Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Handsome Ralph
Sep 3, 2004

Oh boy, posting!
That's where I'm a Viking!


BUUNNI posted:

Alright, I can definitely see your POV better and largely agree with it. It's just frustrating that after all the equipment, intel and training we provide for Israel's Defense Forces they still hosed everything up and now Palestinians are the ones paying most of the price. Thank you for the good discussion.

I'm with you, believe me. It's indefensible that they ignored so many red flags, including the border monitoring stations going dark as cugel pointed out. And you nailed it, the wrong people are paying the price for it. It loving sucks.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Cythereal
Nov 8, 2009

I love the potoo,
and the potoo loves you.

BUUNNI posted:

It's just frustrating that after all the equipment, intel and training we provide for Israel's Defense Forces they still hosed everything up and now Palestinians are the ones paying most of the price.

Sadly this is just how a lot of history works.

For a historical example not tied up in recent history, you can consider Pearl Harbor. US intelligence knew that Japan was preparing for a massive strike against American holdings, and the US military had begun making preparations for such an attack. That the Japanese offensive was coming, was foreseen and acted on in places that the US then deemed likely to be attacked like the Philippines. What was not anticipated was the sheer scale and widely dispersed nature of the offensive, which lead American planners to think they would have more time and resources to react to the attack than they wound up having, and Pearl Harbor itself was thought immune to torpedo bomber attack because of the shallowness of the waters - and the American intelligence did not know that the Japanese had invented a way to get air-dropped torpedoes to work in such shallow waters.

It's not that the Americans didn't know an attack was coming, they did. They just significantly underestimated the scope of the attack and Japan's innovations that let them strike at targets previously thought unassailable.

I wouldn't be surprised if October 7 ends up with a similar sort of analysis.

Tangy Zizzle
Aug 22, 2007
- brad
my understanding is as follows:

1) Local Hamas commanders had been planning this for years and decided to move ahead likely because of the lack of Israeli forces in the area (they were pulled over to the West Bank at the time)
2) The plan called for the taking of hostages and their eventual release in return for the release of Palestinians incarcerated in Israeli detention centers, a known successful tactic previous to this attack
3) The music festival was not supposed to be happening on that Saturday - but was given the green light to expand to an additional day at the last minute
4) Hamas commanders on the ground adjusted their plans to attack the music festival as well - it was a target of opportunity
5) Due to the lack of Israeli forces and disarray of those that initially responded, it was impossible to capture more hostages, as they were being killed during transport as Israeli forces were killing anything that moved
6) Hostages were then taken in the kibbutz' and Israeli forces killed hostages and their captors alike in trying to recapture the settlements
7) Any Arab found in the vicinity of the breach or in the area for hours afterwards were considered terrorists and killed, leading to multiple additional civilian deaths

A humongous military fuckup on both sides in my opinion - a few other notes:

- Hours and hours of boredom after crossing into enemy territory lead to marauding, which is a lot of what we saw from Hamas forces that weren't directly involved in hostage taking
- The lack of response from Israel initially probably lead to disputes internally among the Hamas leadership over how to proceed
- Multiple military hostages were taken as well, we haven't heard much about them as of yet


Did I get any of this wrong or backwards?

BUUNNI
Jun 23, 2023

by Pragmatica

Handsome Ralph posted:

I'm with you, believe me. It's indefensible that they ignored so many red flags, including the border monitoring stations going dark as cugel pointed out. And you nailed it, the wrong people are paying the price for it. It loving sucks.

Yup, I think this just proves that modern surveillance states still have so many gaping holes that a determined enemy can use for their advantage. Israel's automated wall system of machine guns and thermal cameras can do gently caress-all if the people monitoring the systems are all inept.

Grip it and rip it
Apr 28, 2020

BUUNNI posted:

Yup, I think this just proves that modern surveillance states still have so many gaping holes that a determined enemy can use for their advantage. Israel's automated wall system of machine guns and thermal cameras can do gently caress-all if the people monitoring the systems are all inept.

