Merged Gaza just launched an unprovoked attack on Israel

[DrZoidberg]

That is incorrect. Most of the inhabitants of Palestine at the time of the Balfour Declaration were descendants of the ancient Canaanites. The DNA evidence is compelling and substantial. There's also anecdotal evidence.

About 10 years ago I came across an article from the Jerusalem Post about an amateur historian who was researching the Jewish Palestinian connection. His findings indicate that at the time of the founding of the State of Israel approx. 60% of Palestinians had Jewish grandmothers or great-grandmothers on their mother's side. He also found evidence the 'Arabs' of the Negev were descendants of Jews who were converted at gunpoint by the Mamluks. He believed that was the reason why their embrace of Islam was tepid at best. I'll see if I can find that article again.

That would be a good article to look at. The figures would not surprise me.

I would like a one state solution to work but the hatred is too strong. A two state would be best but the issues with that might be intractable too.

Found it. There may have been another article I posted around that time that had the 60% figure. This one cites higher numbers:

The Lost Palestinian Jews

Well, genetically Azkenhazi Jews are almost entirely ethnically European. And these were the Jews that founded Israel. It's the same deal with Sephardic Jews. Mizrahi Jews are genetically indistinguishable from Arabs/Palestinians.

This isn't about genetics. It's about feelings. People who feel they are Jewish are. Yes, Jews quibble about this all the time. And have opinions about who is a real Jew or not. But they stop having problems with eahother when there's an external enemy to unite against.

Also, religions is a moving target. Orthodox Judaism... isn't. Modern Orthodox Judaism (of which Netanyahu is aligned) is heavily influenced by American Evangelical Christianity. Which is a fairly new trend (late 19'th century). Which makes sense, since Judaism is a faith that is a product of being under the thumb of various empires. It's not particularly muscular. It's introverted, and is about maintaining unity in the face of political powerlessness. So to create and defend a Jewish state they needed to import a new ideology into the religion.

Also Islam has changed. Islamism Is the unity of Muslim Brotherhood style anti-Western Islam and postmodern post-colonial philosophy. Muslim brotherhood imported a lot of their ideology from their incredibly arrogant and imperialistic colonial overlords. This is the height of scientific racism and imperialism (ca 1870). Creating an elitist and arrogant form of Islam. These ideas were then transformed by Sayyid Qutb in the 1950'ies and 1960'ies where, after studying in USA for 2 years, postmodern post-colonial studies where incorporated. In a western post-colonial context these ideas were intended to be formulations of alternative ways of looking at Islam/the east from the perspective of a priviliged white Christian. To create a counter point and gives us (in the west) a more nuanced way to see Islam. But moved to an Islamic context, without the assumed Christian cultural dominance, it's just straight up Islamo-fascism. Which is what we got.

It's very important to understand that these are new ideas in Islam. Islam didn't used to be like this. It's also good to keep in mind that communism used to be huge in the middle-east. Openly atheist popular communist movements sprung up in every country (causing political unrest). Yes, funded by USSR. But had popular appeal. Which is quite telling regarding how deeply Muslims feel about religion. They seem to be quite flexible.

Islamism and Islamofascism is just the latest ideological trend in the Middle-East. But it is a strong trend in the Islamic world, and until it dies down, Muslims are, unfortunately, going to be unreasonable. I absolutely don't believe this will continue forever.

Karen Armstrong, in the Battle For God compares modern Islam to Christianity in the 19'th century. In the shift from an agrarian economy to an industrial economy it caused extreme social upheavals. People became insecure and anxious, and as a result people became more extreme in their faith. But after a period of a rise of extreme evangelical Christianity, secularism became the norm. Now in the west most people's religion is exceedingly liberal. Yes, some people are devoutly religious. But nowhere near what it was in 1700. If Islam has the same development we can soon look forward to a very liberal and secular Islam in the coming decades. But until then, it's going to suck.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Karen Armstrong, in the Battle For God compares modern Islam to Christianity in the 19'th century. In the shift from an agrarian economy to an industrial economy it caused extreme social upheavals. People became insecure and anxious, and as a result people became more extreme in their faith. But after a period of a rise of extreme evangelical Christianity, secularism became the norm. Now in the west most people's religion is exceedingly liberal. Yes, some people are devoutly religious. But nowhere near what it was in 1700. If Islam has the same development we can soon look forward to a very liberal and secular Islam in the coming decades. But until then, it's going to suck.

Christianity has had a number of Great Awakenings. dating back to the 18th century. All the while marching across America, taking Native American children from their homes, cutting their hair, and teaching them how to be good Christians... oh wait... that was the 20th Century. The Manifest Destiny was the 19th century, where Christians said conquering the Natives was a command given by God. So we lie, stole, and conquered via the Bible.

Secularism these days might be more a reflection of the horrors of WWII and the information age, and the continued expansion of rights despite the gnashing of teeth of the conservative Christians.

The Islamic radicalism in the Middle East/Persia/India can not be discussed without also remembering the negligent meddling to abuse by the US in Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, the UK in the Middle East and Pakistan/India. The Middle East is right in not trusting the West. They aren't right in the violence, but we have a long receipt of bads in this region.

It becomes a lot easier to understand all of this when people get that this is a political thing, not religious.

 

[laughing dog]

Politics is the art of the possible. It doesn't matter how much you want something, if you know that acting for it will fail, or cost more than it's worth. The countries around Israel are playing nice because being friends with USA is valuable. Iran is an example of a country on USA's naughty list. So they are free to act as they see fit.

I think you are naive.

. Indonesia is a majority Muslim country and it is nowhere near Israel. How is it “ hellbent on destroying Israel”? Or Azerbijan “hellbent on destroying Israel”?

It's not slander if it's true.

Bigotry is never true. It is based on half-truths, outright ignorance, fear and hate.

I think it was Gospel who did the postmodern trick of replacing my use of the word "Muslim" with "Jew" and implied by it that I was a racist. As wokes so often do, to prove a point. But modern Judaism and modern Islam are very different. You can't treat them as the same religion. A Jewish extremist is less of a problem than a Muslim extremist. Jewish extremists are a nuisance. Muslim extremists are dangerous.

Cool story bro. All political or religious extremists are dangerous.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Jordan is not a liberal and free country. That's a terrible idea. Don’t hand more power over to autocrats. Nothing good can come of that.

You have any ideas besides kill them all?

Convince the Palestinians that continuing the violence is a terrible idea, both for them and their children? Got any ideas about that?
Tom

Most of the folks being slaughtered don't seem to be the ones actually committing the violence. That would be Hamas. You remember, don't you? The terrorist organization holding hostages? Most Palestinians don't need to be convinced that continuing the violence is a terrible idea, but they don't have the option of voting Hamas out of office. Israelis have repeatedly voted their leadership into office, so maybe they are more amenable to being convinced to stop the violence.

"Most" is technically true--it appears that a bit over half are non-combatants. For urban warfare that's an incredibly good record. Even more so given the use of human shields.

And most Palestinians are in favor of 10/7 despite knowing what would happen. Your "don't need to convince" bit it totally wrong.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

If the British had permitted Jewish communities to develop naturally alongside the indigenous Palestinians, rather than endorsing the formation of an Israeli state, there's a chance – albeit speculative – the region would be dealing with a more enduring situation today. After all, Palestine has historically been a land consisting of Arabs and Jews, encompassing both Christians and Muslims despite major conquests. Israel's approach which amounts to population control in Gaza and the West Bank, driven by concerns over being outnumbered by Teh Muslims and thus compromising its democratic identity, is an unsustainable strategy for national growth. If Israel intends to progress and not remain isolated behind its walls, it needs to reconsider that approach.

Iran and others should focus more on addressing their internal issues instead of attempting to shape the world according to their views. This applies to China and Russia as well.

The USA also needs to improve its approach to international affairs, as our current actions are far from exemplary.

Not having formed Israel would leave them subject to the random pogroms that were the norm of the day. How would you feel about living in the South in 1900? Because that's approximately what you are saying the Jews should have accepted.

 

[Gospel]

How would you feel about living in the South in 1900? Because that's approximately what you are saying the Jews should have accepted.

The comparison presented is not only historically inaccurate but also considerably insensitive. Jewish people were not forced into boats and taken to Palestine in chains; they migrated there by choice. Furthermore, if we were to entertain such an ill-conceived analogy, do you believe that America would extend the same level of support to the blacks in the south that they themselves (not Germany) actually harmed? Indeed, following the Civil War, there was an opportunity to enact significant change, but instead, individuals who had been adversarial to the state were allowed to retain their positions of influence, due to reasons similar to the one that made you think your analogy was a wonderful idea. Bigotry.

