Google Jeb Bush posted:

al mayadeen is not necessarily a reliable source for details, as one can perhaps expect from the martyrdom language

as usual, i'm not really equipped to evaluate their alleged primary sources or their translated takes; qadura fares does seem to unofficially involved with Fatah's treaty-mandated prison oversight but his position also rapidly gets weird and confusing

i think i saw someone digging into al mayadeen a bit earlier but I don't have it to hand

I said come in! posted:

Yeah at the very least the U.S. seems to get a lot out of its relationship with Israel, what that is I really don't understand exactly (weapons I guess), but its enough to support genocide and ethnic cleansing over it.

I said come in! posted:

Yeah at the very least the U.S. seems to get a lot out of its relationship with Israel, what that is I really don't understand exactly (weapons I guess), but its enough to support genocide and ethnic cleansing over it.

Main Paineframe posted:

And unfortunately, "indiscriminately carpet-bombing civilian areas and claiming it's necessary to defeat Arab insurgents" isn't likely to be particularly offensive to Americans, who've spent the last twenty years listening to our own government justify doing basically the exact same poo poo in Afghanistan, Iraq, and whereever else we felt like.

Mid-Life Crisis posted:

The hospital bombers is a pointless investigation. Israel issued warnings they were going to do it and to evacuate. If I were to call a bomb threat I’d be prosecuted for it. Israel is no different. My point really was that the adults in charge there ignored the warnings and let people assemble en masse instead of taking the tyrants serious on their threats. Instead they effectively martyr those civilians. The old world might look fondly on martyrs, but the new world doesn’t. Look, I understand making that call is not an easy one to make and not everyone is capable of doing so. Most people don’t understand how they will react in a crisis until they’re in one, no amount of preparation can prepare one other than crisis itself. Israel is going to attack the other hospitals. It’s coming. Call it callous all you want, I don’t believe in martyrs being beneficial and that’s how I see it. Live another day in the greatest numbers you can keep given the immediate situation at hand.

mannerup posted:

the primary event for that link between Israel, Britain and France was the Suez Canal crisis where Egypt's Nasser nationalized the UK/France joint venture overseeing the canal making him a pan-Arab hero while it was the watershed moment for the UK's decline as a colonial power

always found Nasser one of the most fascinating political figures of the 20th century that gets seldom mentioned in the West

Shageletic posted:

And guess what? They have segregated loving schools. They reinvented American segregation. Here's a paper about it.

Fish Cake posted:

Hello I'm a practicing physician in a level 2 NICU and delivery hospital. In my medical residency I participated in disaster response planning for my institution. Frankly it is a *giant logistical nightmare* to evacuate a hospital even with all the resources of the first world and ample time to plan. If you want to read more about this, check out Five Days at Memorial, which details what happened to the patients and staff that were left behind to weather out Hurricane Katrina because they could not be moved.

Let's take an example: premature infants might be on a ventilator that breathes for them, for days or weeks on end. These are mains-powered with a very short battery backup. To get one of these kids somewhere else you'll need a transport ventilator and likely a specialized neonatal transport rig (would bet money none exist in Gaza right now). I've taken care of patients who decompensate when they're jostled or touched wrong. Now you're throwing them on to an ambulance (assuming there are still ambulances that are not bombed out, and have fuel, and have roads to travel on, and have a destination to go to, etc etc). Moving them doesn't just happen because an internet poster says it's a good idea.

OK, so how about we move only the non-critically ill patients. OK. How do they get to where they're going, when ambulances have been targeted, and roads have been bombed to pieces? Where are they going? Who's going to take care of them once they get there? Medical resources have been stretched to the breaking point already. We've already seen scores of doctors and nurses killed in air strikes and by snipers. It's absolutely galling that people are giving their lives to fulfill their duty to their patients and their motivations are being dragged through the mud by some dipshit sitting comfortably behind their computer. You need to shut the gently caress up because you have no idea what you're talking about. I'll take my probe thanks.

Carmant posted:

These things can change under the right circumstances. Which is really the only option because the idea that Israeli is going to "eradicate Hamas" is nonsense.

Carmant posted:

I don't see a third option, so which of these would you prefer is the question?

I said come in! posted:

What about it do you not agree with? It lines up with this article from the New York Times https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/23/us/politics/israel-us-gaza-invasion.html which mentions that the State Department does not think Israeli's goals are achievable.

Marenghi posted:

Per my post, "The IRA carried out random, sectarian killings"

Marenghi posted:

At the moment, but in a years time how will it go. The initial commentary from the attack it seems Israeli's no longer believe their security barrier is impenetrable. They really seemed to be a sense that they had contained Gaza for all time. An advanced tech driven barrier they couldn't cross, and the iron dome containing their rockets. Now they are not so invincible.

If they cannot entirely contain Gaza there's only two other options. Fully ethnically cleanse Palestinians from the area by mass deportation, or find a solution which removes the need for violence on Palestine's part, i.e. a peaceful resolution.

Muscle Tracer posted:

Given the choice between a 100% chance of your culture being destroyed slowly, or a 99% of chance of faster destruction but a 1% chance of finding a way out, I can see why the latter option might be more appealing.

Discendo Vox posted:

I did; they’re a disinformation mediator with deliberately opaque funding. We’re generally the target demo for their English language material.

Crosby B. Alfred posted:

A third option, would be for Israel, United States along with the rest of the West to persuade other Arabic governments that Hamas must release hostages and step down no longer governing the Gaza Strip. Of course, this is a huge long shot and incredibly unlikely to occur.

Shageletic posted:

Hard to see how a one state solution is possible

Zulily Zoetrope posted:

That's not a third option; that's just the ethnic cleansing one with an added middle step to pretend it isn't.

Neurolimal posted:

They're joining Channel 4, AJE, and preliminary findings for Forensic Architecture in ruling out a misfired rocket.

quote:

The Times’s finding does not answer what actually did cause the Al-Ahli Arab hospital blast, or who is responsible. The contention by Israeli and American intelligence agencies that a failed Palestinian rocket launch is to blame remains plausible. But the Times analysis does cast doubt on one of the most-publicized pieces of evidence that Israeli officials have used to make their case and complicates the straightforward narrative they have put forth.

quote:

Israeli officials and Palestinian militants blame each other for the Al-Ahli Arab explosion. Multiple videos assembled and analyzed by The Times show that militants were firing dozens of rockets from southwest of the hospital minutes before the blast, and the fiery explosion at the hospital is consistent with a failed rocket falling well short of its target with unspent fuel.

quote:

Moreover, the crater left from the impact was relatively small, a fact that Israel has cited in arguing that none of its munitions caused the blast, and could be consistent with a number of different munitions. Hamas has not produced a remnant of an Israeli munition or any physical evidence to back up its claim that Israel is responsible.

Crosby B. Alfred posted:

Why?

This whole conflict is happening under the context of Israel normalizing relations with Saudi Arabi. While not confirmed, it was largely rumored that the Palestinians would get something out of the whole deal. If they did, that is a threat to Hamas because it means there is a potential path to peace without conflict. Because without conflict, there's no need for Hamas.

Crosby B. Alfred posted:

They did. What's your point? As said I, IRA did use violence but it at the least tried to avoid killing innocents. Hamas does not do that to the point where they literally target innocents on purpose.

Crosby B. Alfred posted:

This whole conflict is happening under the context of Israel normalizing relations with Saudi Arabi. While not confirmed, it was largely rumored that the Palestinians would get something out of the whole deal. If they did, that is a threat to Hamas because it means there is a potential path to peace without conflict. Because without conflict, there's no need for Hamas.

Crosby B. Alfred posted:

A third option, would be for Israel, United States along with the rest of the West to persuade other Arabic governments that Hamas must release hostages and step down no longer governing the Gaza Strip. Of course, this is a huge long shot and incredibly unlikely to occur.

Zzulu posted:

Surely no one actually believes it possible? I thought all these arguments for peaceful "solutions" itt were just thought excercises.

There is no solution anymore. 1300 dead israelis = no beneficial outcome for Palestine anymore in our lifetimes.

Crosby B. Alfred posted:

Why?

This whole conflict is happening under the context of Israel normalizing relations with Saudi Arabi. While not confirmed, it was largely rumored that the Palestinians would get something out of the whole deal. If they did, that is a threat to Hamas because it means there is a potential path to peace without conflict. Because without conflict, there's no need for Hamas.

Mid-Life Crisis posted:

Because they were negotiating on their own or with Arabs looking to exterminate Israel behind their back. Normalized relations with Arab nations had a viable different outcome. Had.

kiminewt posted:

I don't think many people here care about this but just to clear up some stuff about the education system.

The Israeli school system is completely split up into four. Secular, orthodox, ultra orthodox and Arab. In the Arab one classes are taught in Arabic and the rest is in Hebrew.

A parent can choose which one their child will go to, though obviously for logistical reasons and social reasons an Arab child will likely go to an Arab school. So the segregation isn't enforced by law as much as it is discrimination. Even in mixed towns like Haifa having Arab students in secular schools is rare. I assume it is difficult language-wise, and that students can face racism.

There are a few mixed schools that teach in both languages but they are rare.

As far as the quality of schooling, there is definite discrimination. Though the Christian Arab schools, in contrast to the Muslim ones, are often considered the best in the country (at least as far as grades and such are concerned). I don't really know it too well.

In universities everything is mixed but people mostly stick to their cliques, speaking their native language. My university was like 20-25% Arabs but in most courses you could see that people usually stuck to the own group. There are groups that are more integrated into Israeli society like the Druze, Bedouin and the ex South Lebanon folk.

I think this separation is one of the "original sins" of Israel (it also effects splits inside Jewish society). It is not segregation by law, but segregation by societal pressure, discrimination and momentum.

Karatela posted:

The main reason Israel would bother trying to normalize relations is so it can exile more Palestinians to refugee camps to join the millions there, since that is safer than having to exterminate them in Gaza. As it stands, with poo poo relations, no one nearby is willing to give an inch on the matter, and that is now dead too for at least a while.

Also citation needed on these alleged backchannel negotiations here, when most of the countries nearby also are not fans of Hamas either.

Mid-Life Crisis posted:

Mid-Life Crisis posted:

So you didn’t read the post and did exactly the shortsighted pitfall highlighted in it.

aBagorn posted:

The pessimism also stems from the fact that there had been moderate relations with the West Bank for a long while, and look how that's working out: the Palestinians losing land year after year.

Palestinians have a choice between a moderate leadership and a slow extermination or a radical leadership and fighting back.

Mid-Life Crisis posted:

Your pessimism might fit bibi himself, but he’s a democratically appointed person who was in the middle of a self implosion. To get internal voters and powers in Israel to support a stand down the existential threat of all their neighbors wanting to kill them needs to be addressed. That’s what normalizing relations can lead to in theory. None of it’s going to happen overnight like the bleeding hearts are always going to demand, but this was the strategy that was slowly moving along.

You’re correct, the neighbors don’t like Hamas for a variety of reasons. Hamas in charge also has no path to a peaceful two state outcome for Palestinians. Though while Israel was actively souring the situation in order to fortify rightist control within Israel, Palestinians also didn’t have a path towards replacing Hamas’ stranglehold with a moderating alternative.

People are correct to say Israel had to make change before Palestinians did and it’s not fair to point all the blame on them. What gets ignored in this simplistic view is Israelis themselves are the hated ethnic minority in the greater region, and not just because of their recent actions, thus addressing that greater region is needed before Israeli citizens have a chance at changing that.

With Turkey on the edge of trying to be European, Syria as dysfunctional, Lebanon as dysfunctional, Egypt dysfunctional, Saudi and UAE backing off incredibly, and Iraq on puppet strings there was a critical mass growing. Left with Iran being the hollow actor. Russia is too busy to get involved. China isn’t dumb enough to get involved. The Arab populaces have grown in the region of younger generations who aren’t as religious or resentful as the past. It might still have taken a decade and would have needed both moderates put in charge in both Israel and Palestine first. Saudi could have demanded Israel concessions for Hamas to lose their grip, to no loss to themselves obviously because they hate both sides, but they fund the region and want to take a leadership role.

Hamas saw the writing on the wall and their warhawks made sure peace isn’t possible. This is going to go on for another 50 years now if the US can’t carve out Mossad’s stranglehold. And even then, Hamas would have to step down, which is only happening via war if Arab moderators don’t step up.

