Israel, Palestine & the Levant rolling events: Oct 23 on

Of course it isn’t right, but considering Israel seems to be able to find Hamas in the mouths of five year old Palestinian children, it might be worth considering who is creating the “sides” that Tracer Hand is speaking of.

https://euromedmonitor.org/en/article/5965

Geneva - Israel has deliberately destroyed archaeological monuments in the Gaza Strip as part of its ongoing bloody war in an explicit targeting of Palestinian cultural heritage, Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor said in a statement issued on Monday.

Israeli air and artillery attacks have targeted many prominent historical sites important to the cultural heritage of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, said Euro-Med Monitor. This has included archaeological sites, historical buildings, places of worship, and museums, and has caused great destruction.

Euro-Med Monitor stressed that international humanitarian law prohibits in all circumstances the deliberate targeting of cultural and religious sites, which do not constitute legitimate military objectives nor an imperative military necessity. The Geneva-based rights organisation cited the 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict as well as the Second Protocol to the Convention of 1999.

The Israeli army targeted the historic Al-Omari Grand Mosque in the centre of Gaza City, destroying its minaret, which dated back 1,400 years. With a total area of roughly 4,100 square metres—including 1,800 square metres of covered area—Al-Omari Grand Mosque is the largest and oldest mosque in the Gaza Strip.

Three historic churches in the Gaza Strip were also attacked by the Israeli army, one of which being the long-standing Church of Saint Porphyrius. Built atop a wooden pagan temple, the church dates back to 407 AD. Israel’s army has also destroyed most of the Old City of Gaza City, Euro-Med Monitor added, which contains 146 old houses in addition to mosques, churches, markets, and historically significant schools.

I'm just wary of conflating the two, as it seems that what Israel wants us to do. They're not elected and have had at least indirect Israeli support in the past (albeit I guess a while ago)

obv the IDF has killed lots of children but we shouldn't pretend that Hamas didn't kill children as well.

Who is doing that?

I haven't seen anyone defend Hamas! But people seem to be conflating Hamas with Palestine, which may just be shorthand rather than intentional but still feels weird

yeah I'm confused. If these posts are in response to felicity's, she didn't say the word Hamas and instead implied that Jewish people and Palestinians "are locked in a mutually lethal death spiral" and that "these two groups of people hate each other for many, many reasons."

my response did not include the word Hamas, fwiw

perhaps acknowledging that Israel has acted on every stage of the ten stages of Genocide would be good.

table, I acknowledge what little I've seen indicates that many of the stages are there, if not all. I found it dismaying that none of the genocide watch sites I looked at seemed to mention the situation as a historical fact or current threat.

rob please don't explain what I implied.

If I misspoke I will correct it.

For anyone confused, I meant there are extremists in Hamas and Israel.

my response (which happened before I had coffee, admittedly) was in relation to the idea that both sides are locked in a death spiral, and have many justifications for why they hate each other, which is something I agree with. I do not conflate Hamas with Palestinians nor do I equate all Israelis with the government of Israel or the IDF; however, Hamas is made up of Palestinians, just as the government of Israel and the IDF are made up of Israelis. Horrific actions by either side feed into fears on the other side. Increased horrible actions by Israel are likely to create more terrorists and more Palestinians sympathetic to Hamas, and vice versa.

Israel has election cycles which have constantly elected these genocidal fascists in government. Israel has a highly equipped military, and we've seen what they can do to a population.

How is this comparable to a people who have faced a blockade for over a decade?

@tamars
Some of the Palestinian children kept in Israeli detention that will be considered for 2nd swap deal round. One boy was detained by Israeli state 4 days after his 16th birthday solely for throwing stones and has been in captivity for 6 months

Is this person a reliable source? I'm kind of wondering how she knows the identity of specific individuals "considered" for a swap?

Sorry nevermind I found her twitter, and she links to this (although I'm not clear on whether this is a list of prisoners in the current deal, up for consideration, or what)

https://www.gov.il/he/Departments/DynamicCollectors/is-db?skip=0

From this list linked here, I think.

“Convicted terrorists”

But: “the status of the majority of the teens who are up for release is arrest because their trial didn’t start yet.” https://t.co/jWGRkr0mMv

You can also see that in the list the Justice Ministry released. “מעצר” means arrest. https://t.co/gjOyyetqUb https://t.co/FoTqeC2jkD pic.twitter.com/7UEBv2bMuO

— Abraham Gutman (@abgutman) November 22, 2023

I think it's fair to say an 18 year old detained for attempted murder is not equivalent to a baby taken hostage, even if the former hasn't been tried, and even if you view the attempted murder as part of a right to resist. The hostages taken by Hamas weren't "convicted" of anything either, nor were they even arrested for anything.

