Acknowledging Israeli apartheid is not the same as being pro-Hamas lmao

Yo kazhard, the real enemies of the Jews are the same people that allowed and/or enabled the Holocaust to happen. And it wasn't Arabs.

The West supporting the formation of the settler colony of Israel afforded them a) the chance to finally be rid of them en masse because they never liked them living in Europe and b) to have eyes in other places in the world to further their imperialist agendas.

Stop ranting and posting nonsensical nothings and immerse yourself in an unbiased history of terrible events that have happened and keep happening.

Jew here.

Fuck the Israeli government, and fuck Hamas, both. While we're at it, fuck the US government, and the European colonialists, as well as all of the other Islamist madmen from Iran and the like who also stoke the fire. The only innocent people here are the civilians caught in the crossfire of this shitstorm of multigenerational horror.

Everyone else has blood on their hands.

Jews are semitic. Palestinians are also semitic. There are certainly anti-semites in the world but they're not going to be the ones shouting "Free Palestine".

Anyone care to take a shot at why people are tearing down missing Israeli posters? I'm not sure I understand why there are missing people posters from 10/07 in NYC, LA, or wherever in the USA, but if that makes someone feel better, it's a harmless thing. But what is this need to tear them down? It's weird. And that isn't anti-government, either, so we have to lean towards hate and racism. But that isn't why I'm curious. It's some kind of odd indoctrination, at least as much as I can estimate. Is that coming from tiktok? where did this get encouraged and supported?

It's hard to say for sure, but the US has had a problem with anti semitism forever, and it's currently spiking.

It seems to be spiking up in a lot of places, not least of all Germany, where - maybe to nobody's surprise - anti-semitism and fascism were not weeded out, and have simply been lying dormant for all these years. "Never again" is starting to look like "not until it's expedient again"

Sorry but, this comment is insanely absurd.

I mean, it's not like we haven't seen this before: progressives immediately dismiss FOX news as if it's off of a white power or Alex Jones blog, or conservatives dismiss CNN as if it's the Communist Manifesto's TikTok, but in reality, every news source has bias, and needs to be read as such, but unless we are talking about truly fringe sources, it's unlikely to at least have some kernel of truth, however skewed.

Calling Al-Jazeera a jihadist blog is, well... god-forbid someone might have some sympathy for Palestinian suffering. Because at least according to what I see this week, the global sympathy towards Israel has evaporated very quickly. Gwynne Dyer wrote a good article about this, saying, that Israel had 1-2 weeks to militarily do whatever they pleased before global patience ran out, and that is what I am seeing right now, everywhere I turn.

I agree with pretty much 95% of what Metal on the Ascendant wrote except for the idea that the Israeli regime is somehow allied with White Supremacy, or at least WS-sympathetic colonialist ideals.

I don't agree that you have to be "white" as some type of qualifier to be a colonialist. Of course we, in this modern era, talk about it as such, but that is only because we are historically adjacent to European colonialism, so for all of us this is what we think of in this context. But world history reaching back farther than our own lives, shows a different worldview, where empires rise and fall. We are in the death-throes of European Imperium, and that's alright. But this has nothing to do with being "white".

Similarly, Israelis are not "white". This is even separate of the fact that at least 40% of their population is Arabic, but even amongst the Jews themselves, really Ashkenazi Jews could be considered "white" since they came from eastern Europe, but even that.. what is "eastern Europe?" does it include the Caucasus? And what of Sephardic jews, from Spain, where some of them can also be Moorish? Mizrahi jews, i.e. directly descended from the Middle East, are a major group within Israel. Are they white? Are they not? Does this even matter? I suppose it matters only to Western progressives.

Jews in general pass off as "white" only when it confers a tangible privilege to be perceived so because of fairer skin, but when it doesn't, then they are "semitic". I don't actually see anything wrong with this, because I see that as a survival mechanism for a community that is never truly welcomed anywhere and it usually at odds with its surroundings, but at the end of the day, this advantage is also its disadvantage.

They are clearly "whiter" than the Palestinians, and because they are using a type of apartheid for the Palestinians in their social system, people will say "oh okay, apartheid = white = jews = white supremacy" but that is a gross oversimplification of the issues, at best.

One thing I also noticed when reading about, for example, the Celtic football fans' overwhelming support for Palestinians, and how they are systematically being censored, as opposed to say, when they were showing solidarity for Ukrainians.... the article I was reading tried to say that because Ukrainians are white and Palestinians are generally brown, that the media censorship double standard is racially motivated.

I don't agree with that at all. The difference, in my opinion, is because we in the west are, to a degree, propagandized politically to think about who is our friend vs. adversary. For years we've been fed a steady diet of Russia = evil, not least of when Hillary's loss to Trump was automatically attributed to the highest Kremlin echelons, whereas, even the most lukewarm criticism of Israeli government politics.... even non-violent ones, such as a goods purchasing boycott, is AUTOMATICALLY antisemitism, and this is of course because of the out-of-proportional influence that Israeli-interest lobbies actually have here in the "west".

And perhaps people across the world are starting to ask themselves why a country like Israel is enjoying such restraint of criticism.. is it because of collective guilt for the second world war? Remember, it wasn't only the Germans. By the end of the war, the SS had divisions in almost every European country, and plenty of divisions in India, Turkey, and recruits from Arabic-North Africa. Does that excuse modern genocidal actions? Why does a country exert such disproportionate influence yet at the same time receive billions of dollars worth of aid, military aid (specifically), annually, from the western world? Wouldn't you expect it to be the other way around?

Some things to think about.

Every community has their interest groups prowling about the parliaments of pretty much every other country, so no surprise our outrage there. But if someone is exerting an over-influence, is it wrong to call it out?

They are propaganda and are being uselessly put up in spaces actual missing people from the area have posters put up. Like if they were just missing person posters or a tribute or something I would get it, but they've got a big CONDEMN HAMAS TAKE ACTION SAVE THESE PEOPLE NOW shpeil like someone in New York or London or whatever can do anything about someone halfway across the world being held in a place Israel is bombing the shit out of anyway

Functionally the only thing they do is serve to drive donations towards IDF stuff which is no good

High chance those posters would've been torn down regardless of the wordage used because lots of people are either unable or unwilling to extent the slightest bit of human empathy and sympathy to victims on the other side. The immediate minimization - or in some cases even justification of 10/07 and the majority opinion in Israel on if Palestinian suffering should be taken into account right now (nope) are clear examples of this.

It's a lot of some kind if ignorant social media indoctrination to activity. I watched a couple videos of a journalist asking ralliers to sign a pro-Hamas petition, but before they signed it, they had to agree to the beliefs of the petition, which involved women's rights and LBGTQ+ rights, etc. Of course, it was like a Jay Leno street question session, and none of these people had any idea of Hamas and hardliners platforms on those issues. To no surprise, once they heard what they were supporting, they wanted no part of it and wouldn't sign the petition. A frenzy based on ignorance. Also watched another video of an onlyfans woman talking about the river to the sea and never, ever, ever going to support Jews. Does she have any clue what would happen to a sex worker if Hamas had control of her life?

Further, are they watching the videos on Middle Eastern TV with Hamas leaders out of Qatar talking about doing it all again, would do it again, but even more extreme, and outright saying that the death of Palestinians is necessary, and useful, to fire people up and give their cause energy. No mincing words about it either. They're all martyrs, and it is fine that innocent Palestinians die, because it works in their favor. My hunch is that their social media feeds make no mention of any of this, especially of the aforementioned value system that would crush the lives of many of the ralliers if they lived under such rule.

The idea that Israel is justified in what it's doing (again, literal war crimes) because of Hamas is insane. If a terrorist takes control of a building full of civilians, you don't bomb the building because you might also take out the terrorist inside. But when it's Palestinians, most of whom are children or youths, suddenly it's fair game. Condemning Israel for its war crimes isn't defending Hamas and only disingenuous fucksticks like kazhard would suggest otherwise.

This situation looks like international law and justice is not working at all these days, in any case.


If what was said in this video is the real state of things in this situation and those "military" people do nothing to protect and to help the civilians there - https://twitter.com/ISefati/status/1719 ... er=ISefati, and if the Israeli army does not care (that, as a result of their military actions, there may be many civilian casualties) either, - then it's horrible and it looks like there is no one for the civilians to hope/to rely on at all.
Do international organizations do any real actions to help civilians there?
From what I heard and read about the actions of the UN during the war here in Ukraine, they can only help civilians in Ukrainian-controlled territories where there is no battles (and they also help Ukrainian refugees abroad). In other cases, they are mostly useless, people in Ukraine especially remember their inactivity during the first hours/days after the detonations on Kakhovka hydroelectric power station and the flooding of the territories there (including those territories that were occupied and controlled by the Russian military and to which Ukrainian rescuers and volunteers did not have acces).
In theory, the international organization "The Red Cross" must do this, but in practice they also do almost nothing, that's all.

If someone mentions Russia in this context, one could have mentioned the actions of the Russian government and military in this case, which led to the tragedy, - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beslan_school_siege
, as an example of a fight against terrorism at the cost of lives of civilians (including many children).

Whether it is justified is a whole argument that is above my pay grade. I do question what people would have them do though, because when you have Hamas leadership hitting the airwaves with saying they'd do it again, will do it again, and that they don't value their own people and see them as pawns in the overall game, Israel isn't left with many options. When your enemy says they're going to do it again (who knows when or what that means), you can't sit back and wait for it to happen. I have no answers to this, and there are no clean solutions that I've heard so far. Again, what should they do with an enemy who is finding a surge in motivation and who is making further threats?

Commit to an actual, sustainable, realistic solution, and maybe don't commit crimes against humanity in the process. Blocking off electricity, fuel, and clean water to millions of people because of the actions of a terrorist organization based in their midst is collective punishment-- and that's a war crime, no ifs or buts about it, the Geneva Convention is unequivocal about that. That's not even starting on the question of Israeli strikes on medical convoys, residential areas, and other off-limits targets. It's not right.

What should they do? Not this. This is not going to solve anything. Hamas's leadership isn't in Gaza. Who's in Gaza? A couple million people living on a couple of pieces of bread a day, the majority of them children, who are watching their homes be destroyed, their parents be killed, their kids go hungry, in retaliation for something they had nothing to do with. I wonder how resistant those people are going to be when the next version of Hamas comes to them and says, hey, remember when Israel took everything from you? Wouldn't you like to give them a little taste in return? And the cycle continues. We cannot pretend that this is any kind of solution, that this isn't perpetuating the problem. If we're going to talk about this in terms of making peace and not getting revenge, we have a moral obligation to point out that what Israel is doing will not create peace, nor will it create security and safety for its citizens, not in the long-term.

This constant refrain of 'there aren't any clear/easy solutions' strikes me as an excuse. Yes, of course there's no easy solution-- there never is in complex geopolitical conflicts. That doesn't mean we have to just accept Israel committing war crimes.

First, I'm not just accepting anything. I'm listening. I'm asking questions. I don't know enough to have much of an opinion about anything other the death and brutality of it all. Ever consider when someone says they don't see a solution, what they're saying is "I'm listening to a lot of people talk, and nobody has a solution. I'm not pretending to have a solution when I can't even form a hazy opinion from it all." So, in other words, there's no subtext OR laziness OR idealism. A lot of people talking, creating a cacophony of noise, and merely acknowledging that?

Second, as far as fuel and supplies, is it really that simple? If Hamas openly states it will confiscate/steal these things to run their tunnel generators for light and ventilation, and knowing their tunnel system is a primary military tool and strategic issue, how can it be reasonably expected Israel should supply these things? Between Hamas and Israeli intelligence, there are somewhere between 30-40K Hamas fighters in Gaza. The leadership might be hanging out in Qatar, living like royalty, but the grunts are next door. If the tunnels are that key to their existence and military prowess, it would be like expecting Israel to send them weaponry. Kind of a fucked decision to make either way, no?

Third, you have Hamas leadership --as I repeat myself, but I find it significant enough to keep mentioning it-- saying they don't value the lives of their own people. I recognize how Hamas will spin all this, like they did with the errant missile, but is "not this" any kind of opinion? The Palestinians are going to form their own collective belief about what is happening, even if it doesn't come from facts and only emotions. Israel is going to do something. They can't be expected to do nothing, and if things are going to get twisted and turn into propaganda, it's only more reason to concern themselves less with the optics. Once again, it sounds like a cacophony with a release valve that will get pressed. It's not going to not get pressed.

So, based on what I've gathered from some of the responses here, neither side is really objectively the "good guy" or the "bad guy"? Or have I missed something?

Granted, I know it's very rarely ever that black and white anyways, but it especially seems to be the case here.

It's pretty clear we're supposed to lean one way or the other, depending on what social pressures you frequent. They're even being exerted here. What can't seem to be acknowledged, because as Bill Maher put it the other day (embarrassing to bring him up in a serious discussion, but he DID address it), you're either the victim or the victimizer. There's no allowance for nuance anymore. Pick a side. You better pick a side. Or else.

A fundamental, primary role of any government worth two mouse turds is to protect its citizens. Israel is going to protect Israelis. There's room for argument whether they're playing the short game or the long game, but either way, they're in the game nonetheless. Hamas is the controlling power in Gaza, and they're outright saying they see their citizens as expendable. They aren't going to look out for their citizens. I don't say this flippantly or with any lightness, but this combination makes the Palestinian people pretty much screwed. How people are walking around placing the blame solely on Israel is odd to me, but again, that is an undeveloped opinion. I'm no isolationist or exceptionalist. That shit is ridiculous, but there are some ridiculous variables at play here that make it dangerously unpredictable. When the hatred for another is more prominent than the love for your own, the rules get very muddy.

I used to be strongly agitated and "against" the USA being the world police dept. I didn't think we had any right to it, and all sorts of other feelings about it. But then at some point, I acknowledged that China or Russia was going to take that role if we dropped out of the race. It's obviously China now, but at the time, it wasn't as clear. Nobody should have a right to it, but in reality, someone is going to do it. A man and his ambition, somewhere out there, is going to demand the question. Do I want Western values running the show, or do I want China's interests running the show? Now I can ask the same question about this war and the war in Ukraine. So yeah, I can learn and teeter and cringe at the mistakes and wish it different and be profoundly saddened, disheartened by the game of thrones, but when everything gets whittled down to the core...because there absolutely is a core...I feel there is a better and a worse. I'm no longer a child seeing in only black and white.

What an absurd thing to say. The only qualifications you need to know whether or not bombing a hospital full of children or cutting off clean water to civilians is justified is to have a shred of empathy, but if you lack even that, then you can just look at the Geneva Convention.



"There are no clean solutions... so let's allow genocide and atrocities". Jesus fucking Christ

and that is the most unfortunate part. 9 times out of 10, whenever conflicts like these happen, it's the innocent civilians that take the brunt of it. It's almost like clockwork at this point. Knowing this fact, you would think the projected goal would be to try and mitigate/reduce said casualties as much as possible. But, from what I've seen, that doesn't seem to be the case in this particular context. In fact, it seems to be the exact opposite.

It's called blowback, and pointing that fact out shouldn't have to mean you also have to qualify your statement by saying that you're against terrorists killing civilians. OF COURSE you are against this, unless you're a psychopath. But at the end of the day, I would be far more sympathetic to the Israelis if Netenyahu hadn't made it a cornerstone of his policy to actually support Hamas at the expense of much more moderate Fatah, or similar. Sorry, but the Israelis here can't have their cake and eat it too, and this whole shit show finally came home to roost, in a spectacular way. It's sad, really. Give the Palestinians a real, 2 state solution, and put an end to this cycle of hatred before we all end up under a god damn mushroom cloud

I see, so of course the USA being the World Police (tm) is driven by purely altruistic tendencies and a desire for stability. You know, if you ever find yourself unemployed, you should go work for one of those Washington think-tanks like the Institute for the Study of War, or the Heritage Foundation. They need people that adhere to this type.of fallacy

If I've implied I have no empathy or concern, I've failed at expressing myself. Same for the assumption that I have an allowance for further barbarism and atrocities. My point all along, with each of my posts, is that if experts, diplomats, and whoever people with real experience in this conflict can't make heads or tails of it, some ignoramus on a music message board isn't going to have any real, worthy understanding of it all. So what am I left with? Gut reactions? Our hearts somehow make us instant geopolitical experts with viable solutions? Of course not. I've always FELT that the new settlements were giving a big ol' fuck you to the Palestinians and poking the bear, but I also acknowledge I have no understanding of the complicated history and political maneuvers happening in that region. Sure, I got an opinion, but it isn't worth squat. I don't think anyone else here does either, and that isn't really an insult, because it's clear that nobody knows what they're talking about, even when this conflict is in their area of expertise. As I try to understand this whole thing, I rarely hear the same strategic or political opinion twice. If there was a clearly right answer, which some people act like there is, I would imagine there would be some kind of agreement somewhere. There isn't.



I'll give you a quarter if you can find anywhere that I said that, or even that I implied that. I did say, however, that there is a better and a worse.

As for the two-state solution, that would seem to be the only rational option, but are any of the players rational? Sure doesn't seem like it.

Aight. So if all you have to offer to the discussion are "gee I just don't KNOW guys, I'm just a dumb ignoramus on a message board ;_; we just can't know if genocide is ok or not since this is all Very Complicated", then feel free to stop posting.

I thought it was Israel's apartheid. I hadn't realized we've moved onto genocide in regards to Israel. Like Rashida Tlaib, are we redefining words and terms now? If you want to actually have a discussion, I only see one party in this with it clearly, and proudly, stated in its charter. Throwing around these terms all willy-nilly is reckless. We can do without more of that now.

Rashida Tlaib
@RashidaTlaib
From the river to the sea is an aspirational call for freedom, human rights, and peaceful coexistence, not death, destruction, or hate. My work and advocacy is always centered in justice and dignity for all people no matter faith or ethnicity.

Imam of Peace
@Imamofpeace
Rashida is a liar. Why? Because the chant “From the river to the sea” is a translation of the original Arabic chant “from the water to the water, Palestine will remain Arab.” This is a genocidal call to ethnically cleanse the land from all non-Arabs i.e. the Jews.

The original Arabic chant: من المية للمية فلسطين عربية

Sure it's not a genocide because genocide implies intent. If Israel intended to commit a genocide the number of deaths would have been way higher than the still horror inducing number we're at right now - 10.000 according to the Gaza health ministry, considering the sheer amount of bombs used.

On Oct. 14, just a week into the war, the Israeli air force said it had dropped 6,000 bombs on Hamas targets in Gaza. By contrast, a little more than 7,300 bombs were dropped on Afghanistan by the U.S.-led coalition in all of 2019, the heaviest year of aerial bombardment there. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/20 ... ans-hamas/

Moreso Israel is just bombing the absolute shit out of Hamas targets while not caring about the surrounding civilians. Obviously heinous warcrimes - but not genocide in the strictest sense. Although a portion of Netanyahu's government would probably be A-OK with implementing some more intent....

The consistent lies of the mainstream media on the war is fathomable. It's not worth my time. Usually, I compile articles from Arab sources. The US should not be involved in any foreign disputes. It is not our duty to fight Israel's wars. They are not our ally either as they've attacked us in the past. They are the aggressors and keep on attacking nations such as occupied Palestine, Lebanon, and Syria. Fox News only told the truth once during 9/11 in regards to Israelis spying on Americans. You will occasionally get a slip of the tongue from controlled media outlets, but when in fact, they actually support all these wars. Our nation interests become ignored and are devalued as Israel and Ukraine come first and foremost. It is not "anti-Semitic" to criticize the biggest manufacturer of terrorism, Israel. Trump's slogan should've been MIGA and not MAGA during his reign. It really doesn't matter though because politicians are SELECTED, not "elected."

It's a pretty fine line between genocide and ethnic cleansing (the latter of which I strongly believe is the appropriate term for what is happening and has been happening to Palestinians) and I think once you're debating where that line is it's pretty clear whatever is happening is unacceptable. The seizure of land belonging to Palestinians and their removal from that land is a form of ethnic cleansing. The expulsion of a million Gazans from their homes with no 'safe zone' to go to is a form of ethnic cleansing. The deliberate imposition of unlivable conditions in the form of no access to clean water, electricity, and medicine on a population that overwhelmingly belongs to one ethnic group is a form of ethnic cleansing. Sure, Israel could flatten Gaza and murder tens of thousands of Palestinians if it wanted to. If that's the main argument against calling its actions genocide, then I don't think it's a very compelling one. It's hard to think of any historical genocides that couldn't have been just a little bit worse somehow if the perpetrators really wanted them to be.

Personally, I stick with 'ethnic cleansing' in these conversations. But I think the line is so faint, and frankly irrelevant, that I'm not going to get bogged down in semantics if someone else uses the term genocide.

Yeah I agree that Israel engaged and still is engaging in ethnic cleansing, especially in the West Bank. But I think the line is significant because in my understanding (I could be wrong) genocide means that the first order of business is to destroy an ethnic group instead of "merely" removing them from a piece of land. Not exactly a faint line, imo. But you're right, not the most important thing to focus on.

Keep on thinking you have a say by "voting."

Of course you do have a say. That doesn't mean you get what you want.

The whole "they're picked, it doesn't matter, blah blah blah" is just anti-Democracy nonsense by people who don't want people to vote. If you beleive it's futile, you're more likely to stay home*. And it favors a certain type of candidates, as well as the statu quo.

*Doubly so when the people "staying home" favors put other obstacles, such as restricting voting hours, the number of stations, etc.

Ethnic cleansing backed by violence against civilians is genocide, how can anyone think otherwise? They're fucking bombing hospitals with children and babies inside. They attack schools, refugee camps, they attack the so-called "safe routes" evacuees were told by the Israeli government to use, they shoot journalists and children.

aCkShUaLlY It's nOt gEnOcIdE

Come on.

who was arguing that it wasn't? Getting bogged down because of semantics, elaborating on how people are applying the terms to what's happening, and how they differ seems to be the main points of discussion here.

I'm wondering how it's possible that Israel commits "ethnic cleansing/genocide" if the Arab population in Gaza rose from 340,000 people in 1970 to over 2,000,000 in 2023?

I don't have any special insight (putting it mildly) into the Israel-Hamas war or the history of the conflict, but the post above mine strikes me as a remarkably bad argument. Wouldn't it be about like saying: NYC had more buildings in 2001 than in previous years, so 9/11 didn't happen...?

Please, try to avoid whataboutism.

We're talking about ethnic cleansing and genocide in the context of what is happening right now, not going back to 1970. It's hard to argue that Israel's displacement of 1.4 million Palestinians from their homes (not to mention, the more than 10,000 dead) doesn't count as ethnic cleansing, at the very least. And harder still to argue that the current atrocities occurring in Gaza and the West Bank won't beget even more atrocities.

shimmer, I'm not sure what point you're trying to make regarding "whataboutism."

The point I was trying to make was that this (the quote below):



...seems to resemble this:



The second of the two quotes above is a (purposefully) ludicrously bad argument. After all, it would never occur to us to deny that "9/11 happened" (i.e., that the Twin Towers were attacked and destroyed) by arguing, "The number of buildings standing intact in NYC on 9/11/2001 is actually greater than it was in decades past."

But unless I've misunderstood, the reasoning in the (parody) argument about 9/11 is actually pretty similar to the reasoning in your argument about ethnic cleansing/genocide.

To put this all more directly: I understand "ethnic cleansing/genocide" to mean the organized mass-displacement and/or -killing of a region's inhabitants on the basis of ethnicity (or other identifying traits). Now, you seem to deny that ethnic cleansing/genocide has happened in the present case, on the basis that the targeted population has been growing overall. But this looks like a simple fallacy; the most I think your numbers would entitle you to say is, "The targeted population hasn't been utterly wiped out - but perhaps it's true nonetheless that Israel has systematically displaced/killed large numbers of people (albeit not large enough to reverse the overall trend in population growth)."