If Israel is trying to ensure its safety and survival while surrounded by enemies, its current course of action is guaranteed to make that impossible for the forseeable future. You couldn't ask for a more perfect recipe for continued terrorism against Israel if you specifically tried to create one.
The irony is that the framework of international law that was created after World War 2, specifically to deal with crimes against the Jews, showed the right way to deal with monstrous acts 10 times worse than October 7th, without creating an endless cycle of violence and humiliation and retribution like the one that led led to the rise of the terrorist state which had tried to exterminate them. Modern Israel has taken that priceless and painful lesson, and left it trampled and forgotten in the mud while they embark on their latest bloodthirsty adventure.
The problem with "modern Israel" is that... it isn't modern.
Its conception lies in the late 19th century, before even WW1, way before WW2, the Holocaust, or any of the laws and organizations (UN) set to deal with the aftermath.
Zionists hijacked the prosecution in Europe, hoping to populate their promised land with those fleeing from the horrors... but even after WW2, it turned out that a large number of Jews would rather GTFO to America, be it North or South... so the "founding fathers" of Israel intentionally antagonized Arab countries, just to make Jews flee those countries and have a large enough headcount to populate the land of Israel. Like, WTF! Who does that to their own people?... oh right, Palestinian Arabs got into the same game. ☹️
Of course the leaders of Israel have learned nothing, they want their people to stay terrorized, whatever it takes! They still think that's the way to keep them there, to get more international support, to prove how endangered they are. While the other side is playing the "no, me more" card. It's sickening.
Imagine Israel, of all countries, crying to the UN, of all organizations, about a purported "flagrant violation of narional sovereignty, international law and Security Council resolutions."
I laughed out loud when I read that. As if that isn't exactly what Israel does virtually on a daily basis, and has done for decades now, and while thumbing their nose at the UN the entire time.
The best part is the UN charter clearly states that when a country is attacked, it has aright to self defense. Let's watch Israel talk their way around that as they vindicate Iran and incriminate themselves.
They literally killed two Iranian generals and a bunch of other officials at a consulate. So yes, Israel is trying to escalate a regional war so Bibi can keep his genocide going. Iran has actually showed pretty remarkable restraint.
It's the same old tired play that fascists do to stay in power. Like, literally every time, and somehow people don't catch on...
Do Israel’s “previous” attacks on Palestine justify the Palestinians attacking Israel in the present or future, more or less out of nowhere, if they feel like it?
Can you explain to me how a pogrom can ever be justified? Because that was what Palestinian terrorists did on October 7, under the applause of a worrying number of people. It was the kind of pogrom Jews have been experiencing for millennia.
A better example of a pogrom might be the killing of over 30,000 civilian Palestinians and simultaneously starving them to death with blockade following 75 years of occupation and a century of colonialism. Proportionality matters and it doesn't favor your argument
Yeah. For as inhuman as it was, "pogrom" doesn't at all fit with the terrorist attack in October, but it fits perfectly to what Israel is currently doing in Gaza.
Sure. It's now 33,000+ Palestinians, 2/3ds of them of them civilians, including 13,000 children. It's as if it was a music festival attended only by children, and then 10 times over, all dead now, and still the number is climbing as the famine becomes ever more a reality day by day.
Or crippled for life, or orphaned, or both, or physically okay but with their home and the whole town they live in and many of their friends blown to scattered, dusty rubble.
I'm not denying that lots of civilians are dying in Gaza, that many are buried under rubble and starving - but please, don't use numbers that are obviously false in order to create emotional outrage.
One should also keep in mind that Hamas knew Israel would strike back with full force in response to the massacres and rapes they committed. And yet they didn't build a single bomb shelter for civilians. There aren't even air raid sirens in Gaza. This is the only war in human history where one side is fighting a nation with overwhelming air power and yet does absolutely nothing - hell, usually the opposite - to protect their civilians. They are also, right in the open, stealing aid and firing at desperate civilians, but I guess you choose to ignore this as well.
Your source's first chart doesn't match the actual OCHA numbers -- look at October 31 for example; their dot is well above 8,000 while the OCHA chart shows 8,005.
I didn't dig too much into the other statistical arguments, because I didn't see a link to the actual raw data in either place. Do you have links to the actual data? Usually my reaction to claims from a source I've never heard of is to test some of the things they're saying against things I can verify, and tabletmag.com failed for the one thing I tested it on that way.
I also found this article, which never mind what it says about the Iran deal, includes this fascinating little statement:
They lied about an “insurrection” on Jan. 6, 2021, to justify designating one half of the country as domestic terrorists, in order to put their political opponents in jail.
You’re grasping at straws to try to invalidate me instead of saying anything that would back up your point making your argument weaker. There was no repetition from me so if you’ve heard this before it would seem you’ve had this discussion before and may benefit from listening. Perhaps you shouldn’t respond if you have nothing to say
I don't at all think attacks on innocent Israelis are justified, no. I think the perpetrators of October 7th should get what's coming to them and are most likely destined for hell.
I'm pointing out that your logic would justify sudden attacks on Israel or the US by the Palestinians -- say, on October 6th if they had bombed the embassy and killed some generals and some random civilians -- because of "previous."
One need not pretend something that is already factually accurate. This was a retaliation and direct response for Israel bombing Iran's consulate in Syria on April 1. This is why Iran targeted and struck the Negev air force base ( which contains US F-35s used to bomb Gaza ) as that is the base from which that attack originated. This is also why Iran says it now considers the matter "concluded" and warned the US and Israel against further reprisals. Those are facts and not "pretending" so if you are going to "pretend" this isn't true and try to distort the matter I'm not interested.
@immibis@mozz I am not quite as cynical as you regarding the UN. Yes, the do seem to be a Western toy much of the time, but they also have their moments of clarity. It will be interesting to see their response to Israel's complaints.
The percentage chance that the security council will do something about this is pretty much exactly 0.
The US vetoes anything the UN tries to do against whatever war-criminal shit Israel gets up to in any given year, the two of them often completely alone, but with the veto on the other foot, the other 99% of the world will I think be firmly on the side of simply telling Israel "my guy you must be joking with this."
Iran has stated that they now consider the matter closed from their perspective, and the US is for the most part pretty careful about escalation management. The only real wild card is what Israel wants to do, which God only knows, but I do hold out hope that their first action being to involve the UN means they're planning on a bunch of performative outrage and nothing else significant.
The US is always at war in at least one place somewhere on earth, and has learned from painful experience how easy it is to ratchet a conflict up into a bigger deal than it needed to be and how difficult to ratchet it back down, so they pay close attention now to when they’re crossing certain lines especially when nuclear weapons are involved.
Put it another way, all the nations of the world all go to the same bar, and a lot of them have guns and split personalities, and they spend every night playing cards and cheating and there’s always at least one fist fight, and somehow it’s been about 75 years since anybody got shot.
On the other hand, weapon manufacturers are always looking to expand their markets, and they have the money to buy outlobby governments, so the question is more about where is the balance between what would a "sane" government want, and what conflicts could weapon peddlers make them instigate in order to maximize profits.
Like: would Israel want to buy some more stuff from the US? Would they give the US a discount on some Iron Dome in exchange? Could Biden reinstate sales to the UAE? Exactly how many nukes might be involved, and how would that impact everyone's interests in the region? (for example: what will be the oil prices tomorrow?)
Yeah. And the whole thrust of that whole document is, more or less, how can we use violence anywhere in the world to achieve our goals while making sure it won't get out of control or come into a realm where it might come back and impact our happy, well-fed families.
I wasn't saying any of this whole thing as a good thing necessarily; just giving the description: This is how the US tends to behave.
It was always thus, in this as in many other contexts. If phase 1 is "You can't stop me, rules mean nothing, I will do as I please," it's a good bet that by phase 3 we'll arrive at "OMG what is happening now is against the rules, won't someone step in and make sure I come to no harm, we need justice."