Sources for Saudi/Israel normalization talks has been posted plenty.

Mid-Life Crisis posted:

What gets ignored in this simplistic view is Israelis themselves are the hated ethnic minority in the greater region, and not just because of their recent actions, thus addressing that greater region is needed before Israeli citizens have a chance at changing that.

the holy poopacy posted:

No, Israelis are the hated ethnic minority in the greater region for the last 75+ years of their actions. You're correct, it's a complicated problem and it can't be fixed overnight--the original sins of 1948 cannot realistically be fixed at this point and the Arab world does need to make its peace with that, but Israel's treatment of Palestinians directly relates to and exacerbates that problem. You're essentially arguing that Israel can't afford to stop mistreating Palestinians until Israel's neighbors stop hating Israel for mistreating Palestinians. I would argue instead that Israel's security situation means they can't afford to not stop mistreating Palestinians.

The statements that just came out after Biden's call with MBS reinforce this; normalization isn't off the table, but it's not progressing until the bombs stop. Israel has chosen to sacrifice its standing in the greater region in favor of extracting its pound of flesh, so you can hardly claim it's justified in its actions by its precarious standing in the region.

Neurolimal posted:

NYTimes digital analysis is being shared right now, thread:

https://twitter.com/AricToler/status/1717015483843576248

They're joining Channel 4, AJE, and preliminary findings for Forensic Architecture in ruling out a misfired rocket. They don't confidently say "Israel did this", but it's disqualifying the most publicized bit of evidence in Israel's favor short of the blatantly fake audio.

It's also the first major US news org I've seen acknowledge that Israel shelled the building prior...which feels like journalistic malpractice to be honest but at least it's there.

Raenir Salazar posted:

As a trial run, Israel could always agree to hand over the settlements to Palestinian administration with the promises the rights of the settlers are respected and see how that goes; or alternatively the tax income granted to the PA with the agreement of no more settlements and all the agreement that the land can no longer be traded or sold between Israeli citizens but only to citizens of the PA. There's lots of imaginative solutions where two separate states are maintained and they compromise over the disputed matters and kick the can down the road.

Darth Walrus posted:

Good points made in this thread on the subject of Gazan casualty numbers:

https://x.com/christapeterso/status/1717040903158976633?s=46&t=ARI_L-v32Oind1-d9B3a3Q

Marenghi posted:

How does the IRA having at one point used violence directly targeting innocent civilians on the basis of their religion in any way demonstrate they tried to avoid killing innocents. It was a tactic that fell to the wayside as it did more harm than good with the wider war for hearts and minds. But it did happen early during the armed campaign.

quote:

According to CAIN, the IRA was responsible for 1,705 deaths, about 48% of the total conflict deaths.[256] Of these, 1,009 (about 59%) were members or former members of the British security forces, while 508 (about 29%) were civilians.[257] According to Lost Lives, the IRA was responsible for 1,781 deaths, about 47% of the total conflict deaths.[258] Of these, 944 (about 53%) were members of the British security forces, while 644 (about 36%) were civilians (including 61 former members of the security forces).[258] The civilian figure also includes civilians employed by British security forces, politicians, members of the judiciary, and alleged criminals and informers.[258] Most of the remainder were loyalist or republican paramilitary members, including over 100 IRA members accidentally killed by their own bombs or shot for being security force agents or informers.

Paladinus posted:

It raises good points about the overall numbers, but from what I see online, a lot of scepticism is implicitly more about who died and how they died. I saw people claim that when Gazan MoH says, for example, that three thousand Gazans died, what they don't tell you is that two thousand of those were actually active Hamas terrorists. Or that MoH says some people died in an Israeli strike, but really, you guessed it, it was a malfunctioning Palestinian rocket or even terrorists directly targeting disloyal population and then misattributing it to Israeli strikes. There is an obvious bias behind that sort of scepticism, though, and I don't think even if UN published their own similar numbers independently, it would completely dissuade people from that thinking. There are already tensions between Israel and UN that will probably result in more Israel supporters completely disregarding any data from international organisations.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/israel-halts-un-staff-visas-as-officials-pan-guterress-truly-insane-hamas-remarks/