calodo2003
Flaming Full Member
Didn’t see the fine print. Thanks!Based on the source, 1986?
Didn’t see the fine print. Thanks!Based on the source, 1986?
Absolutely. They ate that right up. Most of the media here is the root of all evil.Just like those awful Mexicans. That'll play well in the US.
I don’t necessarily see the air strikes as an overstep. From a military standpoint, they are massively restrained & targeted. The collateral damage is unfortunate, but expected & inevitable. The air strikes are somewhat proportional to the rocket attacks in their current scope.
If a wider bombing campaign erupts or IDF forces enter into Gaza on the ground, that would definitely constitute a shift in aggression in my mind.
The only effective recourse for me would then be reduction in future financial aid & stopping whatever aid was in the pipeline. That would be the only acute way to affect Israel, it seems.
Its about 70/30 in favor of the Israeli side in the US at the moment, although sympathy for the Palestinians has been slowly gaining over the past few years.
I think Netenyahu has a two pronged strategy. First, use the conflict to advance his political survival (mission accomplished apparently). Second, hammer Hamas into submission by taking out as much of their weapons and development infrastructure as possible and in the process kill as many of their members as possible (including where possible, its leaders). Once those two are accomplished, it will probably coincide with growing international outrage and the US nagging him behind the scenes to knock it off, that (assuming the Hamas rockets stop) he will then be incentived to deescalate.
Not who I had in mind
Fair enough! From a military standpoint it's ok, but some strike targets seem political/punitive, as opposed to strategic. I'm not sure that withdrawing aid is even possible; much like China they are hugely entangled economically, and the US relies on Israel for tech and intelligence in a few areas.
This is the last poll I found: https://www.pewforum.org/2005/04/15/american-evangelicals-and-israel/ (My numbers were wrong a bit and it's old as I suspected, it's around a 3% advantage to Palestinians.) I take your point that voting is on a knife edge currently though, and they really can't afford to lose any support over this. Is there any recent polls on this?
I agree with the latter unfortunately.
Nice witch hunt guys.
When you find the culprit, let me know and I'll get the lobby to fund another.
Sadly, I think Joe has trouble remembering what he said yesterday.Based on the source, 1986?
Gallup just released a new poll a few weeks ago.
https://news.gallup.com/poll/340331/americans-favor-israel-warming-palestinians.aspx
How easy to say these 8 words when you are not on the other side.The collateral damage is unfortunate, but expected & inevitable.
How easy to say these 8 words when you are not on the other side.
The collateral damage is unfortunate, but expected & inevitable.
Casualty reports are hard to verify because Hamas controls the media (even the international press) inside the Gaza Strip, but it appears that more than 50 Palestinians have been killed. Some of these people are entirely innocent non-combatants, including children. This is an unspeakable tragedy. It is also one of the unavoidable burdens of political power, of Zionism’s dream turned into the reality of self-determination.
Impossible to disentangle war & politics obviously.Fair enough! From a military standpoint it's ok, but some strike targets seem political/punitive, as opposed to strategic. I'm not sure that withdrawing aid is even possible; much like China they are hugely entangled economically, and the US relies on Israel for tech and intelligence in a few areas.
This is the last poll I found: https://www.pewforum.org/2005/04/15/american-evangelicals-and-israel/ (My numbers were wrong a bit and it's old as I suspected, it's around a 3% advantage to Palestinians.) I take your point that voting is on a knife edge currently though, and they really can't afford to lose any support over this. Is there any recent polls on this?
I agree with the latter unfortunately.
Yup. Demographic trends are sometimes the only factor that change a country's internal power structure.The power structure of the country is such that we're probably a couple of decades off from it being 50/50. It will take a brand new generation of kids growing up and gaining power to see any substantive change.
Makes me sick - I don't want to say it, but I do hope people doing this and justifying this end up in a similar situation some time in their lives.
Its about 70/30 in favor of the Israeli side in the US at the moment, although sympathy for the Palestinians has been slowly gaining over the past few years.
I’m not arguing for anything with that statement. It’s simply fact.Love this line of argument!
https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/the-bad-optics-of-fighting-for-your
Time for an update to an old classic I think.
