Israeli undercover forces dressed as women and medics storm West Bank hospital, killing 3 militants
DdCno1 @ DdCno1 @kbin.social Posts 0Comments 437Joined 2 yr. ago
DdCno1 @ DdCno1 @kbin.social
Posts
0
Comments
437
Joined
2 yr. ago
It's a lesson Jews around the world learned the hard way. They can't rely on others to protect them.
The Wayback Machine in particular is one of the greatest treasures of the Internet. An absolutely invaluable tool and so far entirely irreplaceable.
It's already on the Internet Archive:
the perpetrator is being careful about their public image
Israel is anything but careful about their public image. I just mentioned the posturing from the Israeli government, which is the opposite of that. This doesn't make any sense. What you are alleging is that they are doing what, the starvation carefully, so that nobody notices it's deliberate? Do you have any idea how massive of a conspiracy would be necessary for this, in a country where government leaks are a regular occurrence? Do you really think the 85% of Israelis who want Netanyahu gone as soon as possible, the same ones who have been protesting Netanyahu for months, even before the war, would put up with this?
You appear exceptionally confident, yet your arguments often consist of nothing but generic talking points, are paper-thin without an ounce of nuance. That's not meant to be insulting, but merely an observation.
I can't look into your mind, but that's how you are conducting yourself here. If there is any doubt, any uncertainty, any nuance in your thought, you are not sharing it - or I missed it entirely.
Who or what do you think indoctrinated me? What do you think you know about me to come to such a conclusion?
You know I can read this as well, right? I have no interest in frustrating anyone. I'm frustrated enough myself, I don't need to share this misery with others.
Do you really think what I'm doing is propaganda? If you were in charge of a unit for online propaganda, would you order to someone to be doing what I'm doing, writing long rambling comments that are at no point applauding how Israel is conducting warfare, that are criticizing its government, that come without clear conclusions - in a community where what I'm doing is largely falling on deaf ears, where people like you are writing responses so insulting that even the moderators here have to step in?
Because there isn't a coherent starvation tactic. The same Israeli government that has members talking about limiting aid to Palestinians is also having Israeli officers inspect aid trucks at the Egyptian border and letting them through (Egypt and Israel jointly administer the crossing and Israel has the last word there), has also been sending aid through their own borders into Gaza (which is what these protesters are trying to stop). The IDF has entire units that are doing nothing but provide aid to civilians. This doesn't mesh with the idea that they want to starve these people.
Netanyahu and his government are doing a lot of posturing aimed at their voting base, but then they more or less sneakily don't follow through with it. They say one thing in public, exclusively in Hebrew (which still gets out and is being translated, of course, and is getting used against them) and then behind the scenes, they do the opposite, e.g. turning utilities back on after a very short period of time, sending aid through, performing secret negotiations, etc.
This is incredibly stupid on every level. They won't win the next election even if they get every remaining hostage out and catch Sinwar alive, but they refuse to acknowledge this. It's hurting Israel's international reputation, it's creating tensions with allies and within the Israeli society. While I do not think that a left-leaning Israeli government would have responded to October 7 with a more limited war against Hamas in Gaza, I do think they would not have fumbled communication to such a baffling degree.
I was talking about Hamas members. I thought it was pretty obvious from the rest of the paragraph, but if it wasn't, I apologize for causing a misunderstanding.
Do you ever have doubts about yourself, your political views, your opinions and knowledge? Do you ever think twice about what you're writing, perhaps even writing a comment and then not submitting it, because you are not sure about it anymore? I do, all the time, and while this is deeply uncomfortable, I wish you some of this discomfort as well. I think it would do you good.
Enlightened centrism is neither enlightened nor centrism.
I just tormented myself writing this and I'm happy to torment you with it:
If you still think that's one-sided support of Israel, then I can't help you.
A starving person can, at least in theory, surrender and recover, might have a small chance of learning the errors of their ways and making the best out of the rest of their lives. Someone who has been shot dead or killed otherwise is dead forever. No redemption in their character ark, just a sudden end to it all. That's all theory though, entirely pointless theory. In practice, this won't happen. Hamas would rather have every last man, woman and child who isn't on their member list succumb to starvation before any of them have to even miss a meal. It's a win-win for them: They can blame the suffering and deaths from starvation, just like from bombings, on Israel entirely and enough people around the world will eagerly accept this narrative, even though it takes two to tango.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but this entire conflict has to be one of very few in history where one side is actively trying to increase the suffering on their own side as a weapon of war and manipulation. I cannot think of many other wars where one side implements deliberate measures for more of their own people to die for the purposes of both domestic and foreign propaganda - and being so successful at doing the latter in particular, albeit with plenty of outside help. There really aren't many equivalents I can think of. The Japanese Empire in WW2 and Khmer Rouge perhaps. The latter is perhaps the most apt comparison, even though what they were doing to their people was being treated as a secret, as they also had a strong support base among the academic far-left in the West, just like Hamas today, with these intelligent, highly educated idealists deliberately ignoring readily available evidence in favor of maintaining their ideologically-driven views.
There is October 7 denial out there that is completely indistinguishable from Holocaust denial in its mechanisms. The same conspiratorial thinking, the same inane and insane excuses, just with a predominately (but not exclusively) far-left twist instead of a far-right one. As someone who considers themselves fairly left of the center on most issues, it's quite eye-opening to see just how vulnerable people I have a fair bit in common are to the same kind of manipulation, the same errors of judgment as outright fascists.
How on Earth do you fight such an enemy and how do you break this spell they have over so many people in the world? There's a reason why I said that the quicker the war is over, the better. Both the Japanese and the Khmer Rouge were defeated through military action and in both cases, just like with Hamas, any delays in their demise would have resulted in an enormous amount of additional suffering, despite the fact that the methods used to remove them were anything but gentle. That is what Israel has been doing, but it's important to keep in mind that they are neither the US nor Vietnam, that they can not afford to throw people into the meat grinder. They are more than willing to trade time, Palestinian concrete and also Palestinian lives for keeping their own soldiers safe. Despite the mostly toothless international backlash, this strategy is working, but it is not fast enough for today's world with its collective median attention span of eight seconds. There is no urban combat equivalent to the breakneck-speed island hopping of WW2 to be found here.
I'm not really worried about the military outcome of this war. I think it's only a matter of time - time which civilians in Gaza don't have though. There is no intentional genocide happening here, but at some point, the number of civilian dead through both Hamas concerted efforts and sheer indifference on the side of the Israeli government will become impossible to ignore and impossible to excuse by the aforementioned valuing of their own side over the enemy. Maybe it's time to take risks, but that is an almost impossible call to make in a country so small, among a people so small, everyone knows someone who is personally affected by this war. Netanyahu won't make it, he's too worried about is fruitless endeavor of saving his own skin - and the IDF, for as much as it is representative of almost the entirety of Israeli society, including people who oppose the ruling coalition, is still beholden to the civilian government and can not on its own decide to accelerate the speed of their assault. Not to mention, a faster war means more civilian deaths in the short term (even if it results in less suffering overall), creating more international outrage, which Israel can only afford up to a point.
Another hostage exchange ceasefire might give Palestinian civilians the breather they need, but I'm not holding my breath it's happening and it would most certainly benefit Hamas more.
To sum this up, a slow war like we have it now is terrible, a faster war is also terrible, but potentially the less terrible alternative in the long run, yet impossible to sell to the public. I have no answer.
This conflict is far more complicated than just blaming it on one party alone. I can only advice you to strive for a more nuanced understanding of it, because if you keep maintaining a view this one-sided for long enough, you will unknowingly learn not just to ignore evidence to the contrary about this conflict, but any other topic that you already have a more or less firm opinion on. You do not want to become that kind of person.
The quicker Hamas is defeated and the war is over, the quicker the humanitarian crisis can be solved. Hamas existing and the humanitarian crisis are inseparably linked to one another. As long as Hamas holds control over parts of the strip, nobody can make sure that aid doesn't get diverted from the intended recipients.
While I would personally send aid regardless - because even if only some of it reaches civilians, it would still be the morally right thing to do - I can understand why people who are personally affected by Hamas terror have a different view of this.
Which deals has Israel broken?
Nope, the user just chose to misrepresent the actual ruling, whether dishonestly or because they are simply misinformed. The court did not determine whether or not there was a genocide, which means it can't have possibly ruled for it to stop, because that would have required the former.
Explain to me why the buffer zone should be located in Israeli land? The government of Gaza started this war and they are about to lose this war. Why should the winner of this war make territorial concessions for their own safety? That's not how this works.
The point of these protests is that the aid is just as if not more likely to benefit terrorists and enable them to hold out for longer than it is to reach civilians, which in turn makes it possible for these terrorists to continue their holding of hostages. There is ample evidence of Hamas stealing aid from the people who need it, including by force.
Also, stopping these protesters from blocking the crossing would be the task of the police, not the military, but I suspect that you know that and were just looking for cheap polemics.
American nukes in the UK aren't missiles that can be launched, they are gravity bombs that are loaded onto fighter bombers and would be used tactically as part of a European ground war. This type, to be precise:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B61nuclearbomb
This is not a first strike weapon nor one that can be used immediately if e.g. Russian ICBMs were to be detected en route to the UK or any other NATO country.
The presence of these weapons in the UK serves several purposes: They are part of the overall nuclear deterrent, but they are also an expression of American commitment to their European allies. It's a signal to Russia that if a European NATO member were to be attacked, they have the ability to deploy this weapon on the battlefield. It's not just theoretical: A total war started by Russia against NATO is unfortunately increasingly likely in the coming years, so one reason this weapon is being transferred to the UK is that there is the expectation that it might be needed soon.
Note that the UK is not the only European nation where American nuclear weapons are present. There are five NATO member states - Belgium, Germany, Italy, The Netherlands and Turkey - that have an agreement with the US enabling pilots from these countries to deploy American nuclear bombs in case of a war, about 20 of the same B61 type mentioned above. These nations are all threatened by Russian nukes, but have no active nuclear weapons programs of their own, so this is a vital part of their deterrent.
All of these nations, with the exception of Turkey, just recently purchased F-35 jets specifically for this mission, replacing older Tornado jets that had previously fulfilled this role. The bombs are under the full control of American officers until the American President and the heads of the respective nations' governments have both signed off their use. The US President approves and permits American officers to unlock the weapons. The local head of government has the final word and full control over their use from that point on.
If it's stupid and it works, then it's not stupid.