Merged Gaza just launched an unprovoked attack on Israel

[Loren Pechtel]

Since nothing I wrote on this excuses or explains terrorist activity, your terminology is misleading.

You found a bit of pedantry to hand wave the attacks Gazan leadership is perpetrating on Israel Today. Tom

Perhaps if you could provide a link to an actual attack on Israel today from Gaza,, it might lessen the irony of your baseless accusation.

I'm referring to the kidnapping victims and their family, friends, and government.

Also the Gazan civilians. The attacks perpetrated by the Muslim authoritarians (terrorists) that have control over Gaza are also attacks on Palestinians.
From the UN to the world media, Israel commonly gets blamed for the disaster in Gaza. But that's really not true and any rational person can see it.
Tom

It's the easy option. To see past the disinformation takes work. Same reason we elected The Felon. It was notable when some of the big papers didn't endorse Harris out of fear. It is completely normal for the world press to not report honestly from Gaza out of fear.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Currently, the Palestinians are suffering from lack of aid due to gangs seizing aid trucks. The odd part, Hamas apparently is powerless to stop the much smaller gangs. Palestine feels like the Middle East version of Haiti.

Currently, Palestinians are suffering because their Muslim leadership wants them to suffer.
Muslims could end this conflict. But they don't want that to happen. So they're going to continue it.
Tom

You keep making this about religion, this is political, not religious. Hamas can end the struggle immediately. They could enact measures that would allow Gaza to be opened back up. Well, until the next group arrives with funding. But peace isn't Hamas' mandate.

So we need to step back and reassess solutions, because Hamas has no intent to allow peace and ridding the Middle East of Hamas isn't possible. Which brings us back to Iran and the Arab nations.

But the keys must be under the Israeli streetlight! At this point removing the Iranian influence is impossible. And people don't like to accept that something is impossible.

 

[Gospel]

There must be greater recognition of the real human toll on both ends of this conflict. Innocent Palestinians, caught in the crossfire simply because they live in a combat zone or were born into this situation, deserve acknowledgment and compassion, not dismissal (because herp-derp Hamas). Behind every statistic is a person whose life was tragically cut short.

What you don't understand is that by taking this position you are aiding Hamas. They are using the suffering of their people as a weapon.

If you focused on the context of what I’m saying, you’d see that I’ve clearly explained how Hamas contributes to civilian deaths. I’m not discussing what you assume I am. I understand why you might make this mistake, as the complex dynamics between Israel and Gaza appear overly simple to you.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

there are a lot of people who demand absolute perfection

I literally said, 'I’m not expecting a perfect answer (none exist).' If you don’t want to answer the question, you’re free to ignore it. Your comment about there being 'a lot of people who demand absolute perfection' is just your opinion, I don’t expect perfection. Do I really have to defend opinions I don’t hold just to get a response from you? Are you sure we’re stuck on this because others are demanding perfection, or is that just a strawman you’ve created? I hope you're talking to me, not to others.

You keep saying this--but always expect Israel to do better.

Israel is already doing better than Hamas because Israel is not classified as a terrorist organization. Are you suggesting that Israel is not doing better than Hamas? If you genuinely believe I expect Israel to outperform Hamas, that would imply you think Hamas is somehow doing better than Israel.

I don't understand. You're objecting to the harm Israel is causing which would imply you think there's some better path.

 

[Gospel]

there are a lot of people who demand absolute perfection

I literally said, 'I’m not expecting a perfect answer (none exist).' If you don’t want to answer the question, you’re free to ignore it. Your comment about there being 'a lot of people who demand absolute perfection' is just your opinion, I don’t expect perfection. Do I really have to defend opinions I don’t hold just to get a response from you? Are you sure we’re stuck on this because others are demanding perfection, or is that just a strawman you’ve created? I hope you're talking to me, not to others.

You keep saying this--but always expect Israel to do better.

Israel is already doing better than Hamas because Israel is not classified as a terrorist organization. Are you suggesting that Israel is not doing better than Hamas? If you genuinely believe I expect Israel to outperform Hamas, that would imply you think Hamas is somehow doing better than Israel.

