Israel vs Hamas

[dang1]

..extreme collective punishment of Palestinians in Gaza. Why the double standard?

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/palestinian-muslim-arab-islamophobia-media_n_65319009e4b03b213b094cce

seems like maybe "collective punishment" to you is Israel degrading hummus' ability to wage war on Israel.

Maybe hummus expected Israel to respond with just merely thoughts and prayers in response to hummus' attack

[bacchi]

..extreme collective punishment of Palestinians in Gaza. Why the double standard?

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/palestinian-muslim-arab-islamophobia-media_n_65319009e4b03b213b094cce

seems like maybe "collective punishment" to you is Israel degrading hummus' ability to wage war on Israel.

Maybe hummus expected Israel to respond with just merely thoughts and prayers in response to hummus' attack

"Collective punishment" would be cutting off utilities and water and food shipments to 2M civilians, and expecting 1M to evacuate in 24 hours, because of the actions of ~20k Hamas members.

Hamas likely expected this type of overreaction from the Israel hawk politicians.

[dang1]

..extreme collective punishment of Palestinians in Gaza. Why the double standard?

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/palestinian-muslim-arab-islamophobia-media_n_65319009e4b03b213b094cce

seems like maybe "collective punishment" to you is Israel degrading hummus' ability to wage war on Israel.

Maybe hummus expected Israel to respond with just merely thoughts and prayers in response to hummus' attack

"Collective punishment" would be cutting off utilities and water and food shipments to 2M civilians, and expecting 1M to evacuate in 24 hours, because of the actions of ~20k Hamas members.

Hamas likely expected this type of overreaction from the Israel hawk politicians.

cutting off utilities and water and food shipments to 2M civilians, and expecting 1M to evacuate in 24 hours, seems like Israeli military move to deny hummus resources to fight an Israeli invasion in a free-fire zone. Wouldn't want more civilians around in a urban warfare environment. The faster hummus cease to resist, the faster the intense immediate combat would cease

[Metalcat]

Yeah, while y'all figure out which nouns and adjectives to use, people are dying.

There are fraught issues about how we talk about the current conflict that I think are much more important than whether we say "the Jews and the Palestinians" or "the Jewish people and the Palestinian people." The issue I find disturbing is that there seems to be a double standard regarding what people are allowed to say. Students and faculty on campuses like Harvard and Penn are being angrily denounced for expressing pro-Palestinian points of view without also condemning the Hamas attack, whereas those same denouncers say nothing when certain commentators in the media advocate extreme collective punishment of Palestinians in Gaza. Why the double standard?

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/palestinian-muslim-arab-islamophobia-media_n_65319009e4b03b213b094cce

I'm very happy to get back on topic if we have any more clarity on what the hell is happening. I was just trying to offer some perspective on a conflict that was already happening in the thread. But I certainly regret doing that now.

That said, more subtle manifestations of antisemitism and anti Arab or anti Muslim sentiment are quite important and playing out in waves of both forms of bigotry all over as what existed as general negative sentiment explodes into hatred.

I'm personally pretty shocked by how this is playing out outside of the region. Trudeau just made a statement about how the level of antisemitism in Canada is sharply rising in response.

I fully understand being really, really angry with the Israeli government, but I can't make sense of what that has to do with attacking a Jewish school in Canada.

I also live right near a Somalian neighbourhood and they have had guards around the Muslim community center, which is batshit crazy. What the hell does a Somalian community center have to do with Hamas??

So people are getting outraged by senseless violence against innocent people and their response is to commit more senseless violence against more innocent people??

It's nuts.

[GuitarStv]

I'm personally pretty shocked by how this is playing out outside of the region. Trudeau just made a statement about how the level of antisemitism in Canada is sharply rising in response.

I fully understand being really, really angry with the Israeli government, but I can't make sense of what that has to do with attacking a Jewish school in Canada.

I also live right near a Somalian neighbourhood and they have had guards around the Muslim community center, which is batshit crazy. What the hell does a Somalian community center have to do with Hamas??

So people are getting outraged by senseless violence against innocent people and their response is to commit more senseless violence against more innocent people??

It's nuts.

Agreed, the stuff that's going on makes no sense at all.  There just seem to be a certain number of people who want to attack others and are waiting in the wings for any excuse possible to do so.

[snic]

..extreme collective punishment of Palestinians in Gaza. Why the double standard?

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/palestinian-muslim-arab-islamophobia-media_n_65319009e4b03b213b094cce

seems like maybe "collective punishment" to you is Israel degrading hummus' ability to wage war on Israel.

Maybe hummus expected Israel to respond with just merely thoughts and prayers in response to hummus' attack

Seems like maybe you intentionally misinterpreted my post by cutting off most of it and then replying to something you made it seem like I said, but didn't.

Ironically enough, your childish attempt at misdirection illustrates the point I was trying to make to begin with. The media figures (and Lindsey Graham) described in the article I linked propose even harsher treatment of Palestinians in Gaza than what Israel so far has done. Where is your condemnation of their outrageous cheerleading for the butchery of innocents? Why are only pro-Palestinian voices subject to such condemnation?

[snic]

Yeah, while y'all figure out which nouns and adjectives to use, people are dying.

There are fraught issues about how we talk about the current conflict that I think are much more important than whether we say "the Jews and the Palestinians" or "the Jewish people and the Palestinian people." The issue I find disturbing is that there seems to be a double standard regarding what people are allowed to say. Students and faculty on campuses like Harvard and Penn are being angrily denounced for expressing pro-Palestinian points of view without also condemning the Hamas attack, whereas those same denouncers say nothing when certain commentators in the media advocate extreme collective punishment of Palestinians in Gaza. Why the double standard?

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/palestinian-muslim-arab-islamophobia-media_n_65319009e4b03b213b094cce

I'm very happy to get back on topic if we have any more clarity on what the hell is happening. I was just trying to offer some perspective on a conflict that was already happening in the thread. But I certainly regret doing that now.

That said, more subtle manifestations of antisemitism and anti Arab or anti Muslim sentiment are quite important and playing out in waves of both forms of bigotry all over as what existed as general negative sentiment explodes into hatred.

I'm personally pretty shocked by how this is playing out outside of the region. Trudeau just made a statement about how the level of antisemitism in Canada is sharply rising in response.

I fully understand being really, really angry with the Israeli government, but I can't make sense of what that has to do with attacking a Jewish school in Canada.

I also live right near a Somalian neighbourhood and they have had guards around the Muslim community center, which is batshit crazy. What the hell does a Somalian community center have to do with Hamas??

So people are getting outraged by senseless violence against innocent people and their response is to commit more senseless violence against more innocent people??

It's nuts.

It is beyond nuts. Then again, people's passions are not rational, and the situation is not helped by the way people get their news nowadays. It's so easy to get caught in an echo chamber of media and social media in which one's own prejudice is reinforced and objective reality holds no sway. The results can be tragic.

[dang1]

..extreme collective punishment of Palestinians in Gaza. Why the double standard?

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/palestinian-muslim-arab-islamophobia-media_n_65319009e4b03b213b094cce

seems like maybe "collective punishment" to you is Israel degrading hummus' ability to wage war on Israel.

Maybe hummus expected Israel to respond with just merely thoughts and prayers in response to hummus' attack

Seems like maybe you intentionally misinterpreted my post by cutting off most of it and then replying to something you made it seem like I said, but didn't.

Ironically enough, your childish attempt at misdirection illustrates the point I was trying to make to begin with. The media figures (and Lindsey Graham) described in the article I linked propose even harsher treatment of Palestinians in Gaza than what Israel so far has done. Where is your condemnation of their outrageous cheerleading for the butchery of innocents? Why are only pro-Palestinian voices subject to such condemnation?

War is hell, especially for the collateral damage. Better for those Palestinian civilians to heed the directions of the Israeli military asap.

[MustacheAndaHalf]

I'm very happy to get back on topic if we have any more clarity on what the hell is happening.

Posting repeatedly off topic doesn't show much interest in getting back on topic.

[MustacheAndaHalf]

Before this semantic debate I was discussing the hospital parking lot explosion in Gaza, and have one clarification / update:

(1) Hamas fighters launched rockets, one of which went off course (per video shared by IDF, I didn't check the timestamp).

Apparently IDF also "didn't check the timestamp", as the video was from a misfired Hamas rocket after the hospital parking lot explosion.  It wasn't the same incident, and the IDF has taken down that video.

Well, kind of - they now show that misfire in a montage of other Hamas rockets misfiring.  A number of Hamas rockets have spiraled chaotically and landed randomly somewhere in Gaza.

[GilesMM]

Before this semantic debate I was discussing the hospital parking lot explosion in Gaza, and have one clarification / update:

(1) Hamas fighters launched rockets, one of which went off course (per video shared by IDF, I didn't check the timestamp).

Apparently IDF also "didn't check the timestamp", as the video was from a misfired Hamas rocket after the hospital parking lot explosion.  It wasn't the same incident, and the IDF has taken down that video.

Well, kind of - they now show that misfire in a montage of other Hamas rockets misfiring.  A number of Hamas rockets have spiraled chaotically and landed randomly somewhere in Gaza.

IDF has a long history of misinformation and outright lies.   We would do well to discount anything they say on this issue.

[GuitarStv]

..extreme collective punishment of Palestinians in Gaza. Why the double standard?

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/palestinian-muslim-arab-islamophobia-media_n_65319009e4b03b213b094cce

seems like maybe "collective punishment" to you is Israel degrading hummus' ability to wage war on Israel.

Maybe hummus expected Israel to respond with just merely thoughts and prayers in response to hummus' attack

Seems like maybe you intentionally misinterpreted my post by cutting off most of it and then replying to something you made it seem like I said, but didn't.

Ironically enough, your childish attempt at misdirection illustrates the point I was trying to make to begin with. The media figures (and Lindsey Graham) described in the article I linked propose even harsher treatment of Palestinians in Gaza than what Israel so far has done. Where is your condemnation of their outrageous cheerleading for the butchery of innocents? Why are only pro-Palestinian voices subject to such condemnation?

War is hell, especially for the collateral damage. Better for those Palestinian civilians to heed the directions of the Israeli military asap.

Putting aside for a moment that the UN believes that the order that you support may well be a crime against humanity (https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/10/17/israel-could-be-in-breach-of-global-law-with-gaza-relocation-order-un), what is your solution for all the Palestinians who physically can't heed the directions of the Israeli military?  The old, the sick or injured, parents with multiple children and no transportation, people who are looking for loved ones under collapsed buildings?  You're telling these people to try to move across an area that is under siege . . . where roads and buildings are blown up, fuel food and potable water is not available, and there is active weapons fire.

That hardly seems reasonable.

[dang1]

..extreme collective punishment of Palestinians in Gaza. Why the double standard?

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/palestinian-muslim-arab-islamophobia-media_n_65319009e4b03b213b094cce

seems like maybe "collective punishment" to you is Israel degrading hummus' ability to wage war on Israel.

Maybe hummus expected Israel to respond with just merely thoughts and prayers in response to hummus' attack

Seems like maybe you intentionally misinterpreted my post by cutting off most of it and then replying to something you made it seem like I said, but didn't.

Ironically enough, your childish attempt at misdirection illustrates the point I was trying to make to begin with. The media figures (and Lindsey Graham) described in the article I linked propose even harsher treatment of Palestinians in Gaza than what Israel so far has done. Where is your condemnation of their outrageous cheerleading for the butchery of innocents? Why are only pro-Palestinian voices subject to such condemnation?

War is hell, especially for the collateral damage. Better for those Palestinian civilians to heed the directions of the Israeli military asap.

Putting aside for a moment that the UN believes that the order that you support may well be a crime against humanity (https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/10/17/israel-could-be-in-breach-of-global-law-with-gaza-relocation-order-un), what is your solution for all the Palestinians who physically can't heed the directions of the Israeli military?  The old, the sick or injured, parents with multiple children and no transportation, people who are looking for loved ones under collapsed buildings?  You're telling these people to try to move across an area that is under siege . . . where roads and buildings are blown up, fuel food and potable water is not available, and there is active weapons fire.

That hardly seems reasonable.

hummus surrenders, Israeli bombing stops

[Metalcat]

..extreme collective punishment of Palestinians in Gaza. Why the double standard?

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/palestinian-muslim-arab-islamophobia-media_n_65319009e4b03b213b094cce

seems like maybe "collective punishment" to you is Israel degrading hummus' ability to wage war on Israel.

Maybe hummus expected Israel to respond with just merely thoughts and prayers in response to hummus' attack

Seems like maybe you intentionally misinterpreted my post by cutting off most of it and then replying to something you made it seem like I said, but didn't.

Ironically enough, your childish attempt at misdirection illustrates the point I was trying to make to begin with. The media figures (and Lindsey Graham) described in the article I linked propose even harsher treatment of Palestinians in Gaza than what Israel so far has done. Where is your condemnation of their outrageous cheerleading for the butchery of innocents? Why are only pro-Palestinian voices subject to such condemnation?

War is hell, especially for the collateral damage. Better for those Palestinian civilians to heed the directions of the Israeli military asap.

Putting aside for a moment that the UN believes that the order that you support may well be a crime against humanity (https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/10/17/israel-could-be-in-breach-of-global-law-with-gaza-relocation-order-un), what is your solution for all the Palestinians who physically can't heed the directions of the Israeli military?  The old, the sick or injured, parents with multiple children and no transportation, people who are looking for loved ones under collapsed buildings?  You're telling these people to try to move across an area that is under siege . . . where roads and buildings are blown up, fuel food and potable water is not available, and there is active weapons fire.

That hardly seems reasonable.

hummus surrenders, Israeli bombing stops

Like, Hamas, as an entire organization and all of its backers around the world just collectively decide it should stop existing? Seems improbable. It also seems like that would just create a vacuum for another group to be backed and armed.

[EvenSteven]

..extreme collective punishment of Palestinians in Gaza. Why the double standard?

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/palestinian-muslim-arab-islamophobia-media_n_65319009e4b03b213b094cce

seems like maybe "collective punishment" to you is Israel degrading hummus' ability to wage war on Israel.

