishes, like you see in every war zone. Conflating the two only serves the most violent monsters in the IDF and Hamas.

Even the most heroically-motivated have evil people take advantage of them to do evil. It's one of the oldest problems in managing an army, it was a predictable part of this assault just like it's a predictable part tof the IDF counterstrike. Acknowledging and mourning the evil doesn't discredit the Palestinian cause unless you insist that they're actually the same thing.

Civilized Fishbot fucked around with this message at 21:26 on Oct 8, 2023

Civilized Fishbot
Apr 3, 2011

Homeless Friend posted:

This is partly because such shock videos are served with the express purpose of garnering shock. They're political in purpose, some people are interested in this a community re-affirmation of evil as you say. Whereas some others don't feel the need to condemn every event of malice...

There's a difference between what you're describing - being so constantly confronted by atrocities that you have to accept them just to move on - and what I'm describing, which is responding to the normal healthy disgust reaction with "oh, so you just want Palestinians to lay down and die?"

Civilized Fishbot
Apr 3, 2011

Captain Oblivious posted:

Sounds like the kind of thing that the position with all the power could have prevented for the better part of a century, but instead chose to make literally inevitable.

Shame that. :shrug:

Nobody in this thread feels differently.

The divide here is just whether you see a woman whose corpse was stripped and desecrated, or a bunch of old people shot up while waiting for the bus, as horrible civilian casualties in a war Israel started or settlers who faced the heroic, overdue vengeance of the Palestinian people

steinrokkan posted:

Just because they didn't advertise the location doesn't mean it wasn't known to a bunch of people involved in organizing it, and a bunch of officials who had to approve it. The question is whether Hamas had been actively looking for information on public gatherings that may have been planned in the area, and somehow found out about this.

The incredible ambition, investment, and risk-taking in this operation, to me that doesn't align with wanting to shoot up a rave that otherwise would've made 0 headlines. Clearly this was planned long before the rave was planned. I think it was a target of opportunity and basically a lethal coincidence, whether they discovered it in their planning or they discovered it when they encountered it in person.

Civilized Fishbot fucked around with this message at 22:15 on Oct 8, 2023

Civilized Fishbot
Apr 3, 2011

i fly airplanes posted:

Really? You're calling the Jews "white" people now and baiting race into this? Disgusting.

Within American society, your average Ashkenazi Jew is almost always tagged as white with all the privileges it confers. It's nuanced, but it's the reality. The same is true of most Ashkenazim in Israel. Main Paineframe was accurately describing that reality, it's not race-baiting.

I never hear normal people talking about "The Jews."

Civilized Fishbot
Apr 3, 2011

i fly airplanes posted:

Did this attack happen in "American society?"

Americans projecting their society and politics onto a conflict on the other side of the world is another continuous problem.

The user was giving their thoughts about why America (and to a much lesser extent its 'Western World' allies) stands behind Israel so much.

In this context it's useful to know that modern American White Supremacy, which we've now exported all over the world, sorts most Ashkenazim as White for most purposes.

Civilized Fishbot
Apr 3, 2011

Tigey posted:

I basically agree, but keep in mind that the attacks have only just happened, and were accompanied by graphic shocking images that have dominated the news cycles. Its therefore natural that they're the fresh thing that everyone is posting about.

If its still the case in a week's time, especially as Israel ramps up the slaughter, then its a lot more reasonable to start asking questions about motives.

I agree but there's another dimension that isn't being discussed. Israel overwhelming Gaza with technological and tactical advantage while doing double/triple-digit civilian casualty war crimes in is "dog bites man." It happens so often that there's basically nothing new to say with each new time it happens. There's only the same emotions and helplessness as last time.

Hamas managing to do it to Israel is "man bites dog." It's an unprecedented moment in Israeli-Palestinian history. Of course people are more interested in talking about it

It reminds me of when that Titanic tour submarine was lost, and many people pretended not to understand why it was getting more attention than much higher numbers of refugees drowning in the Mediterranean. What people are interested to discuss online isn't a good proxy for what they find morally outrageous.

Civilized Fishbot
Apr 3, 2011

Barrel Cactaur posted:

Yeah the point of attack, at least immediately, is to trigger a political "DO SOMETHING" that ends up hurting their most critical enemy, other political factions in Palestine. The only real threat to the power of Hamas, other than Gaza being flattened with indiscriminate bombing, is that they will be displaced by a credible peace movement. Its basically why every political movement with a violent core ideology purges political moderates from their own party and government. Its why they openly plot to use any concession, aid route, or freedom of movement to launch attacks. The forever war is the goal, and end in and of itself.

This is why I can't stand the "how dare you tell the Palestinians what methods are and are not acceptable" line. This isn't "the Palestinians," this is Hamas, which like every political party/militia will always pursue its political needs even when it's not in the best interest of the people they represent.

Acting like Hamas is the natural, organic representative of the people of Gaza and their best interest only functions to cover up the role of Israeli intelligence, and Netanyahu in particular, in promoting these right-wing psychos over secular/socialist groups which operate with far fewer civilian casualties.

Civilized Fishbot fucked around with this message at 16:59 on Oct 9, 2023

Civilized Fishbot
Apr 3, 2011

kolby posted:

Are you saying that Hamas just had a few bad apples and hopefully they'll train their soldiers better in the future?

Chalking up rapes and murders to "lack of discipline" seems odd to me.

I can't explain why it seems odd to you, but it's the reality of war, especially with volunteer armies. When you send men out with weapons to do violence, it's very difficult to get them to only do the violence you want them to do, and not whatever violence they think is necessary or they think they'd enjoy.

Civilized Fishbot
Apr 3, 2011
Comparing Hamas to Nat Turner or the ANC is just giving a big thumbs-up to the Israeli operation to make Hamas the only authority in Gaza. Of course Hamas is a violent right-wing militia with basically no concept of "civilian"," that's why they were picked to run Gaza.

Civilized Fishbot fucked around with this message at 16:22 on Oct 10, 2023

Civilized Fishbot
Apr 3, 2011
Fool of Sound, do you think it's impossible for Hamas to act immorally, or that it's possible but (certain/privileged/all) people shouldn't talk about it because it just serves to validate Israeli repression?

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Civilized Fishbot
Apr 3, 2011

Fister Roboto posted:

No fight for liberation is ever going to be "clean". Oppression and subjugation literally dehumanizes people - it turns them into animals who have no choice but to lash out violently at the first opportunity they find.

Palestinians aren't animals, they're human beings.

If you're calling Palestinians animals, you need to back up and rethink how you got here.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply