Israel-Gaza war

[Vosem]

Even if it wasn't long proven (including by Israeli historians) that most  Palestinians were either forced out by the Israeli army or fled out of fear of Israeli attacks, Israel's refusal to allow them to return once the war was over was without any doubt ethnic cleansing.

No, people fleeing because of enemy propaganda does not count as ethnic cleansing. (Ethnic cleansing is what happened to the Israeli settlers in Gaza in 2004, who were moved out by force; by no means here is my position that the Israeli state is totally innocent). Countries also have a right to set their own immigration policy even if that results in ethnic changes; saying otherwise is the preserve of insane Eurabia conspiracy theorists.

It has held - against international law  - Palestinian majority territories for decades while oppressing the locals.

It has not held Palestinian-majority territories against international law. One can argue about the propriety of its hold on the Golan, but there is no recognized state with any claim to territories within the former Mandate other than Israel itself.

The Mandate has not been operative since 1948.

Yes, this is how decolonization works. The Mandate came to an end and Israel is its legal successor entity.

Israel has no rights under that Mandate (and good for them, because the Mandate also provided for respecting the rights of the Palestinians). No country has ever recognized Israel's right to any claim to the West Bank and in fact Israel has refused to make such a claim because then they'd have to treat the local Palestinians as citizens.

Yes, but the thing is that it belongs to Israel under international law and Israel has never renounced its claim; its final status remains pending a peace agreement. But there is actually no generally recognized existing entity other than Israel that has a claim to it under international law (although there is a partially-recognized Palestinian state, also with ill-defined boundaries); this is why the occupation is legal.

Instead they have held the West Bank as a military occupation and massively violated the provisions of military occupations in international law (most obviously by allowing their citizens to settle there).

Right, so they have a claim to the area under international law and since they control the immigration policy they can let their citizens live there, and in fact some of the circumstances in which they’ve denied that right to their citizens actually are violations of international law. My main problem with the Israeli state is that they are far too hostile towards the settlers, in ways that should not be permitted. This pales next to the existence of Palestinian liberationism but ultimately there is a set of crimes the state will have to pay for.

Is that what you call the moral high ground?

…yes, I already said that. I think not recognizing the overwhelming moral superiority of the Israeli side is preposterous and comically blind.

A country that would never have existed without ethnic cleansing and which claims that it needs to indefinitely hold millions under blockade or under occupation for its security can't hold the moral high ground, it can merely claim to be the lesser evil. Only someone who assumes that Palestinians deserve less rights than Israelis in principle can support such views.

Yeah, I mean, I have made it very clear that my position is that Palestinian liberationism should not exist at all; foreign support for it should not exist at all; and the goal should be to get the Palestinian people to a point of cultural development where they celebrate and revel in its demise. I think the movement is cartoonishly evil and if North Korea attacked the Palestinian liberationists they would also hold the moral high ground; my opinion of this entire political tendency is very low. Just in this conversation I have compared it to apartheid and Nazism; my point is that extreme violence is justified in destroying it and there can be peace only when its former adherents and international allies recognize the totality of its evil, depravity, and unjustifiability.

That the Palestinians have also committed many terrible crimes against Israel over the years doesn't make Israel righteous.

And what does a "reasonable" person want to happen with the Palestinians if "liberationism" is unreasonable? Expulsion or apartheid?

The solution is post-apartheid: Palestinian liberationist organizations like Fatah and Hamas, like the apartheid National Party before them, should enter a coalition with the Israeli state as its junior partners and act in good faith towards Zionism and the furtherance of the goals of the Israeli state. The alternative is the fate of the National Socialist Party in Germany — nonexistence.

The Germans and white South Africans still exist, but the goals which their governments worked for have been utterly proscribed and cast out of the souls of the people living there. This is what any moral person demands of Palestinian leadership: the total abandonment of their current goals and deliberate action to aid those they have been fighting against. Also to feel sincere happiness about this outcome and to celebrate it for generations.

So you're arguing for a one state solution where everyone has equal rights, which is what happened in South Africa after the fall of the Apartheid regime? Good for your if this is true. As difficult as making it work, it would be better than the present situation.

Yes, but I think to have that happen would require enormous changes in people’s souls. These are not impossible and have happened before, but the current circumstances are such that I really do not expect them.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

https://twitter.com/DrDavidInDC/status/1711126327250534484

That seems so idiotic (on the part of the protester) i wouldn't be surprised if it was some attempt to be an agent provocateur.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

While I understand that a lot of people find it more comfortable to discuss the wider historical issues and contemporary political context, the issue at hand here is a series of deliberate massacres of civilians that have also featured widespread hostage-taking and (yes, this is also undeniably true) sexual assault by a well-armed paramilitary organization. It seems fairly clear that the most appropriate comparison to a recent event would not be anything that has happened in ~The Conflict~ of late, but the massacres at Bucha and some other towns in Ukraine last year, though the massacre at the music festival also has obvious echoes of the attacks in Paris in 2015. I will also add that amongst the victims were Bedouin Arabs (I think the latest figure is somewhere near forty at least) and Nepali and Thai citizens (I had initially written 'workers' here, but the Nepali citizens appear to have been students staying at a kibbutz). What I'm trying to say, of course, is that the concepts of 'taste' and 'decency' do occasionally have a value and it would be for the best if discussion here at least make a few vague nods in that direction. Equally it is obviously not appropriate to post lurid revenge fantasies, no matter how angry you might feel.

[GMantis]

Even if it wasn't long proven (including by Israeli historians) that most  Palestinians were either forced out by the Israeli army or fled out of fear of Israeli attacks, Israel's refusal to allow them to return once the war was over was without any doubt ethnic cleansing.

No, people fleeing because of enemy propaganda does not count as ethnic cleansing. (Ethnic cleansing is what happened to the Israeli settlers in Gaza in 2004, who were moved out by force; by no means here is my position that the Israeli state is totally innocent). Countries also have a right to set their own immigration policy even if that results in ethnic changes; saying otherwise is the preserve of insane Eurabia conspiracy theorists.

No, people fleeing to escape state-sanctioned massacres (unless you claim that Deir Yassin was an invention of Arab propaganda) is very much ethnic cleansing. People being forced out of their homes (it's well documented to have happened) is ethnic cleansing. And not allowing people to return to their homes is also ethnic cleansing. Also, please don't insult my intelligence by pretending that people returning to their homes are immigrants.

It has held - against international law  - Palestinian majority territories for decades while oppressing the locals.

It has not held Palestinian-majority territories against international law. One can argue about the propriety of its hold on the Golan, but there is no recognized state with any claim to territories within the former Mandate other than Israel itself.

The Mandate has not been operative since 1948.

Yes, this is how decolonization works. The Mandate came to an end and Israel is its legal successor entity.

Absolutely not. Israel has never been recognized as the legal successor of the Mandate.

And do you know what decolonization would be? Giving independence to the Arab lands conquered by Britain in WWI. Israel would never have existed without British colonialism.

Israel has no rights under that Mandate (and good for them, because the Mandate also provided for respecting the rights of the Palestinians). No country has ever recognized Israel's right to any claim to the West Bank and in fact Israel has refused to make such a claim because then they'd have to treat the local Palestinians as citizens.

Yes, but the thing is that it belongs to Israel under international law and Israel has never renounced its claim; its final status remains pending a peace agreement. But there is actually no generally recognized existing entity other than Israel that has a claim to it under international law (although there is a partially-recognized Palestinian state, also with ill-defined boundaries); this is why the occupation is legal.

Israel hasn't renounced its claim because it doesn't have one.

Instead they have held the West Bank as a military occupation and massively violated the provisions of military occupations in international law (most obviously by allowing their citizens to settle there).

Right, so they have a claim to the area under international law and since they control the immigration policy they can let their citizens live there, and in fact some of the circumstances in which they’ve denied that right to their citizens actually are violations of international law. My main problem with the Israeli state is that they are far too hostile towards the settlers, in ways that should not be permitted. This pales next to the existence of Palestinian liberationism but ultimately there is a set of crimes the state will have to pay for.

Absolutely not. Israel holds Palestine under military law (this is how they justify trying Palestinians in military courts, for example) and under international law, an occupying power must not settle its own citizens in occupied territory. If Israel were to annex the West Bank, this would be different but then Israel would have to actually treat the Palestinians equally.

Is that what you call the moral high ground?

…yes, I already said that. I think not recognizing the overwhelming moral superiority of the Israeli side is preposterous and comically blind.

A country that would never have existed without ethnic cleansing and which claims that it needs to indefinitely hold millions under blockade or under occupation for its security can't hold the moral high ground, it can merely claim to be the lesser evil. Only someone who assumes that Palestinians deserve less rights than Israelis in principle can support such views.

Yeah, I mean, I have made it very clear that my position is that Palestinian liberationism should not exist at all; foreign support for it should not exist at all; and the goal should be to get the Palestinian people to a point of cultural development where they celebrate and revel in its demise. I think the movement is cartoonishly evil and if North Korea attacked the Palestinian liberationists they would also hold the moral high ground; my opinion of this entire political tendency is very low. Just in this conversation I have compared it to apartheid and Nazism; my point is that extreme violence is justified in destroying it and there can be peace only when its former adherents and international allies recognize the totality of its evil, depravity, and unjustifiability.

