Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)KA
Posts
0
Comments
1,129
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • If Palestine had the international funds and military equipment of Israel they would be able to similarly protect their civilians

    Or they would use those funds and equipment to do what they've layed out in their charter, which is to destory Israel and "push the jews into the sea".

    You’re just glossing right past the fact that one has been intentionally impoverished

    No I'm not. The better question is, why is that? According to lemmy, they have like the noblest cause in the world, so why isn't the international community flocking to aid them?

    Also the blood is on more than just the trigger pullers. Surely you wouldn’t disagree that organizers that didn’t directly participate don’t have blood on their hands.

    Sure, there is more blame to go around. But we should have learned from WW2 that "just following orders" isn't an excuse that absolves people from responsibilty.

    I guess it is a bit muddier when you account for religious childhood indoctrination.

    All about killing terrorists but never that interested in the geopolitical context that bred those terrorists.

    Because it's not that relevant to the situation anymore. It's very unlikley that a nation will ever be established in the way that Israel was. And yes, it was a very terrible chain of events. Hopefully lessons have been learned to avoid such partitions in the future.

    But for this conflict, it's done. Unless you have a time machine, Israel is there now and it's powerful enough to not be going away anytime soon.

    There is also no chance of a Palestinian military victory. So the only prospects for them is either making some kind of peace (yes, the conditions will be shit, but the killing will stop) ... or keep fighting an unwinnable war, which will just put you into an even shittier position down the line.

    Talking about the geopolitical context can be very interessting, but it doesn't help much when coming up with a solution. But we can blame the British if you want?

  • Why is it okay that Israel has taken so much control of the region that Gaza can’t even control its own resources?

    Because the can and it's in their interesst. Again, a blockade is a very basic military tactic.

    Why are you talking like Palestine is just Hamas and not also thousands of women and children that didn’t choose to be in this open air prison?

    Hamas enjoy wide support in the population though.

    For the Palestines that actually don't support Hamas, it sure sucks. But guess who's the first party that surpresses any Palestines that support peace negotiation or any normalisation of the conflict? Right ... Hamas, because they are militant hardliners and don't actually give a shit about peace or the Palestinian people.

    The blood of these concert goers is on their malicious actions

    Fuck off. The blood is on the people that pulled the trigger and one one else. Anything else just makes you a supporter of terrorism.

    Much like in Israel, the average citizen doesn’t get much choice and instead gets to bear the brunt of the other sides rage

    Actually, Israel goes to great lenght to install defensive meassures to protect their citizens.

    On the ther side, Hamas will go to great lenght to protect their weapons from Israeli attacks by hiding them amongst their citizens, preferably in school.

  • Starving innocents is bad

    How is it Israel's responsibility to supply their enemies in the first place? Cutting supply lines is like the most basic military tactic there is.

    If they don't want to starve, they can ask Iran to send some food instead of the next rocket shipmment.

  • Is it "consensual" if one party in a war surrenders to the terms of the victor after a military defeat? I'm not sure this is the right concept to apply here.

    What I'm saying is that Israel has had military hegemony for quite some time and has made several attempts to negotiate a peace (of course on their terms). A two-state solution was at least on the table.

    I just can't see this happening in a scenario if the power was reversed. The charters of the Palestinian militant groups makes it very clear that their goal is total military victory.

    So yes, if you want the prospect of a two-state solution, you have to support Israel.

    And that would be ignoring the fact Israel has been increasingly extending its territorial integrity over palestinian land for the duration of the conflict, and will continue to do so. Not a lot of “two-state solution” in that.

    I mean, of course. After negotiate fail and fighting resums, your objective is to get into a more favourable position for the next round of negotiate. That's how this works.

    But at this point I agree that Israel has also given up on a two-state solutuion. That's why they switched to slow annexation by settlemts in the west bank. And we'll see what happens to gaza, soon.