The Palestinian side is bigger than just Hamas. They also have Fatah as another party but if I recall correctly there's been internal rivalry between Fatah and Hamas.How many decades have the Palestinians tried? They absolutely need to get rid of Hamas and Abbas. But Abbas and the Americans and the Israelis would not let anyone competent or charismatic get their heads up.
Case in point, the proliferation of voting law changes in this country occurring right now.Yup. Demographic trends are sometimes the only factor that change a country's internal power structure.
I’m not arguing for anything with that statement. It’s simply fact.
I’m not using it to condone what Israel is doing.
Impossible to disentangle war & politics obviously.
The difference in the bombing is when it morphs from tactics to strategy. Targeted surgical bombing could can often be considered tactical because it often doesn’t affect long term change due to its localized effect & its taxation / degradation on the military’s infrastructure.
If the campaign becomes wider & more indiscriminate, then a strategic shift is apparent. That could cause quantitative pushback by allies.
But even then, that pushback could only be superficial & pro forma.
Also worth noting that Hamas seem to have developed the capability to manufacture rockets inside Gaza, which if true, means the Israelis are likely to continue bombing until they think they're removed that capability. Its one thing to destroy tunnels and pressure the Egyptians to clamp down on smuggling via Iran and Syria, its another for Hamas to have an organic capability to make everything by themselves.
World? Just quoted a caf member saying its inevitable.It's a fecking shame on the world when the lives of children is considered "acceptable" collateral damage.
It's not that simple though because over a majority also supports Palestinian statehood and if there was polling on the specific actions of Israel. It's definitely not as simple as saying if a majority of the US population supported Palestine that somehow US policy would change when Israel hardliners have a massively powerful lobby and Palestine has nothing of note.
It’s silly to divorce reality from a situation due to emotions. That’s creating a fairytale, an alternative reality.the word inevitable carries a lot of implicit assumptions.
Who are you wishing ill on? The Israeli's for defending themselves against Jihad or the Jihadists literally inviting death and destruction on their own people?
The Palestinian side is bigger than just Hamas. They also have Fatah as another party but if I recall correctly there's been internal rivalry between Fatah and Hamas.
For the Palestinians to become more powerful I reckon they need a unified organisation instead of the current internal strife.
I hope you have children one day and you get in a brawl and the other guy goes after your children instead of you - only then you'll understand.
Why is this still allowed in here?Who are you wishing ill on? The Israeli's for defending themselves against Jihad or the Jihadists literally inviting death and destruction on their own people?
Collateral damage in a military conflict is inevitable, unavoidable, bound to happen, etc.World? Just quoted a caf member saying its inevitable.
It’s silly to divorce reality from a situation due to emotions. That’s creating a fairytale, an alternative reality.
Okay, change the term to ‘unavoidable.’ Of course, the quick, almost pedantic response to ‘unavoidable’ will be ‘well, if no bomb was dropped, then there wouldn’t be collateral damage,’ but this situation is past that.
Why is this still allowed in here?
Collateral damage in a military conflict is inevitable, unavoidable, bound to happen, etc.
Ordnance expended from both sides kills children. We’ve seen evidence of this in the past 48 hours.
He also said Hamas is killing their own children as part of their strategy.Why is this still allowed in here?
Ordnance expended from both sides has killed children in the past 48 hours. Both of these campaigns are employing terror as a weapon.No, if I was emotional about this I'd have been banned a while ago. I'm saying that you believe that a terror bombing campaign that kills children is inevitable, ignores the structure of the conflict, what precipitated it now (in 2021) and generally.
That bombing is inevitable is one point of view, it is not The Truth.
Yeah seen that, quite revolting to be honest.He also said Hamas is killing their own children as part of their strategy.
He also said Hamas is killing their own children as part of their strategy.
Through a quick search, one.How many Israeli children have been killed in this "conflict"?
Who are you wishing ill on? The Israeli's for defending themselves against Jihad or the Jihadists literally inviting death and destruction on their own people?
Yeah, the burden of proof is surely not on the person making ridiculous claims full of hatred and bile.Prove I'm wrong.