256 Gazans killed by unlawful Israeli bombardment

[Heloin]

American support for an Apartheid regime does nothing to create support for peace. That is the fantasy you are pushing, it was the same one pushed in support of South Africa in the past.

It's actually not.

The argument I'm presenting is not about propelling the peace process forward. It has nothing even to do with the peace process. It's about the realities of Israeli policy and the toll that alternatives to the Iron Dome would take on Israeli and Palestinian lives. It cites recent history to that effect, specifically the previous Israeli occupation of Gaza, which led to settlements in Gaza, and recent talk of yet another occupation of Gaza as the Iron Dome came under threat of being over-utilized.

Despite the popular comparison of Israel to Nazi Germany and Apartheid South Africa, this situation isn't comparable to either when it comes to Israeli motivations and objectives with respect to Gaza specifically. Really, the geopolitics are different as well. As are the ambitions of everyone directly involved and in a position to influence events.

No American support = Iron Dome failing = Israel engaging in another occupation = More Israeli and Palestinian deaths

The comparison to Apartheid South Africa isn't an apt one, only to those who are actively excusing Israeli actions which are directly comparable to those of South Africa's. Your argument is that murder and occupation should be supported because... no real reason given actually just the hypothetical that Israel will likely continue doing exactly what it already does. There is no good reason for the unconditional support Israel gets from the States.

[Islamic Holy Sites]

Iron Dome isn't the only air defence system, you know. If the US rejects them, they might go to Russia, who creates the best air defence systems in the world.

You then have to ship those air defense systems to Israel and set them up along with any and all supporting infrastructure. Beyond that, there's speculation that the S-400 might wind up being a paper tiger when really tested. I was accounting for all those possibilities given that the Iron Dome is proven to be effective so long as adequately supplied and maintained.

Perhaps, but in the meantime they've already got some air defence systems, haven't they? And the S-400 might be a paper tiger, but I don't think so.

[Fahran]

The comparison to Apartheid South Africa isn't an apt one, only to those who are actively excusing Israeli actions which are directly comparable to those of South Africa's.

I'm not presenting an ethical argument about Israel and South Africa's policies at the moment. I'm pointing out that in geopolitical and ideological terms they each sought to accomplish distinct goals. South Africa was trying to preserve white minority rule and a racial hierarchy. With respect to Gaza, Israel is trying to minimize Hamas's ability to wage unconventional warfare and minimize Israeli casualties. With respect to the Palestinian Authority as a whole, Israel is striving to annex East Jerusalem and portions of the West Bank with Jewish majorities while tightening security measures through less than ethical means. Even if one supposes Israel is committing apartheid in the West Bank, and that's really the only viable argument for apartheid in Israel, it doesn't really address my point about the comparison being dubious at all.

Your argument is that murder and occupation should be supported because... no real reason given actually just the hypothetical that Israel will likely continue doing exactly what it already does.

I'm not actually arguing that we should continue supporting Israel. I'm presenting a plausible hypothesis of what would happen if we disengaged from the region altogether without setting any groundwork for a lasting peace settlement. Presumably, folks advocating for a complete disengagement will retort that "it's not our problem and we'll make it worse if we get ourselves involved again." Personally, I don't think we should disengage at all. Or that we should continue giving uncritical support to Israel.

There is no good reason for the unconditional support Israel gets from the States.

I mean... there's no good reason to ever give any foreign power unconditional support. And I don't think we've historically given Israel or anyone else unconditional support. We've had some expectations attached to that support. We've just been really imprudent about ensuring those expectations are met.

[Fahran]

Perhaps, but in the meantime they've already got some air defence systems, haven't they? And the S-400 might be a paper tiger, but I don't think so.

An air defense system that Hamas managed to severely test as of last month - to the point that the US had to send additional resources to Israel to maintain it. We can't really know until we get reliable battlefield testing of the S-400.

That's one consistent function Israel fulfills as an American ally. They reliably test a lot of weapons.

[Tarsonis]

Iron Dome isn't the only air defence system, you know. If the US rejects them, they might go to Russia, who creates the best air defence systems in the world.

You then have to ship those air defense systems to Israel and set them up along with any and all supporting infrastructure. Beyond that, there's speculation that the S-400 might wind up being a paper tiger when really tested. I was accounting for all those possibilities given that the Iron Dome is proven to be effective so long as adequately supplied and maintained.

oh it's more than just mere speculation. Just like their next gen tank looks good on paper but is really a convoluted mess.

It's an informed hypothesis.

