Israel-Gaza war

[Pericles]

Yeah, the issue isn't that women are more deserving of release, it's that the feral sadists of Hamas target women and girls for a special kind of abuse. But it doesn't matter, because there will be no prisoner exchanges. The price Hamas demands for them is too high and can't be paid in the aftermath of a slaughter. The only way any of the hostages come home is via escape or liberation, and the latter will likely require a level of military strike that will make many people incredibly uncomfortable. But it doesn't matter. The rubicon has been crossed.

So you're saying that people need to throw the hostages under the bus just to strike Gaza hard

To be fair I can flip it around and say that negotiating and giving ground based on hostages will merely incentive Hamas to take more hostages costly more Israel lives on the long run.

If you want less Israeli lives to be lost in the long run, advocate a two state solution and a sustainable solution that would provide long term stability and peace.

A two state solution is the best outcome in the long term, but it isn't really relevant right now. I can't see how any country in Israel's situation could tolerate leaving Hamas in control of Gaza. Reoccupation will be a huge cost for Israel which is why they tried so hard to avoid it but what alternative is there now? None as I see it.

[Stand With Israel. Crush Hamas]

Yeah, this feels like a warning and potential backup in case Iran gives the order for Hezbollah to launch a full attack and then gets involved themselves.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Israel is specifically telling people where to go to avoid bombings.

Citation needed, because I only see calls to leave one's building or Gaza entirely (from Netanyahu).

False. There are maps asking the residents of perimeter neighbourhoods to move to the inner city.

I'm still waiting for a source.

Funny, I've been waiting for a source for months on who's putting pressure on Biden to pardon Trump.

[GMantis]

If 300 Israelis people are dead (the number is actually higher) that is 3 9/11s. Imagine if 9/11 wasn't just a plane attack though, but an invasion that also resulted in at least 1500 hostages and Americans being raped and murdered, including children, in their own homes. Can anyone who does not simply want the Israelis to give up and die tell me with a straight face that in that analogy America/Israel should just sit back and drop a couple of bombs and treat it like any other terrorist attack? If not, then what should Israel do? Should it occupy the equivalent of 80 million people forever, losing more of its own lives in the process to police people who think it not only okay but morally good to molest Israelis in the street?

If Israel can't exist without ethnically cleansing two million people, it doesn't deserve to exist. And I hope that if they actually go through with doing so, the US government grows some conscience and imposes crippling sanctions on them until they collapse utterly.

[LAKISYLVANIA]

Yeah, the issue isn't that women are more deserving of release, it's that the feral sadists of Hamas target women and girls for a special kind of abuse. But it doesn't matter, because there will be no prisoner exchanges. The price Hamas demands for them is too high and can't be paid in the aftermath of a slaughter. The only way any of the hostages come home is via escape or liberation, and the latter will likely require a level of military strike that will make many people incredibly uncomfortable. But it doesn't matter. The rubicon has been crossed.

So you're saying that people need to throw the hostages under the bus just to strike Gaza hard

To be fair I can flip it around and say that negotiating and giving ground based on hostages will merely incentive Hamas to take more hostages costly more Israel lives on the long run.

If you want less Israeli lives to be lost in the long run, advocate a two state solution and a sustainable solution that would provide long term stability and peace.

A two state solution is the best outcome in the long term, but it isn't really relevant right now. I can't see how any country in Israel's situation could tolerate leaving Hamas in control of Gaza. Reoccupation will be a huge cost for Israel which is why they tried so hard to avoid it but what alternative is there now? None as I see it.

It's not like you're trying a good or respectful solution here.

If anyone is keep saying it's a solution for the long term and it is irrelevant, it'll never happen. It's because nobody is trying or showing the intent.

And offering a peace deal with "a knife on the throat of someone else" isn't good diplomacy either. It has to be an acceptable and respectable offer.

[Horus]

If 300 Israelis people are dead (the number is actually higher) that is 3 9/11s. Imagine if 9/11 wasn't just a plane attack though, but an invasion that also resulted in at least 1500 hostages and Americans being raped and murdered, including children, in their own homes. Can anyone who does not simply want the Israelis to give up and die tell me with a straight face that in that analogy America/Israel should just sit back and drop a couple of bombs and treat it like any other terrorist attack? If not, then what should Israel do? Should it occupy the equivalent of 80 million people forever, losing more of its own lives in the process to police people who think it not only okay but morally good to molest Israelis in the street?

