1295
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] NounsAndWords@lemmy.world 196 points 8 months ago

Sanders notably attributed the war in Gaza to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and “the right-wing Netanyahu government” — not to Israel in general.

This extremely obvious distinction seems to get completely lost in every discussion on the topic. I like Israel and they have the right to exist. I don't like far right conservative governments run by corrupt war criminals (but enough about Bush...).

[-] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 101 points 8 months ago

Absolutely. Just like caring about the fate of innocent Palestinians doesn't mean rooting for the Hamas terrorists. Another distinction a lot of bad faith actors conveniently ignore in order to shift the narrative.

[-] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 18 points 8 months ago

Absolutely.

There are essentially 4 groups that need to be discussed here. The governments of Palestine and Israel, and the civilians of Palestine and Israel.

The governments are both murderous monsters who feed off of each other to fuel their hatred and justify genocide.

The civilians are the Innocents being killed and displaced.

[-] 96VXb9ktTjFnRi@feddit.nl 7 points 8 months ago

This is not a black and white issue though, that is to say: not all civilians are innocent, and not all officials are monsters

[-] Klear@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago

Fuck me, real world is hard =/

[-] wandermind@sopuli.xyz 42 points 8 months ago

In part because there are people actively and deliberately muddying together the Netanyahu government and Israel (as well as Israel and Jews) so that any criticism of the actions of Israel or Netanyahu can be labeled "antisemitism".

[-] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world 16 points 8 months ago

It's very much Israel's war, not Netanyahu. Bernie's wrong. Isreal supports the war, not Netanyahu. Another Prime Minister might have made it worse.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 20 points 8 months ago

You're really suggesting that Netanyahu doesn't want this war?

[-] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world 18 points 8 months ago

No, I'm not suggesting that. I'm suggesting the Israeli people back this war. It's not Netanyahu's war. I'm not so sure another Prime Minister would be any different, perhaps worse. Bernie is in a long line of people that don't like Bibi. I've been there for years. But, there is no use dressing this thing up as one person's fault.

[-] Kosmokomeno@infosec.pub 11 points 8 months ago

I would have killed myself in shame if I presided over israels national defense on Oct 7. Nothing has proven the utter stupidity of national sovereignty than watching the man retain power "to see through the war"

All a commander in chief needs to do is fail to defend his country...and he has an excuse to stay in power. It encourages failure. It's insane.

[-] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world 4 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Bibi will be gone after the shooting stops. It's happened before in Isreal. He currently has 15% approval FFS.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 10 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

So he just has to keep the shooting going.

I'm sure he's aware of this too.

[-] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago

That can last only so long. The money spent and Israel's lack of productivity will stop it.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 6 points 8 months ago

That can last only so long.

That's what Biden is for.

[-] Krauerking@lemy.lol 9 points 8 months ago

No but it helps create a narrative that might allow Israel to get out of this saving face with a scape goat for their lust for genocide.

The people of Israel are absolutely super excited for their new property every time they conquest but having a "wrong leader" that pushed them to do the atrocities means they can "dump him and turn to be better" and if they are lucky all the blame goes to the figurehead. Pretty classic play and if the people of Israel actually want peace one of the only outs they are gonna get.

[-] NoneOfUrBusiness@kbin.social 15 points 8 months ago

I mean Netanyahu has been winning elections since 1996 (granted there was a gap in the middle) so the election is getting dubious.

[-] Serinus@lemmy.world 9 points 8 months ago
[-] endhits@lemmy.world 41 points 8 months ago

Don't treat people worse than literal cattle for decades and they won't hate you.

[-] Serinus@lemmy.world 6 points 8 months ago

Okay, say Israel tomorrow turns the other cheek. They take down all checkpoints and allow free travel anywhere for anyone.

How many Israelis die before the Palestinians decide they no longer "deserve" to die? Does Israel still exist in five years?

[-] Jordan_U@lemmy.ml 23 points 8 months ago

This same argument has been made throughout history.

"If we let Black people have freedom they'll murder all of the white plantation owners!"

Now, I wouldn't blame formerly enslaved people for murdering the people who enslaved them, but that didn't happen.

Aparthide in South Africa was ended without the promised (by white people) "white genocide" either.

Settler-colonial powers always think that the people they're oppressing will commit genocide, because it's what colonizers do.

The only road to true peace is full human rights for all.

[-] Serinus@lemmy.world 8 points 8 months ago

If there's an argument that's going to sway me, it's the historical comparisons. I need to read more about how similar situations have ended in the past, even if a direct comparison probably isn't fully accurate.

I'm absolutely interested in a path to peace; I just don't see one right now. I don't think putting 100% of the burden of peace on Israel is reasonable or possible. Hamas still has over a hundred hostages (assuming they're still alive).

[-] NoneOfUrBusiness@kbin.social 6 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

I don’t think putting 100% of the burden of peace on Israel is reasonable or possible.

Israel is the one who singlehandedly built the current status quo, going as far as to fund Hamas and support them against the PNA.

Hamas still has over a hundred hostages (assuming they’re still alive).

Because hostages are one of the few ways Hamas can get concessions (including Palestinian political prisoners) out of Israel. If Hamas doesn't have hostages Israel simply won't stop.

[-] daltotron@lemmy.world 7 points 8 months ago

why would anyone ever implement that hare brained scheme? most people that I've talked to just want an alternative to bombing the shit out of gaza and killing 21,000 people and like 8,000 kids or whatever, they're not saying israel should immediately just like, dissolve, and all israelis should be left to die and shit. They probably wouldn't even let themselves be killed, without a fight, you'd see something more like an impromtu military junta state crop up and increasing radicalization form among it and then on both sides, and you'd just get a repeat of what's currently happening but probably worse. I don't think that would ever reasonably happen, even, this is a dumb bullshit hypothetical. Even the people who want the dissolution of israel want it over the course of multiple years, or decades, even, where some jewish guy from staten island that doesn't even speak hebrew goes back home, and everything just kind of goes back to what might be considered "normal". The logical follow through of "I dislike it when a bunch of people are getting massacred" isn't "well now I guess we can't do anything at all, they can just march in and kill everyone and that's it. woops. look at what you made us do!". Most people recognize this, and just want the violence to stop as fast as possible, which is why nobody's really talking about the long term plans for what might happen after this. They're too focused on the horrible shit happening right now to propose anything.

[-] NoIWontPickaName@kbin.social 13 points 8 months ago

That’s because israel are killing all of the women, children, israeli hostages, and israeli soldiers, they aren’t worried about Hamas fighters just quite yet.

[-] NoneOfUrBusiness@kbin.social 5 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

I mean yes, October 7th targeted military targets first and foremost. Even if you blame all casualties on Hamas (which is very much wrong; Israel shelled their own citizens during the attack) you're looking at a military casualty ratio of 33%.

[-] crappingpants@lemmy.world 4 points 8 months ago

"The sample size of this poll is 1231 adults, of whom 750 were interviewed face to face in the West Bank and 481 in the Gaza Strip in 121 randomly selected locations." So 72% of only 1231 people is an accurate representation for the opinion of over 5.4 million people?

https://pcpsr.org/en/node/963

[-] yarr@feddit.nl 7 points 8 months ago

How do you think polling works? If you had to "ask everyone" to have data, we wouldn't have any...

[-] abuttandahalf@lemmy.ml 3 points 8 months ago

Literally 1% of Israelis believe that Israel is using too much force in Gaza. The majority believes they are using too little. If Israelis had their way the genocide would be even deadlier than it is today. This is not a state or a society that should be allowed to exist in its current state. The state has to be dismantled to deprogram the fascism and genocidal ideology that it is built on and perpetuates. This is not going to happen peacefully because they refuse to let it happen peacefully, not because anyone wishes suffering on them sadistically. A system of oppression and murder that refuses to be dismantled nonviolently is going to be dismantled by force. That is the only just thing to be done and the responsibility for it lies on Israel wholly.

this post was submitted on 03 Jan 2024
1295 points (100.0% liked)

politics

18898 readers
2720 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS