Merged Gaza just launched an unprovoked attack on Israel

[TV and credit cards]

I wrote specifically about Hamas and the support it receives from Iran.

Of course. You have to. The only way any of this works is to look at this incident in a vacuum. That this hatred for Israel and the US grew organically. And if 25 years from now hundreds of tourists at resorts along the beautiful beaches of Gaza get their throats cut by Arab workers we'll again look at the incident in a vacuum.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Here is an article on the subject. No paywall I can see for this one:

BBC accused of using Hamas official’s son in documentary about ‘ordinary Palestinians’

‘Hamas propaganda promoted as reliable fact’, anti-Semitism campaigners say in official complaint

www.telegraph.co.uk

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Have to sign in though.

 

[Colonel Sanders]

Palestinians aren't being killed because Israel wants to wipe out Palestinians. They're being killed because Hamas, knowing they have no hope of exterminating the Jews like they wished they could, went ahead and attacked Israel, full well knowing what the consequences would be.

Strange. You are saying the Israelies have no choice in the matter, they are automatons simply running the program provided to them by Hamas.

Seriously? I don't even know where to begin, so I won't.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Sorry, the first time I went to the article I could read it. Now there's a sign-in. Let me try another:

BBC blasted for 'blindly spouting propaganda' in new Gaza documentary

Gaza: How to Survive a Warzone was broadcast on Monday on BBC Two with the aim of showing a 'vivid and unflinching view of life' in the strip.

www.dailymail.co.uk

BBC accused of spreading propaganda after airing Gaza doc featuring Hamas official's son - JNS.org

"It is about time that the BBC understood that the only organization that has editorial control over what we see come out of Gaza is Hamas."

www.jns.org

 

[Colonel Sanders]

I wrote specifically about Hamas and the support it receives from Iran.

Of course. You have to. The only way any of this works is to look at this incident in a vacuum. That this hatred for Israel and the US grew organically. And if 25 years from now hundreds of tourists at resorts along the beautiful beaches of Gaza get their throats cut by Arab workers we'll again look at the incident in a vacuum.

What I refuse to do is to attempt to kick the ball through ever moving goalposts and then entertain unjustified speculation that ends with justification for continued hatred and murder by oppressive theocratic regimes.

 

[Colonel Sanders]

ETA: if Trump launched a nuclear strike against China and they retaliated in kind, thereby killing tens of millions of Americans, shouldn't Trump be held responsible for starting that bullshit?

Of course he should because those tens of millions wouldn't have been killed without his idiotic choices.

Yes. And you think that hypothetical is relevant to defending the proposed ethnic cleansing of Gaza because.......?

See, you keep using that term despite the fact that it's not happening….

I didn’t use the term genocide.

]
The hypothetical works because we would hold Trump responsible for his decisions. Meanwhile, folks like yourself have decided that it's apparently fine for Hamas to attack Israel and that there will be no consequences for that. It is indeed a puzzling position to hold.

Doubly so, because I don’t hold it.

How does it make sense to ethnically cleanse of Gaza (Trump’s wet dream) to hold millions of Gazans accountable for something Hamas did ?

Mm'kay.

 

[Elixir]

if Trump launched a nuclear strike against China and they retaliated in kind, thereby killing tens of millions of Americans, shouldn't Trump be held responsible for starting that bullshit?

Why should he be? It's obviously Obama's Biden's shifty Schiff's fault.

The hypothetical works because we would hold Trump responsible for his decisions.

Like we held him responsible for trying to overturn the 2020 election? Note: He is blaming Biden for causing the spike in inflation since he took office. Nobody is blaming poor Donald the perennial victim. It mystifies me why anyone would think "we" would hold him responsible for any of his theft, grift, dereliction of duty or treason.

why do liberals support oppressive theocratic nations whose unmistakable intent is genocide?

Since when is Saint Donald a liberal?

 

[laughing dog]

ETA: if Trump launched a nuclear strike against China and they retaliated in kind, thereby killing tens of millions of Americans, shouldn't Trump be held responsible for starting that bullshit?

Of course he should because those tens of millions wouldn't have been killed without his idiotic choices.

Yes. And you think that hypothetical is relevant to defending the proposed ethnic cleansing of Gaza because.......?

See, you keep using that term despite the fact that it's not happening….

I didn’t use the term genocide.

]
The hypothetical works because we would hold Trump responsible for his decisions. Meanwhile, folks like yourself have decided that it's apparently fine for Hamas to attack Israel and that there will be no consequences for that. It is indeed a puzzling position to hold.

Doubly so, because I don’t hold it.

How does it make sense to ethnically cleanse of Gaza (Trump’s wet dream) to hold millions of Gazans accountable for something Hamas did ?

Mm'kay.

I apologize. I thought I was dealing someone who had a clue.

 

[TomC]

Palestinians aren't being killed because Israel wants to wipe out Palestinians. They're being killed because Hamas, knowing they have no hope of exterminating the Jews like they wished they could, went ahead and attacked Israel, full well knowing what the consequences would be.

Strange. You are saying the Israelies have no choice in the matter, they are automatons simply running the program provided to them by Hamas.

Nonsense.
He's pointing out that that the Israelis are the victims here. They are responding to a vicious attack. The Gazan casualties are entirely the result of the policies and choices made by the Gaza leadership.

That's the part that keeps getting handwaved away. Virtually every casualty is a direct result of Gaza being run by violent Muslim terrorists, including the deaths of the human shields.
Tom

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Palestinians aren't being killed because Israel wants to wipe out Palestinians. They're being killed because Hamas, knowing they have no hope of exterminating the Jews like they wished they could, went ahead and attacked Israel, full well knowing what the consequences would be.

Strange. You are saying the Israelies have no choice in the matter, they are automatons simply running the program provided to them by Hamas.

Nonsense.
He's pointing out that that the Israelis are the victims here. They are responding to a vicious attack. The Gazan casualties are entirely the result of the policies and choices made by the Gaza leadership.

That's the part that keeps getting handwaved away.

Except it isn't really that simple. Hamas are the people in control, but to consider them the "leadership" is gross oversimplification. There is a consistent attempt to equate Hamas with Gaza, therefore making damage to Gaza a moralistic action.

However, we can let that pass as is, but still run into the roadblock of "Is Israel better off now?" Even if we suppose the IDF's actions were 100% moral, we still need to assess the benefits of the actions and how it will impact Israel over the long-term.

 

[Elixir]

If you asked an ultra-orthodox Jew, none of my step-siblings are Jewish, though many of my uncles and aunts, and one of my step-fathers is.

What’s the point in identifying with a “group” that is such an amorphous entity?

 

[Elixir]

The Gazan casualties are entirely the result of the policies and choices made by the Gaza leadership under the duress of decades of oppression and displacement forced upon them by Israeli policies.

That is the part that keeps getting handwaved away.

 

[bilby]

If you asked an ultra-orthodox Jew, none of my step-siblings are Jewish, though many of my uncles and aunts, and one of my step-fathers is.

What’s the point in identifying with a “group” that is such an amorphous entity?

Beats me. Humans love them some tribalism, I guess.

 

[TV and credit cards]

The Gazan casualties are entirely the result of the policies and choices made by the Gaza leadership under the duress of decades of oppression and displacement forced upon them by Israeli policies.

That is the part that keeps getting handwaved away.

Exactly so. Though I’m probably not the first, I call it Battered Palestinian Syndrome. How much can a people take.

 

[TomC]

If you asked an ultra-orthodox Jew, none of my step-siblings are Jewish, though many of my uncles and aunts, and one of my step-fathers is.

What’s the point in identifying with a “group” that is such an amorphous entity?

People do that a lot. What is the point of identifying as a Christian or black?

Jews are a particularly sticky wicket. It's a vague ethnicity, and a culture, and a religion. My b-i-l is ethnic Jewish, cultural Jewish, but he's no more theistic than I am (possibly less).
Plus, Jews have been the target of vicious bigotry for centuries throughout the Abrahamic world. My b-i-l is super smart and accomplished (PhD, department chair of a giant university), not much interested in religion. I'm certain that the anti-Jewish bigots of the world would have consigned him to a death camp back in the 40s.
Tom

 

[TV and credit cards]

I wrote specifically about Hamas and the support it receives from Iran.

Of course. You have to. The only way any of this works is to look at this incident in a vacuum. That this hatred for Israel and the US grew organically. And if 25 years from now hundreds of tourists at resorts along the beautiful beaches of Gaza get their throats cut by Arab workers we'll again look at the incident in a vacuum.

What I refuse to do is to attempt to kick the ball through ever moving goalposts and then entertain unjustified speculation that ends with justification for continued hatred and murder by oppressive theocratic regimes.

For my part I use the end of WWII and what has transpired since. What I cannot look past is how the governments of the civilized world routinely stand against us on Israel/Palestine issues in the UN. Even our best bud GB, abstain as they oftentimes do end up on the other side of these issues. If someone can give me a good reason to wave all this away, I'd be most impressed.

 

[Elixir]

Jews are a particularly sticky wicket.

That was my point.
A sticky, militaristic wicket.

 

[laughing dog]

Palestinians aren't being killed because Israel wants to wipe out Palestinians. They're being killed because Hamas, knowing they have no hope of exterminating the Jews like they wished they could, went ahead and attacked Israel, full well knowing what the consequences would be.

Strange. You are saying the Israelies have no choice in the matter, they are automatons simply running the program provided to them by Hamas.

Nonsense.
He's pointing out that that the Israelis are the victims here. They are responding to a vicious attack. The Gazan casualties are entirely the result of the policies and choices made by the Gaza leadership.

The bold-faced part is counterfactual. The Israelis are victims of Hamas terrorism. But the gov't of Israel made choices on how to react and how to conduct its military actions. Gazan civilians are victims of Hamas terrorism, and the policy and military choices of Israel.

 

[TomC]

Jews are a particularly sticky wicket.

That was my point.
A sticky, militaristic wicket.

Why do you add militaristic?
Leaving out the defense against violent attacks, what militaristic behavior are you referring to? I don't see much.
Tom