Nah you just automate the response to kill everyone within a certain area bing bong

Alchenar
Apr 9, 2008

Tangy Zizzle posted:

my understanding is as follows:

1) Local Hamas commanders had been planning this for years and decided to move ahead likely because of the lack of Israeli forces in the area (they were pulled over to the West Bank at the time)
2) The plan called for the taking of hostages and their eventual release in return for the release of Palestinians incarcerated in Israeli detention centers, a known successful tactic previous to this attack
3) The music festival was not supposed to be happening on that Saturday - but was given the green light to expand to an additional day at the last minute
4) Hamas commanders on the ground adjusted their plans to attack the music festival as well - it was a target of opportunity
5) Due to the lack of Israeli forces and disarray of those that initially responded, it was impossible to capture more hostages, as they were being killed during transport as Israeli forces were killing anything that moved
6) Hostages were then taken in the kibbutz' and Israeli forces killed hostages and their captors alike in trying to recapture the settlements
7) Any Arab found in the vicinity of the breach or in the area for hours afterwards were considered terrorists and killed, leading to multiple additional civilian deaths

A humongous military fuckup on both sides in my opinion - a few other notes:

- Hours and hours of boredom after crossing into enemy territory lead to marauding, which is a lot of what we saw from Hamas forces that weren't directly involved in hostage taking
- The lack of response from Israel initially probably lead to disputes internally among the Hamas leadership over how to proceed
- Multiple military hostages were taken as well, we haven't heard much about them as of yet


Did I get any of this wrong or backwards?

Uh, 5 to 7 are just things people on the internet are repeating until they convince themselves it's true without anything really backing it up.

Tangy Zizzle
Aug 22, 2007
- brad

Alchenar posted:

Uh, 5 to 7 are just things people on the internet are repeating until they convince themselves it's true without anything really backing it up.

Hmm, good point - I'll wait for a bit until more scholarly work is done on these points before thinking them ironclad.

Thanks!

On a lighter note,

Only registered members can see post attachments!

Count Roland
Oct 6, 2013

That's a fake, yes?

Radical 90s Wizard
Aug 5, 2008

~SS-18 burning bright,
Bathe me in your cleansing light~

Alchenar posted:

Uh, 5 to 7 are just things people on the internet are repeating until they convince themselves it's true without anything really backing it up.

There's definitely at least one interview with an eyewitness from one of the Kibbutzes stating outright that Israeli tanks were shelling buildings and killing hamas soldiers and their israeli captives alike. And footage of semi-destroyed houses that backed that up.

orange juche
Mar 14, 2012



Count Roland posted:

That's a fake, yes?

Bibi's made no secret that he wants to bulldoze Gaza and the West Bank and turn it all into Israel. Ditto his party and most of the people in Israeli politics.

OctaMurk
Jun 21, 2013

Count Roland posted:

That's a fake, yes?

Tweet might be taken down but it was absolutely real and that was what the translate said in twitter. However an israeli in another thread said the correct text should have bren gaza envelope (really close to the strip, not actually in the strip).

Alchenar
Apr 9, 2008

Radical 90s Wizard posted:

There's definitely at least one interview with an eyewitness from one of the Kibbutzes stating outright that Israeli tanks were shelling buildings and killing hamas soldiers and their israeli captives alike. And footage of semi-destroyed houses that backed that up.

Some people who found themselves suddenly in the middle of a warzone described events as a bit chaotic. And it was a bit chaotic. But a couple of interviews with people who really weren't actually in a good position to understand what was going on is being turned into 'Israel killed a bunch of hostages from friendly fire'. There's no actual evidence for that.

bulletsponge13
Apr 28, 2010

Alchenar posted:

Some people who found themselves suddenly in the middle of a warzone described events as a bit chaotic. And it was a bit chaotic. But a couple of interviews with people who really weren't actually in a good position to understand what was going on is being turned into 'Israel killed a bunch of hostages from friendly fire'. There's no actual evidence for that.

