Comment by mrangle
2 years ago
There was always going to be an opinion war after 1200 massacred civilians, when a large portion of the other side doesn't take the primary tack of "stop bombing Palestine" but instead "Free Palestine".
This particular pro-Palestinian argument being so imprecise and tactically wrong, at this crucial time to saving the lives of Palestinians, only guarantees an unsovable hurricane of noise with no outcome but more civilian deaths and more war.
As the other side can not and will not reward the spark of the initial massacre to force a benefits negotiation, obviously. Let alone one that discusses ceding territory.
It's morally logical to be aghast at the Palestinian Civilian death toll, regardless of the argument as to who is ultimately responsible.
But it is morally unforgiveable for people, living in safety and ostensibly in support of voiceless Palestinians in a war zone, to decide to put a territory argument above Paelstinian lives.
This argument further endangers Palestinian lives when it radicalizes them in a manner, within the context of an unwinnable situation, that all but assures their deaths.
Hamas has been clear about their choice of the promise of territory over the lives of the entire Palestinian population.
Less doomed and morally clearer people need to make the choice to discharge the Palestinian population from their duty as pawns. Even if it means living a long life in another desert that isn't under terrorist militia control. In the context of an absolutely unwinnable situation.
Israel is clear, whatever one thinks of the nature of that clarity. That the Palestinians are unclear is why there will be a continued "information war" until the exact point when there isn't the possibility of Palestinians tolerating a single further death. At which point the rallying cry will focus solely on Palestinian lives.
We should all hope that this mutual clarity comes in this very minute. If not in this minute, then in the next. So that the maximum number of lives can be saved.
People can rail against that reality forever, but it will remain reality.
> There was always going to be an opinion war after 1200 massacred civilians, when a large portion of the other side doesn't take the primary tack of "stop bombing Palestine" but instead "Free Palestine".
The West Bank shows what happens if they only stop being bombed without actually being free. Palestine needs to be free in order for there to be peace.
Your comment implies that Palestinian civilians can't have peace until Israeli territory is ceded back to them. This is in the context of October 7th and a the current Gaza seige. It is reflective of the loudest echo in the war zone.
There won't be a single outcome but the most negative one for radicalized Palestinian civilians as a result. Hopefully, morally clearer voices will be raised higher.
No I think his comment implies Gazans see how Israeli settlers treat West Bank Palestinians (sometimes burning their homes while families are inside and laughing at whosoever dies) and think that they'd rather support strongmen who attempt to fight back against Israel.
It's the exact same mentality that drove normal Afghan people to support the Taliban.
The 1200 casualties on Oct 7 included 283 Israeli soldiers and 57 policemen. 859 civilians were killed. Doesn't change anything but it's worth using the correct figures.