No, what I said was, "they shouldn't qualify as refugees if they haven't been personally displaced." The rest of that is a poor attempt at putting words into my mouth. I never said anything about Jewish claims to the land based on the Roman Empire expelling them being valid.
You can't get away with ad hominem, so you go right for the straw man fallacy. Is that what you consider to be, "engaging in good faith?"
Great article, thanks. It's amazing they would choose to mutually lose so much money over a personal spat. RIP rooster sauce.
It looks like Underwood Ranch is making their own sriracha now, wonder if it tastes the same.
Collateral damage, happens in every war. Especially against Hamas who is fond of using Palestinians as human shields, yet curiously remains popular among them.
Literally, no. It's not indiscriminate, these deaths are due to attacks against legal targets, intentionally selected due to evidence of Hamas militants and infrastructure.
Have you been keeping up with news the last... three months? They've been shooting civilians carrying white flags, rounding up men and killing them, designating safe zones and bombing them
None of that holds a candle to the barbarity of what Hamas did on Oct 7. (Warning: NSFL, gore, cruelty, death.)
Collateral damage is unfortunate but common in war, and my understanding is that Israel's strikes cause far fewer civilian deaths than the average when explosives are involved in urban combat.
I've only seen men rounded up and incarcerated, not killed. Trying to understand what you're talking about, I googled found some articles about accounts of IDF soldiers killing civilians in Al Remal and the UN wanting independent inquiry about it, is this what you're referring to?
Israel has been clear they will strike legal Hamas targets wherever they are found, the "safe zones" have been changing as the war progresses, and it appears there was some inconsistent and unclear messaging about safe zones. Pretty much getting people to leave keeps innocent civilians out of areas where anyone remaining will be considered a potential enemy combatant, and is not a guarantee of safety. Hamas also knows about them and likes to attack from refugee camps, hospitals, schools, mosques, etc.,
It's collective punishment regardless, but the UN still considers Gaza to be occupied because of the amount of control Israel has over it.
I'm aware. The UN's anti-Israel bias has been on display lately. I'd argue that a blockade and secure borders is not the same as an occupation, and it seems odd to have to supply a nation that's actively at war with one's own, but they were just ordered to supply Gaza, so... I guess there's not any reason for them to not occupy Gaza again. They're being treated like they are anyway. Unilateral withdrawal didn't prevent any of the legal consequences of being an occupier. It didn't provide safety. I wonder if the settlers will return to Gaza along with the IDF after Hamas is defeated.
I suspect they will but their attention is elsewhere on more existential matters at the moment.
IDF soldiers openly participate in that "civilian violence", and when a Palestinian tries to defend themselves the IDF shoots them.
A lot of hate has been cultivated on both sides and this is a civilian army. This doesn't justify it but I would be surprised if such acts didn't occur. I can only imagine what it would feel like if my friends and family were one of the above victims.
the Skyrim total conversion mod, Enderal: Forgotten Stories, blew me away, and it's free if you own Skyrim. Even has its own installer and game page on Steam.
The earliest massacres in mandatory Palestine were instigated by Arab nationalists. That's what really got the cycle of violence going and led to the various Jewish terrorist groups and militias.
More relevant to the current war, modern Israel does not behave that way.
I've never seen the IDF do anything remotely comparable to the barbarity on display by Hamas. At worst they don't care as much about collateral damage when attacking legal targets as some people say they should, despite taking precautions that no other countries do to minimize civilian deaths during their military operations.
Reacting to a nation collectively when their government declares war on your nation is par for the course. Were Gaza occupied, you'd have a point, that would be collective punishment and therefore a war crime… but Israel unilaterally left Gaza in 2005.
I'm less informed about what's going on in the West Bank, but the news articles I've read seem to indicate that it's mostly settler violence that is the problem there, civilian violence. I hope for everyone's sake that Israel prosecutes and punishes those responsible for crimes.
I believe their cause would be a lot more sympathetic if they had stuck to military targets and not simply murdered, raped, kidnapped, tortured, and mutilated israeli civilians, employed suicide bombings, or blindly fired rockets into population centers. For me, any claims of Palestinean righteousness and legitimate resistance evaporated when I watched October 7th footage. I simply cannot see such atrocities as a righteous war for liberation.
I think they shouldn't qualify as refugees if they haven't been personally displaced, and I hope one day they realize that lives are more important than claims to land their ancestors lived on. The alternative, violence, is what led to them losing this land in the first place, and is why they continue to lose land and freedoms. Choosing violence has consequences.
Biden is standing by our allies and not throwing them under the bus in a time of need, he made the right call. If he loses due to this demographic it's because young Arabic Americans are evidently more sympathetic to Hamas and Palestine than the Jews they are trying to genocide. America does not throw its allies under the bus because it's popular or expedient short term. At least I hope we never become like that.
Easy choice.