If Israel can't exist without ethnically cleansing two million people, it doesn't deserve to exist. And I hope that if they actually go through with doing so, the US government grows some conscience and imposes crippling sanctions on them until they collapse utterly.

Israel could turn Gaza into a parking lot and we would still fund them. Maybe 20 Dems + Massie would vote no instead of 10, otherwise no change.

Tbh I think Israel would have to launch an unwarranted nuke to lose our money, and even then I'm not sure.

[President Johnson]

How likely is a unity government at this point? German news reported earlier that Gantz and Lapid offered a national unity cabinet with Bibi as long as the far-right parties leave. I guess that would be a good solution and also sink the justice reform.

[GMantis]

https://twitter.com/YousefMunayyer/status/1710777795159228886?t=wajpLhMMxHwcSi0A...

At this point I really don't see why Mods aren't letting us have these discussions. If Likud is having this discussion then I think it is worth considering. I am a free speech absolutist, so I do have a much greater tolerance for this kind of stuff even in other fields, but given the circumstances I do think that in the coming days both Israel and certain Western factions may be considering/supporting options like this.

Are you actually out of your fücking mind? Why in Allah's name should genocide and ethnic cleansing EVER be considered an option?

1. I can't answer on the merits due to moderating policy for the latter. I will say for the former that genocide is always wrong because it takes innocent lives unnecessarily.

2. It should be discussed and freely debated because its going to be a major policy discussion in Israel and the West over the following days. Israel cannot allow Hamas to freely exist in the Gaza Strip after this, and it cannot afford to permanently occupy the Gaza Strip. That lives only one realistic option, as I believe many already recognize.

Rot in Jahannam you fücking bastard

Yeah I'm not the one cheering on murderers and savages.

What would you do if an enclave of cartel members (backed by 2 million people who enthusiastically supported the cartel members and molested the bodies of captured American women and American soldiers in the street) bombarded New York 24/7? Would you say "sorry, yeah, nothing the US can do"?

What if the US had given them everything they wanted re: their enclave, and even kicked Americans out of their homes to do so, but those cartel members still used that as an opportunity to spend the next two decades raiding the US, and then escalating their raids to the point of invading the US and slaughtering and raping Americans, under the demand the US give the entire Southwest back to Mexico? Would you still say the same thing?

Well for starters, I wouldn't be supporting fücking genocide, unlike you.

Genocide is immoral and wrong because it kills innocent people. I don't support genocide.

Your preferred solution wouldn't be possible without war crimes on a vastly greater scale than what we witnessed yesterday. At least be honest with what you truly want.

If 300 Israelis people are dead (the number is actually higher) that is 3 9/11s. Imagine if 9/11 wasn't just a plane attack though, but an invasion that also resulted in at least 1500 hostages and Americans being raped and murdered, including children, in their own homes. Can anyone who does not simply want the Israelis to give up and die tell me with a straight face that in that analogy America/Israel should just sit back and drop a couple of bombs and treat it like any other terrorist attack? If not, then what should Israel do? Should it occupy the equivalent of 80 million people forever, losing more of its own lives in the process to police people who think it not only okay but morally good to molest Israelis in the street?

If Israel can't exist without ethnically cleansing two million people, it doesn't deserve to exist. And I hope that if they actually go through with doing so, the US government grows some conscience and imposes crippling sanctions on them until they collapse utterly.

Israel could turn Gaza into a parking lot and we would still fund them. Maybe 20 Dems + Massie would vote no instead of 10, otherwise no change.

Tbh I think Israel would have to launch an unwarranted nuke to lose our money, and even then I'm not sure.

Unfortunately you're probably right.

[Stand With Israel. Crush Hamas]

How likely is a unity government at this point? German news reported earlier that Gantz and Lapid offered a national unity cabinet with Bibi as long as the far-right parties leave. I guess that would be a good solution and also sink the justice reform.

