I asked you a question? Because your point, if you actually believe that it's a good one leads to that conclusion. Maybe you don't agree with it in which case, your line of thinking becomes a bit strange but I prefer to ask for your explicit thinking.
Israel - Palestine Discussion | Post Respectfully | Discuss more, tweet less
- Thread starter esmufc07
- Start date
I asked you a question? Because your point, if you actually believe that it's a good one leads to that conclusion. Maybe you don't agree with it in which case, your line of thinking becomes a bit strange but I prefer to ask for your explicit thinking.
That's such a poor analogy, I don't think you understand root cause. If you look at it properly you'd go beyond Hamas and ask, why do Hamas exist?
This horrendous leap in "logic" could be used to justify 9/11, Hamas' recent attack on civilians, and a whole bunch of other atrocities committed on civilian populations. You sure you want to follow through with this?
No, he was not just indicating what a poll said. The context is important.
That's the point. It undermines their position to properly understand root cause.
That poll was from nearly 20 years ago.
What choices do the IDF have? They've gone to the last resort first, sending air strikes to one of the most densely populated areas, filled with innocents. There are other ways, including ground invasion. But Israeli soldiers can under no circumstance get hurt. Much easier to send air strikes. Despite the fact that it will lead to more innocent lives being lost vs. killing members of Hamas.
As for the last bit of your post... think about why Hamas exists. Also think about West Bank. Don't forget about the time before Hamas existed.
It's really frustrating me that most news sites I am reading (mostly western) are acting as if October 7th was the start of this conflict and nothing existed before or after that date 
Standard of this thread has gone through the floor today.
Weird phenomenon I found with the MG threads also that there is a period of time where the discussion is really very decent and genuine despite being a difficult topic/confrontational.
It seems like at a certain point in time the people who were discussing well find themselves so often in opposition with the same people that the slinging starts and the whole thing capitulates, not to mention some posters just landing in with absolutely awful takes yet acting quite aggressively, to absolutely nobodies gain.
Weird phenomenon I found with the MG threads also that there is a period of time where the discussion is really very decent and genuine despite being a difficult topic/confrontational.
It seems like at a certain point in time the people who were discussing well find themselves so often in opposition with the same people that the slinging starts and the whole thing capitulates, not to mention some posters just landing in with absolutely awful takes yet acting quite aggressively, to absolutely nobodies gain.
You dare to raise a particular question about a current topic and you are met with a volley of responses like.... brainless and offensive.
It is a sad reflection of some of the peoples intellect that they are not able to read the original question and respond sensibly instead of negativity.
And to stress yet again, I do not agree with what Israel is doing in the West Bank. Don't know how many more times I have to say that.
It is a sad reflection of some of the peoples intellect that they are not able to read the original question and respond sensibly instead of negativity.
And to stress yet again, I do not agree with what Israel is doing in the West Bank. Don't know how many more times I have to say that.
My explicit answer is no.
Ok. Accept that.
Again you making assumptions I never expressed.
57% aren't murderous psychopaths but support a terror organization that is! So they aren't that innocent. Without the strong support the Hamas terrorist organisation gets within the population they couldn't do what they are doing.
If you support murderous regimes or organisations, then you shouldn't cry when the day of reckoning comes. As a German I know what I'm talking about.
I'm usually a lurker her rather than a poster. I'll see myself out
That's fine, you can decide what you like, but keep it yourself or engage with the poster directly. No more blanket insults. Cheers.
Said Hamas leadership, moments prior to murdering whole families and destroying entire communities.
Don’t act innocent, no one’s falling for it.
Here’s what you started with:
here’s my response:
and to that post you said the below - a really childish response.
And now you moan and play the victim and question people’s intellect. Grow up.
Which means that the first post was a dishonest question and that the second was a dishonest point. You can't answer no to my question while at the same condoning Israel's actions in the West Bank based on the concept of spoils of war and also on the base of Israel being the one that took over the West Bank.
