Merged Gaza just launched an unprovoked attack on Israel

Jimmy Higgins said:

Loren Pechtel said:

Jimmy Higgins said:

zorq said:

Do you think Israel would ever choose to lose willingly if winning proved to be too costly in human life or their own humanity?

Israel seems willing to sacrifice everyone and everything in order to win. How are they different?

Click to expand...

I think that is overstepping it a bit. Israel has not demonstrated, in my opinion, a scorched Earth technique. I think the trouble is Israel is managing Gaza like it is a military and religious issue instead of a political one, and Israel isn't alone with that. Sadly, Trump fucked up the Iran deal which would have been a useful first step for a dual pronged Iranian/Saudi rework of the Middle East. But the Saudis didn't want the US getting closer to Iran. Indeed, the trouble in the Middle East stems from the Middle East itself and the inter-political/religious issues amongst themselves. And we kow it isn't even that unified within the borders, hence the authoritarian stuff to both keep out democratic/modernization dissent and terrorism.

Israel is a useful distraction for them. It is one of those, 'they don't need an actual outcome' for it to work in their interests. They just need a distraction.

Ultimately what happens in Palestine, no one cares about. Look at Syria. You see Iran and Saudi Arabia lining up to invest in it? The Middle East is funny. They hate each other as much as they hate us.

Click to expand...

"Trouble is"?? Israel is managing Gaza as a military issue because it is one. It's not a political issue as Gaza is a puppet, not an independent actor.

Click to expand...

And in being a puppet, you accept it is actually a political issue.

Click to expand...

You can't make peace with a puppet, only with the puppetmaster. And I don't see Iran at the negotiating table.

Jimmy Higgins said:

Loren Pechtel said:

As for the Iran deal--The Felon was a stopped clock there. Iran wasn't remotely complying with the agreement. Just look at the recent strike: Israel hit nuclear facilities in Iran that were "unknown". If Israel knew they were there they weren't unknown, it's just they were being swept under the rug.

Click to expand...

Yes, I know you think that. The goal with the deal was camel nose under the tent into Iran. That deal wasn't some sort of "Mission Accomplished", we stopped their nuclear program. It was a long-term first step aimed at improving access for intelligence, among other things. Saudi Arabia, however, doesn't want the US to have better relations with an oil rich Shi'ite nation. Let us remember which nation the people and money that allowed 9/11 to happen came from. It wasn't Iran.

Click to expand...

We stopped? Then what was under those Israeli strikes that people are saying were nuclear stuff? Sites that supposedly didn't exist under the original deal that did absolutely nothing if Iran denied a site was nuclear.

You've been complaining about Zoidberg's use of "antisemite", but you're doing exactly what he's talking about. The idea that Iran has a nuclear program must be Israeli propaganda, therefore Israel didn't actually blow up any nuclear sites. You're deciding the truth based on whether it's the Jews or not.

Jimmy Higgins said:

Loren Pechtel said:

I do agree that Israel is an EastAsia. But they need the EastAsia war! Iran gains by stirring up as much shit as they can, that doesn't mean we can ignore their shit-stirring.

Click to expand...

The whole point is that Iranians need to overthrow their despotic religious tyranny. That happens with The West leaching into Iran. That happens by agreements between the US and Iran, which Trump fucked up and set us back decades.

Click to expand...

Iran was playing us for fools. It's the big problem with the Democrats--so easy to lead down the path of useless diplomacy.

Jimmy Higgins said:

Peace in Israel, requires peace with Iran. We ain't going to war with Iran, so that provides us with fewer options. Options that take time, investment, diplomacy. Obama got it rolling on the long path, and the GOP/Sauds fucked it up.

Click to expand...

Obama was a sucker. Nothing meaningful happened.

laughing dog said:

You have not referenced a single quote of mine. Not one. Either you don’t understand what evidence is or you don’t have any. All you need to do is produce a quote of mine (hopefully in context) that leads you to your conclusion but only if you wish to your post taken seriously instead of being viewed as the rantings of a raving bigot.

My maternal great grandparents and great uncle were killed by Nazis because they were Jews. Frankly, if we were discussing this in person, after the 2nd slander, I’d be facing criminal charges.

Click to expand...

How about your continual demand that Israel find better ways of protecting civilians despite there being no indication that there is any better answer? They're already the world's best and you act as if they are atrocious.

Note that running people in circles until they get tired of responding is not a rebuttal.

Don2 (Don1 Revised) said:

DrZoidberg said:

If someone has a problem with Israel for no reason, that only leaves one reason.

Click to expand...

If there is no reason, then they form opinions randomly. They cannot have the "one reason" you referenced. 1 =/= 0

Click to expand...

It should be obvious he meant "no stated reason". People consistently have a problem with Israel for invalid reasons. That means either they are actually simply opposed to Israel (and the antisemite label fits) or they are duped by the propaganda and are unknowing antisemites.

steve_bank said:

I listened to a BBC report that focused on soldiers soldiers refusing to fight in Gaza. A small number. In one case an order was refused to destroy a Palestinian home for no good reason. Active soldiers who refuse to fight are quietly being allowed to leave, conscientious objectors are going to jail.

Click to expand...

"without reason". No, an order to destroy a particular house would come about because the occupants refused to show that it wasn't booby-trapped. Thus by far the likely conclusion is that it is booby-trapped. Israel doesn't have the resources to deal with all the booby-traps, they simply destroy anything that's booby-trapped.

Loren Pechtel said:

Iran was playing us for fools. It's the big problem with the Democrats--so easy to lead down the path of useless diplomacy.

Click to expand...

Loren Pechtel said:

Obama was a sucker. Nothing meaningful happened

Click to expand...

Obama's plan came to nothing because it was sabotaged by the Teaparty obstructionists in Congress. Then Trump promised and delivered the coup de gras.

The USA gave Iran very good reasons to believe that they need a nuclear deterrent to protect themselves from US. And that we cannot be trusted to keep an agreement longer than a political cycle.

The reason that Iran launched into a nuclear deterrent program is easy to understand. Bush II put them on a list, The Axis of Evil, in his first State of the Union address. He lumped them in with Iraq and North Korea. NK pulled a nuclear deterrent out of their ass. We left them alone, their tyrant died peacefully in bed having delivered the power to his son. Iraq had no such deterrent, we bombed the crap out of them. Their tyrant died at the end of a noose after his sons were killed. Iran learned the obvious lesson.
Get nukes or the USA will destroy you!

Obama tried to end that. But the USA wouldn't allow it and so the Iranians continue to protect themselves from US.
Tom

Loren Pechtel said:

People consistently have a problem with Israel for invalid reasons. That means either they are actually simply opposed to Israel (and the antisemite label fits) or they are duped by the propaganda and are unknowing antisemites.

Click to expand...

What is an "unknowing antisemite"? Someone who hates the Jews but doesn't know he hates them?

DrZoidberg said:

Despite this they're being criticised in western press, holding Israel to impossible standards. Not only that, but the behaviour of Hamas, while accurately reported by the Western press, (if you read carefully) doesn't seem to cause anyone to react and condemn Hamas. Actions have consequences. If a beligerent behaves like Hamas their oponent has to respond to counter it. Which Hamas is using to manipulate western public opinion and western press.

Click to expand...

I wouldn't even say Hamas is accurately reported. The propaganda version goes out first, rarely is their any retraction as it becomes apparent that the original was false. The news (all news) is highly biased towards showing bad things happened, anywhere and everywhere. When the story is big enough there may be some discussion of it being wrong, but most such cases are never retracted. The problem is particularly bad in Gaza where there is both a huge amount of disinformation and the fact that news organizations have a considerable tendency to choose to report propaganda over not having any access to report.

DrZoidberg said:

This conflict has brought home just how antisemtic the world is. And it makes me very uncomfortable. The Jews just can't get a break.

Click to expand...

There's nothing unusual in it. It's just the biases are more in your face.

DrZoidberg said:

Another factor that few people react to is just how preposterously unrealistic Palestinian demands are. Liberal Palestinians want to be set up as a Muslim master race in Israel. That's their baseline demand. While more conservative Palestinians want the Jews wiped out. This is rarely commented on. Why would Israel negotiate with people like that? What could possible come out of it? And fuck the Oslo accord. The Palestinians never respected it. It was just a way for them to move the line one step closer to their end goal, the eradication of Israel.

Click to expand...

Yup, more examples of the antisemitism at work. They have told us often enough what they want but people continue to blame Israel for supposedly causing the problem.

DrZoidberg said:

And here's a news flash, on average Palestinians aren't a modern liberal western community. They are Muslim. They have different values. They have the same values that led to every Arab spring uprising going to shit. For whatever reason Arabs/Muslims aren't so good at democracy and respecting liberal values. Muslim culture seems to be inherently imperialistic. A relentless unstoppable force that continuously pushes toward world domination. My Jewish Israeli ex-wife said that many Israelis see the the Muslims as weeds that need to be trimmed now and again. I now understand what she meant. If you're dealing with unreasonable people, there's just no point to engage with them.

Click to expand...

Every Arab Spring uprising went to shit because the fundies were poised to take over. It says nothing about the people, but rather the size of the effort to "restore" Islamic power. Just look at some of the conservative voters on here--we see the same thing, supporting The Felon while pretending all the bad things aren't going to happen.

DrZoidberg said:

Bottom line, the progressive west are woefully naive when it comes to the Middle-East. We just don't seem to deal well with expantiostic imperialists today. Like Putin. Or China. Stalin, Musselini or Hitler. Or queen Victoria. This attitude and behaviour isn't new. We in the west just struggle to grasp that what we perceive is the norm, western liberal progressive values, just isn't universally held beliefs. I think the pro-Palestinian voices in this thread have trouble with accepting that.

Click to expand...

It's the standard problem that the liberals think the world is a good place and everything can be resolved by enough jaw jaw. Not that the conservatives are any better, they act as if everything can be resolved by enough pew pew. Way too polarized, neither one gets it right.

Most things can be resolved by jaw jaw but when the minimum demand of A exceeds the maximum tolerable by B it's only going to be resolved by pew pew.

Gospel said:

DrZoidberg said:

You mean accept all the evidence I have referenced? Sorry, not sorry, for making you face the reality of your position

Click to expand...

I’d rather be labeled antisemitic than be someone who condones the killing of children. You condone the killing of children. Both you and TomC.

Click to expand...

It cuts both ways. Your demand that Israel not defend itself is a de-facto condoning of Hamas killing Israeli children. You get to pretend nothing bad will happen but history shows otherwise. The "better" Israel behaves the more of it's people die. I would prefer nobody dies, but if it comes down to it I would prefer the deaths to be amongst the attackers rather than the defenders.

Loren Pechtel said:

Don2 (Don1 Revised) said:

DrZoidberg said:

If someone has a problem with Israel for no reason, that only leaves one reason.

Click to expand...

If there is no reason, then they form opinions randomly. They cannot have the "one reason" you referenced. 1 =/= 0

Click to expand...

It should be obvious he meant "no stated reason".

Click to expand...

It should be obvious that he was trying to, but utterly failing, to use the logic present in Sherlock Holmes' famous quote, and that further my very basic feedback was there to elicit a response that would require him to expound in more detail with more descriptors that once done would show the flaws in his logic. A claim that a mere extra word of "stated" makes his original proposition into a solid inference is not merely over-simplified, but also wrong on its face...while it probably works for like-minded people who are ready to jump to conclusions of anti-semitism, it simply does not afford anyone the benefit of doubt that should be afforded in this forum.

Gospel said:

I understand that you believe the deaths of children in Gaza are entirely the fault of Hamas. I agree that Hamas's actions, such as using civilians as shields, are reprehensible and contribute to the suffering of innocents. However, we cannot overlook the broader reality of what this argument implies.

When you argue the deaths of children are "entirely" the fault of Hamas, you risk absolving the IDF of any moral responsibility for the outcomes of their actions. It’s a fact that the IDF chooses when and where to strike. These choices, even in the face of a ruthless adversary like Hamas, result in the deaths of innocent children. If the IDF knows that their actions will likely lead to children casualties and they proceed anyway, responsibility cannot be placed on Hamas alone.

Click to expand...

No. We are expecting Israel to behave in the best fashion it reasonably can--we aren't blaming Israel because we recognize they are meeting this standard.

Gospel said:

Imagine this scenario: if someone deliberately places a child in harm’s way, and another person knowingly shoots through the child to hit their target, does the shooter bear no responsibility for the child's death? Most would argue that both parties hold responsibility, the one using the child as a shield and the one who made the deliberate choice to shoot, knowing the likely outcome.

Click to expand...

It comes down to the overall outcome. Which path kills fewer innocents?

Gospel said:

Blaming Hamas entirely also risks dehumanizing the victims, these children, by treating their deaths as an inevitable collateral damage of war. But every child killed is a tragedy, a life lost that could have been spared with greater care and restraint. This isn't to minimize the challenges of fighting a group like Hamas, but to ask: is there not a shared duty to avoid children casualties, even under the most difficult circumstances?

Click to expand...

And here's where you completely go off the rails: "that could have been spared with greater care and restraint". You have no evidence of this, it's just the liberal faith that there must be a good answer and a failure to find it is the fault of the side with the most perceived power.

Gospel said:

Placing all the blame on Hamas shifts focus away from the harm caused by the very actions of those carrying out the strikes. It implicitly suggests that as long as Hamas is at fault, any outcome, even the killing of children, is justifiable. But can we really accept that? Is this the standard we want to uphold for ourselves, for humanity?

The death of children, no matter the circumstances, should cause us to pause, to question, and to demand better from everyone involved. It is not enough to point fingers. Unless of course you're ok with killing children to get to Hamas. Clearly both you DrZoidberg and TomC are.

Click to expand...

This is a demand to deny unpleasant reality. It's not that we are ok with killing children, but that we recognize there are nothing but terrible choices.

Alternative history: The Air Force was able to scramble faster. Do they knock down the second and third planes? It would be absolute horror for the pilots who had to shoot but it would have been the right thing to do. Should the pilots of the unarmed planes have kamikazed? (Moot, as the point of interception was on the far side of New York.)

Gospel said:

I understand that some actions, though tragic in the short term, are often justified as a means to prevent even greater loss of life over time. The U.S. decision to drop atomic bombs on Japan is frequently framed in this way: as a swift conclusion to the war that avoided a prolonged conflict potentially costing millions more lives. However, even if we accept this reasoning, it does not diminish the profound moral tragedy of the innocent lives lost.

Click to expand...

Life sometimes demands brutal choices.

Despite all the revisionism it's very clear that dropping the bombs (plural) saved more Japanese lives, more Chinese lives and more American lives. No group (other than those in the relevant cities) fared worse because of them.

Gospel said:

This is why I’ve been focused on Israel’s endgame. Having effectively carried out their version of Hiroshima, will it truly bring the conflict to an end? Does anyone here genuinely believe that eliminating Hamas will resolve the deeper conflict? I think we all know the answer to that.

Click to expand...

This will not bring an end to the conflict--Iran is still out there. All Israel can hope for is more time until the next 10/7, or that Iran will fall.

Gospel said:

DrZoidberg said:

If someone has a problem with Israel for no reason, that only leaves one reason.

Click to expand...

It’s clear that you’re unwilling to engage in reasoned discussion, as every post you label as hating Israel or Jews without cause has, in fact, provided a clear reason for the critique. What you’re doing is akin to accusing someone of being a rapist, pedophile, or similarly vile things simply because you disagree with their opinions. I strongly suggest you stop this behavior.

Click to expand...

Sticking your head in the sand about what he's saying doesn't make it go away. He's not looking at a single incident, but a pattern. You can quibble about any given case but that doesn't change the situation.

Flip a coin. Ok, it came up heads, doesn't mean anything. Flip 20 coins, all come up heads. Someone can argue that any given coin was fair, but you're still going to figure the coins are rigged.

DrZoidberg said:

I think mainstream press is antisemitic right now. I won't write liberal press, because the only quality reporting is liberal. The conservative/right wing press is just utter nonsense. That makes it hard to stay informed, in a somewhat unbiased way. Due to Qatars involvement on the Palestine side, Al Jazeera, which normally manages to be quite balanced, has now gone completely pro-Hamas

Click to expand...

Al Jazeera has been under their control for a long time now.

DrZoidberg said:

The connection between Iran, Syria, Russia, Turkey, Hezboallah, Lebanon, Hamas, PA and Gaza is rarely mentioned, even though these are all extremely interconnected conflicts. Basically just one big conflict. Even the war in Ukraine has had a huge impact on the war in Gaza. None of this is mentioned when people talk about the war in Gaza. Its treated as an isolated and contained conflict

Click to expand...

Here I disagree. Russia is simply an ally of convenience, not truly just part of one big conflict. Russia certainly doesn't want an Islamist win, but they benefit from the conflict and are acting to increase it as a distraction for the west.

Gospel said:

That's quite a lengthy way to justify being okay with children being killed because, in your view, Hamas makes it acceptable.

Click to expand...

That's a quite short way of saying don't bother me with the facts.

DrZoidberg said:

Gospel said:

That's quite a lengthy way to justify being okay with children being killed because, in your view, Hamas makes it acceptable.

Click to expand...

What kind of monster are you? Your morals seem despicable

Hamas doesn't make it acceptable. Hamas is guilty of those children dying. Let's put the blame where it belongs

Click to expand...

He's not a monster, he's blinded by faith. Faith that there is a good answer. The faithful tend to have a huge problem with comprehending blasphemous arguments.

TomC said:

The USA gave Iran very good reasons to believe that they need a nuclear deterrent to protect themselves from US. And that we cannot be trusted to keep an agreement longer than a political cycle.

Click to expand...

Yes, we gave Iran a very good reason to believe they need a nuclear deterrent. Specifically, the Afghanistan war. Bin Laden pulled off too big an attack for us to brush it off, we took him out along with the government that was shielding them. Iran doesn't want to be taken out when they pull off 9/11++.

TomC said:

The reason that Iran launched into a nuclear deterrent program is easy to understand. Bush II put them on a list, The Axis of Evil, in his first State of the Union address. He lumped them in with Iraq and North Korea. NK pulled a nuclear deterrent out of their ass. We left them alone, their tyrant died peacefully in bed having delivered the power to his son. Iraq had no such deterrent, we bombed the crap out of them. Their tyrant died at the end of a noose after his sons were killed. Iran learned the obvious lesson.
Get nukes or the USA will destroy you!

Obama tried to end that. But the USA wouldn't allow it and so the Iranians continue to protect themselves from US.
Tom

Click to expand...

Iran proudly proclaims to be an Axis power. Bush II didn't make it so.

Obama was played for a fool. Same mistake we made with North Korea: An agreement to end their nuclear program. Yes, they ended their uranium bomb program--and promptly started up a plutonium bomb program. Iran was doing the same thing--stopping work at acknowledged nuclear sites, but building new ones and saying they couldn't be inspected because they weren't nuclear sites.

Swammerdami said:

Loren Pechtel said:

People consistently have a problem with Israel for invalid reasons. That means either they are actually simply opposed to Israel (and the antisemite label fits) or they are duped by the propaganda and are unknowing antisemites.

Click to expand...

What is an "unknowing antisemite"? Someone who hates the Jews but doesn't know he hates them?

Click to expand...

Someone who blindly believes all the anti-Jewish propaganda and thinks they have a legitimate gripe with Israel's actions.

Loren Pechtel said:

Yes, we gave Iran a very good reason to believe they need a nuclear deterrent. Specifically, the Afghanistan war.

Click to expand...

It was long before that.
It started in the 50s. It includes decades of support for our puppet Shah. Then we launched a war against them in the 80s that had over a million casualties.
Long before Afghanistan...
Tom

Loren Pechtel said:

Swammerdami said:

Loren Pechtel said:

People consistently have a problem with Israel for invalid reasons. That means either they are actually simply opposed to Israel (and the antisemite label fits) or they are duped by the propaganda and are unknowing antisemites.

Click to expand...

What is an "unknowing antisemite"? Someone who hates the Jews but doesn't know he hates them?

Click to expand...

Someone who blindly believes all the anti-Jewish propaganda and thinks they have a legitimate gripe with Israel's actions.

Click to expand...

Do you include the former Israeli Defense Minister and others who respect ICC indictments among those "who blindly believe all the anti-Jewish propaganda"?

And why do anti-Netanyahu and anti-Israel morph in your mind into "anti-Jewish"?

If I reject some of Trump's actions does that make me anti-Christian? (555^*)

* - in Thai, the number 5 is pronounced "Ha!" So we write "555" to simulate laughter!

Loren Pechtel said:

Gospel said:

That's quite a lengthy way to justify being okay with children being killed because, in your view, Hamas makes it acceptable.

Click to expand...

That's a quite short way of saying don't bother me with the facts.

Click to expand...

Let’s be clear: children are dying as a result of IDF strikes aimed at targeting Hamas. You seem entirely comfortable with this outcome, as if the moral line is so black and white that sparing children would somehow equate to supporting Hamas. This oversimplified logic not only dismisses the humanity of innocent lives but also dangerously conflates ethical opposition to the killing of children with political allegiance to a terrorist organization. How you and those who align with you reconcile that kind of moral absolutism with the value of human life is what's on display here.