It seems like Netanyahu has basically said that anyone is welcome to join him but he's not kicking anyone out, so it seems unlikely.

Although the thing is, at this point I imagine the foreign policy of everyone from Gantz to Smotrich would be near-identical.

[pppolitics]

Yeah, the issue isn't that women are more deserving of release, it's that the feral sadists of Hamas target women and girls for a special kind of abuse. But it doesn't matter, because there will be no prisoner exchanges. The price Hamas demands for them is too high and can't be paid in the aftermath of a slaughter. The only way any of the hostages come home is via escape or liberation, and the latter will likely require a level of military strike that will make many people incredibly uncomfortable. But it doesn't matter. The rubicon has been crossed.

So you're saying that people need to throw the hostages under the bus just to strike Gaza hard

To be fair I can flip it around and say that negotiating and giving ground based on hostages will merely incentive Hamas to take more hostages costly more Israel lives on the long run.

If you want less Israeli lives to be lost in the long run, advocate a two state solution and a sustainable solution that would provide long term stability and peace.

A two state solution is the best outcome in the long term, but it isn't really relevant right now. I can't see how any country in Israel's situation could tolerate leaving Hamas in control of Gaza. Reoccupation will be a huge cost for Israel which is why they tried so hard to avoid it but what alternative is there now? None as I see it.

It's not like you're trying a good or respectful solution here.

If anyone is keep saying it's a solution for the long term and it is irrelevant, it'll never happen. It's because nobody is trying or showing the intent.

And offering a peace deal with "a knife on the throat of someone else" isn't good diplomacy either. It has to be an acceptable and respectable offer.

Exactly. Israel has no real interest in a two state solution.

What Israel wants is Palestinian land without the Palestinians.

[Stand With Israel. Crush Hamas]

If 300 Israelis people are dead (the number is actually higher) that is 3 9/11s. Imagine if 9/11 wasn't just a plane attack though, but an invasion that also resulted in at least 1500 hostages and Americans being raped and murdered, including children, in their own homes. Can anyone who does not simply want the Israelis to give up and die tell me with a straight face that in that analogy America/Israel should just sit back and drop a couple of bombs and treat it like any other terrorist attack? If not, then what should Israel do? Should it occupy the equivalent of 80 million people forever, losing more of its own lives in the process to police people who think it not only okay but morally good to molest Israelis in the street?

If Israel can't exist without ethnically cleansing two million people, it doesn't deserve to exist. And I hope that if they actually go through with doing so, the US government grows some conscience and imposes crippling sanctions on them until they collapse utterly.

Israel could turn Gaza into a parking lot and we would still fund them. Maybe 20 Dems + Massie would vote no instead of 10, otherwise no change.

Tbh I think Israel would have to launch an unwarranted nuke to lose our money, and even then I'm not sure.

The surest way to put nukes on the table is to cut off Israel from US support, which is why I imagine there's so much intense resistance to even entertain the ideas.

[LAKISYLVANIA]

If 300 Israelis people are dead (the number is actually higher) that is 3 9/11s. Imagine if 9/11 wasn't just a plane attack though, but an invasion that also resulted in at least 1500 hostages and Americans being raped and murdered, including children, in their own homes. Can anyone who does not simply want the Israelis to give up and die tell me with a straight face that in that analogy America/Israel should just sit back and drop a couple of bombs and treat it like any other terrorist attack? If not, then what should Israel do? Should it occupy the equivalent of 80 million people forever, losing more of its own lives in the process to police people who think it not only okay but morally good to molest Israelis in the street?

If Israel can't exist without ethnically cleansing two million people, it doesn't deserve to exist. And I hope that if they actually go through with doing so, the US government grows some conscience and imposes crippling sanctions on them until they collapse utterly.

Israel does have a right to exist. I don't think how it originated was fair and correct, but the reality is the reality of today. We need to look in the future, and not grief/hold grudges over the past to an extreme extent because that's not going to improve lives either.