This line of thoughts only makes sense if you first believe that Israel is the rightful sovereign of the West Bank and in 2023 you also have to believe that palestinians have no rights in the West Bank. Otherwise Israel are human right violators and war criminals.
Armed revolutions against oppression too. And history is arguably kinder to those. Not sure what your point is.
You're paranoid and more importantly, utterly disingenuous.
None of your accusations holds any water. Against the israeli government's policies? Yes, a good chunk of the posters fall under that category. Biased? Yes, most certainly and there's one poster here that must have beaten the record of posts in a single thread, all pretty much about one side. There's no poster here that wasn't appalled or hasn't condemned the Hamas Attacks. Anti-jewish or antisemitic is something I wouldn't throw around lightly, unless you're trying to shut down the debate.
Excellent summary.This probably requires at least correction or 2, so someone please make any they have:.
Basically Israeli policy towards Gaza since Sharon disengaged has been to occupy the air and sea and blockade it and bomb it whenever rockets are fired or anything violent happens from Gaza to Israel.
Israeli policy towards the West Bank is to build settlements there and take over the land piece by piece, perhaps stopping at some point, leaving a bunch of West Bank towns/cities under the control of Fatah, with no voting rights in Israeli elections. The closest comparison I've seen is the Bantustans of South Africa, because in indigenous reserves in say Canada the residents can vote in Canadian federal elections.
The settlers in the West Bank have a pretty green light to launch attacks without Israeli state organs (police, IDF) stopping them, because the attacks and land grabs are consistent with Israeli state policy. The major political opposition to these attacks and land grabs is the Israeli center, illustrated by the figure of Gantz (in the coalition now, fairly good odds to be next PM), who has supported stopping the attacks and land grabs by settlers, though he is against giving back any of the settlements created so far.
So basically, the settlers on the ground and the right in Israel and some of the center want to keep creating new settlements/land grabs. The center mostly wants settlement creation/land grabs to be decided by the state, not the settlers on the ground, or not done anymore, but also no settlements made before today to be razed or have the Jewish population evicted from those places.
The West Bank is being taken piece by piece by settlers who are generally expansionist and believe Israel should control all lands they can make a biblical claim to, but don't want a one state solution where the Palestinians get to vote in Israeli elections and can travel the country freely. They want the West Bank to be a mix of Israel, and Apartheid style Bantustans. The Netanyahu governments back them when they can get 61/120 seats without center votes and form a government, which they had before the War, but then they added in the center because Israeli convention is to be unified during a war, and likely also because the massive protests in Israel (Bibi and the right moved to reduce the power of the Supreme Court and Constitution) which meant the government was worried people wouldn't support the war effort unless someone like Gantz was in the war cabinet as well.
The center, like the center in many countries, doesn't love the right wing solution but doesn't oppose it, and effectively has no position on a long-term peace process, since that would mean either a one state solution (which they don't support) or a 2 state solution (which they sort of support in theory, but if they won't get rid of settlements, that would either be a state of patches of unconnected land (which I don't think has ever existed?) it would have to be only the Eastern half of the West Bank).
And in this specific case:
"Everything to the right" = more settlements in the West Bank, some of which are created via private settler attacks and some of which are state created.
"Block movement back to the left" = The state getting rid of those settlements.
I'd say that the Banthustan states aren't even considered. Too much trouble. They don't want Palestinians in what they consider to be their promised land, and make their life as miserable as possible to leave them no other solution other than leave. Even if it takes another 5 or 10 decades. It's extremely difficult, if not impossible, for the Palestinians in the West bank to obtain a construction permit for a new house. Each of their house that's been taken, burned or bulldozed is a house less.
Colonization is illegal under international law and they don't even try to hide it. Anyone who's been in the West Bank says and sees the same thing. The official reports and condemnations from the human rights organizations and the UN are accessible to anyone willing to spend about one minute on Google.
Even if say by some miracle, the international community decides to grow a spine and put an end to this madness, Israel and Palestine somehow find a true statesman, something both sides are in dire need of, what are you going to do with the ca. 700,000 settlers? That's about 7% of Israels population.
Last edited:
Because you keep writing completely braindead stuff like this:
Firstly, half of them are under 18. Secondly, do you honestly find it that surprising that an oppressed populace support the only group fighting their oppressors? Periodically, at that, because support for Hamas tends to drop during calmer periods.
Imagine thinking that a population that consists of 50% children is not "all that innocent" and that it's okay to bomb them.
If US continues to unconditionally support Israel while they genocide Gaza, I think there is a high chance that Middle East is gonna orient itself towards China. With Russia also becoming a satellite of China in near future, that could be the end of the Western supremacy.
What do you expect when you ask a "philosophical question"?
It is even worse that that. Pretty much anyone who is 35 years old or younger has never voted in Gaza elections (cause they were younger than 18 when the last elections happen). That probably makes 2/3 of the people there who never voted.
By that logic all Israelites have to do time in the IDF so Hamas only kill soldiers
I don't think you do
I also think you and other Germans took the wrong lessons from that episode years ago
The alternative to supporting Hamas is to just accept the brutality. It's a tricky choice.
People continuously ask "What can Israel do?" The answer is literally anything they have the will to do.
Ask the same question of Palestine. The answer is much more limited. The idea that people choose to fight an army like Israel's from a position of such weakness is solely some sort of malevolence is absurd.
All of it is true.
However since the of WW2 and the global decolonization / dismantlement of the previous colonial empires that followed from 50's to 70's, the world decided that it probably wasn't the best way to go.
By this logic, if you tolerate what Israel is doing right now then you must accept the russian invasion of Ukraine as the natural order of things, tell the Ukrainians to get over it and stop helping them.
Last edited:
It is an Iraqi base holding other nationalities. Iraqi PM should clarify to everybody that we do not accept transferring this conflict to Iraq.
The ME is not a monolith though. Saudis will still want US military cooperation against Iran and their proxies.
I think China is already on the charm offensive with the Arab states. They’re already facilitating conciliatory talks between Saudi and Iran, who I believe have spoken again regarding the Gaza conflict. Their messaging on this conflict specifically has been extremely balanced, and much fairer than what we’ve seen from the West. That will only endear them further to pro-Palestinian states.
So if I understand you correctly. Proliferating unverified and sensationalist media and reports which add nothing to debate, but pour fuel on the fire of an already volatile situation where emotions are running high is acceptable.
Pointing out that people in general (without insulting posters or even limiting the phenomenon to redcafe) are doing so, and that they ignoring reliable and expert opinions in favour of doing this; is unacceptable? And you consider it a “blanket insult” ?
The oppressor banning journalists and news organisations is never a good sign.
Do you have a link for that poll?
They dont want the world to see their crimes.
They also (together with UAE) joined BRICS. Like Egypt, who played both sides (US and USSR), the Gulf countries will likely play both US and China. They are currently more aligned with the US, but this might change if the US continues with their disaster foreign policy in Middle East (pretty much all of Bush, Obama, Trump and Biden administration have been terrible in that aspect).
Ofcourse they will play both US and China. But at this moment I don't foresee a fundamental shift from the ME to China in the sense that the US plays no role anymore.
The difference between the IDF and Hamas is, one tries to keep civilian casualties as low as possible, while the other's goal is to kill as many civilians as possible.
If you don't see the difference, than I rest my case.
If it is that poll, then he’s being misleading about what it says.
Case in point, before it ever gets to the part about “57% have at least a somewhat positive view of Hamas” it says this…
“In fact, Gazan frustration with Hamas governance is clear; most Gazans expressed a preference for PA administration and security officials over Hamas—the majority of Gazans (70%) supported a proposal of the PA sending “officials and security officers to Gaza to take over the administration there, with Hamas giving up separate armed units,” including 47% who strongly agreed. Nor is this a new view—this proposal has had majority support in Gaza since first polled by The Washington Institute in 2014”