Yureina posted:

My interest is in trying to figure out that question - the one about the future, and finding one that can lead to a peaceful resolution eventually. I feel that this question is not being sufficiently addressed in news media, political discourse, or online discussion - and so I chose to bring it up.

Pentecoastal Elites posted:

The state of israel must be treated like nazi Germany should have been. It must be dismantled, and the process shepherded by a truth and reconciliation commission that insures that no one with even the most remote connection to any structure of governmental power in israel, let alone the IDF, is ever within smelling distance of the position of neighborhood dog catcher, let alone a real level of power.

The Sean posted:

Wow, you're even both-sidesing to the point of claiming Hamas is committing genocide.

Inner Light posted:

Doesn’t Hamas’ founding documents, screeds from leaders etc., advocate genocide?

Inner Light posted:

Doesn’t Hamas’ founding documents, screeds from leaders etc., advocate genocide?

Marenghi posted:

It would be like chastising members of the Warsaw Ghetto Resistance for wanting to kill Nazi's.

Inner Light posted:

Doesn’t Hamas’ founding documents, screeds from leaders etc., advocate genocide?

Civilized Fishbot posted:

The correct analogy would be, "it would be like chastising members of the Warsaw Ghetto Resistance for perceiving all Germans, and German-ness itself, as their intractable enemies." I'm sure many of them did understand their struggle that way. In Night, Elie Weisel actually laments that Holocaust survivors didn't do more retributory violence against Germans, including sexual violence against German women.

Whether you want to judge them as bad people for feeling this way is a philosophical question that I personally find very boring. The important thing is that the whole line of thought is unproductive because ethnic-national-religious cohorts aren't the problem, the problem is a particular state and its venomous ideology. And if the party accumulates a sufficient amount of power then that ideological distraction-fixation can put innocent people in unnecessary danger.

In the big picture, it's completely correct to "chastise" a political movement for being unable to correctly articulate who its enemies even are - as in, to recognize it as a problem that holds the movement back from success.

Irony Be My Shield posted:

But given the massively indiscriminate nature of the October incursion and their subsequent statement that they would repeat it until the destruction of Israel there can be little doubt that they've gone back to a genocidal position.

Marenghi posted:

I mean show me a resistance movement that wasn't a bit muddled in it's aims and inarticulate in who their enemies were during their founding year and ill give you a dollar.

And hey Hamas did get rid of the whole "kill the Jews" thing so they themselves have recognized it as a problem that held their movement back from success.

Marenghi posted:

I mean show me a resistance movement that wasn't a bit muddled in it's aims and inarticulate in who their enemies were during their founding year and ill give you a dollar.

quote:

And hey Hamas did get rid of the whole "kill the Jews" thing so they themselves have recognized it as a problem that held their movement back from success.

Sephyr posted:

Of course, it being Friedman, there's decent odds it never happened and he just made it up, like his famous cab drivers that all have prepared pro-market sound bites for him as soon as he hops into the car.

Esran posted:

It is perfectly possible to dissolve Israel and incorporate the population in Palestine without genociding anyone.

Yureina posted:

Who would carry out this dissolution?

Yureina posted:

Who would carry out this dissolution?

Yureina posted:

Who would carry out this dissolution?

Marenghi posted:

I don't know how anyone treated his cab driver thesis with any seriousness. I've gotten cabs in my home city and if you listen to them the city has pockets of Sharia law and African ghettos which are no go areas for white people. Just complete nonsense by reactionary racists who spend their day reading far-right tabloids.

To think they are the ones to find the truth of a city can only be understood if you've never gotten a local cab and spoken to the driver for any amount of time. You don't even have to talk to them, they can't wait to tell you their fantasy views derived from tabloids and Facebook rumors.

Civilized Fishbot posted:

This was a party that was being driven, by carrot and by stick, into more "normal"/"respectable" politics until Israel's diplomatic normalization with more of the Arab/Muslim world, particularly the Abraham Accords, made Hamas look like chumps to their own constituents, so they had to rapidly re-establish themselves as the center of the Palestinian resistance and the Palestinian question as the center of Middle East politics. And the only way for them to do this was spectacular violence.

Nissin Cup Nudist posted:

So was Hamas in any real danger in losing power to Fatah or were they more worried of members splintering to form Nu Hamas

Esran posted:

Depends on who is capable of forcing terms on Israel.

Edit: I should add that I'm not saying this is likely to happen. I'm simply saying that calling for the political entity of Israel to be destroyed is not genocidal by itself.

E2M2 posted:

Wasn't it more that Israel would normalize with the surrounding Arab countries and then do the slow simmer genocide or status quo of mowing the lawn in Gaza and West Bank land expropriation.

And the normalization was essentially the agreement to give up on the Palestinians for economic opportunities with Israel

E2M2 posted:

Wasn't it more that Israel would normalize with the surrounding Arab countries and then do the slow simmer genocide or status quo of mowing the lawn in Gaza and West Bank land expropriation.

And the normalization was essentially the agreement to give up on the Palestinians for economic opportunities with Israel

BRJurgis posted:

That accurate from my understanding. And yet I've heard that leveraged as an attack against Hamas. As if to say "see?!?! They're playing the game!" It goes along with the "good guy bad guy" narrative. "Ooh but it's more insidious than you know! These mfers are trying to influence geopolitics!!!!"

Anecdotal but i think it's important. How the gently caress can we talk to people about this? When you are already the enemy, any power you could potentially wield is an unacceptable threat. I feel if I were Ukrainian I'd want to fight to the man, really stand the gently caress up. We're certainly rara-ing it in the US. But a Palestinian wearing that is a terrorist.

Yureina posted:

Kith posted:

three things

1) good post

2) it cannot be overstated how much of the popular support of ukraine comes from ukrainians appearing to be nominally white

3) it cannot be overstated how much of the popular support of israel comes from this conflict having been kicked off by some brown people doing a terrorist attack on the nominally white israelis

quote:

Israel/Palestine on the other hand is very complicated, has a very long history, and, as my own involvement in this thread has shown, can be deeply unwelcoming to those who don't actively champion one side or the other.

Yureina posted:

For my part, I don't like to just assume people are racists

Yureina posted:

I'm a dual American-Canadian citizen

SMEGMA_MAIL posted:

It is not complicated.

Yureina posted:

I'm going to follow up on this one since it is the closest to a serious reply.

My concern is long-term viability. Speaking of Gaza for a moment, we are talking about a very tiny piece of land devoid of natural resources. The only real thing it has is population, which even without war and blockade would struggle to sustain itself without outside assistance. You cannot build a viable long-term state without future prospects, and so such prospects need to be created. There are potential models for this, of course, since we have numerous resource-poor nations who have managed to make things work out quite well for themselves such as Japan, South Korea, or indeed Israel. What Gaza needs, I think, is some kind of industry or economic project to transform it into a nation that can grow, sustain itself, and provide a future for its people. Something that Gaza can export, acquire currency from, and so be able to give its people growth. Without any prospects for improvement or development, then Gaza is left as it is now: an open-air prison where food and bombs go in, and rockets and terrorism come out. There needs to be an eye to the future - otherwise this is never going to end.

Of course, such an idea will require the violence to be put to an end and for there to be at least some period of detente. Obviously this is way easier said than done: there is some serious bad blood here going back decades. It is quite clear that there are people who need to be removed from the picture. The leadership in Israel that quietly funded Hamas and are exploiting this war to push for a one-state solution need to be removed, tried, and imprisoned for their actions. The leadership of Hamas who carried out the Oct 7 attack and who have made it clear that they too are after a one-state solution will also need to be removed, tried, and imprisoned for their actions. The minions on both sides who have carried out the will of their leaders in support of these criminal goals will also need to be dealt with. There will almost certainly have to be some kind of international force to help rebuild Gaza and prevent another outbreak of violence - The Israelis alone clearly aren't qualified for this task. Such a project would take a sustained effort, quite a bit of money, and require quick action against malefactors that would seek to ruin things. But if it can be made to work? Then you might be able to create something that can last into the long-term.