1967 borders with a contiguous border connecting Gaza & West Bank (preferrably through the South) would be fair, and transfer of Israeli people to Israel (who are willing) and Arab citizens/Palestinians (who want) to Palestine. And additionally some guarantees for good treatment of Arab citizens within Israel and vice versa. Though i think it's best if they live in separate states.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

How likely is a unity government at this point? German news reported earlier that Gantz and Lapid offered a national unity cabinet with Bibi as long as the far-right parties leave. I guess that would be a good solution and also sink the justice reform.

I'm guessing we get a unity government and then when the dust settles Netanyahu's retirement. There is absolutely no reason he should be able to survive this.

[Pericles]

Yeah, the issue isn't that women are more deserving of release, it's that the feral sadists of Hamas target women and girls for a special kind of abuse. But it doesn't matter, because there will be no prisoner exchanges. The price Hamas demands for them is too high and can't be paid in the aftermath of a slaughter. The only way any of the hostages come home is via escape or liberation, and the latter will likely require a level of military strike that will make many people incredibly uncomfortable. But it doesn't matter. The rubicon has been crossed.

So you're saying that people need to throw the hostages under the bus just to strike Gaza hard

To be fair I can flip it around and say that negotiating and giving ground based on hostages will merely incentive Hamas to take more hostages costly more Israel lives on the long run.

If you want less Israeli lives to be lost in the long run, advocate a two state solution and a sustainable solution that would provide long term stability and peace.

A two state solution is the best outcome in the long term, but it isn't really relevant right now. I can't see how any country in Israel's situation could tolerate leaving Hamas in control of Gaza. Reoccupation will be a huge cost for Israel which is why they tried so hard to avoid it but what alternative is there now? None as I see it.

It's not like you're trying a good or respectful solution here.

If anyone is keep saying it's a solution for the long term and it is irrelevant, it'll never happen. It's because nobody is trying or showing the intent.

And offering a peace deal with "a knife on the throat of someone else" isn't good diplomacy either. It has to be an acceptable and respectable offer.

My point is that your preferred solution to the conflict doesn't change what the necessary military response would be now. Israel isn't blameless but it's totally unreasonable to expect them to just take this kind of attack and not eliminate the threat so it doesn't happen again.

And of course it's a long term issue, there's not going to be a peace agreement in the next few days lol

[LAKISYLVANIA]

If 300 Israelis people are dead (the number is actually higher) that is 3 9/11s. Imagine if 9/11 wasn't just a plane attack though, but an invasion that also resulted in at least 1500 hostages and Americans being raped and murdered, including children, in their own homes. Can anyone who does not simply want the Israelis to give up and die tell me with a straight face that in that analogy America/Israel should just sit back and drop a couple of bombs and treat it like any other terrorist attack? If not, then what should Israel do? Should it occupy the equivalent of 80 million people forever, losing more of its own lives in the process to police people who think it not only okay but morally good to molest Israelis in the street?

Stop comparing this to 9/11, it's not even remotely similar.

[No War, but the War on Christmas]

Israel is specifically telling people where to go to avoid bombings.

Citation needed, because I only see calls to leave one's building or Gaza entirely (from Netanyahu).

False. There are maps asking the residents of perimeter neighbourhoods to move to the inner city.

I'm still waiting for a source.

Funny, I've been waiting for a source for months on who's putting pressure on Biden to pardon Trump.

The brain-dead recommends on this post, after I was castigated for being ‘off-topic’ by multiple Israeli apologists is insane.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Yeah, the issue isn't that women are more deserving of release, it's that the feral sadists of Hamas target women and girls for a special kind of abuse. But it doesn't matter, because there will be no prisoner exchanges. The price Hamas demands for them is too high and can't be paid in the aftermath of a slaughter. The only way any of the hostages come home is via escape or liberation, and the latter will likely require a level of military strike that will make many people incredibly uncomfortable. But it doesn't matter. The rubicon has been crossed.

So you're saying that people need to throw the hostages under the bus just to strike Gaza hard

To be fair I can flip it around and say that negotiating and giving ground based on hostages will merely incentive Hamas to take more hostages costly more Israel lives on the long run.

If you want less Israeli lives to be lost in the long run, advocate a two state solution and a sustainable solution that would provide long term stability and peace.

