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

"this makes israel less safe" is the tactic i try to take with the more zionist-leaning people in my orbit, can only get so far tho

xp no worries

I assume the position that the people directing and supporting this assault would take is that Israel was unsafe because they were too nice, they held back too much and allowed Hamas to build up their strength. "We had a ceasefire before Oct. 7" is the standard line. And the option of changing the material conditions of Palestinians can't be countenanced because it would look like giving Hamas a win. So the other option is to make Israel look like a monstrous force of nature that will obliterate anything in its path if disturbed. And I don't know, maybe that will make Israel 'safer' for a certain amount of time, or temporarily reduce the desire to significantly attack Israel. I think it also increases the feeling worldwide that the Jewish state is an evil regime that cannot be reasoned with and must be utterly destroyed, and certainly damages the safety of Jews around the world.

my social media bubble is very pro-Palestinian, but I occasionally see liberal-Zionist posts from someone I know from high school, recently sharing one of those "what it's like to be Jewish today" accounts. Which listed a series of traumatic issues for Jews writ large, including some recent incidents of anti-Semitism, and also "the deaths of innocents martyred by the death cults running their governments." And it just fucking breaks my brain seeing this torturing of language to make sure Israel has absolutely no agency in this, as if the missiles with hilarious messages on them got sent off to blow up ambulances all by themselves. To be Jewish in their eyes is to be terribly sad that every Gazan life is now forfeit, nothing to be done about it unless Hamas surrenders.

JoeStork your posts today putting into words feelings I have been having. Thank you.

And yet you also agree with me that the military investigating itself rarely leads to discipline or action of any substance. I am confused by what seems like inconsistency here.

No. Don't be confused. What I agree with is that legal systems can be imperfect and need reforming. I don't have empirical information on how often military investigations yield those outcomes.

And I generally don't believe that what has happened in the past is the only indicator of what what can or should happen in the future, especially on this topic.

That said, the idea that the IDF— a murderous terrorist organization— will discipline itself strains credulity.

Knowing your views generally, I understand this. I see things differently - the delta between what is and what ought to be, and how to get from A to B.

I mean, this is why you’re involved in the legal field and I am not— we have different relationships to institutions of justice (or injustice, as I would have it). That’s fine— it’s not like my cynicism has done me many favors! (Also this isn’t meant as judgment, just observation)

Militaries do sometimes court martial their own members for carrying out illegal acts, but do militaries ever hold themselves accountable for official acts?

Like America has not prosecuted the generals in thd Vietnam or Iraq Wars for instance

Maybe? Militaries being held accountable as entities sounds like reparations or official national apologies, like the negotiations over comfort women

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

The core problem of the entire idea of the IDF 'disciplining itself' is that we have to pretend that soldiers aren't acting under orders.

They've been routinely killing civilians for decades. This is not some new creation of this conflict, it's what the IDF does.

Have we mentioned that the USA was the sole veto in yesterdays UN security council on a ceasefire, again.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2024/feb/20/us-vetoes-un-resolution-ceasefire-israel-gaza

And guys, stop doing personal beefs in the thread about genocidal actions. It is distasteful. There are other venues

I did notice that Guardian article and had to read the New York Times article to understand the difference between Algeria's ceasefire resolution and the US's ceasefire resolution.

Gift link:

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/20/world/middleeast/us-vetoes-ceasefire-resolution.html?unlocked_article_code=1.XE0.6a0Y.ZdTmVqJURYkX&smid=url-share

The United States has drafted a rival resolution, which is still in early stages of negotiations, that calls for a temporary humanitarian cease-fire “as soon as practicable,” and the release of hostages.

Forgive my ignorance, and maybe my brain is unable to comprehend the horrors, but I keep thinking of all the tunnels in Gaza. I keep thinking there are enough tunnels to have kept the women and children and other non combatants safe if Hamas wanted them to be safe. It's very sad.

― felicity, Tuesday, February 20, 2024 2:31 AM (nineteen hours ago)

this is maybe the grossest post i have ever seen on ilx

I am talking about the money spent, where the priorities are.

I get that you really really want someone to blame though.

You’re an appalling person, Felicity. Just despicable

I don't know you but I felt the same way about your posting on October 7.

I am willing to talk it over with you but I am not applogizing for saying I don't find calling for my death acceptable.

I am talking about the money spent, where the priorities are.

Really sticking it to all the Hamas fans here. Can’t go a post without seeing someone on ILX proclaim Hamas’s commitment to good government.

