-61
or even both if you want to play safe?
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 13 Oct 2023
-61 points (14.1% liked)
Asklemmy
43396 readers
1406 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
I don’t get it. There’s a war going on because of terrorists who attacked Israel, these terrorists want their supposed nation to be independent, and people are complaining Israel cut off food/water/electricity? Imagine if you were at war with an independence movement and were like “hey, my good enemies, we’re trying to put you down because you insist you’re determined to be independent enough to make your own, but here, have some food and water and free electricity”. Nobody is obligated to give stuff, that’s how sanctions work.
If you're running a prison, and the prisoners riot killing guards, killing the families of the guards, and you locked the prison down, not letting food, water, medicine inside. You're killing the prisoners, the prisoners have no other ability to survive their dependent on food water and medicine coming in. You're running the prison, you have obligations when you run a prison, even when the prisoners riot.
The analogy would work better if Palestine was an enclosed system as opposed to a wannabe independent nation that never stopped advocating terrorism to achieve those ends.
The Gaza strip is a closed system. Thats what the big deal is. They can't leave, they can't do bo business they can't trade, they can't be independent... It's literally a closed system
I meant in the sense of your analogy. Everything given to the people there or anywhere comes off as a potential trap in the making, as is the nature of what happens in guerilla escalations, something Egypt as much as Israel has had to come to terms with. That elaboration may/would've helped, and if however/whatever I phrased, it's why.
Because, in each and every country, it's the inept and childish leadership that has ruined everything for us all. Israel's government is corrupt. HAMAS are terrorists. How many governments are made up of the original native population from the region? Every country has been created by murdering the innocent.
You say that as if Israel hasn't been there since ancient times and that randomly killing oblivious civilians is the same thing as amassing a military to fight a military.
To use an analogy, suppose this were Hetalia and countries were individual human personifications who "won" territory from one another through fencing. The forces attacking Israel did the equivalent of taking a blade and slashing Israel's eyes as he slept. That ain't fencing. And then Russia and North Korea, who have abused Ukraine miserably because he wanted to be left alone, come to take fruits from the conflict, unquestioned by Palestine, as if by design.
After all that, and after letting terrorists infiltrate the Palestinian territory in the first place by setting up shop, again uncondemned, under their nose, I'd argue both Israel and Palestine are corrupt, but that the nation that makes a deal with the devil is moreso, but that you don't deal with corrupt nations by killing random people unprovoked. Even if killing innocent people to achieve goals was a commonality, I still object to the many pro-Palestinian people who say it should be considered normalized because it supports their side of things.
Exactly. Each and every country is built on blood.
But is every country built on fear of existence? Clearly some nations go about what you call "being built on blood" better than others.
My point was that the countries who are trying to be the good guy have at one point tried to kill off the native population. I'm not saying things are equal. Are you trying to say Israel was built on fear of existence? They aren't being good neighbors. And Israel is a manufactured country by the "winners" of WW2. I'm not saying the jews are bad. I'm saying those that are in power are the ones fucking it up for the rest of us. There is no pure good entity. As humans, we are all animals. Some are disgusting animals. The ruling class are the problem. Until there are no classifications of higher or lower human, there will always be problems. Are we all equal in every way? No of course not. But we need to try to help the less fortunate until they are no longer less fortunate.
There are two versions of history regarding how Israel formed. One of them was Moses incited a rebellion against the pharaoh and then escaped with his followers into Israel, fighting the Canaanites when they got there (but definitely not through terrorism and by far not the whole Canaanite territory, which stretched far to the East) and settling in what's roughly considered their current territorial borders.
The other version of Israelite history began with them simply forming into existence on an area surrounded by Canaanite land (this view is often held by those who doubt the pyramids used unwilling slaves), similar to many city-states, and that the Israelites are in fact the Canaanites.
Neither of these began with indiscriminate extermination or fear of existence.
Modern Israel, which was given to the inhabitants after British occupation which also followed periods of Babylonian, Roman, and Ottoman occupation, was founded on the chaos caused by the British being as good at drawing borders than they were, a complaint which has also been spoken by India and Pakistan, who themselves are destined for a third war this century (I can almost smell it). Which leads us to the following...
That's kind of the biggest point, there is a distinction NOT being made by Hamas or even the majority of Palestine. While also not encourageable, fedai warfare, which was even invented by Muslims, would've been 110% more peaceful than what Hamas did and what Palestine continues, which is highly collateral and reckless in its aggression, deception, and urge to drag people in, such as with the OP but also with the fact Russia and the whole Ummah just had to join, making it more than just par for the course.
There's also the fact there's one Jewish homeland and more land operating in the sphere of the Islamic world than there is land on most continents, which itself is only a factor because Palestine considers itself inseparable from Islam (if it wasn't, the spheres of Islam and Judaism wouldn't be used as reference points to where their lands begin, it would just be "another factor" and thus no alienation if Palestine wanted Israel's land).