A two state solution is the best outcome in the long term, but it isn't really relevant right now. I can't see how any country in Israel's situation could tolerate leaving Hamas in control of Gaza. Reoccupation will be a huge cost for Israel which is why they tried so hard to avoid it but what alternative is there now? None as I see it.

It's not like you're trying a good or respectful solution here.

If anyone is keep saying it's a solution for the long term and it is irrelevant, it'll never happen. It's because nobody is trying or showing the intent.

And offering a peace deal with "a knife on the throat of someone else" isn't good diplomacy either. It has to be an acceptable and respectable offer.

My point is that your preferred solution to the conflict doesn't change what the necessary military response would be now. Israel isn't blameless but it's totally unreasonable to expect them to just take this kind of attack and not eliminate the threat so it doesn't happen again.

And of course it's a long term issue, there's not going to be a peace agreement in the next few days lol

Israel's actions arent ideal but that is because of the region they are in.

[PSOL]

Back during Obama there were many smart imperialists who realized that the United States needs to open up its markets to areas it was previously antagonistic towards. Obama nixed that strategy in the bud by going after Syria and Libya on behalf of the Brits and Sarkozy, leading most people to discover what cards the United States will play and adjust to that strategy.

As the bunker around Jerusalem gets pressed and as Biden adopted a my way or the highway nonsense from Trump, leading to worldwide antagonism, I am sure that this will go in the history books as a sad affair that led to the fall of a once mighty empire and its crew. Of course that book is going to be buried in garbage and not in highly circulated prints, so nonsense on Evangelicalism, Mexicans and male homosexuality being the chief reasons for its fall will be the thing studied on.

Hezbollah, Hamas, and a few other militant groups in Iraq said in a communique that they DGAF about some ships and threatened retaliation of their own in some Hold'em Up roadshow.

[GALeftist]

The two-state solution is dead and buried. At this point, settlements in the West Bank have grown so large and so numerous that any "evacuation" is unthinkable; Rashida Tlaib was right when she said such a move would be analogous to the Nakba.

[pppolitics]

If 300 Israelis people are dead (the number is actually higher) that is 3 9/11s. Imagine if 9/11 wasn't just a plane attack though, but an invasion that also resulted in at least 1500 hostages and Americans being raped and murdered, including children, in their own homes. Can anyone who does not simply want the Israelis to give up and die tell me with a straight face that in that analogy America/Israel should just sit back and drop a couple of bombs and treat it like any other terrorist attack? If not, then what should Israel do? Should it occupy the equivalent of 80 million people forever, losing more of its own lives in the process to police people who think it not only okay but morally good to molest Israelis in the street?

If Israel can't exist without ethnically cleansing two million people, it doesn't deserve to exist. And I hope that if they actually go through with doing so, the US government grows some conscience and imposes crippling sanctions on them until they collapse utterly.

Israel could turn Gaza into a parking lot and we would still fund them. Maybe 20 Dems + Massie would vote no instead of 10, otherwise no change.

Tbh I think Israel would have to launch an unwarranted nuke to lose our money, and even then I'm not sure.

The surest way to put nukes on the table is to cut off Israel from US support, which is why I imagine there's so much intense resistance to even entertain the ideas.

Since this doesn’t involve the US, I fail to see the problem.

[LAKISYLVANIA]

Yeah, the issue isn't that women are more deserving of release, it's that the feral sadists of Hamas target women and girls for a special kind of abuse. But it doesn't matter, because there will be no prisoner exchanges. The price Hamas demands for them is too high and can't be paid in the aftermath of a slaughter. The only way any of the hostages come home is via escape or liberation, and the latter will likely require a level of military strike that will make many people incredibly uncomfortable. But it doesn't matter. The rubicon has been crossed.

So you're saying that people need to throw the hostages under the bus just to strike Gaza hard

To be fair I can flip it around and say that negotiating and giving ground based on hostages will merely incentive Hamas to take more hostages costly more Israel lives on the long run.

If you want less Israeli lives to be lost in the long run, advocate a two state solution and a sustainable solution that would provide long term stability and peace.

A two state solution is the best outcome in the long term, but it isn't really relevant right now. I can't see how any country in Israel's situation could tolerate leaving Hamas in control of Gaza. Reoccupation will be a huge cost for Israel which is why they tried so hard to avoid it but what alternative is there now? None as I see it.