The planner of the October 7 attacks had been imprisoned for kidnapping and murdering two Israeli soldiers, and was freed in a prisoner exchange.

Is this person a reliable source? I'm kind of wondering how she knows the identity of specific individuals "considered" for a swap?

― longtime caller, first time listener (man alive), Wednesday, 22 November 2023 bookmarkflaglink

Lives in Israel, looks at the situation closely and I see that often what she says are being said by one or two others. Obviously these are developing situations so if you know different say.

She did have some other speculations in the past that I found a bit too online and I haven't bought that here.

I wonder in how many parts of the world "throwing rocks" is considered "attempted murder." You can kill someone with a rock, but you also can with a lot of other non-weapons.

I think it's fair to say an 18 year old detained for attempted murder is not equivalent to a baby taken hostage, even if the former hasn't been tried, and even if you view the attempted murder as part of a right to resist. The hostages taken by Hamas weren't "convicted" of anything either, nor were they even arrested for anything.

I don't think it is? The people on the list who are detained for throwing stones seem to be listed as detained for throwing stones, so I assume if it says "attempted murder" that means something else.

Ok, I was responding to the link I posted which was specifically about stone throwing. I took your comment as a reply to mine.

Israel has election cycles which have constantly elected these genocidal fascists in government.

Is the argument that Gaza's genocidal fascist government was only nominally elected? I suppose Israel's current government was only nominally elected as well.

I don't think anyone itt is unaware that there are extremists on both sides, but nonetheless it remains that one side actually has the military capacity and international support to fulfil their extremist's dreams should they choose to and the other doesn't. So talk of a mutual genocide becomes equating an actual possibility with a thought experiment.

So the argument is that Israel could, if it wanted to, but Hamas can't, but would?

They can't so talk of whether they would or not is immaterial - a scenario where they could is so radically different from our political reality that it's impossible to tackle outside of alternative history.

This doesn't make Hamas not horrible - as stated before no one itt has ever consistently argued they're in any way defensible.

Because Israel has nuclear weapons the first half of that argument is undeniably factual, but we could only know how Hamas would use an equivalent military capacity to Israel's if they in fact possessed it.

I don’t get the insistence on arguing hypotheticals when there are real events and real casualties.

Also, if you’re holding a country - and not just any country, THE ONLY DEMOCRACY IN THE MIDDLE EAST - to the same standards of behaviour as a terrorist militia, what are you actually saying about said country’s standards?

Well, I mean, Hamas *could*, it would just be really slow. 100 Israelis here, 100 there. That's more or less been their stated goal, iirc. One crux of this/these argument/arguments is what Hamas should or should not be allowed to do in service of its goal, no matter how plausible. Also I suppose worth keeping in mind that one reason Hamas "can't" is indeed because of the current situation, with Israel in top-dog position. If Israel lost support/funding/land/whatever, and Hamas gained land/support/funding/land/whatever, wouldn't they just ramp up their attacks? I've not seen a lot of discussion about what comes next, even assuming Israel capitulates to every demand.

Is the argument that Gaza's genocidal fascist government was only nominally elected? I suppose Israel's current government was only nominally elected as well.

The last election held in Gaza was in 2006… when was the last election held in Israel?

What % of the Gazan population was even alive to vote for Hamas? Less than 50%? 40?

I don't think Israel is particularly democratic, and they're definitely moving the wrong direction, regardless. Current Israeli government is in place not particularly due to popular support, as I understand it. Neither is Hamas. So here we are. Israel should have a new government. So should Gaza. There are mechanisms in place to achieve the former, in theory, though they seem pretty weak. What about the latter?

Well, I mean, Hamas *could*, it would just be really slow. 100 Israelis here, 100 there.

Sorry, but that is nonsensical thinking.

In the sense that it’s an apartheid state, no Israel is not democratic. In what way are non-Palestinian and non-Arab citizens restricted from voting, though?

I’m more interested in anyone answering my question tbh. In what meaningful way is this a symmetrical conflict given one of the parties isn’t even a country and the other has unlimited American support and nuclear weapons?

xIsn't it a non-majority, not terribly representative cobbled together right wing coalition? I don't really know how Israeli elections work or don't work.

xxpost I was being more than a tad facetious, which is why I followed it up with: if Israel lost support/funding/land/whatever, and Hamas gained support/funding/land/whatever, wouldn't they just ramp up their attacks? I've not seen a lot of discussion about what comes next, even assuming Israel capitulates to every demand.

Maybe Israel should stop funding Hamas through proxies and we could find out about a new government for Gaza, but Israel needs Hamas to continue to justify its ethnofacist takeover of the Strip and the West Bank.

I'm not sure there's much point in discussing what comes next, when what is coming now hasn't stopped yet

xIsn't it a non-majority, not terribly representative cobbled together right wing coalition? I don't really know how Israeli elections work or don't work.

A plurality is not un-democratic. Given the return of right wing governments over and over it takes some work to pretend that the Israeli state and its actions doesn’t represent the overall will of the Israeli electorate.

^^^

OTM. Netanyahu has had a very long career in Israeli politics. Trying to defend this rn is a terrible look.

Or wave it aside with a but Hamas / Gaza 'state' democracy or whatever contortions are being made here.

Don't know if you're addressing me, I'm not trying to defend anything. I think there was some discussion of parallels or whatever. Israel's government has leaned right, or right enough, for a long time. And Gaza voted for Hamas (which is genocidal and fascist - too, if that makes anyone feel more righteous) before Hamas did away with elections entirely. For sure Israel made that situation worse. Yet here we are. I don't see how anything positive happens until Israel gets a new government and Gaza gets a new government.

No, I agree with Josh In Chicago on this point: I absolutely do not think this Likud/Otzma Mehudit alliance is in any way representative of “Israel” as a whole, and I resist generalizing the Israeli populace as much as I resist the same for Palestinians re: Hamas

But I do think Netanyahu and his entire cabinet deserve something for which I’ll invent a word: a massassination. Anybody got any connects at CIA? I can think of nothing this world needs more than immediate death of these racist world-ending fucks

We are trying to tell you Gaza isn't a state, and that Gaza last held any sort of vote in 2006, and that Hamas is propped up by the Israelis.

And I am telling you that Israel's government are in favour of genocide, and that it's people have constantly voted for this in large enough numbers. The situation to Gaza is not in any shape or form comparable.

And that therefore I disagree with this 'both sides' assessment xp

In the UK Conservative governments are voted in over and again. Now I can say it's the press twisting voters, or a lack of democracy or what have you and that there are many nice people here but in the end a lot of this country is conservative and terrible. This is what we face.

also, why is it every other time the conversation is (rightfully) "Civilians don't deserve to die based on who was elected their leaders", like we didn't sit around saying "serves them right" when poor Brazilians (many of whom likely hated Bolsonaro) were dying of COVID due to Jair not even attempting to combat the disease. we said Iraqis didn't deserve to die due to Hussein and his Ba'ath parties actions.

so why would "they elected Hamas as their government fuck em" fly here? not that anybody has outright said that here, but the ship shouldn't sail anywhere near that shore (esp since plenty of influential people ARE saying that)

Maybe Israel should stop funding Hamas through proxies and we could find out about a new government for Gaza, but Israel needs Hamas to continue to justify its ethnofacist takeover of the Strip and the West Bank.

― butt dumb tight my boners got boners (the table is the table), Wednesday, November 22, 2023 2:27 PM (one hour ago) bookmarkflaglink

I think this is kind of a distortion of what was still a terrible policy. If Israel had wanted to take over Gaza, it could simply have stepped up settlement and occupation of Gaza, instead of forcibly removing settlers and withdrawing troops, which is what Israel did in the mid 00's. Bibi did favor Hamas as a counterweight to the PA, because he did not want a unified Palestinian government, however I do not think this was done in order to justify a takeover of Gaza, rather he arrogantly hoped he could maintain a kind of uneasy, quasi-peace with Gaza. Allowing funding to go to Hamas was with the intention that it could be governed and kept quiet, not to arm Hamas so they could attack Israel in order to create some kind of false flag justification to invade Gaza, that just doesn't make any sense to me. Since 10/7 Hamas leadership has openly bragged about its strategy for the last several years of pretending to be willing to maintain this "peace" while actually building up its capacity to attack. Historically, Israel has not been as interested in Gaza as the West Bank, both for "religious" reasons and because it probably has less military strategic value.

I have also seen vague claims that this somehow relates to offshore gas, but I haven't seen any explanation of why Israel would need to reoccupy gaza to access that offshore gas.

If there's evidence to the contrary, I'm not saying it's impossible, but it doesn't make much sense to me as a theory.