Maybe hummus expected Israel to respond with just merely thoughts and prayers in response to hummus' attack

Seems like maybe you intentionally misinterpreted my post by cutting off most of it and then replying to something you made it seem like I said, but didn't.

Ironically enough, your childish attempt at misdirection illustrates the point I was trying to make to begin with. The media figures (and Lindsey Graham) described in the article I linked propose even harsher treatment of Palestinians in Gaza than what Israel so far has done. Where is your condemnation of their outrageous cheerleading for the butchery of innocents? Why are only pro-Palestinian voices subject to such condemnation?

War is hell, especially for the collateral damage. Better for those Palestinian civilians to heed the directions of the Israeli military asap.

Putting aside for a moment that the UN believes that the order that you support may well be a crime against humanity (https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/10/17/israel-could-be-in-breach-of-global-law-with-gaza-relocation-order-un), what is your solution for all the Palestinians who physically can't heed the directions of the Israeli military?  The old, the sick or injured, parents with multiple children and no transportation, people who are looking for loved ones under collapsed buildings?  You're telling these people to try to move across an area that is under siege . . . where roads and buildings are blown up, fuel food and potable water is not available, and there is active weapons fire.

That hardly seems reasonable.

hummus surrenders, Israeli bombing stops

Is the righteousness of this strategy specific to this conflict, or does it extend to more general cases? Like, if the US government starts bombing Saint Louis, and says they will stop once all of Patriot Front surrenders, is that a good and moral strategy for combating violent extremists?

[GuitarStv]

..extreme collective punishment of Palestinians in Gaza. Why the double standard?

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/palestinian-muslim-arab-islamophobia-media_n_65319009e4b03b213b094cce

seems like maybe "collective punishment" to you is Israel degrading hummus' ability to wage war on Israel.

Maybe hummus expected Israel to respond with just merely thoughts and prayers in response to hummus' attack

Seems like maybe you intentionally misinterpreted my post by cutting off most of it and then replying to something you made it seem like I said, but didn't.

Ironically enough, your childish attempt at misdirection illustrates the point I was trying to make to begin with. The media figures (and Lindsey Graham) described in the article I linked propose even harsher treatment of Palestinians in Gaza than what Israel so far has done. Where is your condemnation of their outrageous cheerleading for the butchery of innocents? Why are only pro-Palestinian voices subject to such condemnation?

War is hell, especially for the collateral damage. Better for those Palestinian civilians to heed the directions of the Israeli military asap.

Putting aside for a moment that the UN believes that the order that you support may well be a crime against humanity (https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/10/17/israel-could-be-in-breach-of-global-law-with-gaza-relocation-order-un), what is your solution for all the Palestinians who physically can't heed the directions of the Israeli military?  The old, the sick or injured, parents with multiple children and no transportation, people who are looking for loved ones under collapsed buildings?  You're telling these people to try to move across an area that is under siege . . . where roads and buildings are blown up, fuel food and potable water is not available, and there is active weapons fire.

That hardly seems reasonable.

hummus surrenders, Israeli bombing stops

Like, Hamas, as an entire organization and all of its backers around the world just collectively decide it should stop existing? Seems improbable. It also seems like that would just create a vacuum for another group to be backed and armed.

 . . . and given the huge amount of support that the Israelis havs provided Hamas to sabotage the two state solution, who would they turn to support?

[iris lily]

I'm very happy to get back on topic if we have any more clarity on what the hell is happening.

Posting repeatedly off topic doesn't show much interest in getting back on topic.

Must we always be exactly on topic?

I like meandering discussions, they mimic real life human conversations.

[dang1]

Going forward, maybe one lesson some Israeli learn: not to sabotage the two-state solution, support two-state solution Palestinians

some Palestinians finding out: what happens when they fudge around. And just drop the whole: ”wipe out Israel” thing

combating violent extremists seem like require both military and political

[MustacheAndaHalf]

I'm very happy to get back on topic if we have any more clarity on what the hell is happening.

Posting repeatedly off topic doesn't show much interest in getting back on topic.

Must we always be exactly on topic?

I like meandering discussions, they mimic real life human conversations.

My single sentence reply doesn't mention "always be exactly on topic", so I'm not sure where you pulled that from.

Someone (1) claimed they were very happy to get back on topic ... after (2) posting repeatedly off topic.

[MustacheAndaHalf]

Before this semantic debate I was discussing the hospital parking lot explosion in Gaza, and have one clarification / update:

(1) Hamas fighters launched rockets, one of which went off course (per video shared by IDF, I didn't check the timestamp).

Apparently IDF also "didn't check the timestamp", as the video was from a misfired Hamas rocket after the hospital parking lot explosion.  It wasn't the same incident, and the IDF has taken down that video.

Well, kind of - they now show that misfire in a montage of other Hamas rockets misfiring.  A number of Hamas rockets have spiraled chaotically and landed randomly somewhere in Gaza.

IDF has a long history of misinformation and outright lies.   We would do well to discount anything they say on this issue.

Yet if you've ever said anything incorrect on the forum, by the same logic I should discount your opinion of the IDF (Israeli Defense Forces).  To be more constructive, do you have a high quality source showing the frequency of IDF lying?

[GuitarStv]

Before this semantic debate I was discussing the hospital parking lot explosion in Gaza, and have one clarification / update:

(1) Hamas fighters launched rockets, one of which went off course (per video shared by IDF, I didn't check the timestamp).

Apparently IDF also "didn't check the timestamp", as the video was from a misfired Hamas rocket after the hospital parking lot explosion.  It wasn't the same incident, and the IDF has taken down that video.

Well, kind of - they now show that misfire in a montage of other Hamas rockets misfiring.  A number of Hamas rockets have spiraled chaotically and landed randomly somewhere in Gaza.

IDF has a long history of misinformation and outright lies.   We would do well to discount anything they say on this issue.

Yet if you've ever said anything incorrect on the forum, by the same logic I should discount your opinion of the IDF (Israeli Defense Forces).  To be more constructive, do you have a high quality source showing the frequency of IDF lying?

There has been an awful lot of misinformation floating around related to this conflict.  The IDF did say that Hamas was beheading babies and raping women . . . and to date has been unable to confirm either of those claims (https://www.cnn.com/2023/10/12/middleeast/israel-hamas-beheading-claims-intl/index.html), and the false information they were trying to pass off about the hospital bombing.

At this point, I think it would be unwise to trust the IDF without independent verification given the purposeful and outright falsehoods that they've told so far.

That's not to say they're the only ones to worry about.  There is plenty of fake news out there about this conflict.  I had read in several places that the IDF had confirmed they bombed the hospital before finding out that they were strenuously denying doing so.  Everything from Ukraine providing Hamas with weapons, to top generals from Israel being held hostage, to pretend threads of Qatar threatening to shut down oil production because of the war, to Israel fighting brown people to expedite 'The Great Replacement' that neo-nazis want, etc.  It's a shit show and hard to fact check things properly and even credible news sources have reported the wrong thing.

[GilesMM]

Before this semantic debate I was discussing the hospital parking lot explosion in Gaza, and have one clarification / update:

(1) Hamas fighters launched rockets, one of which went off course (per video shared by IDF, I didn't check the timestamp).

Apparently IDF also "didn't check the timestamp", as the video was from a misfired Hamas rocket after the hospital parking lot explosion.  It wasn't the same incident, and the IDF has taken down that video.

Well, kind of - they now show that misfire in a montage of other Hamas rockets misfiring.  A number of Hamas rockets have spiraled chaotically and landed randomly somewhere in Gaza.

IDF has a long history of misinformation and outright lies.   We would do well to discount anything they say on this issue.

Yet if you've ever said anything incorrect on the forum, by the same logic I should discount your opinion of the IDF (Israeli Defense Forces).  To be more constructive, do you have a high quality source showing the frequency of IDF lying?

The IDF spokesman has admitted to lying, when convenient.  It was certainly the case with the Al Jazeera journalist they claimed to not have shot then later confessed to.

[dang1]

"All warfare is based on deception. Hence, when we are able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must appear inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe we are near."

[LateStarter]

I think @GuitarStv hit the nail on the head bringing up the preference for the using "black" as an adjective and not a noun. With how large anti-black racism has been looming in public consciousness for the last few years, it makes sense people would begin to default to that phrasing as a baseline form of avoiding offense when talking about any group of people.

Of for sure, which is why that example is different from the rest of the list of terms he mentioned earlier.

As Pete said, there's no universal rule. For some populations the noun version is offensive, for others it isn't.

What we're talking about are populations where the noun version is *not* offensive, especially within that community, but folks feel uncomfortable saying those nouns because they've been raised around those nouns having negative connotations.

Like if you grew up around a lot of Jews, like I have, then you will likely be totally comfortable with saying "she is a Jew." Or if you grew up around a lot of Mexicans, like I have, then you will be comfortable saying "They're Mexicans." But if you have mostly grown up with the terms "Jew" and "Mexican" having a vague or obvious negative connotation, then you may default to always saying "Jewish people" and "Mexican people/people from Mexico."

I feel like I've somehow been super unclear but I don't know how to be clearer.

I also didn't mean to detail the thread, I was just trying to offer some perspective and clarity on a conflict that was kind of relevant to me.

Can I persuade you / PeteD01 that my caution re. use of the word "Jew" is not a personal failing ?  -  in a separate Topic:  On the careful use of some Group Labels

[Metalcat]

I think @GuitarStv hit the nail on the head bringing up the preference for the using "black" as an adjective and not a noun. With how large anti-black racism has been looming in public consciousness for the last few years, it makes sense people would begin to default to that phrasing as a baseline form of avoiding offense when talking about any group of people.

Of for sure, which is why that example is different from the rest of the list of terms he mentioned earlier.

As Pete said, there's no universal rule. For some populations the noun version is offensive, for others it isn't.

What we're talking about are populations where the noun version is *not* offensive, especially within that community, but folks feel uncomfortable saying those nouns because they've been raised around those nouns having negative connotations.

Like if you grew up around a lot of Jews, like I have, then you will likely be totally comfortable with saying "she is a Jew." Or if you grew up around a lot of Mexicans, like I have, then you will be comfortable saying "They're Mexicans." But if you have mostly grown up with the terms "Jew" and "Mexican" having a vague or obvious negative connotation, then you may default to always saying "Jewish people" and "Mexican people/people from Mexico."

I feel like I've somehow been super unclear but I don't know how to be clearer.

I also didn't mean to detail the thread, I was just trying to offer some perspective and clarity on a conflict that was kind of relevant to me.

Can I persuade you / PeteD01 that my caution re. use of the word "Jew" is not a personal failing ?  -  in a separate Topic:  On the careful use of some Group Labels

I'm not going to engage further for risk of taking things off opic again, but for the record I never considered it a personal failing, only an indicator that the person likely hasn't spent much time with Jews.

[blue_green_sparks]

Boiling this down to the basics; the intent of each warring faction is what matters. The intent of the ruling party of Gazi is death to Israel. There is no ambiguity about this. The intent of Israel is to survive.

This leaves two solid solutions.
(1) The much stronger Israel simply packs up and leaves the Levant
(2) Hamas is destroyed

Anything else requires compromise. Each time a compromise is reached; religious fundamentalists have breached the agreement with suicide bombings or illegal settlements. They need to ditch the Jihadists and extremists.

[waltworks]

At this point both governments (assuming you consider Hamas a "government") are comprised of the worst/craziest elements of their societies. Israel isn't going to stop settlements, Palestinians aren't going to stop wanting Israel erased from the map, and we'll just get bloodier and bloodier little wars until we get a big one (could be now!) and/or someone in the region who isn't Israel gets their hands on a nuke or two. Then it'll be settled, for better or worse, with one or both parties wiped out and maybe the land permanently uninhabitable.

-W

[Metalcat]

Boiling this down to the basics; the intent of each warring faction is what matters. The intent of the ruling party of Gazi is death to Israel. There is no ambiguity about this. The intent of Israel is to survive.

This leaves two solid solutions.
(1) The much stronger Israel simply packs up and leaves the Levant
(2) Hamas is destroyed

Anything else requires compromise. Each time a compromise is reached; religious fundamentalists have breached the agreement with suicide bombings or illegal settlements. They need to ditch the Jihadists and extremists.

But doesn't #2 just create a vacuum for a new anti-Israeli group to take over? It's not like the conditions that create anti-Iraeli sentiment in the area would go away if Hamas specifically went away. Wouldn't #2 require Hamas and Hezbollah to cease to exist AND the ability of Iran to back anti-Israeli groups?

Hamas is a product of anti-Israeli sentiment, not a primary source of it, although it obviously promotes it.

But the question is, how can Israel exist without being surrounded by anti-Israeli sentiment among autocracies?

As for Israel leaving, where would they go? Also wouldn't a lot of very powerful governments work very hard to create conditions that would make that an unappealing option since they absolutely wouldn't want to lose Israel in the region?

[blue_green_sparks]

Boiling this down to the basics; the intent of each warring faction is what matters. The intent of the ruling party of Gazi is death to Israel. There is no ambiguity about this. The intent of Israel is to survive.

This leaves two solid solutions.
(1) The much stronger Israel simply packs up and leaves the Levant
(2) Hamas is destroyed

Anything else requires compromise. Each time a compromise is reached; religious fundamentalists have breached the agreement with suicide bombings or illegal settlements. They need to ditch the Jihadists and extremists.

But doesn't #2 just create a vacuum for a new anti-Israeli group to take over? It's not like the conditions that create anti-Iraeli sentiment in the area would go away if Hamas specifically went away. Wouldn't #2 require Hamas and Hezbollah to cease to exist AND the ability of Iran to back anti-Israeli groups?

Hamas is a product of anti-Israeli sentiment, not a primary source of it, although it obviously promotes it.

But the question is, how can Israel exist without being surrounded by anti-Israeli sentiment among autocracies?

As for Israel leaving, where would they go? Also wouldn't a lot of very powerful governments work very hard to create conditions that would make that an unappealing option since they absolutely wouldn't want to lose Israel in the region?

Anti anti-Israeli sentiment is fine. Presumably, the vacuum left by the eradication of Hamas would be filled with rational non-Jihadists just like the eradication of Nazis in Germany left people willing to move on. Of course, Israel isn't going to pack up and leave. This illustrates is how preposterous Hamas's goal is.

[maizefolk]

Anti anti-Israeli sentiment is fine. Presumably, the vacuum left by the eradication of Hamas would be filled with rational non-Jihadists just like the eradication of Nazis in Germany left people willing to move on. Of course, Israel isn't going to pack up and leave. This illustrates is how preposterous Hamas's goal is.

Like the eradication of the Taliban in Afghanistan and the eradication of the Ba'athist party in Iraq similarly left rational people willing to move on?

[blue_green_sparks]

Anti anti-Israeli sentiment is fine. Presumably, the vacuum left by the eradication of Hamas would be filled with rational non-Jihadists just like the eradication of Nazis in Germany left people willing to move on. Of course, Israel isn't going to pack up and leave. This illustrates is how preposterous Hamas's goal is.

Like the eradication of the Taliban in Afghanistan and the eradication of the Ba'athist party in Iraq similarly left rational people willing to move on?

This stuff is centuries in the making and was given up on for political reasons. I didn't really agree with interventions in those places in the first place. ISIS was eradicated when and wherever the rational people had enough of them.

[GuitarStv]

Anti anti-Israeli sentiment is fine. Presumably, the vacuum left by the eradication of Hamas would be filled with rational non-Jihadists just like the eradication of Nazis in Germany left people willing to move on. Of course, Israel isn't going to pack up and leave. This illustrates is how preposterous Hamas's goal is.

Like the eradication of the Taliban in Afghanistan and the eradication of the Ba'athist party in Iraq similarly left rational people willing to move on?

This stuff is centuries in the making and was given up on for political reasons. I didn't really agree with interventions in those places in the first place. ISIS was eradicated when and wherever the rational people had enough of them.

Were the rational people being oppressed daily by the folks ISIS were fighting against though?  I feel like Israeli actions continue to create an awful lot of friction with the Palestinians.  As long as that exists there will be demand for a Hamas or Hezbollah.

[Michael in ABQ]

Anti anti-Israeli sentiment is fine. Presumably, the vacuum left by the eradication of Hamas would be filled with rational non-Jihadists just like the eradication of Nazis in Germany left people willing to move on. Of course, Israel isn't going to pack up and leave. This illustrates is how preposterous Hamas's goal is.

Like the eradication of the Taliban in Afghanistan and the eradication of the Ba'athist party in Iraq similarly left rational people willing to move on?

This stuff is centuries in the making and was given up on for political reasons. I didn't really agree with interventions in those places in the first place. ISIS was eradicated when and wherever the rational people had enough of them.

ISIS was (mostly) eradicated in Iraq at the cost of thousands of Iraqi Soldiers lives and the virtually complete destruction of the city of Mosul which ISIS spent two years fortifying. That was with US assistance in terms of intelligence, logistics, advisors, precision strikes, etc. The people in Mosul and the rest of the short-lived Islamic had no chance at overthrowing ISIS because they ruled with an iron fist and would kill anyone who opposed them.

In Syria they still haven't been completely eliminated even with the US/Kurdish allies fighting them on one side, along with Syria/Russian allies on the other side (Turkey is tacitly supporting them, or at least not actively trying to stop them).

The people in Gaza have no real hope of removing Hamas from power, just like the people in Lebanon have no real hope of removing Hezbollah - even though in both cases these groups are causing massive harm to the regular people. Both groups have outside sponsors (namely Iran) that continue to provide them with money and materiel to continue fighting Israel for the benefit of those sponsors.




It's not that different from the situation in many cities where a criminal gang (Hamas) controls a neighborhood (Gaza) and the police (Israel) are trying to stop the criminal gang but end up turning the entire neighborhood against them. The regular people may not like the gang, but they end up not liking the police even more. At least the gang pays them (or gives them the opportunity to make money).

[dang1]

"pressure on the Israeli government to halt the expansion of settlements and ease restrictions on the civil life of some estimates indicate around 1.9 million Palestinians in Israel proper and more than two million in the West Bank. Another is to exert pressure on Israel to limit its postwar economic isolation of Gaza’s two million residents while recognizing that Israel does have very real new internal security needs. It seems equally important to ensure that the present arrangements for Jordan’s role in support of the Al Aqsa Mosque continue, along with the restrictions on Israeli religious ceremonies on the Temple Mount.

At the same time, it will be critical to minimize any “blame games” by the U.S. and international community that hold either Israel or all the Palestinians to blame for the current crisis. U.S. and international community need to focus on steps that will limit the impact of Hamas’s invasion and Israel’s war in Gaza and this aftermath.

The key near-term approach to such an effort to ease the risks of a “no-state solution” may be international efforts to offer major new postwar aid and opportunities to the Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank on a conditional basis. Offering such aid to the Palestinians, supported by active efforts to ensure human rights in ways that did not cripple Israel’s internal security programs, would at least offer a tangible way to move toward a more stable peace.

The present levels of poverty and unemployment in Gaza have made popular support of Hamas and violence all too serious, and Israel’s future wartime and postwar security efforts will almost certainly make this situation far worse. The same may be true to a lesser extent of the war’s impact on Israeli and Palestinian actions in the West Bank. Once again, the gap between Israel and West Bank incomes and employment opportunities is a key source of its tensions and violence.

At the same time, such international aid must be conditional on Palestinian non-violence, on ensuring that it is independent of Israeli political and security interests, and on providing effective outside international management and planning that ensures such aid is used honestly and effectively."
https://www.csis.org/analysis/war-gaza-and-death-two-state-solution

[blue_green_sparks]

Anti anti-Israeli sentiment is fine. Presumably, the vacuum left by the eradication of Hamas would be filled with rational non-Jihadists just like the eradication of Nazis in Germany left people willing to move on. Of course, Israel isn't going to pack up and leave. This illustrates is how preposterous Hamas's goal is.

Like the eradication of the Taliban in Afghanistan and the eradication of the Ba'athist party in Iraq similarly left rational people willing to move on?

This stuff is centuries in the making and was given up on for political reasons. I didn't really agree with interventions in those places in the first place. ISIS was eradicated when and wherever the rational people had enough of them.

Were the rational people being oppressed daily by the folks ISIS were fighting against though?  I feel like Israeli actions continue to create an awful lot of friction with the Palestinians.  As long as that exists there will be demand for a Hamas or Hezbollah.

True. Israel feels they have no choice but to keep Hamas weak to avoid what just happened, conditions are poor and unfortunately young Palestinians get drafted into the Hamas cycle of hate instead of rejecting the Jihadism. What can the world do to break that cycle?

[blue_green_sparks]

At the same time, such international aid must be conditional on Palestinian non-violence, on ensuring that it is independent of Israeli political and security interests, and on providing effective outside international management and planning that ensures such aid is used honestly and effectively."
https://www.csis.org/analysis/war-gaza-and-death-two-state-solution

I do think this is the best short-term solution. Effectively buy them out. Make Hamas the second best choice.

[GuitarStv]

Anti anti-Israeli sentiment is fine. Presumably, the vacuum left by the eradication of Hamas would be filled with rational non-Jihadists just like the eradication of Nazis in Germany left people willing to move on. Of course, Israel isn't going to pack up and leave. This illustrates is how preposterous Hamas's goal is.

Like the eradication of the Taliban in Afghanistan and the eradication of the Ba'athist party in Iraq similarly left rational people willing to move on?

This stuff is centuries in the making and was given up on for political reasons. I didn't really agree with interventions in those places in the first place. ISIS was eradicated when and wherever the rational people had enough of them.

Were the rational people being oppressed daily by the folks ISIS were fighting against though?  I feel like Israeli actions continue to create an awful lot of friction with the Palestinians.  As long as that exists there will be demand for a Hamas or Hezbollah.

True. Israel feels they have no choice but to keep Hamas weak to avoid what just happened, conditions are poor and unfortunately young Palestinians get drafted into the Hamas cycle of hate instead of rejecting the Jihadism. What can the world do to break that cycle?

A good first step would be withholding any/all military aid to Israel until the Israelis choose to fix some of their human rights abuses.

- Full voting rights in Israeli elections for all Palestinians ruled by Israel (so all Palestinians)
- An end to separate legal treatment for Palestinians when compared to Israeli citizens in the Israeli legal system
- A return of the thousands of Palestinians currently detained without charges or hope of due process in Israeli prisons
- A permanent end to all Israeli government support of Hamas (and laws to prevent support of other terror groups in the future)
- An end to all Israeli 'settlements' illegal under international law, jail time for all Israelis found squatting on such lands, and return of all stolen land to Palestinian landowners

This would be a reasonable starting place, and would cover many of the worst complaints that Palestinians have regarding the apartheid they're living under.

[ender]

One interesting consideration on the "Jews" conversation is it's not really a 1:1 parallel with "American" at all. Or any country specific descriptor - Mexican, Canadian, German, whatever.

It can mean a combination of things, including 1) affiliation with Israel, 2) religion, or 3) cultural/ancestral heritage.

Most other descriptors seem to be primarily focused on one of those.

Also, this conversation was quite relevant to the thread because antisemeticism can play off people not understanding the difference and nuances in what someone being a Jew actually means. And assume if you are any one of the above (3) items, you automatically are the others. Thus being a Jew by ancestry -> support of Israel.

[partgypsy]

"pressure on the Israeli government to halt the expansion of settlements and ease restrictions on the civil life of some estimates indicate around 1.9 million Palestinians in Israel proper and more than two million in the West Bank. Another is to exert pressure on Israel to limit its postwar economic isolation of Gaza’s two million residents while recognizing that Israel does have very real new internal security needs. It seems equally important to ensure that the present arrangements for Jordan’s role in support of the Al Aqsa Mosque continue, along with the restrictions on Israeli religious ceremonies on the Temple Mount.

At the same time, it will be critical to minimize any “blame games” by the U.S. and international community that hold either Israel or all the Palestinians to blame for the current crisis. U.S. and international community need to focus on steps that will limit the impact of Hamas’s invasion and Israel’s war in Gaza and this aftermath.

The key near-term approach to such an effort to ease the risks of a “no-state solution” may be international efforts to offer major new postwar aid and opportunities to the Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank on a conditional basis. Offering such aid to the Palestinians, supported by active efforts to ensure human rights in ways that did not cripple Israel’s internal security programs, would at least offer a tangible way to move toward a more stable peace.

The present levels of poverty and unemployment in Gaza have made popular support of Hamas and violence all too serious, and Israel’s future wartime and postwar security efforts will almost certainly make this situation far worse. The same may be true to a lesser extent of the war’s impact on Israeli and Palestinian actions in the West Bank. Once again, the gap between Israel and West Bank incomes and employment opportunities is a key source of its tensions and violence.

At the same time, such international aid must be conditional on Palestinian non-violence, on ensuring that it is independent of Israeli political and security interests, and on providing effective outside international management and planning that ensures such aid is used honestly and effectively."
https://www.csis.org/analysis/war-gaza-and-death-two-state-solution

I agree with this analysis. But it seems like we are so far from this.

[ATtiny85]

"All warfare is based on deception. Hence, when we are able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must appear inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe we are near."

This is a great Sun tzu quote. This applies equally to the enemy and to the armchair generals sitting in front of media feeds.

I remember during my education on "The Art of War" one of the lessons that really hit home was the three buckets of information you need to work to fill. 1) What do I know about the enemy, 2) What do I know about my forces, and 3) What does the enemy know about me. These were all "Essential Elements of Information" if my memory of some of my schooling from a quarter century ago holds.

[Just Joe]

We may not call people "Englishmen" but we readily call them Brits.

I live in a pretty multicultural area and many, many more cultures use nouns than just "she's an American" like "she's a(n) Canadian/Mexican/Dane/Swede/Finn/Italian/Russian/Persian/Arab/Australian/Algerian/South African/Nigerian/Puerto Rican/Cuban/Brazilian/Venezuelan/Colombian/Panamanian/Latvian/Croatian/Hungarian/Indonesian/Malaysian/Syrian/Kenyan/Ethiopian/Indian/Pakistani/ and oh....Palestinian and Israeli"

I hear what you are saying and believe you that your experience is representative of the region in which you live.

From my personal worldview and regional experience, "She's Canadian" sounds politer (and is what I would say by default) than "She's a Canadian" and is what I find myself naturally saying and hear folks in my region (the american midwest). Same for most of those others. That's a one word (really a one letter) difference, but it changes the statement from a noun to an adjective.

The change is very modest in some cases, and much larger in others. If I hear someone say "She's a Mexican" instead of "She's Mexican" the former comes across as a reasonably strong signal the person I'm talking to is prejudiced against Mexican people. Choosing to say "that guy is a Hindu" vs "that guy is Hindu" has a similarly strong connotation about the worldview of the speaker (whether that signal is accurate or not).

Again, I'm not arguing this pattern is universally true of english speakers, just that it is representative of I've observed at least in my little corner of the USA.

Addendum: While I'm writing this I saw you posted again, and it would make sense part of this may be explained by being exposed to people who really are prejudiced against groups and wanting to develop ways of distinguishing our use of language from the negative language we've heard in our lives.

Why do we say "African American"? Do any other countries get that specific? Or are we "othering" some folks in the process?

[blue_green_sparks]

When taking a rational view of the situation right now, moral justice doesn’t really win wars to gain territory. Never has, never will. The land I live on right now has been controlled by Native Americans, Spain, Britain, and finally me.

There are obvious injustices perpetrated on the Arabs by the Zionists. Nobody will argue that. However, like all wars, someone will be the loser. The more the loser fights, the worse it will be for them. Does anyone think Hamas can win over Israel if Egypt, Jordan and Syria couldn’t beat them when Israel was not even as strong? Israel has the US and Europe backing; Hamas has Iran and Qatar. “From the River to the Sea"...will not happen.

So, forgetting about all the morality, history, religion and just looking at it as a “rational Palestinian”; they can keep on throwing rocks and shooting crappy rockets like this or they can elect a non-violent government and win their human rights after a period of peaceful civil disobedience, the way Martin Luther King encouraged black Americans or the way Ghandhi did with the Indians vs Britain to gain self-governance. The world would come to their side.

[bacchi]

So, forgetting about all the morality, history, religion and just looking at it as a “rational Palestinians”; they can keep on throwing rocks and shooting crappy rockets like this or they can elect a non-violent government and win their human rights after a period of peaceful civil disobedience, the way Martin Luther King encouraged black Americans or the way Ghandhi did with the Indians vs Britain to gain self-governance. The world would come to their side.

The rocket terrorists -- "they" -- are only about 20-25k strong. Gaza hasn't had an election since 2006 so, first, the unarmed civilians would have to fight the well-armed Hamas gang in order to have an election.

Second, the civilians living in an open-air prison have to wage a likely decade long civil disobedience action to win a state or voting rights.

Eta: As long as we're proposing ideas way out of our control, does Israel have any part in solving this crisis? What does the "rational Israeli" do?

[scottish]

A good first step would be withholding any/all military aid to Israel until the Israelis choose to fix some of their human rights abuses.

- Full voting rights in Israeli elections for all Palestinians ruled by Israel (so all Palestinians)
- An end to separate legal treatment for Palestinians when compared to Israeli citizens in the Israeli legal system
- A return of the thousands of Palestinians currently detained without charges or hope of due process in Israeli prisons
- A permanent end to all Israeli government support of Hamas (and laws to prevent support of other terror groups in the future)
- An end to all Israeli 'settlements' illegal under international law, jail time for all Israelis found squatting on such lands, and return of all stolen land to Palestinian landowners

This would be a reasonable starting place, and would cover many of the worst complaints that Palestinians have regarding the apartheid they're living under.

Gaza isn't actually ruled by Israel is it?   Israel pulled out of Gaza in 2005 and it's now ruled by Hamas...

What is this "Israeli government support of Hamas" all about?   I though the Iranian government was supporting Hamas, why would the Israelis support them?

You've got a point about the detentions and the Israeli settler actions in the west bank.

[blue_green_sparks]

So, forgetting about all the morality, history, religion and just looking at it as a “rational Palestinians”; they can keep on throwing rocks and shooting crappy rockets like this or they can elect a non-violent government and win their human rights after a period of peaceful civil disobedience, the way Martin Luther King encouraged black Americans or the way Ghandhi did with the Indians vs Britain to gain self-governance. The world would come to their side.

The rocket terrorists -- "they" -- are only about 20-25k strong. Gaza hasn't had an election since 2006 so, first, the unarmed civilians would have to fight the well-armed Hamas gang in order to have an election.

Second, the civilians living in an open-air prison have to wage a likely decade long civil disobedience action to win a state or voting rights.

Eta: As long as we're proposing ideas way out of our control, does Israel have any part in solving this crisis? What does the "rational Israeli" do?

If a non-violent "Free Palestine" movement was embraced and practiced by millions of Palestinians, the international pressure on Israel would be intense. It could take a few years for them to internally clear out/reprogram Jihadists, but what other choice do they have? It's not ever gonna be "from the river to the sea". Look at the support Palestinians still get even after the recent murders and kidnappings of noncombatants by Hamas. I think if they had their version of a 'peaceful Mandella', they could finally break the cycle of apartheid.

[GilesMM]

A rational Israel needs to think very carefully how their actions toward Hamas will appear to Hezbollah. They may be in for a bumpy ride if they make the wrong choice.

[GuitarStv]

A good first step would be withholding any/all military aid to Israel until the Israelis choose to fix some of their human rights abuses.

- Full voting rights in Israeli elections for all Palestinians ruled by Israel (so all Palestinians)
- An end to separate legal treatment for Palestinians when compared to Israeli citizens in the Israeli legal system
- A return of the thousands of Palestinians currently detained without charges or hope of due process in Israeli prisons
- A permanent end to all Israeli government support of Hamas (and laws to prevent support of other terror groups in the future)
- An end to all Israeli 'settlements' illegal under international law, jail time for all Israelis found squatting on such lands, and return of all stolen land to Palestinian landowners

This would be a reasonable starting place, and would cover many of the worst complaints that Palestinians have regarding the apartheid they're living under.

Gaza isn't actually ruled by Israel is it?   Israel pulled out of Gaza in 2005 and it's now ruled by Hamas...

What is this "Israeli government support of Hamas" all about?   I though the Iranian government was supporting Hamas, why would the Israelis support them?

You've got a point about the detentions and the Israeli settler actions in the west bank.

What was the first thing that Israel did when this conflict started?  They cut off the power, water, and food to Gaza and shut all of Gaza's borders.  I don't know what you could call that other than complete and total rule.  Gaza has been a defacto Israeli state for decades.

Netanyahu has a long history of (publicly and privately) supporting Hamas as a way of preventing moderate Palestinians from getting into power to prevent any chance of a two state solution.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/for-years-netanyahu-propped-up-hamas-now-its-blown-up-in-our-faces/
https://chicago.suntimes.com/columnists/2023/10/20/23923953/israel-hamas-war-palestine-netanyahu-likud-government-gene-lyons
https://thehill.com/opinion/international/4268794-the-symbiotic-relationship-between-netanyahu-and-hamas/

[lemonlyman]

A good first step would be withholding any/all military aid to Israel until the Israelis choose to fix some of their human rights abuses.

- Full voting rights in Israeli elections for all Palestinians ruled by Israel (so all Palestinians)
- An end to separate legal treatment for Palestinians when compared to Israeli citizens in the Israeli legal system
- A return of the thousands of Palestinians currently detained without charges or hope of due process in Israeli prisons
- A permanent end to all Israeli government support of Hamas (and laws to prevent support of other terror groups in the future)
- An end to all Israeli 'settlements' illegal under international law, jail time for all Israelis found squatting on such lands, and return of all stolen land to Palestinian landowners

This would be a reasonable starting place, and would cover many of the worst complaints that Palestinians have regarding the apartheid they're living under.

Gaza isn't actually ruled by Israel is it?   Israel pulled out of Gaza in 2005 and it's now ruled by Hamas...

What is this "Israeli government support of Hamas" all about?   I though the Iranian government was supporting Hamas, why would the Israelis support them?

You've got a point about the detentions and the Israeli settler actions in the west bank.

What was the first thing that Israel did when this conflict started?  They cut off the power, water, and food to Gaza and shut all of Gaza's borders.  I don't know what you could call that other than complete and total rule.  Gaza has been a defacto Israeli state for decades.

Netanyahu has a long history of (publicly and privately) supporting Hamas as a way of preventing moderate Palestinians from getting into power to prevent any chance of a two state solution.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/for-years-netanyahu-propped-up-hamas-now-its-blown-up-in-our-faces/
https://chicago.suntimes.com/columnists/2023/10/20/23923953/israel-hamas-war-palestine-netanyahu-likud-government-gene-lyons
https://thehill.com/opinion/international/4268794-the-symbiotic-relationship-between-netanyahu-and-hamas/

Most of Gaza's GDP comes from foreign aid including hundreds of millions from Iran and Turkey annually. Only 10-20% of the water comes from Israel. Posting opinion pieces including Israel giving Gazan's work permits to support calling Gaza a Israeli state is a stretch. A big one. Hamas and Israel have been in conflict since 2008. And Israel does not control Gaza's border with Egypt nor Hamas negotiations for fuel purchasing from Egypt.

[GuitarStv]

A good first step would be withholding any/all military aid to Israel until the Israelis choose to fix some of their human rights abuses.

- Full voting rights in Israeli elections for all Palestinians ruled by Israel (so all Palestinians)
- An end to separate legal treatment for Palestinians when compared to Israeli citizens in the Israeli legal system
- A return of the thousands of Palestinians currently detained without charges or hope of due process in Israeli prisons
- A permanent end to all Israeli government support of Hamas (and laws to prevent support of other terror groups in the future)
- An end to all Israeli 'settlements' illegal under international law, jail time for all Israelis found squatting on such lands, and return of all stolen land to Palestinian landowners

This would be a reasonable starting place, and would cover many of the worst complaints that Palestinians have regarding the apartheid they're living under.

Gaza isn't actually ruled by Israel is it?   Israel pulled out of Gaza in 2005 and it's now ruled by Hamas...

What is this "Israeli government support of Hamas" all about?   I though the Iranian government was supporting Hamas, why would the Israelis support them?

You've got a point about the detentions and the Israeli settler actions in the west bank.

What was the first thing that Israel did when this conflict started?  They cut off the power, water, and food to Gaza and shut all of Gaza's borders.  I don't know what you could call that other than complete and total rule.  Gaza has been a defacto Israeli state for decades.

Netanyahu has a long history of (publicly and privately) supporting Hamas as a way of preventing moderate Palestinians from getting into power to prevent any chance of a two state solution.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/for-years-netanyahu-propped-up-hamas-now-its-blown-up-in-our-faces/
https://chicago.suntimes.com/columnists/2023/10/20/23923953/israel-hamas-war-palestine-netanyahu-likud-government-gene-lyons
https://thehill.com/opinion/international/4268794-the-symbiotic-relationship-between-netanyahu-and-hamas/

Most of Gaza's GDP comes from foreign aid including hundreds of millions from Iran and Turkey annually. Only 10-20% of the water comes from Israel.

That's sophistry.  Since 2007 Israel has also imposed full control of entry or exit of people into Gaza by air, land, and sea.  100% of the goods going into or out of Palestine depend on the Israelis allowing them to go through.

"We are putting a complete siege on Gaza … No electricity, no food, no water, no gas – it’s all closed" - Israeli Defence Minister Yoav Gallant a few hours after the attack by Hamas.  A siege that started before the attack and will continue until Israel decides it will end.

Sounds an awful lot like complete and total control to me.

Posting opinion pieces including Israel giving Gazan's work permits to support calling Gaza a Israeli state is a stretch. A big one. Hamas and Israel have been in conflict since 2008.

Occasionally Israel allows Palestinians out to do manual labor for cheap rates.  This is part of the ongoing apartheid.  Hamas and Israel have been in conflict pretty much since the group broke away from the Muslim Brotherhood in the 80s.

But that's not why I call Gaza an Israeli state.  It's the total lack of autonomy over their borders.

And Israel does not control Gaza's border with Egypt nor Hamas negotiations for fuel purchasing from Egypt.

Again, sophistry.  Technically there's a border with Egypt from Gaza.  No goods can cross it without Israeli say so, as the current siege against the civilians in Gaza shows pretty clearly.

[lemonlyman]

A good first step would be withholding any/all military aid to Israel until the Israelis choose to fix some of their human rights abuses.

- Full voting rights in Israeli elections for all Palestinians ruled by Israel (so all Palestinians)
- An end to separate legal treatment for Palestinians when compared to Israeli citizens in the Israeli legal system
- A return of the thousands of Palestinians currently detained without charges or hope of due process in Israeli prisons
- A permanent end to all Israeli government support of Hamas (and laws to prevent support of other terror groups in the future)
- An end to all Israeli 'settlements' illegal under international law, jail time for all Israelis found squatting on such lands, and return of all stolen land to Palestinian landowners

This would be a reasonable starting place, and would cover many of the worst complaints that Palestinians have regarding the apartheid they're living under.

Gaza isn't actually ruled by Israel is it?   Israel pulled out of Gaza in 2005 and it's now ruled by Hamas...

What is this "Israeli government support of Hamas" all about?   I though the Iranian government was supporting Hamas, why would the Israelis support them?

You've got a point about the detentions and the Israeli settler actions in the west bank.

What was the first thing that Israel did when this conflict started?  They cut off the power, water, and food to Gaza and shut all of Gaza's borders.  I don't know what you could call that other than complete and total rule.  Gaza has been a defacto Israeli state for decades.

Netanyahu has a long history of (publicly and privately) supporting Hamas as a way of preventing moderate Palestinians from getting into power to prevent any chance of a two state solution.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/for-years-netanyahu-propped-up-hamas-now-its-blown-up-in-our-faces/
https://chicago.suntimes.com/columnists/2023/10/20/23923953/israel-hamas-war-palestine-netanyahu-likud-government-gene-lyons
https://thehill.com/opinion/international/4268794-the-symbiotic-relationship-between-netanyahu-and-hamas/

Most of Gaza's GDP comes from foreign aid including hundreds of millions from Iran and Turkey annually. Only 10-20% of the water comes from Israel.

That's sophistry.  Since 2007 Israel has also imposed full control of entry or exit of people into Gaza by air, land, and sea.  100% of the goods going into or out of Palestine depend on the Israelis allowing them to go through.

"We are putting a complete siege on Gaza … No electricity, no food, no water, no gas – it’s all closed" - Israeli Defence Minister Yoav Gallant a few hours after the attack by Hamas.  A siege that started before the attack and will continue until Israel decides it will end.

Sounds an awful lot like complete and total control to me.

Posting opinion pieces including Israel giving Gazan's work permits to support calling Gaza a Israeli state is a stretch. A big one. Hamas and Israel have been in conflict since 2008.

Occasionally Israel allows Palestinians out to do manual labor for cheap rates.  This is part of the ongoing apartheid.  Hamas and Israel have been in conflict pretty much since the group broke away from the Muslim Brotherhood in the 80s.

But that's not why I call Gaza an Israeli state.  It's the total lack of autonomy over their borders.

And Israel does not control Gaza's border with Egypt nor Hamas negotiations for fuel purchasing from Egypt.

Again, sophistry.  Technically there's a border with Egypt from Gaza.  No goods can cross it without Israeli say so, as the current siege against the civilians in Gaza shows pretty clearly.

It's not true goods can't cross Gaza's border with Egypt without Israel's say so. Where are you getting that? Egypt closed its own border to Gaza not Israel. Egypt doesn't want Gazan refugees. Nor does Jordan.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/oct/19/egypt-rafah-crossing-aid-enter-gaza-why-closed-israel-us-egypt
"In 2008, tens of thousands of Palestinians crossed into Sinai after Hamas blasted holes in border fortifications, prompting Egypt to build a stone and cement wall."

So Israel is supporting Hamas by allowing work permits but it's also part of apartheid? Ok.

The truth is Gaza has no border controls because its government is a terrorist state. Egypt's closed border is backed by the Palestinian Authority because Hamas is too dangerous to let run amok with their own autonomy.