Except for the IDF admitting it in tweets, using gunships to attack the music festival.

psydude
Apr 1, 2008

I haven't seen the IDF friendly fire story line being reported by any credible media outlets, including those that are otherwise more sympathetic to the Palestinian cause. The only place I've seen it is here, with no supporting evidence other than allusions to Xeets. Which leads me to suspect it's either not true, or being vastly over-stated.

Hannibal Rex
Feb 13, 2010
https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news...dd-f0ff7b550000

quote:

As of now, there are two known events where Israeli civilians were apparently killed due to Israeli fire. The first was during the hostage situation at Kibbutz Be’eri, where 12 hostages were being held by 40 Hamas terrorists. In the heavy crossfire between Israeli forces and the kidnappers, 10 hostages died. According to the testimony of the two Israeli survivors, at least some of them died as a result of Israeli fire. The second is the incident in which a helicopter may have fired on Israelis who were fleeing the Nova trance festival in Re’im.

Serjeant Buzfuz
Dec 5, 2009

I have no evidence either way but I'm pretty sure if a gunship attacked crowds of civilians there would be a few cell phone videos floating around or something.

bulletsponge13
Apr 28, 2010

If it didn't happen, why would an official account announce it?

Maybe I'm the dickhead, but I'm not sure why it's so hard to believe a military made up of mostly conscripts with little training and combat training responding to a massive attack wouldn't be responsible for some of the civilians casualties. Hostage Rescue is typical a pretty specialized training requirement because you can't send in random rear end dudes and expect them to do the job correctly.

To put this in perspective, even the best trained, equipped, and funded militaries- and their elite units within- gently caress that exact mission set up. Expecting a military made up of troops scared shitless and firing on each other to have good enough target discrimination to not kill any hostages is beyond fantasy. SEAL Team 6, SAS, and even Israeli SF have hosed up and killed hostages in surgical rescue missions. It's fantasy to pretend the IDF didn't kill some of the hostages.

Vahakyla
May 3, 2013

bulletsponge13 posted:

military made up of mostly conscripts with little training and combat training

This framing is wrong.

Conscript doesn't necessarily mean poorly trained, especially in Israel where it's 2 years and 8 months for men and 2 years for women, with some roles having mandatory extensions, and senior NCOs and officers above lieutenants being careerist. Not only that, with Israeli Air Force Flight Academy training pilots and navigators, including chopper pilots, for three years at which point they enter their specialization course for 6 to 12 months, where they'd then learn to fly the Apache. Israeli pilot training is rigorous by worldwide standards, and provides much higher than average number of flight hours compared to many other countries. Some 300-400 per year, compared to 200 per year in many others. Current USAF UPT lands at roughly 180-220 for the one year.

The people flying the Apaches aren't some rinky dinky militiamen who learned to fly last week.

That doesn't mean that they could not have let some cannon fire on civilians, but your descriptors are flat out wrong and give a completely false idea.


Vahakyla fucked around with this message at 00:13 on Nov 30, 2023

psydude
Apr 1, 2008


So two known incidents, the first of which resulted in some portion of up to 10 hostages dying, and the second of which has no firm number of casualties. For as much attention as this seems to be getting here, it would appear to constitute an overall small share of the ~1200 total Israeli casualties that day.

bulletsponge13
Apr 28, 2010

Vahakyla posted:

This framing is wrong.

Conscript doesn't necessarily mean poorly trained, especially in Israel where it's 2 years and 8 months for men and 2 years for women, with some roles having mandatory extensions, and senior NCOs and officers above lieutenants being careerist. Not only that, with Israeli Air Force Flight Academy training pilots and navigators, including chopper pilots, for three years at which point they enter their specialization course for 6 to 12 months, where they'd then learn to fly the Apache. Israeli pilot training is rigorous by worldwide standards, and provides much higher than average number of flight hours compared to many other countries. Some 300-400 per year, compared to 200 per year in many others. Current USAF UPT lands at roughly 180-220 for the one year.

