You're viewing part of a thread.
This whole conflict has just always felt like a massive grey area as an outsider. Both sides have done horrible things over the years, with the retaliation often being even worse. Most governments (including mine) are actually supporting both sides, for example through humanitarian aid. That's just kind of weird when you think about it, in a way they're enabling both sides to keep going. And I just don't know if there's any way out of this besides one side completely destroying the other. Peace talks have been had so many times and it just doesn't lead anywhere. It just feels inevitable.
There is no argument for "both sides bad" when one side is currently right now this instant blowing up hospitals, schools, and children. One side is objectively worse and it's the side hiding behind the skirts of "antisemitism" as they carry out an Arabic genocide
I disagree.
Both sides are bad, no matter who is currently the aggressor.
Now because there is aggression, the aggressor has an obligation to stop it, and we have an obligation to force a stop in the conflict as well. But that doesn't make the other party less Bad in this. Both sides killed a lot of innocent people, both have inhumane ulterior motives and both are supporting further escalation. But ofc if there's only one party doing the fighting, then that's the party that acutely needs to be stopped.
This distinction is very important to me, because you are not suddenly the good guy because you stopped killing civilians. You are just not actively doing war crimes which means we don't have to intervene because of you anymore, which is at least one less reason. But you are not holy because "this year it was only 300 war crimes".
"Both have inhuman ulterior motives"
Palestine wants to be free
Israel wants to genocide Palestine and live in their homes
Yes I can see how wanting liberty and self governance is exactly the same as wanting more land for your historically landless people regardless of how many natives you have to kill. Completely balanced
The attacks weren't perpetrated by a free Palestinian people or some recognized advocacy group, but by an extremist wing of the Muslim Brotherhood that has been pushed by Israel for decades.
And the Palestinians vote them in.
If White Southerners are responsible for the Civil War, the Palestinian people bear responsibility for choosing a genocidal majority.
My sympathy for the Palestinians only goes so far—it ends with their ballot box.
Just as all US citizens are responsible for ongoing drone strikes etc
If they vote for candidates who support them, then yes, the body politic is responsible.
Democracy comes with responsibility.
How do you know which candidate I voted for before you blow up my house?
You don’t. War is a blunt instrument. If you went door-to-door and mapped out households with different-colored thumbtacks, your enemy would take the advantage and strike at you while you worried about it.
Being attacked by a terrorist isn't an excuse to act like a terrorist. You don't get to murder children because someone else did. And you don't get to use war as an excuse.
It's a bit more complicated than that. Palestine doesn't have a strong democratic tradition to begin with. Additionally, Hamas is only governing Gaza, not the West Banks. Hamas also suppresses secular Freedom organizations. And ~50% of the people in Gaza wouldnt even be able to vote out Hamas since they are under 18. Then we have the case of Hamas indoctrination, which finds fertile soil in the impoverished and destitute Gaza youth.
All of that isn't to say I support Hamas. I am quite vocal in my disdain for them. But Israel plays a significant part in their success. So does Iran. And let's not forget that the religious right has been torpedoing a resolution aswell, not just the Jihadist organization Hamas. Rabin wasn't killed by a palestinian hardliner.
“Strong democratic tradition”? So you’re arguing that they were too stupid to vote is what you’re saying?
Hamas’ charter explicitly calls for the destruction of Israel.
They don’t want a resolution.
When did the Palestinians vote last? What were the demographics of that vote? Are you completely confident it was a purely democratic vote or was it the kind of democracy Putin got voted by? Perhaps the kind kim was voted in by? Or do you think Palestinians have an electoral college like the US?
2006. They were judged free and fair by observers. Hamas won the majority, to the surprise of many outside the region.
So you're fine with a nearly 20 year old vote, when the majority of the population is under 20, being the justification for "they chose Hamas?"
Fatah wins against Hamas in West Bank cities and Hamas wins in Gaza Strip cities [given a putative snap election]
To break the deadlock, 56% support popular non-violent resistance, 50% support a return to armed intifada [emphasis mine], and 48% support dissolving the PA
The largest percentage (42%) views armed struggle as the most effective means of ending the occupation
In the poll, 53% of the 1,200 Palestinians surveyed said they believed Hamas is "most deserving of representing and leading the Palestinian people." By contrast, just 14% said the same of Fatah.
You tell me (PDF warning):
It’s not letting me select and copy from it; read the damn thing.
Permanently Deleted
Lmfao that hasn't been true since Athens invented democracy. Alcibiades was elected plenty and still turned traitor. The average Palestinian doesn't support Hamas, but they're not going to denounce one of the few factions actually fighting towards their goals. Get Israel out of Palestine and you'll be amazed how few rockets will fly
Permanently Deleted
As a native American in modern America, tell me more about how the terrorists won. Lmao my people also fought back, were labeled "terrorists" (read "savages" for old timey historically accurate racism flavor), and were damn near driven to extinction. There's a reason I'm French Indian instead of just Indian.
The Colonies revolted. And then, for good measure (/s), they terrorized everybody else.
The Bluecoats were terrorists. They had no legitimate basis to rebel against the Crown.
So forcing an entire people's into ghettos and taking their land, while putting them under blockade and only reluctantly letting I'm small amounts of aid and food, all while bombing them weekly is actually good, because sometimes they fight back, making them the aggressor?
The post you replied to called no actor in this good. That's your own forced dichotomy. To condemn an act does not mean you condone every act taken in response.
But ofc if there’s only one party doing the fighting, then that’s the party that acutely needs to be stopped.
Hamas never stopped fighting and they still have about 200 hostages. What makes you think that the IDF would stop fighting now?