Foreign support for a two state solution exists because the alternative - the one-state solution - is even less likely to ever work. For one, Israel has decried such a solution as being de-facto Palestinian supremacy. The Palestinian people might celebrate the end of a two state solution if they get equal rights with Israelis, but Israel is never realistically going to allow that.

That the Palestinians have also committed many terrible crimes against Israel over the years doesn't make Israel righteous.

And what does a "reasonable" person want to happen with the Palestinians if "liberationism" is unreasonable? Expulsion or apartheid?

The solution is post-apartheid: Palestinian liberationist organizations like Fatah and Hamas, like the apartheid National Party before them, should enter a coalition with the Israeli state as its junior partners and act in good faith towards Zionism and the furtherance of the goals of the Israeli state. The alternative is the fate of the National Socialist Party in Germany — nonexistence.

The Germans and white South Africans still exist, but the goals which their governments worked for have been utterly proscribed and cast out of the souls of the people living there. This is what any moral person demands of Palestinian leadership: the total abandonment of their current goals and deliberate action to aid those they have been fighting against. Also to feel sincere happiness about this outcome and to celebrate it for generations.

So you're arguing for a one state solution where everyone has equal rights, which is what happened in South Africa after the fall of the Apartheid regime? Good for your if this is true. As difficult as making it work, it would be better than the present situation.

Yes, but I think to have that happen would require enormous changes in people’s souls. These are not impossible and have happened before, but the current circumstances are such that I really do not expect them.

I think both sides recognizing that the others have just as much right to the land and just as worthy of having basic rights there would be a good start.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

https://twitter.com/DrDavidInDC/status/1711126327250534484

That seems so idiotic (on the part of the protester) i wouldn't be surprised if it was some attempt to be an agent provocateur.

The way the picture is shot makes this look even likelier. It looks like one very self-aware guy trying to create a scene, not something the organizers planned for.

[Kahane's Grave Is A Gender-Neutral Bathroom]

For all that you've called me a Nazi or whatever, I'd like to point out that the father of an Israeli hostage has shown more humanity than all the blue and half of the red avatars on this forum.

Oh don't pretend to both-sides it now.

If you watch a video of someone being gang raped, their head smashed in, and then be dragged through a cheering crowd like a hunting trophy, and you call it "decolonization",

You are just a sadist. Enjoy your airstrike.

[CumbrianLefty]

I don't think there's actually been a political victory for the Palestinians of any kind since...uh...I guess the specifics of Barak's offer at Camp David in 2001? And there hasn't been a military victory in longer; if you don't count the other Arab states -- which you really shouldn't given how anti-Palestinian they were and are -- I think plausibly not since before the establishment of the State of Israel. I'm drawing a post-1930s blank.

Well there is certainly an argument that the 2006 Israeli invasion of Lebanon was basically a failure - even if they had some success in selling it otherwise.

[Meclazine for Israel]

Enjoy your airstrike.

Well, there's certainly heaps of those going on right now. Concrete dust everywhere.

Northern Gaza is copping a hiding now.

Gaza Air Strikes

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IcPPJqKsTR8

I would guess Camera 2 is looking North towards Northern Gaza.

Camera 3 is from Israel looking South.

Camera 4 is southern Gaza.

Israel have launched somewhere in the order of 500 attacks on the Gaza Strip in the last 24 hours.

If you watch and listen carefully, you can hear the massive artillery booms in the background, the missile strikes and the Israeli Jets.

Judging by the video, it looks like the Gazan's in this area are all packing up and heading elsewhere.

[CumbrianLefty]

For all that you've called me a Nazi or whatever, I'd like to point out that the father of an Israeli hostage has shown more humanity than all the blue and half of the red avatars on this forum.
https://twitter.com/tamars/status/1710964645425467880?t=02idx95FiKJyOnDn-J2RZg&a...

Actually, a lot of the worst stuff has come from red avatars.

Whereas quite a few of the blues have been (surprisingly?) reasonable.

[DavidB.]

In Israel there is talk about RZ and Otzma having to leave the government for the sake of national unity, but I would actually argue it's the Haredim who need to go now. You don't deserve to decide on the (way of) deployment of the army if you fight vehemently to have everyone in the country serve in it except for your own community.

[jaichind]

In Israel there is talk about RZ and Otzma having to leave the government for the sake of national unity, but I would actually argue it's the Haredim who need to go now. You don't deserve to decide on the (way of) deployment of the army if you fight vehemently to have everyone in the country serve in it except for your own community.

Who do any of them have to leave?  It would not like "national unity" if certain parties have to "leave"

[jaichind]

Bloomberg reports that Chevron has shut sown its gas field in Tamar on the Israel government's request due to safety concerns.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Haaretz blames Netanyahu for the conflict with Gaza.
https://www.haaretz.com/opinion/editorial/2023-10-08/ty-article-opinion/netanyahu-bears-responsibility/0000018b-0b9d-d8fc-adff-6bfd1c880000

Apologies for the fact it's behind a paywall.

[jaichind]

Pew poll from April 2023

[DavidB.]

Who do any of them have to leave?  It would not like "national unity" if certain parties have to "leave"

Apparently that's some sort of precondition for some of the left-liberal parties, although these things could shift quickly. I also agree with what you say here, though.

[Mechavada]

Two thoughts:

1. Wow this thread sucks.
2. Wow you guys SUCK.

If there's a thread that makes a solid argument for me leaving this forum because of insane ass bullsh**t, this one is it.  I've heard enough genocide fantasies on both sides to make me understand why some folks want to live in Mars.

-The Man

[Aurelius2]

In Israel there is talk about RZ and Otzma having to leave the government for the sake of national unity, but I would actually argue it's the Haredim who need to go now. You don't deserve to decide on the (way of) deployment of the army if you fight vehemently to have everyone in the country serve in it except for your own community.

Yeah, I've been wondering if this will be the moment that would finally force the Haredim to do their fair share to defend and support the country that protects their way of life. I agree with them that Torah study should be part of the fabric of a Jewish state, but certainly not at the expense of literally everything else. Their kollelim don't defend themselves.

Military needs are much higher than they were 3 days ago, and Israel can't afford to have 20% of its Jewish population not contributing.

[Aurelius2]

Haaretz blames Netanyahu for the conflict with Gaza.
https://www.haaretz.com/opinion/editorial/2023-10-08/ty-article-opinion/netanyahu-bears-responsibility/0000018b-0b9d-d8fc-adff-6bfd1c880000

Apologies for the fact it's behind a paywall.

Of course they'd say that.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Haaretz blames Netanyahu for the conflict with Gaza.
https://www.haaretz.com/opinion/editorial/2023-10-08/ty-article-opinion/netanyahu-bears-responsibility/0000018b-0b9d-d8fc-adff-6bfd1c880000

Apologies for the fact it's behind a paywall.

Of course they'd say that.

Well, they would have (primarily self-interested) reasons to. But I do wonder how much things like this could tell us about the dynamics within Israel. Bibi is not as strongly positioned now as Bush was in 2001.

[Velasco]

Well, here you have the genocidal rhetoric of a fascist government. "Human animals", untermensch. Two millions of civilians trapped in Gaza, human beings treated like beasts in a cage. Barbarism unfolding

https://twitter.com/manniefabian/status/1711311030083563925?t=nMkOSDsgtc01tkbvhJ...

[WalterWhite]

There will be a refugee crisis because of this war, like there is with EVERY war. I imagine the Biden administration would be very welcoming of refugees (like most Democrats are), but it will probably be more of a mixed bag in Europe. In either case, it is essential that governments do not repeat the mistake they made in WWII of denying refugees entering their countries.

[CumbrianLefty]

Yes, Hamas are animals. Amalekites, even. The videos they themselves released all weekend show this quite clearly.

Dehumanising rhetoric is how we beat dehumanising rhetoric, well done.

[Aurelius2]

https://twitter.com/hqsatmar/status/1711196451785626020?s=46&t=w0MIDrmNnSlDz...

Satmar is a fringe sect that burns Israeli flags every year and whose founding rebbe taught that the Holocaust was God's punishment for Zionism. There is unprecedented Jewish unity right now.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

https://twitter.com/GoodGrimey/status/1711041078663524736?t=0ieMrYjpVOSjOoxAmdMr...
https://twitter.com/quendergeer/status/1711345809856340397?s=20
https://twitter.com/tompars/status/1711347609799991402?s=20
Israel benefits quite a bit from the fact that most people don't know Hebrew.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

There will be a refugee crisis because of this war, like there is with EVERY war. I imagine the Biden administration would be very welcoming of refugees (like most Democrats are), but it will probably be more of a mixed bag in Europe. In either case, it is essential that governments do not repeat the mistake they made in WWII of denying refugees entering their countries.

In America there would likely be many raising concerns about terrorism in order to leverage this as a wedge issue. I kinda doubt America would take a particularly large number of them. In a worst case scenario, most likely Turkey would take the most, Canada taking quite a lot, with some possibly going to Russia and a large number going to willing EU countries.