The people flying the Apaches aren't some rinky dinky militiamen who learned to fly last week.

That doesn't mean that they could not have let some cannon fire on civilians, but your descriptors are flat out wrong and give a completely false idea.

Would Draftees make it more palatable? They are still conscripts, and many are reservists. I didn't say there entire army, I said most, which is factual.
I didn't say the pilots were conscripts, either.

It is beyond the realm of reason to pretend that an army made up of largely of mandatory service, unblooded against a real enemy, responding to an attack unprecedented in recent memory didn't kill hostages. That's like trying to pretend civilians don't get bombed by the US.

david_a
Apr 24, 2010




Megamarm
I don’t think anybody is really doubting that Israel could have killed a lot of their own civilians in their response, but without more rigorous investigative journalism we don’t really know.

Are foreign journalists being curtailed inside of Israel? Would they be preventing from interviewing Israelis who might be survivors/witnesses of friendly fire incidents? I don’t know anything about how free the press was before or after October 7 in Israel.

mlmp08
Jul 11, 2004

Prepare for my priapic projectile's exalted penetration
Nap Ghost
People have less of a problem with the idea that some number of Israeli civilians were killed by friendly fire (seems very likely that somewhere and in some number that occurred, on the day of the Hamas attack! And it's just a known certainty that thousands of civilians have been killed by the bombing campaign in Gaza), but people are balking at the idea, absent evidence, that over 50% of the deaths at the concert were at the hands of Israeli helicopter pilots.

bulletsponge13
Apr 28, 2010

mlmp08 posted:

People have less of a problem with the idea that some number of Israeli civilians were killed by friendly fire (seems very likely that somewhere and in some number that occurred, on the day of the Hamas attack! And it's just a known certainty that thousands of civilians have been killed by the bombing campaign in Gaza), but people are balking at the idea, absent evidence, that over 50% of the deaths at the concert were at the hands of Israeli helicopter pilots.

In fairness, I'm the only curmudgeon who has posited that belief, I think, and I fully admit that can be disregarded on the subject. I fully admitted in a past post of mine it's my own bullshit based on limited information and personal bias.

But having people in this thread seeming to deny IDF culpability in the deaths of hostages at all is some weird poo poo to me.

Radical 90s Wizard
Aug 5, 2008

~SS-18 burning bright,
Bathe me in your cleansing light~

Alchenar posted:

Some people who found themselves suddenly in the middle of a warzone described events as a bit chaotic. And it was a bit chaotic. But a couple of interviews with people who really weren't actually in a good position to understand what was going on is being turned into 'Israel killed a bunch of hostages from friendly fire'. There's no actual evidence for that.

Dude, you can't argue that this combat was so chaotic that eyewitness accounts are unreliable, but simultaneously so perfectly controlled that collateral damage is unthinkable. This is just bullshit dismissal because you don't like the idea for ~reasons~
I do think the damage done to a bunch of the houses isn't poo poo you would see from grenades and small arms alone, but yea that is just my own conjecture.

psydude posted:

So two known incidents, the first of which resulted in some portion of up to 10 hostages dying, and the second of which has no firm number of casualties. For as much attention as this seems to be getting here , it would appear to constitute an overall small share of the ~1200 total Israeli casualties that day.
This is a fair point, for me, the reason I get frustrated in this thread, and it's particularly with you and a couple other posters, is that it seems to me like you are just flat out ignoring the idea that Israel could do any wrong, or even act in bad faith wrt some of this stuff. It gives me massive post 9/11 vibes when people would just straight up deny the idea that the "good guys" could possibly do anything wrong, deliberately or otherwise despite like, an entire history showing otherwise. While conversely like just in general being super credulous about anything coming from Israel but really nitpicky about anything contrary to your ideals.
Like dude you already got fully sucked into the most absurd claims of hamas atrocities a few days ago, maybe you should be a little more critical?

e] I get that the obvious response here is that I'm guilty of the same idealistic thinking just from another side, and maybe, I'm consciously trying not to be, but at this point I really don't think I gotta hand it to Israel.Even ignoring the heinous poo poo they've been doing my whole life, they have made it absolutely clear over the last month that they don't give a single gently caress about murdering whoever they want and what's more they will lie through their loving teeth about it while they're doing it.

Radical 90s Wizard fucked around with this message at 02:26 on Nov 30, 2023

Radical 90s Wizard
Aug 5, 2008

~SS-18 burning bright,
Bathe me in your cleansing light~

david_a posted:

I don’t think anybody is really doubting that Israel could have killed a lot of their own civilians in their response, but without more rigorous investigative journalism we don’t really know.

Are foreign journalists being curtailed inside of Israel? Would they be preventing from interviewing Israelis who might be survivors/witnesses of friendly fire incidents? I don’t know anything about how free the press was before or after October 7 in Israel.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/nov/21/israel-hamas-war-is-deadliest-conflict-on-record-for-reporters-says-watchdog

Okay yea these are local not foreign but welp. Israel does not give a gently caress about journalists.

Borscht
Jun 4, 2011
What’s the bottom line on bibi’s popularity right now at home? Is he turbo hosed now or have they gone all post 9/11 on us?

Tangy Zizzle
Aug 22, 2007
- brad
As far as I know independent corroboration of the things that happened on October 7th and afterward have not been allowed by Israel. They've also been specifically targeting journalists inside Gaza, the West Bank, and the Lebanon border areas intentionally, one could go so far as to say 'assassination campaign' due to Israeli overwhelming control and surveillance of the area. When you know the exact location of the homes of journalists and also know their tech signatures, turns out it's incredibly easy to silence them.

Haaretz and mondoweiss are the only two *credible news orgs that I've seen suggest that there could have been friendly fire involved in the casualty count

*credible based on my understanding not any other metric sorry

Herstory Begins Now
Aug 5, 2003
SOME REALLY TEDIOUS DUMB SHIT THAT SUCKS ASS TO READ ->>

david_a posted:

I don’t think anybody is really doubting that Israel could have killed a lot of their own civilians in their response, but without more rigorous investigative journalism we don’t really know.

Are foreign journalists being curtailed inside of Israel? Would they be preventing from interviewing Israelis who might be survivors/witnesses of friendly fire incidents? I don’t know anything about how free the press was before or after October 7 in Israel.

Reporters without Borders ranks Israel 88th in press freedoms, putting it behind Albania and just ahead of Central African Republic and Haiti.

david_a
Apr 24, 2010




Megamarm
I specifically mentioned journalists inside Israel, I know Gaza & the West Bank are insanely dangerous for journalists. We were talking about the IDF killing Israelis, so the investigation would presumably be inside of Israel. I know there are foreign journalists there but I don’t know if people want to talk to them about this or if the Israeli government would discourage any investigations of friendly fire.

Edit:

Herstory Begins Now posted:

Reporters without Borders ranks Israel 88th in press freedoms, putting it behind Albania and just ahead of Central African Republic and Haiti.

:chanpop:
yikes

bulletsponge13
Apr 28, 2010

Israel also has a history for shooting reporters near groups of Palestinians, and in Palestinian areas even in peace time, so I would image that discourages some.

psydude
Apr 1, 2008

Radical 90s Wizard posted:

Dude, you can't argue that this combat was so chaotic that eyewitness accounts are unreliable, but simultaneously so perfectly controlled that collateral damage is unthinkable. This is just bullshit dismissal because you don't like the idea for ~reasons~
I do think the damage done to a bunch of the houses isn't poo poo you would see from grenades and small arms alone, but yea that is just my own conjecture.

This is a fair point, for me, the reason I get frustrated in this thread, and it's particularly with you and a couple other posters, is that it seems to me like you are just flat out ignoring the idea that Israel could do any wrong, or even act in bad faith wrt some of this stuff. It gives me massive post 9/11 vibes when people would just straight up deny the idea that the "good guys" could possibly do anything wrong, deliberately or otherwise despite like, an entire history showing otherwise. While conversely like just in general being super credulous about anything coming from Israel but really nitpicky about anything contrary to your ideals.
Like dude you already got fully sucked into the most absurd claims of hamas atrocities a few days ago, maybe you should be a little more critical?

e] I get that the obvious response here is that I'm guilty of the same idealistic thinking just from another side, and maybe, I'm consciously trying not to be, but at this point I really don't think I gotta hand it to Israel.Even ignoring the heinous poo poo they've been doing my whole life, they have made it absolutely clear over the last month that they don't give a single gently caress about murdering whoever they want and what's more they will lie through their loving teeth about it while they're doing it.

You bring up fair criticism. I need to restate that I've never supported Israel's approach to Palestine and think that the two state solution, or the abolition of Israel's theocracy is the only path forward here. I also don't support anything about their response so far.

My issue, though, stems from the growing attempts to downplay Israeli civilian casualties (I'm not accusing you specifically of this BTW). I've spent the better part of a decade working in Eastern Europe, the Middle East, and Asia Pacific - regions where openly flouting one's anti-Semitism isn't as taboo as it is in the West. Working in tech means partnering with and competing against Israeli companies, which inevitably leads to editorializing in otherwise normal conversations about work. I've come into contact with an alarming amount of ordinary folks working in professional fields who believe everything from a global Jewish cabal controlling the world to the belief that the Holocaust was outright fabricated. While you're right and it is important to challenge every assertion the Israeli government makes (particularly with the limited press freedoms), I'm alarmed at how quick some folks are to dismiss the issue all together.

Of course Europe and the US have their own issues with Islamophobia and anti-Semitism, but the latter is taboo and the former is well-documented. The death of Palestinian civilians is getting widespread media coverage for seemingly the first time ever, which is a major improvement from prior I/P conflicts, as well.

Alchenar
Apr 9, 2008

mlmp08 posted:

People have less of a problem with the idea that some number of Israeli civilians were killed by friendly fire (seems very likely that somewhere and in some number that occurred, on the day of the Hamas attack! And it's just a known certainty that thousands of civilians have been killed by the bombing campaign in Gaza), but people are balking at the idea, absent evidence, that over 50% of the deaths at the concert were at the hands of Israeli helicopter pilots.

This.

Radical 90s Wizard posted:

Dude, you can't argue that this combat was so chaotic that eyewitness accounts are unreliable, but simultaneously so perfectly controlled that collateral damage is unthinkable. This is just bullshit dismissal because you don't like the idea for ~reasons~
I do think the damage done to a bunch of the houses isn't poo poo you would see from grenades and small arms alone, but yea that is just my own conjecture.


Dude, some Kibbutz were seized, the IDF had to fight their way in. Of course there was damage. Of course there were firefights with hostages in proximity. Were some of them killed by friendly fire? Seems plausible.

But 'seems plausible' is the height of evidence you actually have that this might have happened once or twice. And people like bulletsponge are taking that and running an absolute mile with it when the much more simple explanation is 'Hamas killed a bunch of people'.

PurpleXVI
Oct 30, 2011

Spewing insults, pissing off all your neighbors, betraying your allies, backing out of treaties and accords, and generally screwing over the global environment?
ALL PART OF MY BRILLIANT STRATEGY!

psydude posted:

regions where openly flouting one's anti-Semitism isn't as taboo as it is in the West.

...

While you're right and it is important to challenge every assertion the Israeli government makes (particularly with the limited press freedoms), I'm alarmed at how quick some folks are to dismiss the issue all together.

I think the issue is conflating anyone's dislike for Israel, which is generally anti-Zionism, with anti-Semitism.

Sure, there are some(probably a lot) of anti-Semites that would like to see Israel reduced to rubble, but I would wager that most people's issues with Israel are completely unrelated to Israel being Jewish. I, personally, loving hate Israel as a country, I loathe their government, I think that any state they have a "right" to exist in would be very different from the current one with significantly changed borders, I think Netanyahu should be burning in Hell next to Kissinger and Thatcher and I generally take any statement they make with enough salt that the Dead Sea would be jealous.

This has nothing to do with Israel being Jewish and everything to do with the way it was founded, the way they treat minorities(especially Palestinians) and their settler projects. And I'm going to go out on a limb and say that I think it's probably the same for 99% of people on these forums with an intense distrust/dislike of Israel.

And even so... I believed pretty much everything the Israeli government said about the 7th of October immediately after it happened, but then one by one, all of the most extreme and absurd things they said were either outright disproven or turned out to have a suspicious lack of evidence, which ended up making even the more prosaic things start to be untrustworthy. If they'd lie about beheaded babies for sympathy and support, for instance, why would they not lie about the extent of civilian casualties? Sure, civilians did die, that much is hard to dispute, but can I trust the numbers and situations presented by the Israeli government and IDF? Hell no.

Yes, some people go even farther and dispute the existence of the narrative at all. I think that's wrong, but I don't think it makes them anti-Semites, I just think it means they have poor judgment/source critique and are very, very, very loving tired of Israel's zionist bullshit.

psydude
Apr 1, 2008

PurpleXVI posted:

I think the issue is conflating anyone's dislike for Israel, which is generally anti-Zionism, with anti-Semitism.

Sure, there are some(probably a lot) of anti-Semites that would like to see Israel reduced to rubble, but I would wager that most people's issues with Israel are completely unrelated to Israel being Jewish. I, personally, loving hate Israel as a country, I loathe their government, I think that any state they have a "right" to exist in would be very different from the current one with significantly changed borders, I think Netanyahu should be burning in Hell next to Kissinger and Thatcher and I generally take any statement they make with enough salt that the Dead Sea would be jealous.

This has nothing to do with Israel being Jewish and everything to do with the way it was founded, the way they treat minorities(especially Palestinians) and their settler projects. And I'm going to go out on a limb and say that I think it's probably the same for 99% of people on these forums with an intense distrust/dislike of Israel.

And even so... I believed pretty much everything the Israeli government said about the 7th of October immediately after it happened, but then one by one, all of the most extreme and absurd things they said were either outright disproven or turned out to have a suspicious lack of evidence, which ended up making even the more prosaic things start to be untrustworthy. If they'd lie about beheaded babies for sympathy and support, for instance, why would they not lie about the extent of civilian casualties? Sure, civilians did die, that much is hard to dispute, but can I trust the numbers and situations presented by the Israeli government and IDF? Hell no.

Yes, some people go even farther and dispute the existence of the narrative at all. I think that's wrong, but I don't think it makes them anti-Semites, I just think it means they have poor judgment/source critique and are very, very, very loving tired of Israel's zionist bullshit.

I don't think being critical of Israel or its government makes one an anti-Semite. Certainly that argument has been used by Zionists to shut down legitimate critiques of Israel's behaviour in the past. Rather, I'm worried that broad acceptance of conspiracy theories seeking to play down the attack will be co-opted to strengthen anti-Semitism globally. Because a lot of people do draw a false equivalence between Israel and all Jewish people.

psydude fucked around with this message at 12:17 on Nov 30, 2023

Fivemarks
Feb 21, 2015
Gotta say, I don't like the idea that we gotta step around on eggshells when talking about the Israeli's state's crimes and actions because the Israeli State has spent the past 80 years conflating the Israeli State with Jewishness and no-one wants to be an anti-semite. It feels a lot to me like how Apartheid South Africa and Rhodesia tried to conflate themselves with whiteness and if you were anti-Apartheid or Anti-Rhodeisa, you were in favor of white genocide. Maybe we should save the accusations and worries of Anti-Semitism for when someone starts going full anti-semitic, instead of the reasonable assumption about Israel firing into a confused crowd at a music festival with Apaches leading to lots of deaths of civilians.

Edit: Also its not trying to play down the attacks. It's people looking at all the poo poo Israel has lied about so far to justify genocide, and going "Hey we also think this thing in a pile of rotting fish smells fishy."

bulletsponge13
Apr 28, 2010

Our greatest export to Israel isn't weapons, it's American™️ Brand Exceptionalism.

BrutalistMcDonalds
Oct 4, 2012


Lipstick Apathy

bulletsponge13 posted:

Our greatest export to Israel isn't weapons, it's American™️ Brand Exceptionalism.
Timestamped

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9yCONEdFgWo&t=2163s

Fivemarks posted:

Maybe we should save the accusations and worries of Anti-Semitism for when someone starts going full anti-semitic, instead of the reasonable assumption about Israel firing into a confused crowd at a music festival with Apaches leading to lots of deaths of civilians.
I think it's possible Israeli helicopters killed Israeli civilians. But I think what's going around are competing narratives from people about what happened that has some political context attached to it. Not referring to anyone specifically on the forums. But there are people who have taken sides and it's in the interest of people who are on the Palestinian side to play up that Israel is barbaric and that Hamas is not. Therefore, Hamas didn't do the killings, it was Israeli gunships. When I'm looking at it, the whole situation seems pretty barbaric to me. But I've been trying to practice more agnosticism about these things.

Anti-Semitism in this framework is more of a second-order issue rather than the primary motivation of people who downplay that Hamas is a pretty brutal and radical Islamic nationalist organization in its own right, and it's unlikely most Israelis are going to be comfortable with a peaceful solution to the conflict in which they don't disarm. You have to think about the Israeli reaction to that too. That said, the anti-Semites exist in the world but it's not the problem right here. In the battle of competing narratives, facts that support the narrative are emphasized, and facts that conflict with the narrative are de-emphasized or ignored.

BrutalistMcDonalds fucked around with this message at 18:40 on Nov 30, 2023

Lovely Joe Stalin
Jun 12, 2007

Our Lovely Wang
Israel are going to bury all the vehicles from the rave so I guess no one will ever be able to give an independent verdict. Weird that.

BrutalistMcDonalds
Oct 4, 2012


Lipstick Apathy

Lovely Joe Stalin posted:

Israel are going to bury all the vehicles from the rave so I guess no one will ever be able to give an independent verdict. Weird that.
Okay, but there were a bunch of survivors who said that the Hamas guys were just shooting people left and right. I saw one video that was probably taken from a surveillance camera of a guy actually shooting people in the back as they ran away from that festival. And you can disbelieve the witness accounts, but the basic problem -- as I look at it -- isn't convincing me of that, it's convincing the Israelis that Hamas isn't trying to kill them. You know? What are they going to say? "Oh sorry we didn't realize that it was our own guys who did the festival attack and not Hamas" and then stop trying to destroy them? Doesn't seem likely to me.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Herstory Begins Now
Aug 5, 2003
SOME REALLY TEDIOUS DUMB SHIT THAT SUCKS ASS TO READ ->>
eh makes more sense in the context of just how many completely destroyed cars there are to deal with

(nothing graphic, AP segment on people being allowed back to the cars from the rave that has some drone shots of the scale of what they're dealing with)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P1T51_iroHo

Herstory Begins Now fucked around with this message at 19:03 on Nov 30, 2023

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply