Merged Gaza just launched an unprovoked attack on Israel

[Tigers!]

Citation please.

here you go - this is what Tigers! was talking about:




What an atnisemetic bitch cunt. amirite?

I do not bother with Instagram but I assume it refers to the letter put out by Wong from her office.
Such a mealy mouthed response to an invasion.

 

[ZiprHead]

How about a few hundred words saying this is what needs to be done to stop Hamas doing another Oct 7th?

Do you really think you could stop another October 7th? It was done with small arms and motorcycles. It could easily be repeated.

The problem is that Israel is held to a standard that Hamas/Hezbollah et. al are not.
When Hamas/Hezbollah do what they do there is sighing, clutching of pearls, attack of vapours etc. but nothing is done.
When Israel responds we get calls of possible war crimes, disproportionate response, 'haul them to the Hague', sanctions etc. Why the difference?

Hamas is dog bites man. Israel is man bites dog.

So? The fact that evil is normal doesn't make it not evil.

Never said it wasn't.

 

[Tigers!]

It is indeed reasonable to hold governments responsible, so why is Hamas held to no standard while Israel is held to impossible standards? I cannot help but see hypocrisy and antisemitism as core elements of this support.

I keep seeing the meme of “Hamas is not held accountable” but it is a fiction. It is designated as a terrorist organization by the US, the EU, Canada, and many other nations. There are sanctions, and continual assassinations. The US subsidizes Israel’s military.

What more is the world supposed to do? Stay mute regardless whatever the gov’t of Israel chooses to do?

Your last line is the problem. Its all about Israel isn't it?

Well, the topic is Israel, so Israel should be expected to come up. Laughing Dog makes a viable opinion indicating that there is a tremendous amount of support for Israel and that criticism a decision by the Israeli military or Government isn't defaulting to anti-Semitism.

I have never claimed that criticism of Israel military or govt is anti-semitic. There is much to criticise.
But downplaying Hamas' atrocities is not good either.
When you constantly blame one side yet effectively ignore the other's actions or provide any practical solutions you are just being seen to be partisan and not really interested in helping.

People love to use terms of bigotry to shut other people up. The people doing this blame blacks for doing the same thing, calling all things "racism" when it is just "disparate outcomes".

You do not have to stay mute but you have spent 1000's of words castigating Israel and the Israeli response.

I wrote after 9/11 that in the future the misery must be remembered as the attack on 9/11, not our response to it. Israel's response to Hamas became somewhat repetitive and pointless after 18+ months. The West gave Israel a blank check. Even Canada looked the other way after 10/7. But Netanyahu's military response was clearly leading to a no where goal. And after one or two years, at some point, need to stop because what has been achieved? Mossad's attack on Hezbollah was substantial and relatively clean. And yet Hezbollah still exists. Israel has failed in eradicating Hezbollah and Hamas with bombs, missiles, and bullets.

How about a few hundred words saying this is what needs to be done to stop Hamas doing another Oct 7th? Or what needs to be done to stop Hezbollah shelling northern Israel?

Getting Iran to stop funding it.

That is the 1st step.

And oddly enough, there is an agreement that could have involved that.

Yes and too many fools and knaves are involved.

Of which the GOP and Trump have not put a dyne of pressure on Iran to do that! laughing dog is a red herring. What laughing dog says here is irrelevant. The GOP and Trump have a moment in which they could press for this, and they aren't touching it with a 1000 meter long pole. All this bullshit about how the liberals are anti-Semites, and we see where the GOP actually stands on Israel!

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Citation please.

here you go - this is what Tigers! was talking about:




What an atnisemetic bitch cunt. amirite?

I do not bother with Instagram but I assume it refers to the letter put out by Wong from her office.
Such a mealy mouthed response to an invasion.

Did you have a point or are you just using your imagination to make a point.

 

[Tigers!]

I think that you're trying to find the middle road. Which I agree. The problem is that the people running Israel; the people running Gaza; the people running Iran are all right wingers who do not want peace. I do think that Israel's government will moderate in their next election. But I see no chance of that in Iran or Gaza. So war will continue. Will we ever have a time similar to October 23, 1998 when two sides (Arafat and a moderate Israeli government) came so close to a peace agreement? Probably not.

Arafat couldn't make peace. That's why he walked away.

And that was tragedy that is still unfolding.

 

[ZiprHead]

How about a few hundred words saying this is what needs to be done to stop Hamas doing another Oct 7th?

Do you really think you could stop another October 7th? It was done with small arms and motorcycles. It could easily be repeated.

So Israel just has to put up with the possibility of such attacks forever?

What's your alternative?

 

[Tigers!]

It is indeed reasonable to hold governments responsible, so why is Hamas held to no standard while Israel is held to impossible standards? I cannot help but see hypocrisy and antisemitism as core elements of this support.

If the keys (peace) aren't under the streetlight (Israel) then there's no hope of finding them. And people will engage in considerable contortions to avoid accepting something is a no-win situation.

The situation may very well be a no-win scenario in the sense that there is no perfect outcome. But "no perfect outcome" and "no possible improvement" aren't the same thing.

History is full of conflicts that weren't solved so much as managed, contained, or gradually improved through imperfect compromises. How do you think those improvements happened? In many cases, the stronger side, or the side that emerged victorious, eventually took steps to improve conditions after the conflict. But just as importantly, the other side had to be willing to participate in a new reality rather than continue the fight indefinitely.

With Hamas not willing to accept Israel's existence nor the presence of Jews in the ME there is no viable side for Israel or anyone else, to deal with.

 

[Tigers!]

It is indeed reasonable to hold governments responsible, so why is Hamas held to no standard while Israel is held to impossible standards? I cannot help but see hypocrisy and antisemitism as core elements of this support.

I keep seeing the meme of “Hamas is not held accountable” but it is a fiction. It is designated as a terrorist organization by the US, the EU, Canada, and many other nations. There are sanctions, and continual assassinations. The US subsidizes Israel’s military.

What more is the world supposed to do? Stay mute regardless whatever the gov’t of Israel chooses to do?

But none of that meaningfully curtails Hamas. The only meaningful pressure is applied to Israel.

How would the world meaningfully pressure a terrorist group? Please reveal the secret so that the world can immediately and effectively deal with every terrorist group.

IIRC once the USA became serious about stopping funding to the IRA they began to discuss peace.
Stop Iran's funding of Hezbollah and Hams and let's see what happens.
Continued Military pressure on them is the other side of the vice.
But only Israel will do that. No one else will.

BTW, how has world pressure meaningfully curtailed Israel in Gaza?

You think that the hardliners in the Israeli govt were not prepared to fling all the Gazans out? It did not happen due to world pressure.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I feel like you're looking at this through a pretty extreme lens. A lot of people fiercely oppose Hamas, felt sickened by October 7, and stand with Iranian protestors, yet they still believe Palestinians have a right to their own future and that Israel's government isn't above criticism. You seem to be reducing this to a binary choice between supporting human rights and condemning terrorism, when it's entirely possible to do both.

No. You are looking at a fantasy of peaceful coexistence, but the Palestinian cause is and always has been one of genocide.

This is exactly the kind of bullshit I'm talking about.

Where did I mention peaceful coexistence? Nowhere. You completely made that up and argued against something I never said.

What's bizarre is that people on this forum can post complete fiction with zero evidence, invent positions for other people, and somehow that's considered acceptable. But the moment someone points out that it's a flat-out lie, suddenly that's the problem?

If you're going to disagree with me, at least respond to what I actually wrote instead of arguing with a version you invented. Again.

How many times do I have to repeat this?

So you want genocide? Because that's what you get if you support the Palestinian cause but aren't after peaceful coexistence.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I think part of the communication breakdown is that many of the people protesting Israel in the United States, particularly those waving the Palestinian flag rather than a Hamas flag, believe they are protesting what they see as a humanitarian catastrophe or genocide. They are not necessarily advocating for the destruction of Israel, the death of Jews, or the objectives espoused by Hamas or Hezbollah.

Yeah. It's support for a fantasy of peaceful coexistence.

If I understand your position correctly, you're arguing that the practical end result of these protests could be to weaken Israel's ability to fight Hamas, ultimately benefiting an organization that openly seeks Israel's destruction. That's a legitimate concern to raise, even if not everyone agrees with the conclusion.

It's exactly what happens. By far the biggest weapon Hamas has is dead civilians. The behavior of both sides makes no sense unless you understand this.

My question is what comes next. Let's assume Israel succeeds in eliminating Hamas as a governing and military force in Gaza. How does Israel prevent another Hamas from emerging in five, ten, or twenty years? Military victories can remove organizations, but they don't necessarily eliminate the conditions that allow new ones to form.

Whatever the answer is, it probably can't be a return to previous approaches. If the goal is long-term security, there has to be a strategy beyond defeating Hamas today and hoping something similar doesn't rise in its place tomorrow.

Israel knows there is no peace so long as someone is funding the terror. Terror movements are never defeated so long as their sponsor is untouched. Israel's objective is to delay the next 10/7.

 

[laughing dog]

It is indeed reasonable to hold governments responsible, so why is Hamas held to no standard while Israel is held to impossible standards? I cannot help but see hypocrisy and antisemitism as core elements of this support.

I keep seeing the meme of “Hamas is not held accountable” but it is a fiction. It is designated as a terrorist organization by the US, the EU, Canada, and many other nations. There are sanctions, and continual assassinations. The US subsidizes Israel’s military.

What more is the world supposed to do? Stay mute regardless whatever the gov’t of Israel chooses to do?

But none of that meaningfully curtails Hamas. The only meaningful pressure is applied to Israel.

How would the world meaningfully pressure a terrorist group? Please reveal the secret so that the world can immediately and effectively deal with every terrorist group.

IIRC once the USA became serious about stopping funding to the IRA they began to discuss peace.
Stop Iran's funding of Hezbollah and Hams and let's see what happens.
Continued Military pressure on them is the other side of the vice.
But only Israel will do that. No one else will.

And how does the world stop Iran's funding of terrorists?

BTW, how has world pressure meaningfully curtailed Israel in Gaza?

You think that the hardliners in the Israeli govt were not prepared to fling all the Gazans out? It did not happen due to world pressure.

Interesting, you are effectively saying that world pressure kept Israel from the complete ethnic cleansing of Gazans.

 

[laughing dog]

It is indeed reasonable to hold governments responsible, so why is Hamas held to no standard while Israel is held to impossible standards? I cannot help but see hypocrisy and antisemitism as core elements of this support.

I keep seeing the meme of “Hamas is not held accountable” but it is a fiction. It is designated as a terrorist organization by the US, the EU, Canada, and many other nations. There are sanctions, and continual assassinations. The US subsidizes Israel’s military.

What more is the world supposed to do? Stay mute regardless whatever the gov’t of Israel chooses to do?

Your last line is the problem. Its all about Israel isn't it?
You do not have to stay mute but you have spent 1000's of words castigating Israel and the Israeli response.
How about a few hundred words saying this is what needs to be done to stop Hamas doing another Oct 7th? Or what needs to be done to stop Hezbollah shelling northern Israel?
Designating Hamas as terrorist organisation did not prevent Oct 7th.

You didn’t answer either of my questions. They weren’t rhetorical. I wonder why.

I did answer "Stay mute .....".

Read you own words. You wrote “You don’t have to stay mute”. Which doesn’t answer the question about the world, because the workd doesn’t stay mute.

For a change how about actually reading my words rather than responding to what you think I wrote or wanted me to write.

Take your own advice.

Tell us - how can we (i.e. not Israel) stop Hamas doing what Hamas does best (killing Jews)?

You still haven’t answered my actual question.

Looking back your question was "What is the world supposed to do? Stay mute regardless whatever the gov’t of Israel chooses to do?"
You and many others have not stayed mute. This thread and your contributions are evidence of that. Your raging at Israel is duly noted. That is the 2nd part of your question already answered.

I no more rage at Israel than you do at innocent Gazans, so you can stop with the misrepresentation.
If the 2nd part of my question is answered, you are saying that the world is supposed to engage in "raging at Israel". Somehow, I don't think that is what you meant.

As to the 1st part "What is the world supposed to do?". Are you referring to Israel, Hamas or both?
The world has already shown what it will do to Israel.

Both, and that does not answer what the world is supposed to do.

Still waiting for the world's response to Hamas. Apart from wailing and gnashing of teeth that is.
You can start. What should the world do about Hamas?

It is true that you have responded to my questions, albeit with nonsensical responses. Ideally, the world would cut off armaments to Hamas, and try to show them that they are better off with peace than violence. However, there is always someone willing to interrupt the peace process (which will take a long time in order to install the requisite amount of trust among all parties) with a senseless act of violence.

I have no hope for peace in that region during my lifetime nor during my granddaughters. The best I can foresee is to minimize the killing of non-combatants.

 

[laughing dog]

So you want genocide? Because that's what you get if you support the Palestinian cause but aren't after peaceful coexistence.

We didn't have peaceful coexistence with the USSR, but neither side was a victim of genocide. So, your conclusion seems a bit farfetched, unless you are fearful that Israel who clearly have the means to engage in genocide will be the one to be successful.

 

[Gospel]

With Hamas not willing to accept Israel's existence nor the presence of Jews in the ME there is no viable side for Israel or anyone else, to deal with.

Isn't that the entire rationale behind removing Hamas from power in Gaza?

If Hamas is unwilling to accept Israel's existence and is committed to perpetual conflict, then they're obviously not a viable negotiating partner. That's precisely why I support efforts to remove Hamas from power and replace it with a leadership that is at least capable of pursuing coexistence.

And since Loren seems determined to ignore this point: yes, Israel's stated position is that peaceful coexistence is possible without regimes like Hamas and Hezbollah in power. I happen to agree with that objective. Do I personally think achieving it will be easy, or even likely? No. But I support the effort to try.

What exactly is objectionable about that? If the alternative is leaving organizations in power whose stated goals include the destruction of Israel and endless conflict, then what is the competing solution supposed to be?

Your constant tantrums about this not being a perfect world just makes me want to ask: where did the world touch you?

 

[Gospel]

Yeah. It's support for a fantasy of peaceful coexistence.

If Israel's stated objective is to remove Hamas and help establish a viable Palestinian leadership capable of coexistence, then calling peaceful coexistence a "fantasy" sounds less like support for Israel and more like a rejection of Israel's own stated goals.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

It is indeed reasonable to hold governments responsible, so why is Hamas held to no standard while Israel is held to impossible standards? I cannot help but see hypocrisy and antisemitism as core elements of this support.

If the keys (peace) aren't under the streetlight (Israel) then there's no hope of finding them. And people will engage in considerable contortions to avoid accepting something is a no-win situation.

The situation may very well be a no-win scenario in the sense that there is no perfect outcome. But "no perfect outcome" and "no possible improvement" aren't the same thing.

History is full of conflicts that weren't solved so much as managed, contained, or gradually improved through imperfect compromises. How do you think those improvements happened? In many cases, the stronger side, or the side that emerged victorious, eventually took steps to improve conditions after the conflict. But just as importantly, the other side had to be willing to participate in a new reality rather than continue the fight indefinitely.

And the second half of this is not remotely reality. The Palestinians are simply not powerful enough to resist the terror money, Iran has no interest in peace.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I feel like you're looking at this through a pretty extreme lens. A lot of people fiercely oppose Hamas, felt sickened by October 7, and stand with Iranian protestors, yet they still believe Palestinians have a right to their own future and that Israel's government isn't above criticism. You seem to be reducing this to a binary choice between supporting human rights and condemning terrorism, when it's entirely possible to do both.

No. You are looking at a fantasy of peaceful coexistence, but the Palestinian Hamas cause is and always has been one of genocide.

FTFY

1948 was about genocide.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

It is indeed reasonable to hold governments responsible, so why is Hamas held to no standard while Israel is held to impossible standards? I cannot help but see hypocrisy and antisemitism as core elements of this support.

I keep seeing the meme of “Hamas is not held accountable” but it is a fiction. It is designated as a terrorist organization by the US, the EU, Canada, and many other nations. There are sanctions, and continual assassinations. The US subsidizes Israel’s military.

What more is the world supposed to do? Stay mute regardless whatever the gov’t of Israel chooses to do?

But none of that meaningfully curtails Hamas. The only meaningful pressure is applied to Israel.

How would the world meaningfully pressure a terrorist group? Please reveal the secret so that the world can immediately and effectively deal with every terrorist group.

BTW, how has world pressure meaningfully curtailed Israel in Gaza?

Doesn't change the fact that you're proposing a course of action because it's the only thing you can do, not whether it will actually make the problem better. The need to do something is behind so much wrongdoing. This is a case where doing nothing is a lot better than doing the wrong thing.

And Israel wasn't substantially curtailed in this case because of the hostages. That was too much to tolerate.

 

[laughing dog]

It is indeed reasonable to hold governments responsible, so why is Hamas held to no standard while Israel is held to impossible standards? I cannot help but see hypocrisy and antisemitism as core elements of this support.

I keep seeing the meme of “Hamas is not held accountable” but it is a fiction. It is designated as a terrorist organization by the US, the EU, Canada, and many other nations. There are sanctions, and continual assassinations. The US subsidizes Israel’s military.

What more is the world supposed to do? Stay mute regardless whatever the gov’t of Israel chooses to do?

But none of that meaningfully curtails Hamas. The only meaningful pressure is applied to Israel.

How would the world meaningfully pressure a terrorist group? Please reveal the secret so that the world can immediately and effectively deal with every terrorist group.

BTW, how has world pressure meaningfully curtailed Israel in Gaza?

Doesn't change the fact that you're proposing a course of action because it's the only thing you can do, not whether it will actually make the problem better. The need to do something is behind so much wrongdoing. This is a case where doing nothing is a lot better than doing the wrong thing.

Pretty ironic response if you actually thought about it.

And Israel wasn't substantially curtailed in this case because of the hostages. That was too much to tolerate.

So world pressure is pointless, so whine about it?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

With respect to future deterrence, It's impossible to say what will prevent future violence. Hamas, unlike Egypt and Jordan cannot and should not be counted on to act in good faith.

I think one solution would be to create DMZ several kilometers wide. It's worked in Korea for 70 years.

At some point it needs to be accepted that radical Islamists will never be willing to make peace with Israel.

This is exactly the kind of conversation I'd rather see more of. These are the discussions people who genuinely care about the safety, security, and long-term future of Israelis and Palestinians should be having.

Frankly, people who spend more time hurling accusations than discussing actual solutions don't strike me as particularly concerned with Israel at all. Israel is a nation of real people facing real security issues being used as a rhetorical shield to attack anyone who doesn't fall in line with a particular viewpoint.

The problem is that discussing "solutions" while ignoring the Islamists doesn't produce useful answers. You're after an end point that won't exist.

For my part, I largely agree with Israel's stated position on what Gaza should look like after Hamas is removed from power. Given the events of October 7th and the decades of rocket attacks, terrorism, and failed peace efforts that preceded it, I think it is entirely reasonable for Israelis to prioritize security above all else.

This makes sense to me:

• Hamas should be dismantled and disarmed.
• Hamas should not be permitted to govern Gaza in any form.
• Israel should maintain security responsibility for the foreseeable future to prevent another October 7th-style attack.
• Gaza should eventually be administered by Palestinian actors who are not affiliated with Hamas or other terrorist organizations.
• Any future governing structure should demonstrate both the ability and willingness to coexist peacefully before being entrusted with greater autonomy

And you think there's actually a path to accomplishing anything on this list?!

• .

It's worth noting that "coexist peacefully" was apparently meant as an insult when Loren accused me of using the term.

The problem is with the notion that if you remove Israeli provocations you'll have peace.

That said, I would hope the first and last points evolve over time. Ideally, as trust is built, violence decreases, and stable institutions emerge, Israel's direct security involvement could gradually diminish and Palestinians could move toward greater self-governance and, under the right conditions, eventual independence. But expecting Israel to simply hand over control immediately after the deadliest attack in its history seems detached from political and security realities.

And what do you propose to do to stop the rise of a new Hamas? The money Iran pours into terror will simply overwhelm them.

These are the conversations worth having. Could a DMZ work? What security guarantees would be required? How should reconstruction be handled? What incentives would encourage peace? What would a realistic pathway toward Palestinian self-government look like? How do you prevent Hamas 2.0 from emerging a decade from now?

DMZ? Israel tried that last time. Defined a zone on the border that nobody would enter. Hamas forced families into it until Israel stopped shooting them, effectively removing the DMZ.

And there's no way Israel is going to accept anyone's security guarantees. Once again, tried and failed--UNIFIL. They do absolutely nothing about Hezbollah, in times of conflict their cameras are used by Hezbollah and they've kept their people out there as human shields.

Those questions are infinitely more productive than the endless purity tests and ideological witch hunts that dominate these threads from just two members.

I have no interest in supporting Hamas. I also have no interest in pretending Israel's security concerns are imaginary. What I am interested in is discussing practical ways to reduce future violence, improve security, and create conditions where fewer people die on both sides.

That seems infinitely more worthwhile than watching Loren and DrZoidberg spend another hundred posts arguing over who possesses the correct ideological membership card this week.

And every time you scream about supposed war crimes in Gaza you're aiding Hamas.