256 Gazans killed by unlawful Israeli bombardment

[SD_Film Artists]

Ah, Ireland. You’ve always been pro-Palestine. We appreciate you.

"You'll never get back to the same level of hatred as [Catholic vs Protestant football teams]; even if you had a Muslim football team the Catholics and the Muslims will just bond over their mutual hatred of orange outfits."- Frankie Boyle

[Borderlands of Rojava]

Ah, Ireland. You’ve always been pro-Palestine. We appreciate you.

"You'll never get back to the same level of hatred as [Catholic vs Protestant football teams]; even if you had a Muslim football team the Catholics and the Muslims will just bond over their mutual hatred of orange outfits."- Frankie Boyle

I once saw a white nationalist trying to convince an Irishman to side with the English against Muslim immigration only for the Irish guy to tell the whitenat to suck on a bullet. The nazi got slapped down so hard, I think Lil Nas X's satanic lap dance was interrupted by that guy screaming as he fell down into hell.

[Insaanistan]

Wow, Israel is the king of deception.
It’s Hebrew account on Instagram is posting videos of IDF strikes on targets in Palestine, trying to portray it as strong, intimidating and formidable to Israelis and Palestinians.

It’s English account is posting videos of Israelis running from the few Hamas rockets that actually hit anything, attempting to portray itself to the rest of the world as helpless, innocent, and the one defending itself from a senseless attack.

Well would you not do the same thing if you were them? It is not even technically false, those rockets and people fleeing are real. The best propaganda tells the truth, but not the whole truth.

That is just them being smart.

I’d be honest about the situation. I’d post the same things on both accounts.

[Insaanistan]

"You'll never get back to the same level of hatred as [Catholic vs Protestant football teams]; even if you had a Muslim football team the Catholics and the Muslims will just bond over their mutual hatred of orange outfits."- Frankie Boyle

I once saw a white nationalist trying to convince an Irishman to side with the English against Muslim immigration only for the Irish guy to tell the whitenat to suck on a bullet. The nazi got slapped down so hard, I think Lil Nas X's satanic lap dance was interrupted by that guy screaming as he fell down into hell.

Based Irishman.
The only Saracens and Saladdins he hates are used by the British Army.

[Novus America]

Well would you not do the same thing if you were them? It is not even technically false, those rockets and people fleeing are real. The best propaganda tells the truth, but not the whole truth.

That is just them being smart.

I’d be honest about the situation. I’d post the same things on both accounts.

Would you? You seem quite willing to present only the things that support your side.
Do not pretend to be some impartial observer, when you obviously have a side to support.

Also tailoring your approach to your audience is pretty much propaganda, politics, and advocacy 101.
It is not one size fits all, you have to make your argument differently, depending on the audience if it is to actually be effective.

Imagine for example if you want to present your side to a group of US scientists. And later you had to present it to a group of persons in another country with no scientific background who do not speak English. Obviously you would not use the same presentation.

And if you would, you would not do a very good job advancing your state’s interests. Obviously those openly advocating Israel’s side should favor arguments favoring the Israeli side and tailor those arguments to fit the audience. I mean they would be pretty shitty advocates if they did not.

[Insaanistan]

I’d be honest about the situation. I’d post the same things on both accounts.

Would you? You seem quite willing to present only the things that support your side.
Do not pretend to be some impartial observer, when you obviously have a side to support.

Also tailoring your approach to your audience is pretty much propaganda, politics, and advocacy 101.
It is not one size fits all, you have to make your argument differently, depending on the audience fit it to actually be effective.

And if you would, you would not do a very good job advancing your state’s interests. Obviously those openly advocating Israel’s side should favor arguments favoring the Israeli side and tailor those arguments to fit the audience. I mean they would be pretty shitty advocates if they did not.

Again they were not objectively

I never said I’d be impartial, I said I’d post the same things in both sides.

Obviously I’m not impartial: one side is an apartheid state that bombs civilians and only exists because the British promised three different groups the exact same land.
The other is being oppressed, blockaded, bombed, occasionally invaded, starved, and faced with apartheid.

“There comes a time when you’re either with us or against us, and no one, not you [Muhammad Ali], not me, not Jim, not Sam, can afford to be on the fence!”
-El-Hajj Malik El-Shabbaz

[Tarsonis]

Would you? You seem quite willing to present only the things that support your side.
Do not pretend to be some impartial observer, when you obviously have a side to support.

Also tailoring your approach to your audience is pretty much propaganda, politics, and advocacy 101.
It is not one size fits all, you have to make your argument differently, depending on the audience fit it to actually be effective.

And if you would, you would not do a very good job advancing your state’s interests. Obviously those openly advocating Israel’s side should favor arguments favoring the Israeli side and tailor those arguments to fit the audience. I mean they would be pretty shitty advocates if they did not.

Again they were not objectively

I never said I’d be impartial, I said I’d post the same things in both sides.

Obviously I’m not impartial: one side is an apartheid state that bombs civilians and only exists because the British promised three different groups the exact same land.
The other is being oppressed, blockaded, bombed, occasionally invaded, starved, and faced with apartheid.

“There comes a time when you’re either with us or against us, and no one, not you [Muhammad Ali], not me, not Jim, not Sam, can afford to be on the fence!”
-El-Hajj Malik El-Shabbaz

I notice how Egypt gets none of your ire

[Atheris]

I never said I’d be impartial, I said I’d post the same things in both sides.

Obviously I’m not impartial: one side is an apartheid state that bombs civilians and only exists because the British promised three different groups the exact same land.
The other is being oppressed, blockaded, bombed, occasionally invaded, starved, and faced with apartheid.

“There comes a time when you’re either with us or against us, and no one, not you [Muhammad Ali], not me, not Jim, not Sam, can afford to be on the fence!”
-El-Hajj Malik El-Shabbaz

I notice how Egypt gets none of your ire

What does Egypt have to do with Hamas and Israel shooting each other?

[Novus America]

Would you? You seem quite willing to present only the things that support your side.
Do not pretend to be some impartial observer, when you obviously have a side to support.

Also tailoring your approach to your audience is pretty much propaganda, politics, and advocacy 101.
It is not one size fits all, you have to make your argument differently, depending on the audience fit it to actually be effective.

And if you would, you would not do a very good job advancing your state’s interests. Obviously those openly advocating Israel’s side should favor arguments favoring the Israeli side and tailor those arguments to fit the audience. I mean they would be pretty shitty advocates if they did not.

Again they were not objectively

I never said I’d be impartial, I said I’d post the same things in both sides.

Obviously I’m not impartial: one side is an apartheid state that bombs civilians and only exists because the British promised three different groups the exact same land.
The other is being oppressed, blockaded, bombed, occasionally invaded, starved, and faced with apartheid.

“There comes a time when you’re either with us or against us, and no one, not you [Muhammad Ali], not me, not Jim, not Sam, can afford to be on the fence!”
-El-Hajj Malik El-Shabbaz

Read my edit, and see why that is not the best approach.
Tailoring your argument to your audience is pretty much advocacy 101. An argument that might work with one audience could easily fall completely flat with another audience.

You would not be a very good advocate to use the same argument regardless of the audience.

Although I see you made that same mistake here. Why would that quote you use have any credibility with me?
I mean surely you could find a quote from say Washington, Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, Eisenhower or someone saying you have to pick a side if you wanted to convince me.

While in all fairness it probably still would not work, it would work better than that quote. Who are you trying to appeal to? Is there a significant Muslim contingent on hear that does not favor the Palestinian side already?

Although I would not necessarily pick your side anyways, my problems with many aspects of Israel policy would not cause me to side with Hamas.
That is the problem with your all or nothing, with us or against us approach.
Israel certainly has problems when it comes to human rights, but Hamas is far worse.

Although human rights is only part of the equation.

And though a separate point, whether or not Britain fucked up is not really important to Israel’s legitimacy.
I mean by that whole argument about half the states in the world would lose legitimacy.

The vast majority of people living in Israel, were born in Israel, have no other home.
Israel deserves its own state there just as much as the Palestinian Arabs do.

[Novus America]

I notice how Egypt gets none of your ire

What does Egypt have to do with Hamas and Israel shooting each other?

Egypt is supporting the blockade of Hamas controlled Gaza.
Egypt is certainly involved in the particular matter of the situation in Gaza.

[Tarsonis]

I notice how Egypt gets none of your ire

What does Egypt have to do with Hamas and Israel shooting each other?

Israel isn't acting alone in its choking off of Palestine, the blockade is a joint venture between Israel and Egypt. Yet, Egypt is hardly ever criticized from its role.

[Insaanistan]

I never said I’d be impartial, I said I’d post the same things in both sides.

Obviously I’m not impartial: one side is an apartheid state that bombs civilians and only exists because the British promised three different groups the exact same land.
The other is being oppressed, blockaded, bombed, occasionally invaded, starved, and faced with apartheid.

“There comes a time when you’re either with us or against us, and no one, not you [Muhammad Ali], not me, not Jim, not Sam, can afford to be on the fence!”
-El-Hajj Malik El-Shabbaz

I notice how Egypt gets none of your ire

Probably because you don’t know me in real life and haven’t seen me and the Egyptian kids at the masjid angrily condemn Sisi.
However, while I do it much less so than I do Israel (mostly because Israel’s the one committing the apartheid and occupation), I have criticized the Egyptian government and its blockade of Gaza multiple times.

[Insaanistan]

I never said I’d be impartial, I said I’d post the same things in both sides.

Obviously I’m not impartial: one side is an apartheid state that bombs civilians and only exists because the British promised three different groups the exact same land.
The other is being oppressed, blockaded, bombed, occasionally invaded, starved, and faced with apartheid.

“There comes a time when you’re either with us or against us, and no one, not you [Muhammad Ali], not me, not Jim, not Sam, can afford to be on the fence!”
-El-Hajj Malik El-Shabbaz

Read my edit, and see why that is not the best approach.
Tailoring your argument to your audience is pretty much advocacy 101. An argument that might work with one audience could easily fall completely flat with another audience.

You would not be a very good advocate to use the same argument regardless of the audience.

Although I see you made that same mistake here. Why would that quote you use have any credibility with me?
I mean surely you could find a quote from say Washington, Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, Eisenhower or someone saying you have to pick a side if you wanted to convince me.

While in all fairness it probably still would not work, it would work better than that quote. Who are you trying to appeal to? Is there a significant Muslim contingent on hear that does not favor the Palestinian side already?

Although I would not necessarily pick your side anyways, my problems with many aspects of Israel policy would not cause me to side with Hamas.
That is the problem with your all or nothing, with us or against us approach.
Israel certainly has problems when it comes to human rights, but Hamas is far worse.

Although human rights is only part of the equation.

And though a separate point, whether or not Britain fucked up is not really important to Israel’s legitimacy.
I mean by that whole argument about half the states in the world would lose legitimacy.

The vast majority of people living in Israel, were born in Israel, have no other home.
Israel deserves its own state there just as much as the Palestinian Arabs do.

Since when does Malcolm X appeal only to Muslim audiences?
Hamas is not worse than the Israeli government, though I have a hatred for both.

[Novus America]

Read my edit, and see why that is not the best approach.
Tailoring your argument to your audience is pretty much advocacy 101. An argument that might work with one audience could easily fall completely flat with another audience.

You would not be a very good advocate to use the same argument regardless of the audience.

Although I see you made that same mistake here. Why would that quote you use have any credibility with me?
I mean surely you could find a quote from say Washington, Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, Eisenhower or someone saying you have to pick a side if you wanted to convince me.

While in all fairness it probably still would not work, it would work better than that quote. Who are you trying to appeal to? Is there a significant Muslim contingent on hear that does not favor the Palestinian side already?

Although I would not necessarily pick your side anyways, my problems with many aspects of Israel policy would not cause me to side with Hamas.
That is the problem with your all or nothing, with us or against us approach.
Israel certainly has problems when it comes to human rights, but Hamas is far worse.

Although human rights is only part of the equation.

And though a separate point, whether or not Britain fucked up is not really important to Israel’s legitimacy.
I mean by that whole argument about half the states in the world would lose legitimacy.

The vast majority of people living in Israel, were born in Israel, have no other home.
Israel deserves its own state there just as much as the Palestinian Arabs do.

Since when does Malcolm X appeal only to Muslim audiences?
Hamas is not worse than the Israeli government, though I have a hatred for both.

When use the Islamic name rather than the commonly used one it tends to be that way, although he does not particularly appeal to the side most likely to favor Israel. Which is more establishment oriented.

I admit I did not even make the connection, I just skipped over the quote rather than really looking at it.
Maybe I should not have, but again appeal to your audience. If I just looked past it, it was not effective on me.

I think it is fair to say Hamas has a worse record on human rights. Arabs in Israel or Israel occupied areas actually have more rights than those under the rule of Hamas.

Anyways that last part kills your “we must pick a side argument”. Unless you are saying we should still side with Hamas against Israel?

[Jutlop]

What does Egypt have to do with Hamas and Israel shooting each other?

Egypt is supporting the blockade of Hamas controlled Gaza.
Egypt is certainly involved in the particular matter of the situation in Gaza.

Yeah as an egyptian myself I can tell you that the egyptian populace hates what sisi is doing

[Novus America]

Egypt is supporting the blockade of Hamas controlled Gaza.
Egypt is certainly involved in the particular matter of the situation in Gaza.

Yeah as an egyptian myself I can tell you that the egyptian populace hates what sisi is doing

I am sure it is not necessarily popular with many amongst the populace, but it is logical considering the Muslim Brotherhood wants Sisi overthrown, and the fact that Hamas is associated with Erdogan, and Egypt and Turkey are in a struggle over the situation in Libya and the EEZ allocation in the Mediterranean which are far more pressing concerns for the Egyptian government.

It is hard realpolitik. By associating with Turkey, Iran and the Muslim Brotherhood (which is banned in Egypt) Hamas is not exactly doing a good job winning the sympathy of other Arab governments.

For them Israel is the less problematic side.

They want Hamas contained just as much. Really the only way to get any progress is for Hamas to be removed.
But that is not easily done.

[Insaanistan]

Since when does Malcolm X appeal only to Muslim audiences?
Hamas is not worse than the Israeli government, though I have a hatred for both.

When use the Islamic name rather than the commonly used one it tends to be that way, although he does not particularly appeal to the side most likely to favor Israel. Which is more establishment oriented.

I admit I did not even make the connection, I just skipped over the quote rather than really looking at it.
Maybe I should not have, but again appeal to your audience. If I just looked past it, it was not effective on me.

I think it is fair to say Hamas has a worse record on human rights. Arabs in Israel or Israel occupied areas actually have more rights than those under the rule of Hamas.

Anyways that last part kills your “we must pick a side argument”. Unless you are saying we should still side with Hamas against Israel?

Hamas is one faction in Palestine. One that is only popular because extremism gains popularity when people are oppressed.
Israel doesn’t have three different governments. It has one.
Support Palestine, but not Hamas.

[Novus America]

When use the Islamic name rather than the commonly used one it tends to be that way, although he does not particularly appeal to the side most likely to favor Israel. Which is more establishment oriented.

I admit I did not even make the connection, I just skipped over the quote rather than really looking at it.
Maybe I should not have, but again appeal to your audience. If I just looked past it, it was not effective on me.

I think it is fair to say Hamas has a worse record on human rights. Arabs in Israel or Israel occupied areas actually have more rights than those under the rule of Hamas.

Anyways that last part kills your “we must pick a side argument”. Unless you are saying we should still side with Hamas against Israel?

Hamas is one faction in Palestine. One that is only popular because extremism gains popularity when people are oppressed.
Israel doesn’t have three different governments. It has one.
Support Palestine, but not Hamas.

But see that makes the “support Palestine” pretty meaningless. Because what are we exactly supporting? A geographical area of land? Support the Palestinian people makes more sense, but it is still too vague given it is not clear exactly what the majority of Palestinian people want. So what exactly are we supporting? Which faction should we support? But then we are supporting Palestinian Arabs faction. Not just “supporting Palestine”.

But that is my point, it is complicated. There is bad and good on both sides, there is a lot of ambiguity and gray area, many factions, and Israel is not least in the wrong, even though they often do things that are wrong.

It is simply much more complicated than your Manichean conception of it.

[Diarcesia]

Hamas is one faction in Palestine. One that is only popular because extremism gains popularity when people are oppressed.
Israel doesn’t have three different governments. It has one.
Support Palestine, but not Hamas.

But see that makes the “support Palestine” pretty meaningless. Because what are we exactly supporting? A geographical area of land? Support the Palestinian people makes more sense, but it is still too vague given it is not clear exactly what the majority of Palestinian people want. So what exactly are we supporting? Which faction should we support? But then we are supporting Palestinian Arabs faction. Not just “supporting Palestine”.

But that is my point, it is complicated. There is bad and good on both sides, there is a lot of ambiguity and gray area, many factions, and Israel is not least in the wrong, even though they often do things that are wrong.

It is simply much more complicated than your Manichean conception of it.

Support the Palestinians (and Israelis) who only want to live their lives without fear of being bombed.

[Novus America]

But see that makes the “support Palestine” pretty meaningless. Because what are we exactly supporting? A geographical area of land? Support the Palestinian people makes more sense, but it is still too vague given it is not clear exactly what the majority of Palestinian people want. So what exactly are we supporting? Which faction should we support? But then we are supporting Palestinian Arabs faction. Not just “supporting Palestine”.

But that is my point, it is complicated. There is bad and good on both sides, there is a lot of ambiguity and gray area, many factions, and Israel is not least in the wrong, even though they often do things that are wrong.

It is simply much more complicated than your Manichean conception of it.

Support the Palestinians (and Israelis) who only want to live their lives without fear of being bombed.

A worthy enough cause, one I agree with, but one that is unfortunately fiendishly hard to convert into any policy that can be successfully implemented.

[Diarcesia]

Support the Palestinians (and Israelis) who only want to live their lives without fear of being bombed.

A worthy enough cause, one I agree with, but one that is unfortunately fiendish hard to convert into any policy that can be successfully implemented.

I know. Better keep it the goal than make policy that forgets it.

[Kowani]

Hamas vows to renew fighting if Israel "violates" al-Aqsa Mosque

The Palestinian terrorist group Hamas on Wednesday threatened to renew intense fighting against Israel if the Jewish state “violates” the Al-Aqsa Mosque on Jerusalem’s Temple Mount, and downplayed damage to its military infrastructure following the 11-day conflict in the Gaza Strip.

“What has happened is but a drill for what will come if Israel violates the Al-Aqsa Mosque,” the terror group’s Gaza leader, Yahya Sinwar, said on Wednesday, days after a ceasefire entered effect. “The occupation must know — Al-Aqsa has men who will defend it.” [...] The Hamas leader also said he would welcome Israel killing him in a targeted strike.

“The greatest gift Israel can give me is to assassinate me,” he said. “I prefer to die a martyr from an F-16 than to die of coronavirus or [another] disease.” In an interview with the Associated Press, Sinwar said 80 operatives were killed during the 11-day war with Israel that ended last week, providing the group’s first official tally for losses sustained in the fighting. Sinwar said those killed included 57 members of his group’s armed wing, 22 members of the smaller Islamic Jihad group and one member of a small group called the Popular Resistance Committees.

Gaza’s Hamas-run Health Ministry has put the number of Palestinians killed in the fighting at 254, including 66 children, 39 women, and 17 people above the age of 60. It does not differentiate between terror group members and civilians and did not give a breakdown. The Israeli military maintained that it killed some 225 terrorist operatives and that the Palestinian death toll was in fact considerably higher than was reported.[...] In a separate speech Wednesday, Sinwar also vowed not to touch “a single cent” of international aid to rebuild Gaza following its war with Israel that ravaged the enclave it rules. Sinwar promised “transparent and impartial” distribution of aid. Diplomatic efforts are underway to solidify a fragile Egypt-brokered truce that halted the fighting, with plans to rebuild the Gaza Strip where Israeli airstrikes damaged infrastructure and leveled buildings.

“We welcome any international or Arab effort to rebuild the Gaza Strip,” Sinwar told a news conference in Gaza City.

“I affirm our commitment not to take a single cent intended for reconstruction and humanitarian efforts,” he said. “We have never taken a cent in the past.”

Sinwar said that Gaza has “sufficient financial resources… a large part of which are from Iran, and another part comes from Arab and Muslim donors and free people of the world who stand in solidarity with our people and their rights.”

During a visit to Israel, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said Wednesday that all aid would be “administered in a way that benefits the Palestinian people — not Hamas.” Sinwar added: “I say to Blinken and to everyone else: enough playing with our internal divides. We know how to solve our problems internally. Enough cultivating of internal conflict. We will make way for anyone who wants to rebuild in Gaza or improve the economic situation.”

An Israeli Defense Ministry official said all funds to Gaza would have to flow through an international “mechanism” to reach people directly, to prevent the terror group from replenishing its rocket arsenal. [...] In his address, Sinwar also praised Arab Israeli riots in which Jewish Israelis and their property were attacked during the conflict. He claimed there are “10,000 suicide bombers in Israel” willing to respond to any Israeli “violations” in Jerusalem.

He said Arab Israelis “have proven that so-called ‘Israelification’ — the attempt to turn them into Israeli citizens rather than Palestinians — “and ‘coexistence’ have fallen once and for all.” Sinwar also dismissed an Israeli operation to bomb Hamas’s underground network of tunnels, which its terrorists use for military operations. Statements by the Israeli military during the fighting led foreign journalists to believe that an Israeli ground invasion had begun, reportedly in the hope that Hamas fighters would enter the tunnels to prepare for war.

The IDF later denied misleading anyone, saying the statements were made erroneously. Hebrew media later reported that the operation had been less successful than hoped: relatively few Hamas fighters had entered the tunnels before they were bombed. “It was clear to our military intelligence that this was a deception, and that there was no ground invasion,” Sinwar said.

Hamas’s public works ministry said 258 buildings — around 1,042 residential and commercial units — were destroyed by the Israeli air campaign. Another 769 units were severely damaged, rendering them uninhabitable, and 14,536 suffered minor damage. Seventeen hospitals were damaged, as well as 53 schools.

Over 100,000 people were internally displaced during the hostilities, according to the UN. While many have since been able to return to their dwellings, others have been left homeless.

[Saiwania]

Hamas vows to renew fighting if Israel "violates" al-Aqsa Mosque

So what will launching rockets at Israel accomplish if Hamas is in Gaza but they have no where to go (being boxed in by Israel and Egypt) and they know they don't have the equipment or weaponry that can counter Israel's air supremacy? All attacking Israel will accomplish is get Gaza bombed more.

If Hamas wants to oppose Israel, I honestly don't know what they're supposed to do, but it surely isn't rushing into another skirmish that they'll definitely lose.

[Jutlop]

On another note how are palestinians supposed to resist,
if you resist in a nonviolent way you are called an antisemite

[Dowaesk]

Ah, Ireland. You’ve always been pro-Palestine. We appreciate you.

"You'll never get back to the same level of hatred as [Catholic vs Protestant football teams]; even if you had a Muslim football team the Catholics and the Muslims will just bond over their mutual hatred of orange outfits."- Frankie Boyle

"Been studying Israeli Army martial arts. I now know 16 ways to kick a Palestinian woman in the back"
-Also Frankie Boyle