 

[DrZoidberg]

How would you feel about living in the South in 1900? Because that's approximately what you are saying the Jews should have accepted.

The comparison presented is not only historically inaccurate but also considerably insensitive. Jewish people were not forced into boats and taken to Palestine in chains; they migrated there by choice. Furthermore, if we were to entertain such an ill-conceived analogy, do you believe that America would extend the same level of support to the blacks in the south that they themselves (not Germany) actually harmed? Indeed, following the Civil War, there was an opportunity to enact significant change, but instead, individuals who had been adversarial to the state were allowed to retain their positions of influence, due to reasons similar to the one that made you think your analogy was a wonderful idea. Bigotry.

Ehe. A lot of Jews were forced there. Either directly, or indirectly. After ww2 and the Jews returned to their previous homes finding them destroyed, or occupied by others. Seized property was not returned.

In 1946 Germany staged a series of manifestations apologising to the Jews. They couldn't compensate the Jews monetarily, since everyone was broke back then. Especially the Germans.

The year after Germans were getting annoyed with Jewish organisations who kept going on about compensation. They thought that saying they were sorry should be enough. Countries Jews escaped to also became hostile to Jews, who they thought were unfairly taking a share of the meagre resources they had. They were seen as foreigners.

Europe didn't stop being antisemitic because Germany lost the war.

Out of other options, Jews from all over Europe left for Israel. This was a very common story. While many Jews came to USA they were never particularly welcome there. Antisemitism was strong in USA as well. So many American Jews also left for Israel.

The story of the Jews following WW2 is incredibly sad. Even after we learned about the holocaust people kept being mean to them.

There's many parallels to how blacks were treated after the Civil War. One shouldn't compare degrees of mysery. But both are very sad

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Most of the folks being slaughtered don't seem to be the ones actually committing the violence. That would be Hamas.

I see no way to clearly distinguish between Gazans, Hamas supporters, and Hamas.
What is clear is that nearly all casualties in Gaza(as well as Israel) died because of Islamic violence.

No, nearly all the casualties in Gaza are the result of IDF violence. I realize you believe the IDF revenge is justified, but that does not negate the direct cause and effect.

Repeating your falsehood does not make it true.

But you are ignoring the root cause--the 10/7 attack.

Besides, we have many incidents that appear to be Hamas simply killing people to blame the IDF.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Israeli settlers with the gov't turning a blind eye have been attacking Palesitinians in the West Bank for years.

That's what the Palestinians would have you believe.

Inspecting the UN's strange numbers on settler violence

Opinion: Looking into the UN's data on settler violence reveals inaccuracies meant to placate the international body's conflict for supporting Israel's war

www.ynetnews.com

Yes, there are some but the numbers are greatly exaggerated.

The last many centuries of oppression have rather developed a "live and let live" attitude in Jewish culture.

Bullshit. If that were true, there'd be no thread about the war in Gaza.

You are taking on faith the idea that this war is because of Israel. So long as you worship a falsehood you'll never understand.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Home | INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE
The court has released a preliminary injunction:
Order of 26 January 2024 - 192-20240126-ord-01-00-en.pdf
"APPLICATION OF THE CONVENTION ON THE PREVENTION AND PUNISHMENT OF THE CRIME OF GENOCIDE IN THE GAZA STRIP" in SOUTH AFRICA v. ISRAEL

The 17 judges: President Joan Donoghue of the US, Vice President Kirill Gevorgian of Russia, Judges Peter Tomka of Slovakia, Ronny Abraham of France, Mohamed Bennouna of Morocco, Abdulqawi Yusuf of Somalia, Xue Hanqin of China, Dalveer Bhandari of India, Patrick Lipton Robinson of Jamaica, Nawaf Salam of Lebanon, Yuji Iwasawa of Japan, Georg Nolte of Germany, Leonardo Nemer Caldeira Brant of Brazil, Julia Sebutinde of Uganda, Hilary Charlesworth of Australia, Ad Hoc Judges Dikgang Moseneke of South Africa, Aharon Barak of Israel.

What the court decreed:

1) By fifteen votes to two,

The State of Israel shall, in accordance with its obligations under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, in relation to Palestinians in Gaza, take all measures within its power to prevent the commission of all acts within the scope of Article II of this Convention, in particular

(a) killing members of the group;
(b) causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; and
(d) imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

2) By fifteen votes to two,

The State of Israel shall ensure with immediate effect that its military does not commit any acts described in point 1 above;

All but AB, JS

And what in that list is genocide? This is simply war.

(3) By sixteen votes to one,

The State of Israel shall take all measures within its power to prevent and punish the direct and public incitement to commit genocide in relation to members of the Palestinian group in the Gaza Strip;

4) By sixteen votes to one,

The State of Israel shall take immediate and effective measures to enable the provision of urgently needed basic services and humanitarian assistance to address the adverse conditions of life faced by Palestinians in the Gaza Strip;

All but JS

So they should annihilate Hamas ASAP? Because it's Hamas that is denying the basic services.

(5) By fifteen votes to two,

The State of Israel shall take effective measures to prevent the destruction and ensure the preservation of evidence related to allegations of acts within the scope of Article II and Article III of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide against members of the Palestinian group in the Gaza Strip;

(6) By fifteen votes to two,

The State of Israel shall submit a report to the Court on all measures taken to give effect to this Order within one month as from the date of this Order.

All but AB, JS

It's a war zone. This one is a joke.

 

[Gospel]

There's many parallels to how blacks were treated after the Civil War. One shouldn't compare degrees of mysery. But both are very sad

The analogy Loren tries to make between the plight of Africans in the American South and the destruction in Gaza by Israel, citing dislike from neighbors as a common thread, does not hold up. This comparison lacks depth, especially when considering that the United States has never established a separate state for African Americans based on divine command, and the arrival of Africans in America was not a matter of voluntary migration, particularly to the southern states.
Moreover, the resilience and hope for equal treatment under the law demonstrated by many enslaved Africans, despite the absence of any promising signs, showcases a history of perseverance and heroism. This narrative is filled with instances of African American heroes who fought for justice and equality, contrasting sharply with Loren's argument. The historical absence of widespread violent retaliation by enslaved Africans against their oppressors to safeguard themselves from hostile neighbors further undermines the comparison's validity.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Most of the folks being slaughtered don't seem to be the ones actually committing the violence. That would be Hamas.

I see no way to clearly distinguish between Gazans, Hamas supporters, and Hamas.
What is clear is that nearly all casualties in Gaza(as well as Israel) died because of Islamic violence.

No, nearly all the casualties in Gaza are the result of IDF violence. I realize you believe the IDF revenge is justified, but that does not negate the direct cause and effect.

Repeating your falsehood does not make it true.

IDF violence is clearly a result of Gazan violence.
That is the cause and effect. Gazans attacked Israel and Israeli struck back hard, because they know that half measures just invite more violence.

The direct cause of Gazans being killed in Gaza right now is IDF violence. The gov't of Israel choose to enact revenge and the IDF is carrying out its directive. It doesn't matter that whether you or I endorse it or not. Your persistence in perpetrating a false description reflects solely on your bigotry, not the situation.

Continuing to call it revenge doesn't make it so. Israel is interested in stopping Hamas from carrying out their stated intent of keeping repeating 10/7. Rough on the Palestinians but they approve of 10/7, it's their choice.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Israeli settlers with the gov't turning a blind eye have been attacking Palesitinians in the West Bank for years.

Dayum.
Do you realize how long Islamic people were attacking Zionists before that?
Maybe you should google what Muslims did in 1948? Attacking people who survived European disaster? Now complain about being oppressed?

No. Look at the status quo before 1948. I've already provided an example of the sort of thing that happened. Just because it was from Algeria is irrelevant--it's simply an example of how Jews fared living under Islam.

Bullshit. If that were true, there'd be no thread about the war in Gaza.

Did you notice this part:

Over the last century or so, Zionists have developed a "but, don't fuck with me because I'll make you regret it!" attitude as well.

Tom

But they are Jews, they must be wrong! If the facts say otherwise find some alternative facts.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I pointed out that IDF was responding to an extremely recent bombing. It happened on October 7th last year.

You do know a lot has happened prior to October 7th right? And by a lot I do mean a lot.

Are you a cherry farmer? Because that list is horrendously cherry picked. (And many of the things on the list I haven't heard of, I'm not going to take the time to dig up the truth on the various allegations.)

