Current Israeli-Palestinian Crisis ( May 2021)

[OH&S]

Originally Posted by c933103

Hamas attacked due to the escalating situation in Jerusalem, where Palestinian are being hurt. But if you think people of same ethnicity with your country being hurt by a foreign government within conflicted territory between two other governments, in this case Israeli government and Palestinian Authority over the West Bank, then you would be supporting idea of like China firing rockets against America due to Asian in America being mistreated by local law enforcement.

First, thanks for conceding that Israel was the initial aggressor.

Second, the UN describes Gaza and the West Bank as Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT). These are supposed to be the same country if not for Israel's brutal occupation. That's why your question is inapplicable to the situation. China has never claimed that the USA is Chinese territory. Such is the ridiculousness of your question.

Originally Posted by ramlaen

Your entire argument is framed around the absurd notion that because Israel is better at defending itself than Hamas is at attacking it that Hamas should have free reign to try and kill Israelis.

Bzzt. Wrong. The argument is framed around Israel's disproportionate use of force in killing Palestinians. I'm sure we can both agree that Hamas is bad and full of crazies; but they are just one organization that has formed more recently in this 70 year conflict in response to the conditions levied at them by Israel. And Israel is also filled with crazies.

If Hamas commits a crime, Israel will proceed to blow them and the surrounding civilians up. But if Israel commits a crime, they are said to be defending themselves and have zero accountability for the actions.

And this says nothing of what's been happening in the West Bank.

Ultimately, Israel and the US have all of the power and are the ones prolonging the situation.

Originally Posted by ramlaen

That you would even (mis)use the term genocide shows a willful ignorance of the matter.

Bzzt. Wrong again. Your flippant dismissal of the term is showing your own willful ignorance of the matter. I don't bring things up out of nowhere:

Human Rights Council 9th special session – NGO statement: Israeli’s aggression against the Palestinian people of Gaza constitutes genocide

But interestingly, you didn't say anything about the apartheid. Because that is undoubtedly true:

It is also noteworthy that your graphic makes no distinction between civilians and soldiers.

Here: UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs - Occupied Palestinian Territory - Data on casualties

Data is for 2008 onwards.

Top line results are as follows:

Palestinian fatalities: 5,736
*Armed Group: 913
*Civilians: 3,204
*Dispute: 1,619

Palestinian injuries: 120,978

VS

Israeli fatalities: 251
*Security forces: 121
*Civilians: 130

Israeli injuries: 5,682

Pretty stark difference.

The AP knew that Hamas operated out of their building but provided cover in order to preserve their access to Gaza.

https://www.theatlantic.com/internat...-story/383262/

The article linked provides no evidence of the claim of Hamas operating out of the building. If I missed it, then quote it.

All we're left with is to trust the IDF. Not too keen on that considering their track record.

Unless Hamas was firing rockets from the top of the building, Israel, had no justification to destroy the building.

[Ithekro]

The only reason this is still happening is because the UN said that Israel could not keep the territories it took during a war of defense against the surrounding Arab counties in 1967 and 1973 that attacked Israel. The older standards would have those be spoils of war and that would be it. Done. No whinging on who owned the territory. The issues today would be solidly on how Israel treats the Arab populations within its borders. That would be the issue.

[Anh_Minh]

Originally Posted by Eisdrache

Given that this conflict has been going on for roughly ~60 years with both sides going at it willfully, it makes absolutely no sense to only look at the most recent conflict to place blame. Palaestina and Israel have a long list of attacking both military and civilan targets. Comparing death tolls makes about as much sense as discussing who made more meters progress in trench warfare during WW1.

Either way discussion in this thread seems to only revolve around deciding who is "more wrong" rather than discussing how to potentially solve the conflict. I can't stop anyone from doing that but it will just end up going in a circle that will waste everyone's time.

You want us to find solutions? Sorry, we can't all be Jared Kushner.

[c933103]

Originally Posted by OH&S

the UN describes Gaza and the West Bank as Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT). These are supposed to be the same country if not for Israel's brutal occupation. That's why your question is inapplicable to the situation. China has never claimed that the USA is Chinese territory. Such is the ridiculousness of your question.

"These are supposed to be the same country" does not make sense. It's the same argument Germany would use when they try to create a German nation in WWII.

[OH&S]

Originally Posted by c933103

"These are supposed to be the same country" does not make sense. It's the same argument Germany would use when they try to create a German nation in WWII.

Speaking of not making any sense; Germany was trying to create a German nation in WWII? Care to elaborate on WTF you're talking about?

[c933103]

Originally Posted by OH&S

Speaking of not making any sense; Germany was trying to create a German nation in WWII? Care to elaborate on WTF you're talking about?

https://www.nationalww2museum.org/wa...-hitler-happen

[OH&S]

Originally Posted by c933103

https://www.nationalww2museum.org/wa...-hitler-happen

Don't be lazy now. Quote me the relevant part.

[Ithekro]

From memory, Germany was trying to reunify what had been Germany prior to World War One (the Second Reich), and somewhat also parts of the old Holy Roman Empire (The First Reich) into Hilter's Third Reich. Part of that was to reconnect Germany to East Prussia...via a piece of Poland, starting the Second World War in Europe.

[OH&S]

^
That I can agree on. So how is that equivalent to c933103's statement of Germany creating a nation?

[Magin]

Unfortunately I did a dive on Reddit involving all the politics surrounding this situation, and it was... interesting (in a horrible way) to say the least.

The first is... this is the part where a certain side will twist themselves into knots trying to balance out "The US should NOT play World Police" while at the same time trying to cope with "The US needs to be the superpower involved here because they've poured so much money into it!". Well, which do we go with? The US withdrawing from an absolute mess, or getting even more involved than it already is? I'm pretty sure the outcome is Bad, no matter what.

Personally, I would rather the US doesn't get any more involved than it already has and make matters worse, but I suspect this would lead to another Arab Spring. But I am at least attempting to comprehend this whole centuries-old mess. I realize it's and EXTREMELY complicated mess (and that's still an understatement), but is it something like... the Isrealis claim that it's their ancestral homeland, but the Palestinians are the indigenious peoples to that area? I'm also learning that this is apparently an apartheid situation with the Isrealis on top. I'll still say the US shouldn't be involved in this...

Oh wait, why is the US involved in the first place? I'm sure there's other reasons, but I think at least part of it has to deal with what I've just called the "Zionist boogeyman". I confess that I've seen that word thrown around a lot, and had no idea wtf the conspiracy theorists have been talking about... but now, I think I gained a little insight (unless I have this backwards): half the reason the US supports this is because of the Religious side... aka the Zionists want the Isrealis to have control of Jerusalem, so that the Rapture can occur for all Christians. I suspect this is pure conspiracy theory though. What it really reeks of to me is that there's a faction in the US (aka the Religious Right) who want their own ethnostate, but can't pull it off in America; the rapture for them is supposed to create an ethnostate in some sort of Great beyond or such.

But back to something more concrete. Unless of course, I have this backwards (again, I'm only just learning more about this super-complicated bullshit situation): Hamas is the aggressor in this case... because he was going to face a corruption trial, and what better way than to make sure the trial doesn't happen if there's a war going on? As another comment put it, it's if the January 6th attack had succeeded instead of failed. Can't be removed from power when you have to lead in a conflict, right?

[ganbaru]

Originally Posted by Magin

The first is... this is the part where a certain side will twist themselves into knots trying to balance out "The US should NOT play World Police" while at the same time trying to cope with "The US needs to be the superpower involved here because they've poured so much money into it!". Well, which do we go with? The US withdrawing from an absolute mess, or getting even more involved than it already is? I'm pretty sure the outcome is Bad, no matter what.

The US did spend a lot of time pretending to be neutral while being very obviously bias in favor of Israel. That did damage their credibility as a good-faith actor in this matter, so much than they might nerver be considered neutral on this .

Part of me think than the US should stay out of this as they would either offer a temporary band-aid at best, if not make thing even worse in the long run. But deep down I know than the US is the only nation than might move Israel in the right way if they wanted. Is that possible, well even the US did stop supporting apartheid-South Africa so it might be possible.

[Eisdrache]

Originally Posted by Anh_Minh

You want us to find solutions? Sorry, we can't all be Jared Kushner.

And thank god for that

[c933103]

Originally Posted by OH&S

Don't be lazy now. Quote me the relevant part.

You are surprised by some common knowledge, to which I have already kindly provided a detailed enough article overview for you to read in case you sincerely have no knowledge on the WWII history, and now you call me lazy for that?

[Magin]

Originally Posted by OH&S

Don't be lazy now. Quote me the relevant part.

Here, I'll help you, since you clearly aren't going to read it. Any of these qualify as "creating a German nation":

First, keep this part in mind-

The ultimate aim of the Nazi Party was to seize power through Germany’s parliamentary system, install Hitler as dictator, and create a community of racially pure Germans loyal to their führer, who would lead them in a campaign of racial cleansing and world conquest

Which means the following happened:

In 1938, Hitler began his long-promised expansion of national boundaries to incorporate ethnic Germans. He colluded with Austrian Nazis to orchestrate the Anschluss, the annexation of Austria to Germany. And in Hitler’s most brazenly aggressive act yet, Czechoslovakia was forced to surrender the Sudetenland, a mountainous border region populated predominantly by ethnic Germans

That sounds a lot to me like trying to create a German nation, especially that part in bold. But any more of this off-topic.

[OH&S]

Thank you Magin. I did end up reading the article but it seems I got caught in a semantic trap. It didn't register with me that by creating a German nation, c933103 was referring to the expansion of German territory to include regions with ethnic Germans. Creation vs expansion. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

But even with that enlightenment, I fail to see how this ties back to the original point. c933103 said Nazi Germany's reasoning for expanding their territory
is equivalent to me saying that UN recognized Occuppied Palestinian Territories of Gaza and the West Bank are supposed to be the same country; thus implying that Hamas was in the wrong to use the rationale of atrocities occurring in the West Bank as justification to launch their rocket attacks and were ultimately the initial aggressors. How is that remotely similar?

[c933103]

Originally Posted by OH&S

Thank you Magin. I did end up reading the article but it seems I got caught in a semantic trap. It didn't register with me that by creating a German nation, c933103 was referring to the expansion of German territory to include regions with ethnic Germans. Creation vs expansion. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

But even with that enlightenment, I fail to see how this ties back to the original point. c933103 said Nazi Germany's reasoning for expanding their territory
is equivalent to me saying that UN recognized Occuppied Palestinian Territories of Gaza and the West Bank are supposed to be the same country; thus implying that Hamas was in the wrong to use the rationale of atrocities occurring in the West Bank as justification to launch their rocket attacks and were ultimately the initial aggressors. How is that remotely similar?

With Hamas administering Gaza and Palestinian Authority administering the West Bank area, and with East Jerusalem located between Israel and West Bank, how is that the affair of Gaza's Hamas?
Occupied Palestinian Territories contain both Gaza and West Bank doesn't mean any political entity in the region are supposed to have authority over the entire area

[ganbaru]

That might interest some peoples:
Zaid Jilani: Why Media Coverage Of Israel-Palestine Is DANGEROUS
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-sBhYbiGI8

Edit:
Biden CUCKS To Israel
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_EScZ7xgzfQ

[OH&S]

Originally Posted by c933103

With Hamas administering Gaza and Palestinian Authority administering the West Bank area, and with East Jerusalem located between Israel and West Bank, how is that the affair of Gaza's Hamas?
Occupied Palestinian Territories contain both Gaza and West Bank doesn't mean any political entity in the region are supposed to have authority over the entire area

Now I see what you’re arguing but it makes your original analogy with China even more ridiculous. Your argument would hold more water if Gaza and the West Bank were much further away from each other such that the two territories and their peoples weren’t linked to each other.

But Gaza and the West Bank are as close as 35 – 70 km from each other.
They are both separated by the same entity.
They are both oppressed by the same entity.
Despite the current schism between the governments, they both ultimately seek to unify with each other. (And in fact, they were under the same authority before the 2007 conflict)
They both want their capital city to be the same thing, East Jerusalem (minus the ones that want to wipe out the entirety of Israel; they want all of Jerusalem).
They are recognized as being part of the same sovereign state by the UN.

For all intents and purposes, they are the same people and treat each other as such. Saying that they have different ruling parties and thus should keep to their own affairs is ridiculous.

So of course its their affair if Israel commits atrocities in the most important (and holiest) location of their desired capital city against people who they consider their own; especially with the Palestinian Authority being toothless to stop Israel.

But I’m not expecting you to agree on this. So instead I have three questions:

1. Would it have been preferable for you if instead of Hamas, it was instead some entity in the West Bank that attacked Israel?
2. If Israel is allowed to defend itself from terrorists, are Palestinians ultimately allowed defend themselves when Israel commits atrocities against them, whether that be through terrorism or any means necessary?
3. What exactly are Palestinians supposed to do if Israel commits atrocities against them considering they are living in an apartheid state where they are second class citizens?

[ganbaru]

A fews things I have to say about OH&S's questions:

Question 2; If you think than Israel didn't do atrocities, they did bombs the only lab testing for Covid-19 in Gaza and roads leading to Gaza's main hospital. And let's not forget that media building than they clain was used by Hamas, claim than eventhe US State Seretary haven't seen evidene of it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-YCZTVh83Y

Question 3; some would say than they are in facts third lass citizens, as the second class citizen would be the arab population of Israel.

[c933103]

Originally Posted by OH&S

Now I see what you’re arguing but it makes your original analogy with China even more ridiculous. Your argument would hold more water if Gaza and the West Bank were much further away from each other such that the two territories and their peoples weren’t linked to each other.

But Gaza and the West Bank are as close as 35 – 70 km from each other.
They are both separated by the same entity.
They are both oppressed by the same entity.
Despite the current schism between the governments, they both ultimately seek to unify with each other. (And in fact, they were under the same authority before the 2007 conflict)
They both want their capital city to be the same thing, East Jerusalem (minus the ones that want to wipe out the entirety of Israel; they want all of Jerusalem).
They are recognized as being part of the same sovereign state by the UN.

For all intents and purposes, they are the same people and treat each other as such. Saying that they have different ruling parties and thus should keep to their own affairs is ridiculous.

So of course its their affair if Israel commits atrocities in the most important (and holiest) location of their desired capital city against people who they consider their own; especially with the Palestinian Authority being toothless to stop Israel.

But I’m not expecting you to agree on this.

As you doesn't seems to agree with two state solution, the alternative is to see Israel as just as much a competitor for the sovereignty of the land as Hamas or Palestinian Authority, and can be classified as a civil war on the land. With such thinking it is reasonable to say any power in the area have their stake in gaining control of any points in any territories, but such mindset would lead to legitimization of Israel settlement in West Bank which I don't like.

So instead I have three questions:

1. Would it have been preferable for you if instead of Hamas, it was instead some entity in the West Bank that attacked Israel?
2. If Israel is allowed to defend itself from terrorists, are Palestinians ultimately allowed defend themselves when Israel commits atrocities against them, whether that be through terrorism or any means necessary?
3. What exactly are Palestinians supposed to do if Israel commits atrocities against them considering they are living in an apartheid state where they are second class citizens?

- If they some entity representing the West Bank want to actually start a war against Israel over the matter, I would say it isn't unfair since last time Israel pushed into West Bank was after they lose some wars to Israel.
- I find it difficult to classify terrorism, especially terrorism against civilian, as act of defend
- Are you talking about Arabic people living in Israel, or Palestinian, being second class citizens?