[Washington Resistance Army]

You then have to ship those air defense systems to Israel and set them up along with any and all supporting infrastructure. Beyond that, there's speculation that the S-400 might wind up being a paper tiger when really tested. I was accounting for all those possibilities given that the Iron Dome is proven to be effective so long as adequately supplied and maintained.

oh it's more than just mere speculation. Just like their next gen tank looks good on paper but is really a convoluted mess.

It's an informed hypothesis.

Wdym it's a convoluted mess it's not like it broke down the first time it was shown in public.

Oh, wait.

[Heloin]

The comparison to Apartheid South Africa isn't an apt one, only to those who are actively excusing Israeli actions which are directly comparable to those of South Africa's.

I'm not presenting an ethical argument about Israel and South Africa's policies at the moment. I'm pointing out that in geopolitical and ideological terms they each sought to accomplish distinct goals. South Africa was trying to preserve white minority rule and a racial hierarchy. With respect to Gaza, Israel is trying to minimize Hamas's ability to wage unconventional warfare and minimize Israeli casualties. With respect to the Palestinian Authority as a whole, Israel is striving to annex East Jerusalem and portions of the West Bank with Jewish majorities while tightening security measures through less than ethical means. Even if one supposes Israel is committing apartheid in the West Bank, and that's really the only viable argument for apartheid in Israel, it doesn't really address my point about the comparison being dubious at all.

It's a deep aragoence to pretend the Apartheid comparison isn't apt when the architects of Apartheid in South Africa were the ones who first made the comparison.

Your argument is that murder and occupation should be supported because... no real reason given actually just the hypothetical that Israel will likely continue doing exactly what it already does.

I'm not actually arguing that we should continue supporting Israel. I'm presenting a plausible hypothesis of what would happen if we disengaged from the region altogether without setting any groundwork for a lasting peace settlement. Presumably, folks advocating for a complete disengagement will retort that "it's not our problem and we'll make it worse if we get ourselves involved again." Personally, I don't think we should disengage at all. Or that we should continue giving uncritical support to Israel.

You're "not arguing" but stating a fiction that things will get worse for Palestinians. It likely won't, it'll probably stay just as bad for them. Disengagement isn't about Israel-Palestine not being your problem, it's about the fact that it'll force Israel to actually consider it's action since they'll be weaker in responding to counter attacks, their economy can't likely survive continuing the forever war, and that they clearly don't want to invade the remaining territories of Palestine not under their control just right now. Israel is not going away, but without the constant US support going on the attack becomes increasing dangerous towards that long term survival.

There is no good reason for the unconditional support Israel gets from the States.

I mean... there's no good reason to ever give any foreign power unconditional support. And I don't think we've historically given Israel or anyone else unconditional support. We've had some expectations attached to that support. We've just been really imprudent about ensuring those expectations are met.

American support towards Palestine being conditional is the best joke I've heard all day. Thank you.

[Tarsonis]

oh it's more than just mere speculation. Just like their next gen tank looks good on paper but is really a convoluted mess.

It's an informed hypothesis.

Wdym it's a convoluted mess it's not like it broke down the first time it was shown in public.

Oh, wait.

Clearly a ruse to lull the capitalist pig dogs into a false sense of security.

[Fahran]

It's a deep aragoence to pretend the Apartheid comparison isn't apt when the architects of Apartheid in South Africa were the ones who first made the comparison.

Not especially. Because the point I'm making is a completely different from the one that you're making. You're talking past my point instead of addressing or properly challenging the distinction. And, as far as I'm aware, the apartheid talking point has been promoted predominantly by Palestinian political and social elites. That's how it got into the discourse in the US especially.

You're "not arguing" but stating a fiction that things will get worse for Palestinians. It likely won't, it'll probably stay just as bad for them. Disengagement isn't about Israel-Palestine not being your problem, it's about the fact that it'll force Israel to actually consider it's action since they'll be weaker in responding to counter attacks, their economy can't likely survive continuing the forever war, and that they clearly don't want to invade the remaining territories of Palestine not under their control just right now. Israel is not going away, but without the constant US support going on the attack becomes increasing dangerous towards that long term survival.

Palestine's economy has managed to endure the "forever war" well enough that they have not wholly capitulated to Israeli demands regarding East Jerusalem, the five percent of the West Bank Sharon wanted to annex, and the cessation of hostilities. You're neglecting the fact that the stumbling block to peace isn't the blockade on Gaza or even the continuation of the settlement policy in much of the West Bank. It's Israel's insistence on not surrendering gains in East Jerusalem and the West Bank and Palestine's insistence on not surrendering anything lost after the 1948 War. Neither has budged from these positions in spite of casualties ticking up from time to time. We already know how Israel will react to the unfeasibility of the Iron Dome because we've seen the reaction. We saw it prior to 2006 and we got to see speculation on it last month as well.

It's not a fantasy to assert that the Israeli response to disengagement would likely be the occupation of Gaza, the tightening of security measures in the Disputed Territories, and more bombardments to suppress militant activity because that was the modus operandi during the Second Intifada. So the most likely outcome is a return to the pre-Iron Dome status quo and, subsequently, higher casualties and more economic damage to both sides without a permanent peace occurring.

The national situation of Palestine might improve if you consider more Israeli soldiers shot in Gaza City an improvement, but you're likely going to see more dead Palestinians as well since Israel will lose at least some of the dominance that allows them to avoid the less savory aspects of unconventional war. We know this occurs from other nations' recent wars as well. Assad didn't drop chemical weapons on the FSA because they were exceedingly effective or he was evil, though he might well be the latter. He did it because better options weren't available.

American support towards Palestine being conditional is the best joke I've heard all day. Thank you.

I wasn't implying America gave support, conditional or unconditional to Palestine. But our support for Israel has theoretically been as conditional as our support for Turkey. We do want something out of this after all.

[Borderlands of Rojava]

American support for an Apartheid regime does nothing to create support for peace. That is the fantasy you are pushing, it was the same one pushed in support of South Africa in the past.

It's actually not.

The argument I'm presenting is not about propelling the peace process forward. It has nothing even to do with the peace process. It's about the realities of Israeli policy and the toll that alternatives to the Iron Dome would take on Israeli and Palestinian lives. It cites recent history to that effect, specifically the previous Israeli occupation of Gaza, which led to settlements in Gaza, and recent talk of yet another occupation of Gaza as the Iron Dome came under threat of being over-utilized.

Despite the popular comparison of Israel to Nazi Germany and Apartheid South Africa, this situation isn't comparable to either when it comes to Israeli motivations and objectives with respect to Gaza specifically. Really, the geopolitics are different as well. As are the ambitions of everyone directly involved and in a position to influence events.

No American support = Iron Dome failing = Israel engaging in another occupation = More Israeli and Palestinian deaths

Israel isn't gonna try to occupy Gaza. They'd be sacrificing possibly hundreds or thousands of soldiers just to get a strip of dry desert.

[Tarsonis]

It's actually not.

The argument I'm presenting is not about propelling the peace process forward. It has nothing even to do with the peace process. It's about the realities of Israeli policy and the toll that alternatives to the Iron Dome would take on Israeli and Palestinian lives. It cites recent history to that effect, specifically the previous Israeli occupation of Gaza, which led to settlements in Gaza, and recent talk of yet another occupation of Gaza as the Iron Dome came under threat of being over-utilized.

Despite the popular comparison of Israel to Nazi Germany and Apartheid South Africa, this situation isn't comparable to either when it comes to Israeli motivations and objectives with respect to Gaza specifically. Really, the geopolitics are different as well. As are the ambitions of everyone directly involved and in a position to influence events.

No American support = Iron Dome failing = Israel engaging in another occupation = More Israeli and Palestinian deaths

Israel isn't gonna try to occupy Gaza. They'd be sacrificing possibly hundreds or thousands of soldiers just to get a strip of dry desert.

Nope they'll just level it.

[Dresderstan]

Israel isn't gonna try to occupy Gaza. They'd be sacrificing possibly hundreds or thousands of soldiers just to get a strip of dry desert.

Nope they'll just level it.

And probably salt the Earth like the Romans did to Carthage.

[Saiwania]

Given that the Israelis have created and preserved this particular opposition, yes— if they can handle massive rocket barrages I’m pretty sure a few balloons aren’t going to cause them any real problems

This is like saying that Walmart for example, shouldn't care about shoplifting or loss prevention because for every $1 billion in sales, only around $790,000+ is lost. Less than 1% of the profits being effected doesn't matter right? Well, it still a loss they have to absorb, if not costing their insurer. These are items the grocery store bought from a wholesaler or third party but now can't recoup on any of what was lost because it was taken and never paid for.

In a similar vein, if Israel ignores being attacked, the opponents of Israel existing will be emboldened enough to do more or to escalate in whatever manner they can manage.

[Tarsonis]

Nope they'll just level it.

And probably salt the Earth like the Romans did to Carthage.

Hard to salt a desert more than it already is.

[Heloin]

And probably salt the Earth like the Romans did to Carthage.

Hard to salt a desert more than it already is.

I don't know. I've had chips before that make the Sahara look like a water park.

[Kowani]

Nope they'll just level it.

And probably salt the Earth like the Romans did to Carthage.

rome...probably didn't actually salt carthage
salt was fucking valuable back then, and that's good land. Plus, afaik, none of the contemporary sources mention it
destruction, of the city, yes
salting the earth, no

[Insaanistan]

And Israel should stop running children over for flying the Palestinian flag, deliberately targeting civilians, pretending every building with Arabs in it is a secret Hamas base, purposely bombing civilian infrastructure, ethnically cleansing the West Bank, and committing apartheid.

Yeah, nobody said they shouldn't. But again with your penchant of doing everything you can to excuse Palestinian violence.

“Okay, little boy. Game over. Your dad’s cousin’s daughter’s friend’s neighbor’s boss’s son’s teacher’s vague acquaintance’s fire balloon is no match for our missile.”
*destroys up Gazan house*

[Tarsonis]

Yeah, nobody said they shouldn't. But again with your penchant of doing everything you can to excuse Palestinian violence.

“Okay, little boy. Game over. Your dad’s cousin’s daughter’s friend’s neighbor’s boss’s son’s teacher’s vague acquaintance’s fire balloon is no match for our missile.”
*destroys up Gazan house*

not exactly proving me wrong here.

[Tarsonis]

And probably salt the Earth like the Romans did to Carthage.

rome...probably didn't actually salt carthage
salt was fucking valuable back then, and that's good land. Plus, afaik, none of the contemporary sources mention it
destruction, of the city, yes
salting the earth, no

Damn, Lot must have been fuckin rich

[Kowani]

rome...probably didn't actually salt carthage
salt was fucking valuable back then, and that's good land. Plus, afaik, none of the contemporary sources mention it
destruction, of the city, yes
salting the earth, no

Damn, Lot must have been fuckin rich

well, transporting that pillar was probably a bit beyond his capacities...

[Tarsonis]

Damn, Lot must have been fuckin rich

well, transporting that pillar was probably a bit beyond his capacities...

sure but he was the only land owner left. the mining rights alone would have made a Flippin mint

[Kowani]

well, transporting that pillar was probably a bit beyond his capacities...

sure but he was the only land owner left. the mining rights alone would have made a Flippin mint

most likely, yes

[Senkaku]

Given that the Israelis have created and preserved this particular opposition, yes— if they can handle massive rocket barrages I’m pretty sure a few balloons aren’t going to cause them any real problems

This is like saying that Walmart for example, shouldn't care about shoplifting or loss prevention because for every $1 billion in sales, only around $790,000+ is lost. Less than 1% of the profits being effected doesn't matter right? Well, it still a loss they have to absorb, if not costing their insurer. These are items the grocery store bought from a wholesaler or third party but now can't recoup on any of what was lost because it was taken and never paid for.

In a similar vein, if Israel ignores being attacked, the opponents of Israel existing will be emboldened enough to do more or to escalate in whatever manner they can manage.

Does Walmart bomb shoplifters’ entire neighborhoods into rubble with fighter jets after tracking them home with drones and spy satellites?

[Grootfries Rijk]

This is like saying that Walmart for example, shouldn't care about shoplifting or loss prevention because for every $1 billion in sales, only around $790,000+ is lost. Less than 1% of the profits being effected doesn't matter right? Well, it still a loss they have to absorb, if not costing their insurer. These are items the grocery store bought from a wholesaler or third party but now can't recoup on any of what was lost because it was taken and never paid for.

In a similar vein, if Israel ignores being attacked, the opponents of Israel existing will be emboldened enough to do more or to escalate in whatever manner they can manage.

Does Walmart bomb shoplifters’ entire neighborhoods into rubble with fighter jets after tracking them home with drones and spy satellites?

Saiwania's example was pretty bad all things considered but rockets and balloons actually get people killed and are outright acts of war. Israel acts disproportionately, but only in the sense that it doesn't do the exact same thing Gaza does: hit highly concentrated civilian areas, hospitals and places of worship with thousands of rockets and missiles.

[Koletsia]

The comparison to Apartheid South Africa isn't an apt one, only to those who are actively excusing Israeli actions which are directly comparable to those of South Africa's. Your argument is that murder and occupation should be supported because... no real reason given actually just the hypothetical that Israel will likely continue doing exactly what it already does. There is no good reason for the unconditional support Israel gets from the States.

Did blacks in Rhodesia have a political party representing them? Sure was a rainbow utopia when the whites surrendered power, wasn't it? What pro-white party now exists in Zimbabwe to stop ZANU–PF arbitrarily revoking their rights? Because in Israel right now there is a party in government representing Arab interests in Israeli society.