1. Palestinian Exodus "Nakba" (1948): 700,000 Palestinians expelled during Israel's creation; involved massacres, rape, and looting.

And this one is Palestinian propaganda. Most of those left of their own free will and at Arab behest, getting out of the way of the coming war.

1. Abu Shusha Massacre (1948): Village attacked by Kiryati Brigade; reports of killings and rape.

"Reports of"--means it's likely false.

1. Israel's Ties to Apartheid South Africa: Arms and nuclear warhead sales to South Africa.

And this is supposed to be proof of evil? They were both pariah states. And note that Israel did not sign the Non-Proliferation Treaty--they broke no rules in becoming a nuclear power.

1. Kafr Qasim Massacre (1956): Israeli Border Police killed 49 Arabs unaware of curfew.

We have evidence of Hamas knowingly putting unwitting civilians into forbidden zones. It's been used as a deliberate military strategy--they threw so many civilians into the Gaza border that Israel quit enforcing it, thus providing a big advantage towards 10/7. Why should we assume your case is different?

1. USS Liberty Incident (1967): Israeli attack on American ship, killing 34.

So? Fog of war, things like that happen especially when facing an enemy that doesn't respect the Geneva rules. Israel believed it was an Egyptian ship pretending to be an American ship.

1. Qana Massacre (1996): IDF shelling of UN compound, killing 106 civilians.

Counterbattery fire. Blame the guys who used the UN compound to launch rockets. And blame the UN for permitting it.

1. Assassination of Iranian Nuclear Scientists (2010-2012): MEK, supported by Israel, carried out the killings.

And this is supposed to be something evil? There is a de-facto war between Israel and Iran.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Only a fraction of the current US population ever cast a ballot for Trump.

Didn't stop him from gaining office, nor from attempting a coup to try to remain there.

Agreed, so the question becomes do you hold the entire population responsible and as co-conspirators with Trump’s actions? Any penalty he is deserving of all Americans are deserving of?

You're viewing it as punishment.

If the Orange Turd were to attack somebody and the backlash killed Americans I would blame the Orange Turd, not whoever was shooting back.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Most of the folks being slaughtered don't seem to be the ones actually committing the violence. That would be Hamas.

I see no way to clearly distinguish between Gazans, Hamas supporters, and Hamas.
What is clear is that nearly all casualties in Gaza(as well as Israel) died because of Islamic violence.

I see your point. It is truly hard to distinguish Gazans, Hamas supporters, and Hamas. Here is a story that contains a video of a child carrying a white flag and being escorted by his grandmother. The grandmother was shot dead by the IDF. Another casualty caused by Islamic violence?

She was fleeing with her grandson, who was holding a white flag. Then she was shot​

Apparently, she is not the only Palestinian with a white flag who has been killed by an Israeli sniper. How can you tell a grandmother apart from an innocent Palestinian, a Hamas supporter, and a Hamas terrorist? Was the white flag posing a danger to the sniper?

Assumption: That the sniper was Israeli. We have many cases where it's pretty obvious that the shooters are really Hamas. Surrender is unacceptable, shooting someone with a white flag is quite in line with other Hamas actions. We never see the snipers themselves (which is to be expected--snipers are about hiding and slipping away), they are just assumed to be IDF even when the situation makes it far more likely they were Hamas.

What do you think you would have done in their position? Are you brave enough to take on armed thugs without any weapons? People who live in authoritarian regimes are not necessarily responsible for those regimes remaining in power. Ideally, everyone would rebel. Most people just want to live. Do you imagine yourself to be someone who, in the shoes of a Gazan, would have risen up to throw off the yoke of the oppressors?

I do agree that there is little the Gazans can do. They are victims in this--but victims of their oppressor, Iran.

but they don't have the option of voting Hamas out of office.

That's kinda a problem in Muslim cultures. Secular democracy is anti-Muslim.

Do you distinguish between totalitarian regimes that are secular and those that are not? Do you think it a problem in Muslim democracies?

Where do you find strongly Muslim democracies??

I don't know, Tom. Maybe you should ask those Israelis who voted against the extreme right wing government that currently holds power in Israel. It's not as if there has been unanimity in the Israeli population on these matters. Right now, there is considerable criticism of Netanyahu's government, and it is widely believed that they could not remain in power if an election were held today. Maybe not all Israelis are convinced that their highest priority should be the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from Gaza and the West Bank.

I agree the people don't like him--but this is not the reason. Rather, he failed to prevent 10/7, he's not hawkish enough.

 

[laughing dog]

Most of the folks being slaughtered don't seem to be the ones actually committing the violence. That would be Hamas.

I see no way to clearly distinguish between Gazans, Hamas supporters, and Hamas.
What is clear is that nearly all casualties in Gaza(as well as Israel) died because of Islamic violence.

No, nearly all the casualties in Gaza are the result of IDF violence. I realize you believe the IDF revenge is justified, but that does not negate the direct cause and effect.

Repeating your falsehood does not make it true.

But you are ignoring the root cause--the 10/7 attack.

I am not ignoring anything. The 10/7 attack presented the gov't of Israel with an array of possible responses. The gov't of Israel is responsible for the choices it makes.

Besides, we have many incidents that appear to be Hamas simply killing people to blame the IDF.

Are you seriously arguing that the death rate of Gazan civilians is a vast over-estimate of the deaths caused by IDF bombing?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Anything Hammas tells the international press is uncritically immediately printed as if it's the truth. Even though it's obviously nonsense. After the first day of fighting Hammas could report exactly how many had died within minutes. But it took Israel two whole days to figure out who had been killed after the 7/10 attack. And Israel is an uncorrupt well functioning western state. While no Palestinian records are reliable.

The buildings are blown up, the lack of access to utilities was real, and people are dying. It doesn't matter if it is 25,000 or 2,500. It is high enough for Hamas to use as propaganda.

Hamas messes with the utilities, you blame Israel. At the start Israel talked about blocking them but the reality was it was Hamas actually doing it.

And you only seem to care about dead Palestinians.

*response self-moderated to make moderators job easier... but let me tell you... it was profane*

Israel is trying to prevent a repeat of 10/7. Don't dead Jews matter?

*response self-moderated, but not as easily this time... I mean dude... WTF?!?*

So you don't have an answer.

Everything is about how many Palestinians are dying. No concern for Israel trying to prevent more Jews dying. Obviously, dead Jews don't matter.

They just won't have an army anymore. At this point, I hope we all can agree that the Palestinians can't be trusted to have sharp objects? They keep attacking Israel. It's not an acceptable behaviour for any sovereign state. Israel has had an angel's patience with their nonsense. It just has to stop. And now Israel is stopping it. Well done Israel.

But Israel isn't "stopping it". The use of bombs, missiles, bullets don't equate success. Destroying tunnels doesn't equate success. Hamas can't be defeated like this.

This isn't about stopping it. This is about making it longer until the next attack.

Frequency is certainly much less important than scope and magnitude of attacks.

This isn't sports, there's no requirement that you meet them with only equal force. The attacked party is justified in using whatever force is needed to stop the threat even if that's far greater than the harm posed by the initial threat. By your logic a black can't defend himself against a mob of 100 KKKers trying to lynch him because to do so he must kill far more Klansmen than the threat they pose (his life.)

 

[laughing dog]

Rough on the Palestinians but they approve of 10/7, it's their choice.

Using that reasoning, since Israelis choose to live in a region surrounded by potential terrorist. They remain in place even after multiple attacks. Clearly it is their choice to be victims of terrorism.

If that looks vicious and stupid, you get my point.

 

[laughing dog]

Israeli settlers with the gov't turning a blind eye have been attacking Palesitinians in the West Bank for years.

That's what the Palestinians would have you believe.

Inspecting the UN's strange numbers on settler violence

Opinion: Looking into the UN's data on settler violence reveals inaccuracies meant to placate the international body's conflict for supporting Israel's war

www.ynetnews.com

Yes, there are some but the numbers are greatly exaggerated.

I get my news from the Economist, not Israeli propaganda sources. The current gov't does virtually nothing to stop attacks by settlers or to prosecute them.

The last many centuries of oppression have rather developed a "live and let live" attitude in Jewish culture.

Bullshit. If that were true, there'd be no thread about the war in Gaza.

You are taking on faith the idea that this war is because of Israel. So long as you worship a falsehood you'll never understand.

Your response is totally off the wall. There is a war. The cause is not relevant to that discussion. Please stop telling me what I believe or how I believe, because you suck at it.