2023-24 Israel-Hamas-Hezbollah-Iran-Houthi Conflict

[Spirit of Hope]

As I have said previously I have no problem with Israel responding to the terrorists that are attacking it, it is the manner in which Israel is responding that is both illegal under international law and counter productive to achieving a lasting peace.

I agree with this on a fundamental level. Especially because, as I have said repeatedly at this point, it's becoming increasingly obvious that, much like Bush, Netanyahu doesn't have a tenable exit strategy or vision for peace.

So should the US stop supplying free weapons and training to Israeli units credibly accused of human rights violations?

[Senkaku]

Sorry. I ain't supporting your problematic coalition of Arab nationalists, Anti-Zionists, and socialists, hon.

As I said earlier, if you don’t approve of the opposition or the government, go start your own one-woman show! “Zionists for limited sanctions,” I’m sure there’ll be a handful of SSRI-addled Dem staffers, a couple closeted GOP lobbyists, and some Routh-y eccentric cranks who’ll be happy to sign on to the Movement for Lockheed Jobs or whatever you end up calling it. If you sell AIPAC the copyrights to some of your discourses on Ottoman history, you might even be able to get some money to stand up an astroturfing outfit big enough to pay to feed a family!

[Fahran]

So should the US stop supplying free weapons and training to Israeli units credibly accused of human rights violations?

It depends. I favor a partial weapons ban targeting weapons and munitions associated with excessive civilian casualties, something I've supported for months, and a complete weapons ban to any police or military units that have been found to have committed violations of US policy or international law. I do not support, as an example, defunding the Iron Dome to permit Hamas and Hezbollah to murder large numbers of Israeli civilians in the hopes that this will force a ceasefire or level the playing ground.

[The Lone Alliance]

I agree with this on a fundamental level. Especially because, as I have said repeatedly at this point, it's becoming increasingly obvious that, much like Bush, Netanyahu doesn't have a tenable exit strategy or vision for peace.

So should the US stop supplying free weapons and training to Israeli units credibly accused of human rights violations?

The US is still blacklisting Azov in Ukraine from getting weapons even now in the Ukraine War, last I heard Azov still has to buy their western weapons themselves even though they literally have nothing to do with the Mariupol unit outside of it's name and are now fully integrated in Ukraine's military.

So it's not like it's something the US can't potentially do. , Blacklist the units guilty of human rights violations which will force Israel to pay out of pocket for them.

And make it big and very public about why you are blacklisting those units.

[Fahran]

As I said earlier, if you don’t approve of the opposition or the government, go start your own one-woman show! “Zionists for limited sanctions,” I’m sure there’ll be a handful of SSRI-addled Dem staffers, a couple closeted GOP lobbyists, and some Routh-y eccentric cranks who’ll be happy to sign on to the Movement for Lockheed Jobs or whatever you end up calling it. If you sell AIPAC the copyrights to some of your discourses on Ottoman history, you might even be able to get some money to stand up an astroturfing outfit big enough to pay to feed a family!

Or I could continue making donations to humanitarian and medical organizations and engage in other forms of political participation, and not go gallivanting about in dubious company to prove a point to a random guy from the internet.

[Fahran]

So should the US stop supplying free weapons and training to Israeli units credibly accused of human rights violations?

The US was able to blacklist Azov in Ukraine from getting weapons for most of the war, last I heard Azov still has to buy their own stuff even though they literally have nothing to do with the Mariupol unit outside of it's name and are now fully integrated in Ukraine's military.

So the US could potentially only supply Israel units not under violation, forcing Israel to pay out of pocket for the ones who are.

I'd start with the 97th Netzah Yehuda Battalion.

[Spirit of Hope]

So should the US stop supplying free weapons and training to Israeli units credibly accused of human rights violations?

It depends. I favor a partial weapons ban targeting weapons and munitions associated with excessive civilian casualties, something I've supported for months, and a complete weapons ban to any police or military units that have been found to have committed violations of US policy or international law. I do not support, as an example, defunding the Iron Dome to permit Hamas and Hezbollah to murder large numbers of Israeli civilians in the hopes that this will force a ceasefire or level the playing ground.

Well then call up Blinken and tell him to follow US law which you previously denied was being violated.

[Fahran]

which you previously denied was being violated.

Sen supports a full weapons ban.

[Suriyanakhon]

From a look at the news headlines, it appears that a USA-backed Israeli Empire is expanding militarily in the region.

There have apparently been a number of Israeli personalities calling for colonizing southern Lebanon in the past few months, these groups have gotten more vocal recently.

[Senkaku]

a complete weapons ban to any police or military units that have been found to have committed violations of US policy or international law.

Oh, well don’t worry about that— Secretary Blinken has assured the American people that none of them have done anything of the sort, and any reports to the contrary are simply the insubordinate and antisemitic mutterings of disgruntled individuals.

As I said earlier, if you don’t approve of the opposition or the government, go start your own one-woman show! “Zionists for limited sanctions,” I’m sure there’ll be a handful of SSRI-addled Dem staffers, a couple closeted GOP lobbyists, and some Routh-y eccentric cranks who’ll be happy to sign on to the Movement for Lockheed Jobs or whatever you end up calling it. If you sell AIPAC the copyrights to some of your discourses on Ottoman history, you might even be able to get some money to stand up an astroturfing outfit big enough to pay to feed a family!

Or I could continue making donations to humanitarian and medical organizations and engage in other forms of political participation, and not make a point of gallivanting about in dubious company to prove a point to a random guy from the internet.

Hey, the NGO-industrial complex will take as much money as you want to throw at them, and I’m sure chatting about politics with your family will shift the axis of history any day now. Why do I get a strange gut suspicion that an itemized list of these organizations might raise some questions about the definition of the word “humanitarian,” though?

[Spirit of Hope]

which you previously denied was being violated.

Sen supports a full weapons ban.

Yes, but that doesn't change the fact that you denied that US law was being violated. Which it very much is when the US sends weapons to units credibly accused of violating human rights. Israel already receives deference not extended to any other nation in the Leahy process, but even when the committee there agrees that units are violating human rights the US still continues to send them weapons and training.

[Senkaku]

The US was able to blacklist Azov in Ukraine from getting weapons for most of the war, last I heard Azov still has to buy their own stuff even though they literally have nothing to do with the Mariupol unit outside of it's name and are now fully integrated in Ukraine's military.

So the US could potentially only supply Israel units not under violation, forcing Israel to pay out of pocket for the ones who are.

I'd start with the 97th Netzah Yehuda Battalion.

Outrageous! The State Department and the White House have assured me they investigated themselves and found no wrongdoing, and besides, if we enforce the law this time, that means we might have to enforce it next time, which is a slippery slope to an arms embargo.

[Fahran]

Hey, the NGO-industrial complex will take as much money as you want to throw at them, and I’m sure chatting about politics with your family will shift the axis of history any day now. Why do I get a strange gut suspicion that an itemized list of these organizations might raise some questions about the definition of the word “humanitarian,” though?

Ah, yes. The PCRF. A notorious den of Zionist perfidy.

[Union of Soviet Sovereign Republiks1]

Has anyone noticed that Palestine has two separate governments with one in the Gaza Strip ruled by Hamas terrorists and the West Bank ruled by PLO terrorists?

[Senkaku]

Hey, the NGO-industrial complex will take as much money as you want to throw at them, and I’m sure chatting about politics with your family will shift the axis of history any day now. Why do I get a strange gut suspicion that an itemized list of these organizations might raise some questions about the definition of the word “humanitarian,” though?

Ah, yes. The PCRF. A notorious den of Zionist perfidy.

Aren’t they famously Hamas? Thank god our brave boys and girls in the IDF blew their office to smithereens back in March, I can’t believe you’d let yourself be associated with that viper’s nest of Arab nationalists!