You’re an appalling person, Felicity. Just despicable

FP'd you for that.

might as well T me up too, you feeble pedant

good to know that when people are blamed for their own deaths, you'll be there, enforcing civility

I can't enforce civility. But I can encourage the board to do so. Now plz show us where and how felicity 'blamed people for their own deaths'. bcz if she didn't you're doing worse than blathering, you're smearing her.

At first glance it did seem like Felicity was saying if the 13,000 children didn't want to die they should have just hid in hamas' tunnels (the tunnels that are the assumed direct targets of the IDF?), and then clarified that no that's not it, it's that hamas should have spent the money the spent on the tunnels on some sort of defence against the 13,000 children that were murdered (how?). Either way, both statements seem like absolutely gross victim blaming and I don't think it's a smear to call it.

That said, there's a difference between beamish calling the person appaling/despicable and mookie calling the post gross (which it was).

"gross" being an offensive understatement at those ideas.

like ftr, those ideas are what keep this "war" (can we even call it that?) going. It is evil

Can you quote paste where I said that, please?

If you want to be serious about this and want to be treated seriously and not with disdain, feigning ignorance/innocence will not help. Either own it, explain how I misrepresented you, or apologise. The cute "do you really think I said that" response isn't on. Is it really so hard to speak clearly and not behind layers of cynicism, sarcasm, plausible deniability when we are talking about some of the worst things happening in the world right now? I don't want to engage in rhetorical funny business and verbal subterfuge about this stuff sorry Felicity

Put another way: the 13,000 children killed by Israel in 4 months is not about you. Leave your personal offence at the door. I don't need to quote what you obviously have said (other posters can clarify if I've completely misread your posts since you are not willing to do so yourself) because your personal culpability is not of interest to me. Blaming genocide on the victims though? That is of interest to me, and it can piss right off.

I am willing to give you the grace that you are either ignorant about this or too personally invested here to be able to see this clearly i.e. i dont think you are evil or despicable even if I think what you are saying between the lines is. You not being willing to even consider this is the substance of what you've posted while everyone else on this thread seems to see it should cause you to reflect though.

Sorry for not expressing myself well. We see things diffetently.

My thinking was Israel vacated Gaza in 2005. They even removed settlers by force. A lot of aid money went into Gaza.

I have read some ideas that Hamas started as progressive and could have used the money to governing and building infrastructure. Instead they are firmly committed to eliminating Israel and Jews worldwide.

Are you suggesting that Israel would be murdering 13,000 children in Gaza if Hamas accepted coexisting next door to them?

I'm maybe not understanding why you think I am victim blaming children when I am not blaming children. I am attributing some responsibility to Hamas.

Because you are suggesting that if the Palestinians had just accepted their diminished rights in gaza then maybe 13,000 children wouldn't need to be murdered in four months. And you are focusing on "some responsibility" instead of where "most responsibility" lies. Sure, I'll entertain you and state seriously that Hamas needs to take a small slice of the blame for the dead in Israel right now. But I know, and the world knows who actually bombed, sniped and starved these children.

Even more simply: I know who has the most power here and who is wielding it disproportionately for evil so I will focus on them rather than divert the conversation thus giving that great evil even more room to continue doing what its doing.

*dead in palestine

You start the story at 2005, others at 1948, some at 1000BC, others at the beginning of the world. I don't care why israel had to kill 13,000 children, I care that they killed them.

^A-fucking-men, H.P.

This particular line of victim blaming would sound less absurd if we weren't all aware that Israel is actively murdering children (and adults) in the West Bank.

"My thinking was Israel vacated Gaza in 2005. They even removed settlers by force. A lot of aid money went into Gaza."

People don't want to live in a prison, Felicity.

The number of mornings I open this thread looking to find out what's happening and it's people arguing with one poster, typing out basics like "people don't want to live in a prison"

It becomes easier to understand Zionist logic when you realize that they view Palestinians as rodents. A rodent infestation in the tenancy they believe they are entitled towards.

It doesn’t matter that the Zionist cares not for Jewish scripture when it contradicts them, and says “I wish they hadn’t mentioned scripture” when American rabbis call for Israelis to cease their massacres of the Gazans

It matters not at all that the scripture the rabbis cite is intrinsic to the Jewish schema and Jewish entirety; literally the scripture that is read daily from Rosh to Yom, written by the David of whom Jews name a star, it matters nothing to the Zionist

To the Zionist the Palestinian is a rat in the house, the children of whom their destruction is nothing more than “lamentable”, and why is this? Probably property. Probably some land a father or uncle has bought. Future acquisitions on the beautiful reconstituted Gazan waterfront

In short: this argument is dumb and should be abandoned

I have a solution in mind, btw, and it won’t make anyone happy, but it involves an immediate evacuation of Gaza, Netanyahu and his cabinet jailed shmailed in The Hague Shmague, and a fifty year reeducation of Israeli citizens as to the genesis of their country, and an understanding that Palestinians are deserved the right of return, and a future Levant where they live in peace, and (hopefully) form alliances with their Arab adjacents, and sever this ongoing broader issue of USA destabilizing oil rich regions for personal gain and saying things like “release the hostages” when their destabilization tactics are questioned

Hamas needs to take a small slice of the blame for the dead in Israel right now

Did you mean to say Gaza? Because if you mean Israel I think we probably see things pretty differently.

I corrected myself directly below

My thinking was Israel vacated Gaza in 2005. They even removed settlers by force. A lot of aid money went into Gaza.

I think they vacated but they kept up a blockade, and controlled access to utilities which may or may not technically qualify as occupation, but I think is in the ballpark of it still. Pulling out of Gaza unilaterally inadvertently (or not depending on your opinion) gave Hamas a boost in the election as they could say "see, we pushed them out"

I have read some ideas that Hamas started as progressive and could have used the money to governing and building infrastructure

I've never comes across the idea that Hamas were ever even the slightest bit progressive, where did you come across this? I don't think they have a good track record in this or any other area

Are you suggesting that Israel would be murdering 13,000 children in Gaza if Hamas accepted coexisting next door to them?

I agree Israel wouldn't be doing what they are doing right now if it weren't for Oct 7. It was part of Hamas rationale for Oct 7 in the first place to lure Israel into this type of mistake. But proportionality doesn't just have an ethical component, it also has a strategic one. and Israel are failing both.

https:/twitter.com/YairWallach/status/1760206381565509981?s=20

In next week's municipal elections in Tel Aviv, the Likud and "Jewish Power"(Ben Gvir) are running together as one list.
The Likud is now effectively part of a large Kahanist bloc.

— Yair Wallach (@YairWallach) February 21, 2024

I've never comes across the idea that Hamas were ever even the slightest bit progressive, where did you come across this?

John Oliver did a segment

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJ9PKQbkJv8

https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2023/nov/13/john-oliver-on-israel-hamas-war-netanyahu

It might be unreliable, or I might have misremembered that they presented thenselves as a progressive alternative.

"I have read some ideas that Hamas started as progressive and could have used the money to governing and building infrastructure. Instead they are firmly committed to eliminating Israel and Jews worldwide."

Comes off as paranoia when the boot is firmly on the other foot and as the tweet above indicates Israel's eliminationist tendencies are on the rise.

xp

There are some “huge asterisks” about Gazans’ election of Hamas, such as that it was elected in 2006 without a referendum since; that children born after the election make up roughly half of Gaza’s population; and that Hamas won only a plurality of votes by presenting itself as a moderate organization against a rival party, Fatah, widely known for corruption.

“Hamas is a terrible organization that in no way kept its promises, because in the years following, that tone of open-minded freedom clearly fell away,” Oliver explained.

Might have been useful if there were elections since 2006.

As it is Hamas holds the hostages. They are the ones that have to be negotiated with.

"“I’m also not going to do a historical blow by blow of how Palestinians came to live in Gaza and the West Bank right now. You can Google that for yourselves,” he continued."

Love this one.

Doesn't he know Google hardly works anymore?

The bit talking about 2005 starts around 9 mins in that clip. I think they ran partly on an anti-corruption platform, but I think a lot in that clip is resting on an English language interview - which I wouldn't put too much store in. I think its better to judge them on their actions rather than an English language interview aimed at a Western audience

Throughout 2004/5 Hamas claimed responsibility for a series of attacks on civilians in Jerusalem, Beer Sheva, Tel Aviv, and Sderot amongst others.

Then Israel unilaterally pulled out, and Hamas could say "look, what we're doing works". Thats persuasive! It looked like Israel pulled out because of Hamas attacks in the preceding year, thats a pretty good thing to bring to an election

I know Israel didnt pull out because of Hamas attacks, but its something Hamas could plausibly claim