I don't understand. You're objecting to the harm Israel is causing which would imply you think there's some better path.

Be specific what am I objecting to?

Edit: With a quote please, your word is not enough.

 

[laughing dog]

It is serious. People are dying. Their deaths are completely unrelated to whether calling hostage holding an "attack" or not. But their deaths are directly related to whether or not bombs are dropping or bullets are flying.

Kidnapping is a crime regardless of when the victims are recovered. Nothing changes that. I

I realize that calling hostage holding an attack makes the supporters of Israel's current actions feel better. If your view is that these discussions are simply therapeutic that helps me understand the persistence in your emotional rhetoric and apparent need to fling bullshit accusations.

This is the sort of thing I'm referring to as "terrorist apologetics".

You might not care much about them or the people who care about them. But every single day of captivity is an attack on Israel.
Tom

Since nothing I wrote on this excuses or explains terrorist activity, your terminology is misleading. Either that is unintentional or it is a conscious attempt to emotional rhetoric to obscure the lack of actual thought and content in your responses.

The degree with which someone cares about the situation has nothing to do with accurately describing it. You literally have no idea how much or little I care about the hostages or their families.

If it makes you feel better to fling bullshit then I suppose it has some value in that therapy. However any therapeutic value it gives to you and those who feel the seem way is offset by the lack of credibility it lends to your responses.

And once again you respond with misdirection rather than addressing the point.

If you don’t understand a post, just ask for clarification instead of flinging a baseless accusation.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Holding hostages is not a form of attack.

George Orwell would be proud of your rhetoric.

"So what if we kidnapped your family members? So what if we continue to hold the kidnappees.
It's your fault that we are violent. It's your fault that we refuse to end the violence.
We're Muslim and You are Not!
Tom

George Orwell would not be proud of your insultingly stupid straw man argument.

Kidnapping the hostage is an attack. Holding the hostages is not.

Very keen on hair splitting aren't you.
If you could please detail the logic split between hostage taking being an attck byt retaining said hostages is not a continuation of the attack that would be most helpful.

Been there, done it, and it doesn’t appear to help.

Alright then. No answer.

No, that is an answer that you either don't like or don't understand.

Holding the hostages is a continuation of the crime, but not the attack. Just like the pain from a punch is a continuation from the punch but it is not the punch. It does not mean that the initial act was not an attack. It means its aftermath (depending on the outcome) is not necessarily an attack. That is my view. Either you understand or you don't. Which is different than approving of it or not.

I think your view on this is fucked up. I think you are bending over backwards to reinterptet Hamas crimes, so it'll feel better for you. This is serious. People are dying

It is serious. People are dying. Their deaths are completely unrelated to whether calling hostage holding an "attack" or not. But their deaths are directly related to whether or not bombs are dropping or bullets are flying.

Kidnapping is a crime regardless of when the victims are recovered. Nothing changes that. I

I realize that calling hostage holding an attack makes the supporters of Israel's current actions feel better. If your view is that these discussions are simply therapeutic that helps me understand the persistence in your emotional rhetoric and apparent need to fling bullshit accusations.

Lol "emotional rhetoric". Yes, I must be an overly emotional fop unable to control myself or see things objectively. Perhaps you think I am a weak minded woman?

I suggest trying to sound less patronising in the future

 

[DrZoidberg]

Stop placing your liberal fantasy into the mouths of the Palestinians. Listen to what they are saying

If you don’t mind me asking, what exactly do you mean by 'listen to what they are saying'? I assume you’re referring to a platform you consider trustworthy. Could you share where you’ve been hearing from the Palestinians?

You didn't bother googling this, did you?

Two examples

From the river to the sea - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Calls for the destruction of Israel - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Leftists are continually bending over backwards to reinterpret the Palestinians litteral words in very creative ways. There is absolutely zero political movement in Palestine to live in peace with Jews.

Arabs who live within Israel are just keeping their heads down and mouths shut, because they don't want to be seen as pro-Israel. But they are of course extremely well aware they're the population of Arabs in the Middle-East with the most personal freedoms and the most legal protection. They're better treated by their (Israeli) government than Arabs are treated in any "Arab" or "Muslim" country.

Arabs are deeply conservative and do not care about freedom or security. It's more imortant to them to be seen by their neighbours as good Muslims, than anything else. It makes it increadibly difficult to have reasonable conversations. Currently Islam is a ideological steamroller.

Worth noting is that there is a international movement to liberalise Islam, (the kind of shift that both Christianity and Judaism have gone through). But it only has traction among the tiny educated middle classes. As the Middle-East gets their act together, becomes stable, the middle class will expand and Islam will liberalise. But that's 30 - 50 years away. Right now we simply have to act what's available, and that means managing Islamic aggression, the best we can.

 

[bilby]

There is absolutely zero political movement in Palestine to live in peace with Jews.

Absolute statements are never true.

 

[Gospel]

Stop placing your liberal fantasy into the mouths of the Palestinians. Listen to what they are saying

If you don’t mind me asking, what exactly do you mean by 'listen to what they are saying'? I assume you’re referring to a platform you consider trustworthy. Could you share where you’ve been hearing from the Palestinians?

You didn't bother googling this, did you?

Two examples

From the river to the sea - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Calls for the destruction of Israel - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Leftists are continually bending over backwards to reinterpret the Palestinians litteral words in very creative ways. There is absolutely zero political movement in Palestine to live in peace with Jews.

Arabs who live within Israel are just keeping their heads down and mouths shut, because they don't want to be seen as pro-Israel. But they are of course extremely well aware they're the population of Arabs in the Middle-East with the most personal freedoms and the most legal protection. They're better treated by their (Israeli) government than Arabs are treated in any "Arab" or "Muslim" country.

Arabs are deeply conservative and do not care about freedom or security. It's more imortant to them to be seen by their neighbours as good Muslims, than anything else. It makes it increadibly difficult to have reasonable conversations. Currently Islam is a ideological steamroller.

Worth noting is that there is a international movement to liberalise Islam, (the kind of shift that both Christianity and Judaism have gone through). But it only has traction among the tiny educated middle classes. As the Middle-East gets their act together, becomes stable, the middle class will expand and Islam will liberalise. But that's 30 - 50 years away. Right now we simply have to act what's available, and that means managing Islamic aggression, the best we can.

You've essentially repeated my argument but reframed it as though I said the opposite. You seem to agree that extremists must be addressed while simultaneously supporting efforts to 'liberalize Islam'. It's counterproductive to focus exclusively on extremist Islam, as it undermines and complicates the efforts of those working toward positive change. That's the core of my argument. You consistently imply that I fail to grasp the extremity of groups like Hamas, which is an unfounded assumption. Although it's an improvement, this is the first time you've said anything that genuinely acknowledges the humanity of people of the Muslim faith (again I'm not talking about Hamas here).

BTW, yes, yes, yes, I’ve said it countless times already: Hamas and extremism absolutely need to be addressed. I’m at my wits’ end with how deaf some of you seem to be on this.

 

[Gospel]

Leftists are continually bending over backwards to reinterpret the Palestinians litteral words in very creative ways.

I don't care what other leftists say, and it's not my responsibility to defend positions I don't hold. Even if I wanted to, your statement is so vague and lacks citations that there's nothing substantive to engage with. Besides, what you've shared doesn't represent the views of every Palestinian, and you even acknowledge that in your own post.

As far as this goes

There is absolutely zero political movement in Palestine to live in peace with Jews.

Considering everything, especially Hamas's extremism and the reality that there are Palestinians who can live peacefully alongside Israel, what relevance does the absence of a political movement have here? Based on your own statements, you essentially acknowledge that the current climate is not conducive to such movements. Ya know, the whole Arab's keeping their heads down thing. What’s needed is to encourage them to lift their heads and provide the support they need to hold them high. Letting Hamas dictate the narrative is not the right approach. Rhetoric that portrays all Palestinians as Hamas sympathizers, when many are not, only serves to strengthen Hamas' agenda.

Hamas: "They bomb your homes and take your land. Do you not see how little they care about your suffering? We are the ones who will stand and defend you!"

 

[ZiprHead]

It's a manufactured identity. Before 1948 there were no Palestinians. It was simply an area, not distinct from the areas around it.

Referring to people that live in Palestine as Palestinians dates back to 1898.

And all identities are manufactured.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Your mistake here is in thinking that Gaza can make peace. They are not a primary actor in the conflict and thus have no ability to decide war or peace.

Yes, I'm fully aware of the role Iran plays, and I've emphasized that multiple times in this discussion. However, my focus here is on Israel's endgame in Gaza. Right now, they are working to remove Hamas, a goal I believe they can achieve. But the critical question is: what comes next after Hamas is ousted? Beyond military action, the key lies in winning the hearts and minds of the people in Gaza.

In my view, the only way to do that is by actively engaging with the people. People who are already deeply intertwined with Israel, at the civilian level. The best path forward, in my opinion, is to support those willing to rebuild their communities, stay engaged, and work together to ensure that organizations like Hamas & Iran's influence is kept out of Gaza. It won't be easy due to cultural differences that I've mentioned, but it's doable. I’d argue that despite the challenges ahead, it would still be better than the current situation under Hamas terrorism.

And why is Iran going to permit success?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Innocent people dying in these circumstances is an undeniable tragedy, and the soldiers involved will likely carry that burden for the rest of their lives. Rather than justifying these incidents because herp-derp Hamas, how about you acknowledge the human cost? It’s unlikely that any genuine IDF soldier would find comfort in the kinds of rationalizations or excuses I’ve seen on this forum. And by 'genuine soldiers,' I mean those who serve with integrity, not the bad actors who exist in every military establishment worldwide. That’s a whole other issue: how we often allow the worst individuals to shape perceptions of a nation’s military personnel. This includes the shitty leadership at the top. To me, it’s absurd.

I apologies for the ranting.

We blame Hamas because it's a Hamas tactic to try to cause such mistakes.

I don’t even know where to begin with this. Did you actually read what I wrote, or were you just eager to include Hamas in your response? What I clearly stated is that mistakes are inevitable, and I explained how Hamas’s actions contribute to those mistakes. I LITERALLY SAID THAT! What I disagree with is excusing soldiers who intentionally do wrong, as well as unfairly labeling the entire IDF as bad because of the actions of a few individuals. I understand that you blame Hamas for everything—you’ve made it clear that, in your view, a soldier can intentionally kill a civilian, and the mere existence of Hamas makes that acceptable. I’m not here to change your mind.

You seem to be blaming the IDF for the deaths. Yes, they pulled the trigger but Hamas set the situation up.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

It's a manufactured identity. Before 1948 there were no Palestinians. It was simply an area, not distinct from the areas around it.

The term African American wasn't a thing until the late 1980s. What's your point here?

But that's just putting a label to a group that already existed. Calling people "Palestinian" is more akin to calling people "West Texans". The group is "Texan".

 

[Gospel]

Your mistake here is in thinking that Gaza can make peace. They are not a primary actor in the conflict and thus have no ability to decide war or peace.

Yes, I'm fully aware of the role Iran plays, and I've emphasized that multiple times in this discussion. However, my focus here is on Israel's endgame in Gaza. Right now, they are working to remove Hamas, a goal I believe they can achieve. But the critical question is: what comes next after Hamas is ousted? Beyond military action, the key lies in winning the hearts and minds of the people in Gaza.

In my view, the only way to do that is by actively engaging with the people. People who are already deeply intertwined with Israel, at the civilian level. The best path forward, in my opinion, is to support those willing to rebuild their communities, stay engaged, and work together to ensure that organizations like Hamas & Iran's influence is kept out of Gaza. It won't be easy due to cultural differences that I've mentioned, but it's doable. I’d argue that despite the challenges ahead, it would still be better than the current situation under Hamas terrorism.

And why is Iran going to permit success?

Iran may never fully back down, but Israel can focus on forcing them to abandon using Gaza as a proxy. As I’ve emphasized countless times, the path forward lies in winning the trust and support of the Gazan people. By empowering those oppressed by Hamas and providing them with initial international aid—or even long-term support—the Gazans can establish self-governance. This would enable them to keep organizations like Hamas and external influences, including Iran, out of their territory. It won't be easy.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

There must be greater recognition of the real human toll on both ends of this conflict. Innocent Palestinians, caught in the crossfire simply because they live in a combat zone or were born into this situation, deserve acknowledgment and compassion, not dismissal (because herp-derp Hamas). Behind every statistic is a person whose life was tragically cut short.

What you don't understand is that by taking this position you are aiding Hamas. They are using the suffering of their people as a weapon.

If you focused on the context of what I’m saying, you’d see that I’ve clearly explained how Hamas contributes to civilian deaths. I’m not discussing what you assume I am. I understand why you might make this mistake, as the complex dynamics between Israel and Gaza appear overly simple to you.

But you keep acting like it's something Israel can improve on.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

It is serious. People are dying. Their deaths are completely unrelated to whether calling hostage holding an "attack" or not. But their deaths are directly related to whether or not bombs are dropping or bullets are flying.

Kidnapping is a crime regardless of when the victims are recovered. Nothing changes that. I

I realize that calling hostage holding an attack makes the supporters of Israel's current actions feel better. If your view is that these discussions are simply therapeutic that helps me understand the persistence in your emotional rhetoric and apparent need to fling bullshit accusations.

This is the sort of thing I'm referring to as "terrorist apologetics".

You might not care much about them or the people who care about them. But every single day of captivity is an attack on Israel.
Tom

Since nothing I wrote on this excuses or explains terrorist activity, your terminology is misleading. Either that is unintentional or it is a conscious attempt to emotional rhetoric to obscure the lack of actual thought and content in your responses.

The degree with which someone cares about the situation has nothing to do with accurately describing it. You literally have no idea how much or little I care about the hostages or their families.

If it makes you feel better to fling bullshit then I suppose it has some value in that therapy. However any therapeutic value it gives to you and those who feel the seem way is offset by the lack of credibility it lends to your responses.

And once again you respond with misdirection rather than addressing the point.

If you don’t understand a post, just ask for clarification instead of flinging a baseless accusation.

And once again you respond with misdirection rather than addressing the point.

We have a simple question: is the suffering of the hostages (and there's basically no doubt they are suffering if they are alive) an attack on Israel?

The quote chain is enough to see what I'm asking, I didn't feel the need to spell it out.

 

[Gospel]

There must be greater recognition of the real human toll on both ends of this conflict. Innocent Palestinians, caught in the crossfire simply because they live in a combat zone or were born into this situation, deserve acknowledgment and compassion, not dismissal (because herp-derp Hamas). Behind every statistic is a person whose life was tragically cut short.

What you don't understand is that by taking this position you are aiding Hamas. They are using the suffering of their people as a weapon.

If you focused on the context of what I’m saying, you’d see that I’ve clearly explained how Hamas contributes to civilian deaths. I’m not discussing what you assume I am. I understand why you might make this mistake, as the complex dynamics between Israel and Gaza appear overly simple to you.

But you keep acting like it's something Israel can improve on.

Ok let's try this. What words do you need me to type to confirm I am not doing this thing you keep saying I'm doing. We need to get past this somehow.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

It isn't an attack. It is injustice, grossly immoral, a crime, and worse it is blackmail against Israel from seeking justice for the atrocity committed against it.

Calling it an "attack" is a needless distraction that seems more interested in semantics than the actual suffering out there.

It's an act of terrorism. Calling it an attack is not semantics.

Holding hostages isn't a "daily attack".