Comment by cies
2 years ago
> equally abohorrent
Comparing it to the Ukraine's invasion and we can see this is so much more "invasive". There's a literal wall around 2M ppl with little agency, while most of them are refugees from the other side of the wall.
To methis is one of the most abohorrent conflicts in earth in this day and age. Given South Africa is no longer segregated, and Rwanda reconciled.
I'd be interested to hear what's equally abhorrent in your view.
> There's a literal wall around 2M ppl with little agency, while most of them are refugees from the other side of the wall.
There is a really very simple solution for them to have all of the dignity, agency, independence, prosperity, peace, sovereignty, stability to raise children, etc that you and I want for the Palestinian people. They only have to - and hear me out - not kill Jews. It really is that simple. Don't kill Jews, not by rockets, nor suicide bomb, nor stabbing attacks, nor stealth attacks by terror tunnels, nor any of the varied and creative ways that Jews have been attacked in the region for more than a century.
Most people think that Free Palestine means independence and sovereignty. It does not. Sovereignty has been proffered many times in the last 75 years. So given that it decidedly does not mean what we Westerners expect it means when we hear Free Somewhere - "Free Tibet" "Free Donbas" or whatever - I would like my fellow Westerners to really meditate on the meaning of the term "free" in "Free Palestine". Really ruminate on what possible meaning that can have.
Then, when you are really ready to hear what it means, read the Hamas charter. Or read about the writings, life and times of al-Husseini, the architect and sire of the Free Palestine movement.
We Westerners, especially we Americans, really impose our own views on others. Let Palestinians speak for themselves. They are very clear what Free Palestine means. We just have to listen without preconception.
So you agree that every Palestinian who has never killed a Jew is being unfairly oppressed and should be allowed to immediately live in freedom. Great, that’s what, 1.999 million of them in Gaza?
As I said it before, you should know by now that the "free" in Free Palestine does not, and has never, meant "freedom". That is a Western expectation imposed on the phrase. Determining what it actually means, I will leave as an exercise for the reader. As research materials, I refer you to the writings, life and times of Mohammed Amin al-Husseini who was the architect and sire of the Free Palestine movement. Note particularly the memorandum of understanding he signed on behalf of Palestians with the Nazis. I also refer you to the Hamas charter (both versions 1.0 and 2.0) (Hamas enjoys an 85% approval rating, by the way).
We know "free" does not mean "freedom" in the Western understanding of that phrase, because sovereignty has been proffered many times in 75 years. It is not what Palestinians want. You need to listen to Palestinians, not Westerners westsplaining. And then, when you are really clear on what they mean by "free", you must bravely make your own moral evaluation of whether the "free" they actually mean is something you can support. Only then, and I mean this honestly, will you be able to really understand the dynamic going on over there. Only when you understand what Palestinians, by their own words, want, will you be an effective advocate for peace and prosperity in the region.
13 replies →
Gaza has been pseudo self governed since 2005, and is ruled by an authoritarian theocratic regime. The situation was intolerable on 10/6 but understood. What exactly should israel do after the 10/7 attacks. To me attempting to degrade Hamas is what any other state would do. War in one of the most densely populated places on earth is going to kill a lot of people. The only other option it would seem to me would be to ignore the attacks which I'm sure wouldn't be acceptable to the citizens of Israel.
I think you're suggesting a false dichotomy here: do nothing or sacrifice the lives of tens of thousands of innocent people in pursuit of your aims.
Consider what the Israeli response might have looked like if they didn't have access to the munitions that they do (2000 pound bombs, etc). Likely they would have still invaded Gaza and fought a very bloody battle but with many fewer innocents killed at the expense of more of their own soldiers.
Essentially, Israel has made the judgement that the lives of their soldiers are (many times) more important than those of innocent people.
I think this is true to an extent. I certainly think the US given the same task would have been more surgical, but the US has a lot more money power and resources. Israel has to maintain a military so it can fend off attacks from its neighbor which limits the amount of resources it can expend. Soldiers are a finite resource.
Also all countries military's inherently value its own soldiers over an advisory civilians. If I was a IDF general it would be my goal to minimize the casualties taken in securing what ever goal the political leadership sets forth within the laws of war.
8 replies →
No, they would have been forced to be less surgical and precise in their strikes, leading to even more deaths.
It's been said that the Iron Dome saved more Palestinian lives than anything else in living memory because it allowed Israel to ignore Gaza (well, up till now anyway).
Be very very happy Israel has the tech to minimize civilian casualties and the desire to minimize them - things could have been very different.
During Second World War the Czech resistance assassinated Reich Protector Reinhard Heydrich. To exact revenge the Nazis destroyed the village of Lidice and murdered 340 villagers. If we had social media back then, people would have made the same argument you now do. That the Germans had no choice but to eradicate the village. Because, hey, the only other option would be to ignore the attacks which surely wouldn't have been acceptable to any German.
What would you suggest Israel do if fighting hamas is not an option. Also the Nazis killed civilians as a goal not by happenstance.
36 replies →
[flagged]
The wall wasn’t always there. Just like how the wall trump put between US and Mexico wasn’t always there. Actions have consequences and the West Bank situation regressed from continued suicide bombing and terrorist attackers.
Actions certainly do have consequences, like roughly forty years prior to the wall's construction, arbitrary "military orders" that post-occupation immediately granted the military total authority over every aspect of Palestinian life, declared all water to be the property of Israel, and that land could be seized for any reason - and more which have since made it illegal to do nearly anything without the authorization of the military, which includes everything from planting flowers to doing anything related to water to groups larger than 10 people assembling to attending school to operating a tractor.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Military_Order
Afaik there was already a wall pre-Trump
Nelson Mandela has spoken out on the brutal oppression of the Palestinians by Israel[1]. His words are powerful, and worth reading.
> To methis is one of the most abohorrent conflicts in earth in this day and age.
He agrees with you.
https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2014/9/26/gaza-and-the-cr...
And yet, in that entire article I can find no concrete quote of Mandela pointing out a single action that Israel did to criticize. Just general "Israel is the worst".
Interestingly, the idea that Mandela called Israel an apartheid state was debunked on Stack Exchange, you can read that here: https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/50771/did-nelso...
What Mandela did say about atrocities was directed at the US:
You are simply cherry picking. In the context of addressing the UN, he had to exercise restraint to be taken seriously (it was not an entirely sympathetic audience, and in some cases, like the US, a hostile one)-- this does not negate his other statements, both that I already linked, and others which are easy to find.
Israel is an apartheid state. Israel, last time I checked, had 19 laws which give preferential treatment of Jewish citizens of Israel over non-Jewish citizens of Israel (not talking about Palestinians in W. Bank / Gaza).
Palestinians are not permitted to repair their homes or even their mosques. Go up on the roof and make a repair, and you risk having your home bulldozed by the Israelis.
I once hitch hiked on a Jewish only road in Israel. Jewish only really means not Palestinian.
What exists in the W. Bank and Gaza, is much worse than apartheid. Israel has turned Gaza into an open-air prison-- a concentration camp, if you will. Israel controls all water, food, fuel, electricity, and people entering and exiting from Gaza[1]. And, their carpet bombing of the civilian captives has turned this concentration camp into a death camp.
[1]Israel's PM calls his periodic starving of Gazans, "putting them on a diet" when he blocks shipments of food. And, the water wells in Gaza are contaminated by salt water intrusion, so Israel cuts off fresh water to punish Gazans as well. No freedom of travel even when Israel isn't carpet bombing civilians (the Israelis call these periodic massacres from the air, "mowing the lawn"). Gaza is correctly called an open-air prison or a concentration camp.
1 reply →
Gaza borders Egypt and the West Bank borders Jordan.
If they are blockaded by the country that they cant get along with then it is at least partially on Egypt and Jordan that they are given no way out.
Unless the refugees are guaranteed a right to return, then you're just asking for Jordan and Egypt to facilitate ethnic cleansing and finishing the job.
Right of return is a non starter for the winning power. Which is why this conflict is intractable.
1 reply →
Israel has a secret* agreement with Egypt which it made Egypt sign as a condition for not occupying the border between Gaza and Egypt, which stipulates what Egypt can and can't let through the border.
*The existence of the agreement is not secret, but the contents are.
[flagged]
[flagged]