• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Merged Gaza just launched an unprovoked attack on Israel

To denote when two or more threads have been merged
A return to the status quo before October won't be enough.
True. Hamas must be destroyed before a permanent ceasefire can be implemented.
There has to be significant improvement in the situation for the Palestinians, otherwise the lid just goes back on the pressure cooker while the burner is still lit.
There won't be, nor should there be, an improvement in the situation of Gaza Palestinians until and unless they change their attitude toward attacking Israel. As long as they dream of a "Palestine" stretching "from the River to the Sea" and desire to conquer Israel, no loosening of the restrictions Israel has been placing on Gaza since the Hamas' Machtergreifung is appropriate.
 
Have you never been in a store with a sign that says "You break it, you bought it"?
If you break someone else's property, you have a moral obligation to pay for its repair or replacement.
That does not apply when the other side starts a war and murders ~1,200 of your civilians and kidnaps ~250 others.
If anything, it is Hamas and their masters in Tehran that should pay Israel for damages resulting from their aggression. Compensation for the families of the killed, compensation for the kidnapping victims, and paying for the property damage thousands of rockets they shot at Israel caused.
Are you suggesting that the US was wrong to rebuild Germany after WWII?

The Western Allies tried your suggested approach after WWI, and it wasn't very effective, despite (or rather, because of) it's positive effect on the emotional state of people who wanted revenge.

Perhsps is time for a more mature response, and not just more infantile attempts to assign blame and seek revenge.
 
The civilian population of Gaza is complicit in the kidnapping.
Indeed. I'm 100% convinced that Hamas wouldn't have done it without the explicit support of all the under eight-year-old girls in Gaza.

Collective punishment is therefore not only not a war crime, but is a moral duty. Infants must not be allowed to go unpunished for their infamy!!
 
Are you suggesting that the US was wrong to rebuild Germany after WWII?
Those were not reparations for stuff US and allies broke in Germany. It was a rebuilding plan for Europe and followed the destruction of the Nazi regime and a program of denazification of Germany. Something similar must happen in Gaza before any serious rebuilding efforts are meaningful. Because otherwise, Hamas will just keep attacking Israel, will keep digging up water pipes to turn into rocket bodies, and Israel will have to break shit in Gaza again. Rinse, repeat, unless Israel is allowed to destroy Hamas.
Perhsps is time for a more mature response, and not just more infantile attempts to assign blame and seek revenge.
Rebuilding a Gaza that is still run by Hamas is not in any way "mature". Allies did not rebuild Nazi Germany either.
 
The civilian population of Gaza is complicit in the kidnapping. When a hostage managed to escape his captors, the civilians in Gaza caught him and delivered him back to Hamas terrorists.
Russian-Israeli hostage escaped from Hamas but was found and returned by Gazans, says aunt
And this aunt can tell the difference between civilians and Hamas ? Your link quotes her as saying “ the Gazans” which is ambiguous.

More importantly, even if her story is true, broadbrushing the entire civilian population of Gaza is illogical and bigoted.
 
Are you suggesting that the US was wrong to rebuild Germany after WWII?
Those were not reparations for stuff US and allies broke in Germany.
What, all those German cities just demolished themselves, did they?
It was a rebuilding plan for Europe and followed the destruction of the Nazi regime and a program of denazification of Germany. Something similar must happen in Gaza before any serious rebuilding efforts are meaningful. Because otherwise, Hamas will just keep attacking Israel, will keep digging up water pipes to turn into rocket bodies, and Israel will have to break shit in Gaza again. Rinse, repeat, unless Israel is allowed to destroy Hamas.
Perhsps is time for a more mature response, and not just more infantile attempts to assign blame and seek revenge.
Rebuilding a Gaza that is still run by Hamas is not in any way "mature". Allies did not rebuild Nazi Germany either.
Exactly.

And if Iran pays for the rebuilding, just how likely is it that Hamas would lose power?

Just as you can earn hatred by bombing people's homes, so you can earn at least a grudging respect by rebuilding those homes.

Your proposals are a plan for making Gazans hate Israel, and love Hamas and Iran.

That doesn't strike me as a wise course to pursue. Even if it sates your lust for vengeance.
 
Indeed. I'm 100% convinced that Hamas wouldn't have done it without the explicit support of all the under eight-year-old girls in Gazasignificant portion of the adult population
Hamas is not some of entity imposed on Gazans. They overwhelmingly support Hamas and the 10/7 massacre. Even knowing that attacking Israel endangers their own children. The problem is that Palestinians hate Jewish children far more than they love their own that they will gladly use them as pawns to score points in the propaganda war.
Collective punishment is therefore not only not a war crime, but is a moral duty. Infants must not be allowed to go unpunished for their infamy!!
Those infants' deaths are the direct cause of Hamas starting a war against Israel.
What do you think Israel should do? Meekly accept their people getting murdered and kidnapped without defending themselves because some Gazan children inevitably come to harm during war?
 
Are you suggesting that the US was wrong to rebuild Germany after WWII?
Those were not reparations for stuff US and allies broke in Germany. It was a rebuilding plan for Europe and followed the destruction of the Nazi regime and a program of denazification of Germany.
One of the motivating factors was to avoid the mistakes of the WWI aftermath that led to Germany harbouring resentments that led to WWII. Get the hint?
 
Indeed. I'm 100% convinced that Hamas wouldn't have done it without the explicit support of all the under eight-year-old girls in Gazasignificant portion of the adult population
You didn't say "significant portion of the adult population", you said "The civilian population of Gaza".

Moving the goalposts is logically fallacious. And nobody is suggesting that Hamas doesn't have the support of a significant portion of the adult population of Gaza - literally everyone here knows that they do. Hamas likely has the support of at least two out of five Gazan adults. Probably far more, now that their homes have been extensively bombed.

History shows that there's no better way to get wide support from a civilian population for a tyrannical and evil regime, than for the enemies of that regime to drop bombs on cities.

Strategic bombing is known to be hugely counterproductive towards winning a war, and even more counterproductive to winning the subsequent peace.
 
Indeed. I'm 100% convinced that Hamas wouldn't have done it without the explicit support of all the under eight-year-old girls in Gazasignificant portion of the adult population
Hamas is not some of entity imposed on Gazans. They overwhelmingly support Hamas and the 10/7 massacre. Even knowing that attacking Israel endangers their own children. The problem is that Palestinians hate Jewish children far more than they love their own that they will gladly use them as pawns to score points in the propaganda war.
Collective punishment is therefore not only not a war crime, but is a moral duty. Infants must not be allowed to go unpunished for their infamy!!
Those infants' deaths are the direct cause of Hamas starting a war against Israel.
What do you think Israel should do? Meekly accept their people getting murdered and kidnapped without defending themselves because some Gazan children inevitably come to harm during war?
Your ugly generalizations about “ the Palestinians” reveal much more about your biases than “ the Palestinians “.

For the record, “ Palestinians” are not the same as Hamas.

For the record, Hamas are not “the Palestinians”.
 
Indeed. I'm 100% convinced that Hamas wouldn't have done it without the explicit support of all the under eight-year-old girls in Gazasignificant portion of the adult population
You didn't say "significant portion of the adult population", you said "The civilian population of Gaza".

Moving the goalposts is logically fallacious. And nobody is suggesting that Hamas doesn't have the support of a significant portion of the adult population of Gaza - literally everyone here knows that they do. Hamas likely has the support of at least two out of five Gazan adults. Probably far more, now that their homes have been extensively bombed.

Until recently, Hamas had the support of Israel too. I know that sounds like a snark but it's important.

The PLO was unable to improve the lives of the people of Gaza. But for some mysterious reason *nudge-nudge-wink-wink*, Hamas was able to get the funding and the permits to build schools, playgrounds, clinics, and all sorts of things that made a difference in the lives of Gazans. So naturally the people voted for the party that was actually accomplishing something, as Israel intended.

Israel creates its own monsters. It created the PLO by stealing from and mistreating Palestinians. It created Hamas to counter the PLO. So what's next? Is it going to swallow a dog to catch the cat it swallowed to get the bird it swallowed to get the spider it swallowed to get the fly it swallowed? Or is it going to stop adding fuel to the fire and deescalate the situation?

Derec, you keep saying Hamas started a war with Israel in October. If that's the case, then Israel's murderous attack on the people of Gaza in May was terrorism.

History shows that there's no better way to get wide support from a civilian population for a tyrannical and evil regime, than for the enemies of that regime to drop bombs on cities.

Strategic bombing is known to be hugely counterproductive towards winning a war, and even more counterproductive to winning the subsequent peace.

It's especially absurd if you're going to punish people for their dreams.
 
, all those German cities just demolished themselves, did they?
No.
They were demolished by the Nazis who attacked other people. Then got bombed in response.
Similarly, Gaza is being destroyed by Hamas. They attacked some nearby people and are getting demolished in response.
Tom
 
Reading these posts and arguments, I think we are all missing the basic issue that is going on. We are all being played. Not by Hamas or Israel, but by Putin and Iran! This whole thing is being manufactured by Putin, with Iran’s connivance, to divide the west, and it’s working.

The other day, anti Islamic populist, Gertrude Wilders, and his freedom party, secured the largest number of seats in the Dutch parliament.


Polling indicated he would lose badly back in September. That all changed after the Hamas attack. He started to surge. And while he is rabidly anti Muslim, he also believes in cutting aid to Ukraine.

It’s also likely the reason that Trump is doing so well in the polls right now. He’s promised to ban immigration from Muslim countries. The US response has also been off putting to American Muslims, which are an important democratic demographic in Michigan, a swing state. Many in that community have expressed that they feel betrayed by Biden and will not vote for him. Putin couldn’t have had a better outcome. We are being played. And it’s working.

I just hope it’s working too soon.
 
However, Qatar's Foreign Ministry (like US State Department) states that negotiations are continuing to try to restart the truce.

Podcaster Kyle Kulinski recently proposed what Israel should have done. Make some deal with Qatar's leaders and either arrest Hamas's leaders or else send a hit squad to murder them. Something like  Assassination of Mahmoud Al-Mabhouh in a Dubai hotel room in 2010. The rest of Hamas will then be squabbling over who will be the new leaders. Israel ought not to bomb civilians but instead to protect them and send them aid, especially if they cooperate against Hamas. Thus, Israel can destroy Hamas in a much less murderous and destructive fashion, while making friends among Palestinians.

But instead, Israel's leaders have decided to outdo Hamas in murderousness and destructiveness. I'm disappointed in many critics of Israel for not being willing to say that Israel should not imitate Hamas.

Returning to history, I've found Bayesian phylogenetic analysis of Semitic languages identifies an Early Bronze Age origin of Semitic in the Near East - PMC
  • (root) 3750 BCE - Akkadian - W Semitic
  • W Semitic 3400 BCE - C Semitic - S Semitic
  • S Semitic 2650 BCE - S Arabian 50 BCE - Ethiosemitic 800 BCE
  • C Semitic 2450 BCE - Arabic (difficult to pin down) - NW Semitic
  • NW Semitic 2050 BCE - Ugaritic - NW Semitic A
  • NW Semitic A 1500 BCE - Hebrew - Aramaic
The  Hyksos departed Canaan and arrived in the Nile Delta around 1800 BCE, and were expelled from there around 1550 BCE, or at least their leaders were. So Canaanites dispersed around then, some of them likely also going northward.

Unlike later dispersions, these ones were willing.[/list]
 
Note that Gaza shot rockets at Israel before the truce expired.
IDF resumes combat in Gaza after Hamas violates ceasefire
Somehow that gets neglected with all the "poor innocent Gaza under attack" bullshit being spread around.

However, Qatar's Foreign Ministry (like US State Department) states that negotiations are continuing to try to restart the truce.
A prolonged pause helps Hamas regroup. Every day of the temporary pause means more IDF soldiers will get killed. Better to resume operations until Hamas is destroyed. It will ultimately save lives on both sides. As Prussian officer Ferdinand von Schill said in 1809, "lieber ein Ende mit Schrecken als Schrecken ohne Ende" - "better a frightful ending, than fright without end".
Unfortunately Biden and Blinkenlights are already indicating they want to renege on Biden's statement after 10/7 that Hamas must be destroyed.

Podcaster Kyle Kulinski recently proposed what Israel should have done. Make some deal with Qatar's leaders and either arrest Hamas's leaders or else send a hit squad to murder them. Something like  Assassination of Mahmoud Al-Mabhouh in a Dubai hotel room in 2010.
What would the chiefs of IDF and Mossad do without the insight by some random podcaster! Like they did not have that idea themselves. It would certainly be a happy day when Ismail Haniyeh ends up with a 9mm brain hemorrhage. Easier said than done though.

The rest of Hamas will then be squabbling over who will be the new leaders. Israel ought not to bomb civilians but instead to protect them and send them aid, especially if they cooperate against Hamas. Thus, Israel can destroy Hamas in a much less murderous and destructive fashion, while making friends among Palestinians.
I do not think that part will work. The Gaza leadership of Hamas - Yaya Sinwar, Fathi Hamad and others - have operational control over the fighters. Killing the Qatar leadership would be extremely satisfying but would not disrupt Hamas operations. And as long as they hide among and under the population, civilian casualties are a necessary evil in destroying Hamas.

But instead, Israel's leaders have decided to outdo Hamas in murderousness and destructiveness. I'm disappointed in many critics of Israel for not being willing to say that Israel should not imitate Hamas.
Israel is not imitating Hamas. And neither is it approaching Hamas in murderousness, much less exceeding. Destructiveness is another matter. A successful military campaign is destructive by its very nature. Just ask a German who lived in Berlin in 1945. Or a Japanese resident of Hiroshima, a bit later that same year.

The  Hyksos departed Canaan and arrived in the Nile Delta around 1800 BCE, and were expelled from there around 1550 BCE, or at least their leaders were. So Canaanites dispersed around then, some of them likely also going northward.
The stories of Joseph in Genesis and of Moses in Exodus could have their origins in the history of the Hyskos.
 
What some people seemingly are overlooking is that all of these far right Israeli policies on the Palestinians were put in place to protect Israelis. The policies don't exist just for the heck of it, or because the Israeli government hates the Palestinians. No, the policies are supposed to protect Israel.
Bingo. Which is what makes the endlessly repeated canard that Israel is an apartheid state so disingenuous
Apartheid was put in place to protect South Africans. Apartheid didn't exist just for the heck of it, or because the South African government liked being a global pariah. No, the policy was supposed to protect South Africa.
:picardfacepalm:

"The United Kingdom's Slavery Abolition Act 1833 abolished slavery throughout the British Empire and overrode the Cape Articles of Capitulation. To comply with the act, the South African legislation was expanded to include Ordinance 1 in 1835, which effectively changed the status of slaves to indentured labourers."​

They kept the black people as indentured laborers because free black people kept murdering white people?

"the Franchise and Ballot Act of 1892 raised the property franchise qualification and added an educational element, disenfranchising a disproportionate number of the Cape's non-white voters,[30] and the Glen Grey Act of 1894 instigated by the government of Prime Minister Cecil Rhodes limited the amount of land Africans could hold. Similarly, in Natal, the Natal Legislative Assembly Bill of 1894 deprived Indians of the right to vote."​

Poor, uneducated and Indian voters kept voting to murder white people? Africans with lots of land kept murdering white people?

"In 1905 the General Pass Regulations Act denied blacks the vote and limited them to fixed areas,[34] and in 1906 the Asiatic Registration Act of the Transvaal Colony required all Indians to register and carry passes. "​

Blacks had been voting to murder whites? Unregistered Indians had been murdering whites?

" the Colour Bar Act (1926) prevented black mine workers from practising skilled trades "​

When a mine worker learned to be an electrician he used his skills to electrocute white people?

" the Representation of Natives Act removed previous black voters from the Cape voters' roll and allowed them to elect three whites to Parliament."​

If they allowed three black representatives in Parliament the black MPs would have murdered the white MPs?

" Post-war, one of the first pieces of segregating legislation enacted by Smuts' government was the Asiatic Land Tenure Bill (1946), which banned land sales to Indians and Indian descendent South Africans."​

Selling land to an ethnic Indian made him inclined to murder white people?

"The National Party's election platform stressed that apartheid would preserve a market for white employment in which nonwhites could not compete. "​

Oh, is that what you meant by "put in place to protect South Africans"?

South African practices had the same purpose as Israeli practices because the word "protect" is used both for protectionist economic policies and for keeping people from being murdered. Got it.
 
Perhaps you could think about whether there are also protectionist economic polices in Israel, that make it difficult for Palestinians to participate fully in the economy.

Perhaps you could consider whether the ability to find examples of economic protectionism in any way indicates that there was no element of the South African apartheid system designed to prevent violence by blacks against whites.

Perhaps.
 
What some people seemingly are overlooking is that all of these far right Israeli policies on the Palestinians were put in place to protect Israelis. The policies don't exist just for the heck of it, or because the Israeli government hates the Palestinians. No, the policies are supposed to protect Israel.
Bingo. Which is what makes the endlessly repeated canard that Israel is an apartheid state so disingenuous
Apartheid was put in place to protect South Africans. Apartheid didn't exist just for the heck of it, or because the South African government liked being a global pariah. No, the policy was supposed to protect South Africa.
:picardfacepalm:

"The United Kingdom's Slavery Abolition Act 1833 abolished slavery throughout the British Empire and overrode the Cape Articles of Capitulation. To comply with the act, the South African legislation was expanded to include Ordinance 1 in 1835, which effectively changed the status of slaves to indentured labourers."​

They kept the black people as indentured laborers because free black people kept murdering white people?

"the Franchise and Ballot Act of 1892 raised the property franchise qualification and added an educational element, disenfranchising a disproportionate number of the Cape's non-white voters,[30] and the Glen Grey Act of 1894 instigated by the government of Prime Minister Cecil Rhodes limited the amount of land Africans could hold. Similarly, in Natal, the Natal Legislative Assembly Bill of 1894 deprived Indians of the right to vote."​

Poor, uneducated and Indian voters kept voting to murder white people? Africans with lots of land kept murdering white people?

"In 1905 the General Pass Regulations Act denied blacks the vote and limited them to fixed areas,[34] and in 1906 the Asiatic Registration Act of the Transvaal Colony required all Indians to register and carry passes. "​

Blacks had been voting to murder whites? Unregistered Indians had been murdering whites?

" the Colour Bar Act (1926) prevented black mine workers from practising skilled trades "​

When a mine worker learned to be an electrician he used his skills to electrocute white people?

" the Representation of Natives Act removed previous black voters from the Cape voters' roll and allowed them to elect three whites to Parliament."​

If they allowed three black representatives in Parliament the black MPs would have murdered the white MPs?

" Post-war, one of the first pieces of segregating legislation enacted by Smuts' government was the Asiatic Land Tenure Bill (1946), which banned land sales to Indians and Indian descendent South Africans."​

Selling land to an ethnic Indian made him inclined to murder white people?

"The National Party's election platform stressed that apartheid would preserve a market for white employment in which nonwhites could not compete. "​

Oh, is that what you meant by "put in place to protect South Africans"?

South African practices had the same purpose as Israeli practices because the word "protect" is used both for protectionist economic policies and for keeping people from being murdered. Got it.
Apartheid had numerous reasons for its origin and for its continued existence: economic and social reasons. One could say it was to protect white people’s economic, political status along with personal safety. social status.

Israel’s policies toward Palestinian and Israeli Arabs are geared to protect Israeli Jews personal safety and political status with the added bonus of some economic bonus.

Israel’s policies are not perfect replicas of South Africa’s apartheid but there are parallels. It is a matter of opinion whether they are close enough to be termed apartheid. Which means it is not necessarily disingenuous to describe Israel’s policy as apartheid.

I view Israeli treatment of Israeli Arabs and Palestinians as regrettable and counter- productive but I think the term “ apartheid “ is too strong a description. However, I find your focus solely on murder is a rather disingenuous basis for needless ridicule.
 
Back
Top Bottom