Of course, if people would prefer to continue their forever war until we get a full genocide of one side or the other? Then it would make sense why people like me who hope for a proper, peaceful two-state solution would get told to gently caress off.

Yureina posted:

People who would actually use that as an attack against Hamas must really be either naïve or just grasping at straws. Everybody plays the game, no exceptions.

As for a broader group of the population becoming more accepting of the Palestinian cause, I think that requires a long-term shift. You bring up Ukraine as an example of a cause that people can rally behind. In that example, it seems straight-forward to the casual observer. Ukraine was invaded by its big neighbor and is doing its best to try to fight back to preserve its independence. Attacks against targets within Russia have been limited to military-adjacent targets, and so people can't really make the argument that Ukraine is "just as bad" - usually attacks against pro-Ukraine tend to be more about the US and the "west" than Ukraine. Furthermore, the conflict between Russia and Ukraine is, when you get right down to it, a decolonization war. Ukraine has been a playground for empires for most of the last millennia, with Russia being the main actor. The only reason you don't see more comparisons of Russia/Ukraine to things like Britain/Ireland or France/Algeria is because people aren't used to seeing "white people" as the "victim/oppressed", and so there's some cognitive dissonance going on. So to the casual observer who doesn't have time to do deep research into an issue? Ukraine and Russia looks like an uncomplicated story between a "good side" and a "bad side".

Israel/Palestine on the other hand is very complicated, has a very long history, and, as my own involvement in this thread has shown, can be deeply unwelcoming to those who don't actively champion one side or the other. For a person trying to find a simple answer to the question "who are the goodies/baddies?", they are greeted with a clusterfuck of conflicting messages. If they go to a pro-Israeli space, that person is told about persecution, genocide, terrorism, massacres, and more. If they go to a pro-Palestinian space, that person is told about apartheid, ethnic cleansing, genocide, settlements, and more. With there being so much of a conflicting narrative, a person walking in without knowledge or a clear stance either is pressured into picking a side, or just throw up their hands, say its "too messy" and walk away.

So, if you want to get people to accept your perspective? The story needs to be made to appear less messy. To you, who is deeply involved in research and discussions about this subject, it may not appear messy to you at all. You may have chosen who to support, and so everything is settled for you. But your average person is not like that. They don't have the time or inclination to devote themselves to researching all of the history or knowing every detail of every event of every thing that has happened. You need to gradually take those people in and, over time, persuade them of your perspective. You do not attack them for seeming uncommitted, since that puts people on the defensive and may very well get you the opposite of your intended result.

SMEGMA_MAIL posted:

It is not complicated.

quote:

you're right, it's not complicated at all! especially when you're talking to americans, who most still remember 9/11 as an incident where the peaceful nation was minding its own business was suddenly subject to unprovoked terrorist attacks, which incited a righteous war of retribution that 'maybe' ran a little too long but was ultimately a good thing because look at all of the bad guys we killed. and we even got saddam hussein and osama bin laden!

so now we've got a situation where, prior to oct 7th, most folks did not know or care about the situation between israel and palestine. maybe they've heard something about gaza being the world's largest open-air prison, but who really gives a poo poo? all of that stuff is over there, and we're over here. it doesn't matter. and even if someone DID happen to hear something, isn't israel just trying to exist? they're a defensive state formed in response to antisemitism and they went through the holocaust, we should have pity on them because they're the plucky underdogs. plus, there are some bad guys who keep shooting rockets at them for no reason! completely unprovoked, israel is just sitting there minding their own business! the US went so far as to design them a special missile defense system, so that means israel is our friend and therefore DEFINITELY the good guys.

so then oct 7th rolls around, and holy poo poo are you loving kidding me? the bad guys weren't satisfied with constantly shooting rockets at cities, they just HAD to bypass millions of dollars of defensive military hardware so they could attack a music festival and gun down scores of innocent people because their bloodlust wasn't sated by random attacks anymore, they had to get down and dirty and kill civilians firsthand. do you understand how messed up and evil that is? what are they going to escalate to next? it's totally understandable that israel would want to get rid of them, even if a few bystanders get caught in the crossfire - especially since many of those bystanders are convenient human shields at best and outright collaborators at worst. the US did the same thing in the middle east, and we won, so what's the trouble? they'll win eventually, and they seem to be making great progress so far, so we won't have to hear about it for very long.

Yureina posted:

As for a broader group of the population becoming more accepting of the Palestinian cause, I think that requires a long-term shift. You bring up Ukraine as an example of a cause that people can rally behind. In that example, it seems straight-forward to the casual observer. Ukraine was invaded by its big neighbor and is doing its best to try to fight back to preserve its independence. Attacks against targets within Russia have been limited to military-adjacent targets, and so people can't really make the argument that Ukraine is "just as bad" - usually attacks against pro-Ukraine tend to be more about the US and the "west" than Ukraine. Furthermore, the conflict between Russia and Ukraine is, when you get right down to it, a decolonization war. Ukraine has been a playground for empires for most of the last millennia, with Russia being the main actor. The only reason you don't see more comparisons of Russia/Ukraine to things like Britain/Ireland or France/Algeria is because people aren't used to seeing "white people" as the "victim/oppressed", and so there's some cognitive dissonance going on. So to the casual observer who doesn't have time to do deep research into an issue? Ukraine and Russia looks like an uncomplicated story between a "good side" and a "bad side".

Israel/Palestine on the other hand is very complicated, has a very long history, and, as my own involvement in this thread has shown, can be deeply unwelcoming to those who don't actively champion one side or the other. For a person trying to find a simple answer to the question "who are the goodies/baddies?", they are greeted with a clusterfuck of conflicting messages. If they go to a pro-Israeli space, that person is told about persecution, genocide, terrorism, massacres, and more. If they go to a pro-Palestinian space, that person is told about apartheid, ethnic cleansing, genocide, settlements, and more. With there being so much of a conflicting narrative, a person walking in without knowledge or a clear stance either is pressured into picking a side, or just throw up their hands, say its "too messy" and walk away.

Yureina posted:

this thread has shown, can be deeply unwelcoming to those who don't actively champion one side or the other.

Yureina posted:

You do not attack them for seeming uncommitted, since that puts people on the defensive and may very well get you the opposite of your intended result.

Kith posted:

i don't think they're JAQing, the tone doesn't seem right to me. they seem genuinely uninformed, and have even mentioned valid reasons as to why they might be.

plus assumption of JAQing is against the D&D rules. all things in good faith and etc

The Sean posted:

And that's why I gave two scenarios and presented a case assuming the best of faith to explain why they weren't well-received (which was something they stated to be bothered about).

I did not make a specific assumption and only reply to that.

I think for someone who is acting in good faith that contrast would be valuable to explain why it could be interpreted as bad faith. That could be a valuable thing to learn for someone really looking to get up to speed on this topic of discussion.

Yureina posted:

True. A change in government is not necessarily genocidal by itself, though depending upon who carries it out it could very much end up in that direction. Naturally, such a change would need to be kept out of the hands of those with genocidal intent.

team overhead smash posted:

I think the first thing I’d say is that all the economic problems and concerns you have are good problems to have. If we get to the point where the issue is how should the Gazan economy in the new free Palestine be supported, we’ve advanced a hell of a long way from “How do we stop this genocide”. Let’s focus on the more important things for the moment, though I would note that a Palestinian state would also end Gaza being an enclave. All peace plans have involved discussions of a link between Gaza and the West Bank running through Israel and the establishment of a peace would also open up the opportunity for cross-border migration with people living in Gaza but commuting to work in Egypt or Israel.

BRJurgis posted:

Anecdotal but i think it's important. How the gently caress can we talk to people about this? When you are already the enemy, any power you could potentially wield is an unacceptable threat. I feel if I were Ukrainian I'd want to fight to the man, really stand the gently caress up. We're certainly rara-ing it in the US. But a Palestinian wearing that is a terrorist.

Esran posted:

A likely reason someone might view these conflicts this way is due to western media coverage.

The Sean posted: