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

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

"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.

― xyzzzz__, Wednesday, February 21, 2024 12:31 AM bookmarkflaglink

Sorry, what?

I am trying to find a charitable interpretation of your post, but it sounds like you are dismissing 10/7 and Hamas' promise to repeat it again and again as "paranoia"

Spare me this charity of yours and save it for IDF military tribunals.

You overlook 30000 people and a place in ashes and a further escalation in Rafah to come, since 10/7. What is Hamas' threats compared to this?

They are both very bad!!! I can say it, can you?

Of course. But they have to be negotiated with. So what if you or I think they are bad?

xxp stop equating them

Coming off as "will you condemn Hamas?" at this point is not a great look.

Just checking, I don't know what to assume these days.

Same.

H.P. I am not "equating: them by talking about them at the same as part of the same dynamic and immediately after xyzzz asked me to "compare" them.

I mean it's absurd. One of you asks me something, and when I answer the other says "stop doing that!"

It feels controlling, I don't like it.

...

"they are both very bad" is literally equating the moral weight of the two! I'm assuming it's not a matter of you having a limited vocabulary!

"killing 1000 people, what do you think about that?".
"it's very bad".
"okay, how about 30x that number?".
"the same, also very bad".

???

I mean just quantitatively its terrible, then you bring in the qualitative like the fact that it is unfree people, second class, repressed people on the side to the right. The citizen vs. soldier ratios in those death tolls. The children ratios in those death tolls. The things outside of death tolls i.e. infrastructural destruction, forced mass relocation. Israel hasn't just killed 30,000 Palestinians, they've effectively destroyed the lives of 2 million people. Do you understand how infuriating it is for you to play both-sideisms when this is the reality! It is unbearable!

You want nuance from xyzzzz on how Hamas has culpability but you can't seem to express the brazen fact that Israel has/is/will-continue to do far more horrible things than Hamas in the near future! They are not both "very bad". Israels response is so insanely disproportionate that questions of Hamas' culpability code as "yeah but they deserved it"

And God damn Felicity, as if your last sentence didn't just sum up how frustrating this all is. It is insulting to bring up your personal offence and proclivities when we are talking about 13,000 murdered children. Read the room.

Can I ask you, do you have a personal connection to this conflict?

no

We all have a personal connection to this conflict because our governments are spending billions on arming one side of it.

paging Donne, John Donne

Leaving Suzy's perfectly reasonable point aside, why pull up a close family connection as a means to shut down conversation on what we are seeing and having our actions (marching, in the main) portrayed in a negative light? What's that about?

Can I ask you, do you have a personal connection to this conflict?

Appallingly, I have lifelong friends who are lefty/Dem and Jewish who have, since 7/10, been sharing horrible screeds from Douglas Murray and other professional Islamophobes, and I know pointing out the history of these UK commentators would not go down well when my friends are feeling vulnerable to antisemitic attention. The US media has limited coverage of Palestinian voices. At some point when emotions are not running as strong, it will be easier to discuss this.

I know people who have been completely disowned by their families and communities for taking a stance against the genocide (or in some cases treated like ignorant children who have been brainwashed and will eventually grow out of it). I am very fortunate to not have to make a choice like that and if I was closer to it I would probably have more sympathy for those who don't/won't/can't. Maybe this would be better suited to the effects in other countries thread unless we're talking about Israel specifically because it might come off as equating personal discomfort (which isn't nothing but seriously) with actual ongoing genocide which is something I'm seeing a lot and struggling to know how to respond to sensitively and empathetically enough without denying or excusing reality.

The question makes me wonder what "counts" as a personal connection. A few years ago I knew / was acquainted with a Palestinian man through my partner (he was her student & studio assistant). She lost touch with him during the pandemic, and I have no idea where he is now living or, if he returned to Palestine as he had intended, if he is still alive. I don't want to exaggerate the import of this—I can't say we were close; we met a few times and my partner would tell me about him from time to time—but I do think about him in this context.

I only mention that really because suzy spoke of "Palestinian voices," which are entirely absent on ILX as far as I know. That's no one's fault of course, but sometimes it's striking.