Merged Gaza just launched an unprovoked attack on Israel

[barbos]

So, US was the (!!!) single country who voted against UN resolution calling for ceasefire in Gaza......

 

[Politesse]

So US was the the (!!!) single country who voted against UN resolution calling for ceasefire in Gaza......

Genocide.

 

[Arctish]

The question is the degree of overlap which is something reasonable people can disagree without being disingenuous.

If the dispute were happening in a context-free vacuum, maybe. But the point of labeling Israel's practices "apartheid" is to cast Israel in the role of sole oppressor and misdirect the audience into not observing that Hamas and the other terrorists and their numerous civilian supporters are also oppressors. It's verbal sleight-of-hand.

For some reason, you feel that in a complex world with multiple motivations, there is single reason that motivates everyone .

Israel has been labeled an apartheid state about a million and a half times since Oct. 7. If, in this complex world with multiple motivations, there isn't a single reason that motivates everyone (in parallel with their other additional idiosyncratic motivations), then you should have no trouble quoting one of them who included in his apartheid accusation a forthright stipulation that what Hamas did on Oct. 7 was a crime against humanity.

"quoting one of them who included in his apartheid accusation a forthright stipulation that what Hamas did on Oct. 7 was a crime against humanity"

Why must it be included in the same statement?

I didn't say it must be included in the same statement; people who say it can freely choose to include or not include whatever they please. But people's choices are evidence of their psychology. Someone including it in the same statement is what it would take to provide empirical evidence for ld's contention. Likewise, it must not be included in the same statement in order for the accusation to serve its apparent intended purpose, which is to propagate the misrepresentation that the relation of the Israelis to the Palestinians is the same as the relation of the Afrikaaners to the black South Africans -- i.e., a one-way oppressor-oppressed relation -- as opposed to the two-way mutual-oppression relation the Israelis and Palestinians in fact have with each other. Every time yet another person makes the accusation without the stipulation, it adds more empirical evidence to the already overflowing pile in favor of the hypothesis that the intended purpose is exactly what it appears to be.

What definition of the term 'oppression' do you use, and how do you decide who is oppressing whom?

 

[Gospel]

The question is the degree of overlap which is something reasonable people can disagree without being disingenuous.

If the dispute were happening in a context-free vacuum, maybe. But the point of labeling Israel's practices "apartheid" is to cast Israel in the role of sole oppressor and misdirect the audience into not observing that Hamas and the other terrorists and their numerous civilian supporters are also oppressors. It's verbal sleight-of-hand.

For some reason, you feel that in a complex world with multiple motivations, there is single reason that motivates everyone .

Israel has been labeled an apartheid state about a million and a half times since Oct. 7. If, in this complex world with multiple motivations, there isn't a single reason that motivates everyone (in parallel with their other additional idiosyncratic motivations), then you should have no trouble quoting one of them who included in his apartheid accusation a forthright stipulation that what Hamas did on Oct. 7 was a crime against humanity.

"quoting one of them who included in his apartheid accusation a forthright stipulation that what Hamas did on Oct. 7 was a crime against humanity"

Why must it be included in the same statement?

To abandon subtlety in favor of simplicity makes it all too easy to dismiss people, striding off into the sunset with a self-righteous gait, untouched by criticism. That's why. It fell short.

 

[Gospel]

In my opinion, given the involvement of groups like Hamas, the veto against the cease-fire has some justification. While it's not the ideal choice for the immediate safety and welfare of civilians, a cease-fire doesn't necessarily ensure their long-term security or betterment. Essentially, a cease-fire acts as a temporary solution, providing temporary relief. But once it ends, reality resurfaces & the same destructive patterns resume. The resolution of this conflict requires the cessation of Hamas' activities, alongside a halt and reversal of Israel's expansionist policies. They ought to work in hormony with their neighbors as it's the only way to get remotely close to peace. Throughout history, nations that have tried to eliminate all their enemies have not succeeded, and those that came close to doing so no longer exist.

 

[TV and credit cards]

A ceasefire has been holding in Korea. I think Israel should spend the next seventy years, if necessary building trust with the Palestinian community.
You can't eliminate hate with 155mm rounds.

 

[Politesse]

A ceasefire has been holding in Korea. I think Israel should spend the next seventy years, if necessary building trust with the Palestinian community.
You can't eliminate hate with 155mm rounds.

They don't want to eliminate hate, they want to eliminate the Palestinians. We're picking up the tab.

 

[laughing dog]

The question is the degree of overlap which is something reasonable people can disagree without being disingenuous.

If the dispute were happening in a context-free vacuum, maybe. But the point of labeling Israel's practices "apartheid" is to cast Israel in the role of sole oppressor and misdirect the audience into not observing that Hamas and the other terrorists and their numerous civilian supporters are also oppressors. It's verbal sleight-of-hand.

For some reason, you feel that in a complex world with multiple motivations, there is single reason that motivates everyone .

Israel has been labeled an apartheid state about a million and a half times since Oct. 7. If, in this complex world with multiple motivations, there isn't a single reason that motivates everyone (in parallel with their other additional idiosyncratic motivations), then you should have no trouble quoting one of them who included in his apartheid accusation a forthright stipulation that what Hamas did on Oct. 7 was a crime against humanity.

"quoting one of them who included in his apartheid accusation a forthright stipulation that what Hamas did on Oct. 7 was a crime against humanity"

Why must it be included in the same statement?

I didn't say it must be included in the same statement; people who say it can freely choose to include or not include whatever they please. But people's choices are evidence of their psychology. Someone including it in the same statement is what it would take to provide empirical evidence for ld's contention. Likewise, it must not be included in the same statement in order for the accusation to serve its apparent intended purpose, which is to propagate the misrepresentation that the relation of the Israelis to the Palestinians is the same as the relation of the Afrikaaners to the black South Africans -- i.e., a one-way oppressor-oppressed relation -- as opposed to the two-way mutual-oppression relation the Israelis and Palestinians in fact have with each other. Every time yet another person makes the accusation without the stipulation, it adds more empirical evidence to the already overflowing pile in favor of the hypothesis that the intended purpose is exactly what it appears to be.

What definition of the term 'oppression' do you use, and how do you decide who is oppressing whom?

And why tacitly equate different levels of oppression ?

 

[Gospel]

A ceasefire has been holding in Korea.

While I'm simplifying, the Korean conflict was largely about Communism versus Capitalism ideology, while the Israel-Palestine issue is rooted in religious ideology. In these conflicts, one ideology has often been associated with colonization and the pursuit of total victory over enemies, whereas the other typically does not follow this approach.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Begrudging respect to the Zionist interviewed. It would be cool to have a ethnostate, like he might get soon

Stripping a Palestinian captive is normal practice in response to suicide bombs.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

A Columbia University group organized an event where the Hamas massacre on 10/7 was celebrated. This is yet another example of support for Hamas inside "pro-Palestine" activism.

Where do you get "celebration" from a "teach in"?

For a dog you can be amazingly deaf to dog whistles.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

"centrality of revolutionary violence to anti-imperialism"

Are you really that blind, Hound? You are not a whelp any more, your eyes should be wide open.

I get it - you believe you are reading between the lines. But the space between those lines are open to other reasonable interpretations.

From I can tell from the content of the poster, it appears to me to imply that the terrorism is necessary to fight "imperialism" (whatever that has to do with Gaza, I don't know). It does appear as if the teach in will involve justifying or excusing Hamas's terrorism, but that does not make it a "celebration".

That's how dog whistles always work. They are set up for plausible deniability.

 

[laughing dog]

"centrality of revolutionary violence to anti-imperialism"

Are you really that blind, Hound? You are not a whelp any more, your eyes should be wide open.

I get it - you believe you are reading between the lines. But the space between those lines are open to other reasonable interpretations.

From I can tell from the content of the poster, it appears to me to imply that the terrorism is necessary to fight "imperialism" (whatever that has to do with Gaza, I don't know). It does appear as if the teach in will involve justifying or excusing Hamas's terrorism, but that does not make it a "celebration".

That's how dog whistles always work. They are set up for plausible deniability.

Claims concerning reality require facts. Got any facts that the teach in is also or just a celebration?

For a dog, you can be amazingly deaf to dog whistles.

Or I am acutely aware of what is and what is not a dog whistle. It also helos that my head is not up the metaphorical ass of Israeli propaganda.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

"centrality of revolutionary violence to anti-imperialism"

Are you really that blind, Hound? You are not a whelp any more, your eyes should be wide open.

I get it - you believe you are reading between the lines. But the space between those lines are open to other reasonable interpretations.

From I can tell from the content of the poster, it appears to me to imply that the terrorism is necessary to fight "imperialism" (whatever that has to do with Gaza, I don't know). It does appear as if the teach in will involve justifying or excusing Hamas's terrorism, but that does not make it a "celebration".

This comes down to the semantics of "celebration". "Celebration" can be party, but it can also be holding something up as an example of good. The latter fits his use.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The people hosting the event might believe that terrorism is necessary,

The vile people hosting the event most certainly do, as they are defending the 10/7 terrorism.

Have you done any research on that group and the types of events they host, or are you projecting?

The poster invites people to a discussion. That might be a cover for a sales pitch, or it might be an invitation to a series of short speeches with a question and answer period between speakers. I don't know which and I suspect neither do you.

If you don't know you're not looking. No research is needed, the poster is enough. They clearly are saying the massacre was a good thing.

Admitting that Abbas has committed the PA to seeking a diplomatic solution would be helpful as well.

We don't admit it because it's never happened. He's pretended to seek a diplomatic solution but this has always been shown to be a ruse. Note that radical Islam does not believe in binding agreements with infidels. Any agreement with an infidel is purely for temporary convenience. Think of the QOP turned up to 11.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Over here statements are being interpreted promoting genocide of Jews and Israel, yet that is what Israel is doing to Gaza. The pictures of decaying infant babies in a hospital.

I'm not sure of exactly what pictures you are referring to, but the last one I saw of babies in a hospital in Gaza was clearly staged. It was either a complete lie or the babies were being imperiled to nauseate you. I posted it and asked if anyone could see the problem, nobody saw it. Reality: If you are having a problem keeping a baby warm you wrap them up the best you can. You don't lay a bunch of them out in minimal attire.

You fail to comprehend the evil they are willing to commit to fool you.

Gaza is becoming an apocalyptic waste land. Palestinians not killed directly will die from disease and starvation.

Yet no consideration for the logical option of surrender?

Tunnels may be flooded. We are looking at the kind of contempt Nazis had for not just Jews but any individual or group labeled inferior, or an enemy or threat to the state.

And what's evil about flooding the tunnels?

The Israeli brutality, is it a reflection of the true nature o Israeli culture? I am beginning to think so.

No, it's a reflection of decades of learning that lesser measures don't work.

Israel is shooting at fish in a barrel.

Perfectly fine if the fish persist in shooting back.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The State Department approves the sale of tank ammunition to Israel in a deal that bypasses Congress

Going around Congress, the Biden administration says it's approved the emergency sale to Israel of nearly 14,000 rounds of tank ammunition worth more than $106 million as Israel intensifies its military operations in the southern Gaza Strip.

apnews.com

“The United States is committed to the security of Israel, and it is vital to U.S. national interests to assist Israel to develop and maintain a strong and ready self-defense capability. This proposed sale is consistent with those objectives,”

Horseshit.

I honestly don't think it is.

I think that the decades of U.S. support for Israel is based on our military security, sorta.

I don't think that the U.S. government has ever been at all invested democracy or "doing the right thing for those poor oppressed Jews". But Israel's continued existence and dependence on U.S. gives a reliable beachhead within striking distance of the Gulf Oil Region.

So while AIPAC money and stuff are important, the main thing is military control of petroleum reserves.
Tom

We originally became involved in the mess in 1973--the Arab powers looked like they were going to overrun Israel and that would have caused Israel to push the button. Given the Russian backing of some of the states that would have been on the receiving end of it there was a very real possibility of triggering WWIII. We provided enough aid to keep them from having to push the button.

Since then Israel has provided a lightning rod for Islamic terrorism and has provided a baby war for testing weapons and combat strategies. In Desert Storm we learned the problem with Patriots vs real world ballistic missiles. I'm sure we saw the data on how Israel successfully engaged a ballistic missile.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

<Hits Gospel over the head with a newspaper-by-4>

Have you not seen how much of mess that place has become?

By comparison to the paradise it was under apartheid?

It's become a good deal better for the average Sowetan. A fair bit worse for the average Afrikaner.

Is it better or worse overall? Depends who you ask.

No. It's become a worse place for both.

The people are more oppressed now than under Apartheid. The Afrikaner government was at least sane and not horribly corrupt.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Sometimes things seem the darkest just when they are about to turn. There is no peace possible as long as Hamas is in power. It also probably isn't possible as long as the Israeli far right is in power. I do think that Netanyahu's coalition is going to fall as a result of their unbelievable lapses leading up to this attack. I think that things will look better in a year or so.

There can be no peace so long as Iran continues to pour money in to the war.

 

[Gospel]

We originally became involved in the mess in 1973

I had no idea 1948 was only 50 years ago.