It's not like you're trying a good or respectful solution here.

If anyone is keep saying it's a solution for the long term and it is irrelevant, it'll never happen. It's because nobody is trying or showing the intent.

And offering a peace deal with "a knife on the throat of someone else" isn't good diplomacy either. It has to be an acceptable and respectable offer.

My point is that your preferred solution to the conflict doesn't change what the necessary military response would be now. Israel isn't blameless but it's totally unreasonable to expect them to just take this kind of attack and not eliminate the threat so it doesn't happen again.

And of course it's a long term issue, there's not going to be a peace agreement in the next few days lol

"A long term issue".

I suppose in 1947 it was a long term issue too?
In 1980 perhaps as well
It's today 2023
What will be the situation in 2060.

This is the wrong attitude. You need to actively work on peace. Or there won't be peace. It's basically negligent to not work on a long-lasting peace. Because if we get to a ceasefire or some kind of temporary peace, sooner or later conflict is bound to happen again. And again, and again and again. And even if Hamas is taken out, someone is going to take over out of the ruins of what is going to be the graveyard.

It's the same thing as with climate change. Postponing isn't good for anything, stop freezing conflicts because it makes peace impossible if nobody keeps working actively on peace which seems to be a trend... in later decades. How many long-lasting peaces have we seen since the cold war or especially fall of USSR? (regarding break-off states and so on).

The Western Sahara / Sahrawi republic for instance doesn't use violence, yet it is still an unrecognised break-off state. Nobody knows about the conflict and nothing happens, because nobody is working on peace or a solution.

[PSOL]

The two-state solution is dead and buried. At this point, settlements in the West Bank have grown so large and so numerous that any "evacuation" is unthinkable; Rashida Tlaib was right when she said such a move would be analogous to the Nakba.

It never was a serious proposition to begin with

[Horus]

Israel is specifically telling people where to go to avoid bombings.

Citation needed, because I only see calls to leave one's building or Gaza entirely (from Netanyahu).

False. There are maps asking the residents of perimeter neighbourhoods to move to the inner city.

I'm still waiting for a source.

Funny, I've been waiting for a source for months on who's putting pressure on Biden to pardon Trump.

The brain-dead recommends on this post, after I was castigated for being ‘off-topic’ by multiple Israeli apologists is insane.

I just thought it was funny, idk what you were criticized for but we generally agree on this stuff so you were probably right.

[LAKISYLVANIA]

https://twitter.com/maks_nafo_fella/status/1711087784574759243?s=12
☹️

The link is wrong or the tweet has been deleted. What was it about?

[Vosem]

This is the wrong attitude. You need to actively work on peace. Or there won't be peace. It's basically negligent to not work on a long-lasting peace. Because if we get to a ceasefire or some kind of temporary peace, sooner or later conflict is bound to happen again. And again, and again and again. And even if Hamas is taken out, someone is going to take over out of the ruins of what is going to be the graveyard.

It's the same thing as with climate change. Postponing isn't good for anything, stop freezing conflicts because it makes peace impossible if nobody keeps working actively on peace which seems to be a trend... in later decades. How many long-lasting peaces have we seen since the cold war or especially fall of USSR? (regarding break-off states and so on)

Peace can happen the same way it did in South Africa: Hamas (or some broad 'Palestinian liberationism' party) can join a Likud-led (or broadly 'Israeli right' party) government, much like the National Party became a junior partner to the ANC. It can submit to a Truth and Reconciliation Commission, aid the Israeli right in its agenda, and reject its former beliefs not just in its rhetoric but deep in its soul.

When no one supports genocide, and when those who once did have cast off the parts of them that did so and rejected them, and Palestinian liberationism is left in the same dustbin as apartheid, then there will be peace.

My guess is that this is not very realistic; unlike the National Party, Hamas is not culturally close to movements which would encourage them to take these steps. In that case, warfare will continue until someone wins. In this particular conflict, the disparity of power, and the trend in the growth of the disparity of power, (and the trend in the growth of the disparity of allies), leave no doubt as to the outcome.