I don't exactly think we're equally culpable...it's very unclear to me that the US could change Israel's trajectory in gaza at the moment no matter what we did. They haven't responded to much we've tried to reduce the violence (though we could exert a lot more pressure for sure.)
There are years of the U.S. undercutting or completely ignoring the rights of Palestinians in what amount not sham negotiations. This current violent response by Israel is simply another escalation of disproportional violent responses to Arab/Palestinian attacks since the election of increasingly rightwing Israel governments. Think of the 1982 invasion of Lebanon and the massacres at the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps.
Israel must withdraw to the original 1947 partition and the U.N. must administer free elections in a Palestinian State. The land and property appropriated in the 1948 massacre and ethnic cleansing must be assessed and the value paid to the families who it was stolen from. One Holocaust does not justify another.
And if the free elections elect Hamas which proceeds to continue to try to exterminate every single Jew in the region? Which is right now what all available polling indicates. You are correct, one Holocaust does not justify another.
can't imagine there's been much polling recently...and the situation has changed rather drastically, so don't know that old polling is still relevant...
Sure, there is no polling of Hamas' popularity among Palestinians since October 7th. And polling does indicate that Israeli's have turned against their right wing government, so it is possible that Palestinians have turned against Hamas. But asking Israel to trust, as James does, that a free Palestinian election leads to peace and not Hamas, is asking quite a lot. I continue to think peace can only be imposed on this region at the point of a gun. I've actually had lefty Israelis tell me that they wish the British would come back and reimpose the pre-1947 peace. It is always a joke, but it is an honest joke.
An attack on Israel from a sovereign country is quite different than the attack from a terrorist resistance organization not representative of a beleaguered group constantly assaulted by the state authority that blockades its borders and sea coast. Israel controls the imports and exports going into and out of Gaza. The 52% unemployment rate is not a result of laziness.
not sure what you're saying here. That Hamas' attack was ok because they aren't a sovereign country? that Israel should want them to be able to attack as a sovereign country? that high unemployment is a justification for terrorism?
I am certainly not saying that I support the cowardly, brutal, attack on civilians by Hamas. I am saying that the attack did not occur because all Palestinians are blood thirsty monsters. It was inspired by 76 years of oppression of the Palestinians by the government of Israel.
My statement about a sovereign country, which Gaza is not was simply to indicate that there is a difference between a violent aggressive attack by one country on another and the attempts of a people to achieve self determination by whatever means. For example, acts committed by the Stern Gang are quite different from the invasion of Ukraine by Russia.
The unemployment reference was to the ongoing repression of Gaza by Israel.
saying you don't support the attack and then immediately saying it was justified or "inspired" is a strange pas de deux. in the history of the world violence is most often met with more violence, Hamas knew that and even knew it would trigger the current left call for Israel to stand down. I find it very hard to join that call in the context of it being part of the plan on October 7th.
Saying it was inspired is quite different from saying it was justified. If I resort to your style of argument I suppose I would say that you believe all Palestinians are blood thirsty monsters. I thought we were having a civil discussion. Clearly you’re interested in some sort,of win.
I think all of this is a bit naive. Israel does actually have a clear military plan that it has made public from the beginning: eliminate Hamas' offensive capacity to prevent a repetition of October 7. Whether that plan can succeed, whether all current tactics being used are necessary for that goal, whether that goal could be pursued with fewer civilian deaths, to what extent civilian deaths are caused by Hamas hiding among civilians, whether Netanyahu and his more right wing cronies might continue the war for a variety of reasons (including genocideal ones) after that goal is achieved, all that is debatable. But there is a clear short term military goal and I find it surprising the extent to which so many left critiques feel within their rights to blithely ignore that clear short term goal. And so implicitly ignore any Israeli concerns about a repeat of October 7th.
the plan appears to be to just kill its way through so many palestinians that some in Hamas are killed as well. which doesn't seem to have been very successful thus far. they've done much better at killing Palestinians than they have at finding Hamas command centers.
Israel's security concerns are important, but it's hard for me to see how killing thousands and thousands of Palestinians makes radicalization less likely or makes the region safer or more secure for anyone. And if Israel is really interested in avoiding a repeat, it seems like replacing the government which completely failed to defend them would be a good first step. Bibi's still there though.
Noah that's just fatuous. If the really just wanted to kill lots of Palestinians, there would be a lot more than 11,000 dead right now. If they came in trying to slaughter civilians in the way Hamas did on October 7th, there would be hundreds of thousands dead right now and no buildings at all left standing in Gaza. I think the IDF could be exercising greater restraint but accusing it of exercising none is just plain foolish. And most Israelis do in fact want an election and to remove Bibi. Are you really attacking Israelis for not rising up in armed revolt against their own democracy immediately after an outside attack? The populace there can't call an election on their own any more than we can in this country, os again that comment as written is fatuous.
you also seem to feel its fine to worry about Israel's attacks radicalizing Palestinians but there is no space for worrying about how the Hamas attack may have radicalized Israelis. (which in many cases it in fact has.) and no knowledge of the fact that there were in fact months of massive street protests aimed at trying to remove Bibi from power before this war. and no attempts that I've ever heard of by Palestinians in Gaza to remove Hamas from power. the conflict runs deep on both sides and you join the call from the left that is always primarily a call for Israel to put down its weapons without much regard for whether Palestinians will do the same. you can claim its not up to you to offer a plan, but you sure seem to have one you like and one that more or less ends in a call for unilateral pacifism on the part of Israel. which is then supposed to miraculously lead to peace.
Gazans have a lot fewer levers or opportunities for protest.
I don’t think hamas should have murdered civilians, and thinkndoing that was certainly counterproductive. Not sure how that’s out of line with thinking Israel’s horrific slaughter of civilians is also counterproductive.
Noah did you write anything about Hamas' horrific slaughter of civilians? have you ever even used that adjective for it? you use that adjective pretty freely about Israeli's actions and write an awful lot about them. and I wasn't the one to raise the possibility that people should over throw their leaders: you asked why Israelis hadn't thrown Bibi out of power since October 7th. all I did was point out that one could also ask why Palestinians in Gaza had let Hamas rule them since 2005. they may have fewer levers but you were viscerally outraged that Israelis haven't miraculously overthrown a government in 6 weeks, so I don't think it out of line to wonder why Palestinians did nothing for over 15 years. from my point of view, you feel very free to partition blame primarily to one side of this history of violence. which is certainly a fashionable view on the US left. you're welcome to that point of view, but I still don't hear anything much that actually justifies this fairly one sided take. nor do I think this one sided take is actually of much value if the goal is to promote peace in the region. two sides won't make peace because you pressure one side to do so.
I've said repeatedly that Hamas' slaughter of civilians, including horrific sexual assaults, was horrible and immoral.
It's kind of a standard Israeli talking point that Gazans, who barely have access to food or power, much less weapons, and have had no elections since 2006, should somehow have thrown off Hamas, despite Hamas being buttressed by Israel's government in order to prevent the PA from getting enough authority to form a legitimate government. I think it's a really bad talking point.
And it's not really about blame or history at this point. It's about the fact that Israel appears to be attempting to depopulate the Gaza strip, which I think is wrong, and should be stopped.
The goal right at the moment, I think by all people of good conscience, should be to stop killing huge numbers of civilians. It's really unclear to me how chastising the US left, or spinning fantasies about the Palestinian people throwing off Hamas, gets us closer to that goal.
You know that 95% of Gaza is without water right now, yes? There's going to be a massive cholera epidemic, if there isn't one already. I don't see any way around this being a massive act of collective punishment. Collective punishment is bad when Hamas does it, it's bad when Israel does it. The current ongoing bombardment and massive civilian death is in Gaza, and I think it's pretty reasonable to argue that stopping that is an imperative. The alternative is, what? Repeat, "well it's all Hamas' fault" as more children are killed? I just don't see how that's helpful or moral, though it does seem to be a popular position among many.
Oh, Israel has a plan, all right—complete genocide of the Palestinian Arabs!
I have yet to hear anybody responsible for the Israeli counterattack say the first thing acknowledging that most of the Palestinians aren't members of Hamas, any more than most Israelis aren't members of the Likkud Party. In fact, there's a gleeful tone to the language coming out of Israel these days that I find sickening—and I really wish Biden was willing to put his foot down more with that corrupt Fascist murdering fuck Netanyahu.
Agreed. End the murdering and maiming of thousands of unarmed Palestinians. I see the U.S. equally culpable for this abhorrent situation.
I don't exactly think we're equally culpable...it's very unclear to me that the US could change Israel's trajectory in gaza at the moment no matter what we did. They haven't responded to much we've tried to reduce the violence (though we could exert a lot more pressure for sure.)
There are years of the U.S. undercutting or completely ignoring the rights of Palestinians in what amount not sham negotiations. This current violent response by Israel is simply another escalation of disproportional violent responses to Arab/Palestinian attacks since the election of increasingly rightwing Israel governments. Think of the 1982 invasion of Lebanon and the massacres at the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps.
We’ll have to agree to disagree. Previous U.S. military campaigns look like the prototypes for present IDF actions.
Israel must withdraw to the original 1947 partition and the U.N. must administer free elections in a Palestinian State. The land and property appropriated in the 1948 massacre and ethnic cleansing must be assessed and the value paid to the families who it was stolen from. One Holocaust does not justify another.
And if the free elections elect Hamas which proceeds to continue to try to exterminate every single Jew in the region? Which is right now what all available polling indicates. You are correct, one Holocaust does not justify another.
can't imagine there's been much polling recently...and the situation has changed rather drastically, so don't know that old polling is still relevant...
Sure, there is no polling of Hamas' popularity among Palestinians since October 7th. And polling does indicate that Israeli's have turned against their right wing government, so it is possible that Palestinians have turned against Hamas. But asking Israel to trust, as James does, that a free Palestinian election leads to peace and not Hamas, is asking quite a lot. I continue to think peace can only be imposed on this region at the point of a gun. I've actually had lefty Israelis tell me that they wish the British would come back and reimpose the pre-1947 peace. It is always a joke, but it is an honest joke.
An attack on Israel from a sovereign country is quite different than the attack from a terrorist resistance organization not representative of a beleaguered group constantly assaulted by the state authority that blockades its borders and sea coast. Israel controls the imports and exports going into and out of Gaza. The 52% unemployment rate is not a result of laziness.
not sure what you're saying here. That Hamas' attack was ok because they aren't a sovereign country? that Israel should want them to be able to attack as a sovereign country? that high unemployment is a justification for terrorism?
I am certainly not saying that I support the cowardly, brutal, attack on civilians by Hamas. I am saying that the attack did not occur because all Palestinians are blood thirsty monsters. It was inspired by 76 years of oppression of the Palestinians by the government of Israel.
My statement about a sovereign country, which Gaza is not was simply to indicate that there is a difference between a violent aggressive attack by one country on another and the attempts of a people to achieve self determination by whatever means. For example, acts committed by the Stern Gang are quite different from the invasion of Ukraine by Russia.
The unemployment reference was to the ongoing repression of Gaza by Israel.
saying you don't support the attack and then immediately saying it was justified or "inspired" is a strange pas de deux. in the history of the world violence is most often met with more violence, Hamas knew that and even knew it would trigger the current left call for Israel to stand down. I find it very hard to join that call in the context of it being part of the plan on October 7th.
Saying it was inspired is quite different from saying it was justified. If I resort to your style of argument I suppose I would say that you believe all Palestinians are blood thirsty monsters. I thought we were having a civil discussion. Clearly you’re interested in some sort,of win.
Why do you suppose the terror attack occurred?
I think all of this is a bit naive. Israel does actually have a clear military plan that it has made public from the beginning: eliminate Hamas' offensive capacity to prevent a repetition of October 7. Whether that plan can succeed, whether all current tactics being used are necessary for that goal, whether that goal could be pursued with fewer civilian deaths, to what extent civilian deaths are caused by Hamas hiding among civilians, whether Netanyahu and his more right wing cronies might continue the war for a variety of reasons (including genocideal ones) after that goal is achieved, all that is debatable. But there is a clear short term military goal and I find it surprising the extent to which so many left critiques feel within their rights to blithely ignore that clear short term goal. And so implicitly ignore any Israeli concerns about a repeat of October 7th.
there's a goal. a goal isn't a plan.
the plan appears to be to just kill its way through so many palestinians that some in Hamas are killed as well. which doesn't seem to have been very successful thus far. they've done much better at killing Palestinians than they have at finding Hamas command centers.
Israel's security concerns are important, but it's hard for me to see how killing thousands and thousands of Palestinians makes radicalization less likely or makes the region safer or more secure for anyone. And if Israel is really interested in avoiding a repeat, it seems like replacing the government which completely failed to defend them would be a good first step. Bibi's still there though.
Noah that's just fatuous. If the really just wanted to kill lots of Palestinians, there would be a lot more than 11,000 dead right now. If they came in trying to slaughter civilians in the way Hamas did on October 7th, there would be hundreds of thousands dead right now and no buildings at all left standing in Gaza. I think the IDF could be exercising greater restraint but accusing it of exercising none is just plain foolish. And most Israelis do in fact want an election and to remove Bibi. Are you really attacking Israelis for not rising up in armed revolt against their own democracy immediately after an outside attack? The populace there can't call an election on their own any more than we can in this country, os again that comment as written is fatuous.
you also seem to feel its fine to worry about Israel's attacks radicalizing Palestinians but there is no space for worrying about how the Hamas attack may have radicalized Israelis. (which in many cases it in fact has.) and no knowledge of the fact that there were in fact months of massive street protests aimed at trying to remove Bibi from power before this war. and no attempts that I've ever heard of by Palestinians in Gaza to remove Hamas from power. the conflict runs deep on both sides and you join the call from the left that is always primarily a call for Israel to put down its weapons without much regard for whether Palestinians will do the same. you can claim its not up to you to offer a plan, but you sure seem to have one you like and one that more or less ends in a call for unilateral pacifism on the part of Israel. which is then supposed to miraculously lead to peace.
Gazans have a lot fewer levers or opportunities for protest.
I don’t think hamas should have murdered civilians, and thinkndoing that was certainly counterproductive. Not sure how that’s out of line with thinking Israel’s horrific slaughter of civilians is also counterproductive.
Noah did you write anything about Hamas' horrific slaughter of civilians? have you ever even used that adjective for it? you use that adjective pretty freely about Israeli's actions and write an awful lot about them. and I wasn't the one to raise the possibility that people should over throw their leaders: you asked why Israelis hadn't thrown Bibi out of power since October 7th. all I did was point out that one could also ask why Palestinians in Gaza had let Hamas rule them since 2005. they may have fewer levers but you were viscerally outraged that Israelis haven't miraculously overthrown a government in 6 weeks, so I don't think it out of line to wonder why Palestinians did nothing for over 15 years. from my point of view, you feel very free to partition blame primarily to one side of this history of violence. which is certainly a fashionable view on the US left. you're welcome to that point of view, but I still don't hear anything much that actually justifies this fairly one sided take. nor do I think this one sided take is actually of much value if the goal is to promote peace in the region. two sides won't make peace because you pressure one side to do so.
I've said repeatedly that Hamas' slaughter of civilians, including horrific sexual assaults, was horrible and immoral.
It's kind of a standard Israeli talking point that Gazans, who barely have access to food or power, much less weapons, and have had no elections since 2006, should somehow have thrown off Hamas, despite Hamas being buttressed by Israel's government in order to prevent the PA from getting enough authority to form a legitimate government. I think it's a really bad talking point.
And it's not really about blame or history at this point. It's about the fact that Israel appears to be attempting to depopulate the Gaza strip, which I think is wrong, and should be stopped.
The goal right at the moment, I think by all people of good conscience, should be to stop killing huge numbers of civilians. It's really unclear to me how chastising the US left, or spinning fantasies about the Palestinian people throwing off Hamas, gets us closer to that goal.
You know that 95% of Gaza is without water right now, yes? There's going to be a massive cholera epidemic, if there isn't one already. I don't see any way around this being a massive act of collective punishment. Collective punishment is bad when Hamas does it, it's bad when Israel does it. The current ongoing bombardment and massive civilian death is in Gaza, and I think it's pretty reasonable to argue that stopping that is an imperative. The alternative is, what? Repeat, "well it's all Hamas' fault" as more children are killed? I just don't see how that's helpful or moral, though it does seem to be a popular position among many.
Oh, Israel has a plan, all right—complete genocide of the Palestinian Arabs!
I have yet to hear anybody responsible for the Israeli counterattack say the first thing acknowledging that most of the Palestinians aren't members of Hamas, any more than most Israelis aren't members of the Likkud Party. In fact, there's a gleeful tone to the language coming out of Israel these days that I find sickening—and I really wish Biden was willing to put his foot down more with that corrupt Fascist murdering fuck Netanyahu.