Hamas strike on Israel - Threadbans in op - mod warning in OP updated 19/10/23

Pure evil is murdering innocent women and children by sniper fire.

Pure evil is murdering your own naked citizens waving white flags because they might instead be an Arab.

Pure evil is trying to rationalise war crimes being committed by a nation state

I agree with you. It needs a voice.

Israel created Hamas to counter Fatah and cause a split in Palestinian politics. Israel can't destroy Hamas. Hamas is an ideology facilitated by Israel maintaining Gaza as an open air concentration camp. Israel is committing genocide in Gaza. It has for decades illegally occupied increasing amounts of land in the West Bank. To say Israel is entitled to destroy Hamas is silly. It can't be destroyed.

Israel has condemned the people of Gaza to a horrific existence for decades treating them no better than animals. Are you really shocked that the horrible attacks on October 7th happened? The only thing Israel is entitled to is exist. It is not entitled to treat another ethnic group like animals. It is not entitled to a greater Israel as promoted by Likud's doctrine of from the river to the sea. It is not entitled to illegally occupy the land of another state ie Palestinian Territories. It is not entitled to deny an ethnic group the chance of economic prosperity on foreign soil.

The Palestinian people are entitled to a state of which Gaza is a part. Israel has no right to subjugate 2 million people depriving them any chance of economic prosperity. As I have repeated said here Israel treats Palestinians like the Nazi's treated Jews. The oppressed have become the oppressor. Their is no defending Israel. Their response to October 7 have been indiscriminate and disproportional. By so doing they have done possibly irreperrable damage to their international reputation and potentially put their statehood at risk.

You were describing a picture, a graphic. Someone gave an alternative definition of "pure evil" - and off you go again... One sided too - everything you say there about Israelis applies to the Palestinians.

I'll refer you back to the graphic based on UN data I posted earlier - 22:1 death ratio.

By the way, when I lived in Ashkelon, I regularly saw the Israeli Navy carrying out exercises just off shore. The tracer was like fireworks. I mentioned it to my Jewish friends. They explained (apologetically) that that was to terrorise those living in Gaza. And they added that the Israeli air force would regularly fly over Gaza, hit Mach 1 and break all the windows.

And my bomb shelter was my bedroom - I didn't have to run anywhere. God forbid the inconvenience of me having to get dressed.

It was rather inconvenient for the 10 year old in the West Bank who threw a stone "half the size of his palm". he was killed by the IDF. And yes, that is pure evil.

They are burying civilians alive. That is some twisted way to go about anything

Where did I say I disagreed with that?? Both sides have innocent blood on their hands but nobody is defending the actions of Hamas. The IDF should be doing more to limit civilian deaths.

It's a "settler colonial apartheid state" based on religion though, not race.

Israel being an apartheid state would come as a surprise to the Israeli-Arabs and the Druze population, many of whom happily enjoy the full rights of Israeli citizenship. As to the settler colonial bit, I don't think the Mizrahim, who are native to the Middle East, could be called settler colonialist. Refugees from the rest of the Middle East might be more like it. Israel might have been planned by the Ashkenazi originally, but they're now a minority in Israel. Nor do I think anyone born in Israel could be considered a settler-colonialist, nor anyone even today who makes Aliyah and is welcomed by the natives, regardless of their skin colour.

But it's funny how no Muslim states get the same criticism.

I brought race and politics into it because people on the Left tend to be obsessed with race and politics. I think one of the reasons the Left hates Israel so much is that they perceive it to be a white country. When not only is that not true, but the militaristic policies are promoted by its Middle Eastern and North African ethnic majority. Of course, if the Left have deemed the Mizrahi to be "white adjacent" the way the US Left has done with Asian Americans, then this would be somewhat theoretical.

I feel a much greater need to defend Israel, it's people and right to exist more so than the details of their policy, because many of Israel's detractors don't care how nice they are to the Palestinians or how much land they give away or whatever. They just want Israel gone, full stop.

As to "How about target the efffing terrorists and do everything possible to prevent civilian death and suffering," that sounds like a good idea - to me. But then again, I don't have a bomb shelter in my house, I haven't had to defend my country with force, and nobody in my family history has ever had to flee their homeland as refugees to the only place they could find some kind of safety among people like themselves. Nobody is trying to drive the Irish into the sea ... at least not since the Famine.

So what seems like a good idea to you and me, might not seem so to someone who actually is native to the Middle East.

This statement just has to be discussed. For two reasons.

Firstly, in the post you responded to, there was no mention of the word 'Jews' that is something you have either interpreted as being implied or are deliberately phrasing your response so as to infer it was implied knowing that it wasn't. I'm not saying you have done either, just that it seems that it was one or other.

And this is a critical part of this discussion. Time and time again on this thread, and in the broader discussion, the topic of Jews, versus Israelis (generally) and the Israeli state (specifically) is a bone of contention. I am one of the people who has been staunchly critical of the Israeli state, and anyone who supports their actions with respect to the Palestinians. But I also see myself as very supportive of the Jewish religion and I've said on this thread before that I will continue to advocate for their security as I have done in the past when individuals or the wider religion are being threatened.

It is a unacceptable to conflate criticism of Israel as being criticism of Jews, and I frequently feel that this is being done so as to shut down criticism of the actions that are impacting the Palestinians so negatively. I don't just feel it, I know it is often being done, on here and elsewhere (not saying by you specifically) and that is unacceptable.

Secondly, in the days after Oct 7th, most major world leaders rushed to support Israel and offer them moral and material support for what they were about to do. Within 2 weeks of the attack, both Joe Biden and the leader of the EU had been on the ground in Israel offering this support in person. Since then, the US has continued to provide the funds to facilitate Israels actions entirely. And has done so without any censure or condemnation of their actions in killing tens of thousands. President Biden publicly repeated some of the IDF falsehoods (twice) as part of his efforts to show support for Israel. The US Congress has passed one of the single most draconian pieces of legislation in my lifetime in equating antizionism with antisemitism. Essentially ensuring that the state of Israel can not be questioned for its actions.

The leaders of the UK, Canada, Germany, Australia continue to make it clear that they see any negative assessments of Israel's actions as being inappropriate. A German state has introduced a requirement for immigrants to formally accept that the Israel state has a right to exist. The Presidents of Penn State, Harvard and MIT are being called on to resign (the Penn state president already has) after they appeared in Congress discussing how Jewish people felt unsafe because people were chanting free Palestine. This at the same time as 3 Palestinian students in Vermont were shot, one of them being paralyzed.

So if all of this equates to 'a different, much more severe judgement than everyone else', then I think Palestine, and many other marginalized groups, in the middle east and beyond would only love to be judged in the same way. If you believe the statement you wrote to be true, which I'm sure you do, it's why you wrote it, then I'd ask you to think about these facts and consider if you stand over it.

Where Israel does not see a predominance of support is in the eye of public opinion world wide, echoed by the constant marches in support of Palestine. But this mindset is unburdened by business deals, sunk costs, or beneficial relationships, but rather that simple reality of understanding that this is a situation of the oppressed, and the oppressor and the vastly different ratio in the support (in real terms) offered to one side versus the other is reflected in the death and suffering experienced by both parties and in the simple world of right and wrong, people can see this for what it is.

"

"As for Israel fighting for its existence since it was formed, it didn't event exist as a concept until the late 19th century when zionism emerged and gained traction. It is one of the few states in the world founded specifically so as to give a home for a particular religion, of course there are many states that have used religion to focus their state and so have gotten to the point where the state is seen as a representative of the religion (Ireland up to mid 90's for example) but I'm not sure of many that were specifically founded 'because' of a religion. "

Religious Zionism, one of the precepts of Judaism, has existed longer than Western civilization has existed. Political Zionism, a movement to establish a political entity for Jews in Israel, gained traction in the mid-19th century. Condemning 'Zionism' as racism, when applied to religious Zionism, would be similar to condemning Hajj as a precept and obligation of Muslims.

As for states focused on religion, I submit to you, Vatican City. An extremely wealth state, corrupt and guilty at a minimum of supporting horrible crimes against women and children with little or no remorse.

Welcome to WWIII. Remind me, why should Turkey give 2 figs for the Palestinians? Not like they let them or anyone else in.

I don't understand the idea that that the Jewish people didn't exist in Palestine prior to the creation of the state.

Ultimately the roots of this conflict is the failure to create a two state solution in 1947. Which is baffling.

Not that I think it would have been a peaceful co-existance. Or that any of the above justifies Israel over reaction in killing civilians. But it's entirely predictable based on their reaction to previous attacks. As such Hamas knew what they were starting.

The one that "translates" to free is a back translation from English. The original slogan was associated with the story of Solomon and the baby the two women fought over, ie, they felt that giving any part of the land to Israel was cutting the baby in two. So no Israel.

Do I think people in the west who march for Palestine and use that slogan now are aware of that? No, I think very often they are not. I'm sure they're well meaning, and just want peace - but many are only reacting instinctively to civilian deaths, without grasping much about the conflict and what they're effectively supporting, namely Hamas' murders, including of Palestinian opponents. I even saw an American woman being interviewed at just such a march who didn't even know what river was being referred to. Like - how can someone like that have an informed opinion?

But being a useful idiot is not much of an excuse, really.