[Siamese People Republics]

Has anyone noticed that Palestine has two separate governments with one in the Gaza Strip ruled by Hamas terrorists and the West Bank ruled by PLO terrorists?

I don't care which one is which as long they continued the struggle to force the Israeli settlers to go back to London instead of bombing and sniping more foreign civilians, workers, and children.

Should I remind you that they bomb AP office a while back? Sniped foreign journalists? Killing UN peacekeeper in neighboring country? You want me to oppose the people that fought against these obvious butchers?

[Senkaku]

Has anyone noticed that Palestine has two separate governments with one in the Gaza Strip ruled by Hamas terrorists and the West Bank ruled by PLO terrorists?

I’ve never noticed that; where is Palestine anyways? People are always talking about it so much you’d think it was right next door.

[El Lazaro]

I do not support, as an example, defunding the Iron Dome to permit Hamas and Hezbollah to murder large numbers of Israeli civilians in the hopes that this will force a ceasefire or level the playing ground.

If the Israeli government refuses to divert funding from killing civilians to protect its own, then it is fully responsible for the consequences of that decision.

[Union of Soviet Sovereign Republiks1]

Has anyone noticed that Palestine has two separate governments with one in the Gaza Strip ruled by Hamas terrorists and the West Bank ruled by PLO terrorists?

I don't care which one is which as long they continued the struggle to force the Israeli settlers to go back to London instead of bombing and sniping more foreign civilians, workers, and children.

Should I remind you that they bomb AP office a while back? Sniped foreign journalists? Killing UN peacekeeper in neighboring country? You want me to oppose the people that fought against these obvious butchers?

Should I remind you that Hamas literally wishes the destruction of every Jew on this planet? As to the UN peacekeeper, he wouldn't have died if Hezbollah hadn't launched rockets into Northern Israel leading to a harsh Israeli response. According to the UN Charter, which Israel is a member of, Israel has a right to defend itself plus when you have been invaded 3 times and constantly bombarded by terror groups wishing for your destruction then you would do anything to secure your national sovereignty.

[Oceasia]

New UN damage assessment of Gaza

As of 6 September, more than 128 thousand or 51% of all structures in Gaza are at least moderately damaged.

[Northern Socialist Council Republics]

Neither of y'all supported a decisive response to illegal terrorism or genocide on October 8th.

The level of international isolation and economic sanctions that I believe is appropriate for both sides of this conflict are identical.

The only difference is that only one side is currently avoiding consequences for their actions. Hamas is, I believe I have already pointed out, currently under blockade.

[Fame And Even More Fame]

I am a bit more optimistic than you.

The three people who have inspired optimism in me about the modern Middle East are Yitzhak Rabin, Abdullah II of Jordan, and Mohammed VI of Morocco/André Azoulay. And it wasn't enough optimism to change terribly much.

Where is the contradiction between Palestinians returning and Palestinians living at peace with their neighbours?

In the fact that only 10% of Palestinians want to exercise the right of return if it means falling under Israeli administration. Given the circumstances, financial compensation, possibly with a more limited right of return, makes a lot more sense than expanding the scope of the population and land transfers that are already an inevitable prerequisite for peace.

I think Iraq-level stability is achievable.

Are you trying to make me a doomer?

Yes, so Israel started the war.

A preemptive strike really isn't as simple as so-and-so started the war. It's arguably more accurate to say that normal international relations were never established and that the Arab-Israeli Conflict had become a frozen conflict in the aftermath of the 1948 War. Which yielded geopolitical consequences when push came to shove.

Yeah, and that’s the point: they shouldn’t. Because. It. Is. Not. Theirs.

Pursuing ethnic maximalism and irregular fighting for forty years has consequences. Arafat and Abbas appear to have acknowledged that to some extent.

You said that Arabs were not negotiating, and I brought up examples of Arabs negotiating.

You brought up a foreign monarch who wasn't the dominant or guiding voice within Palestine and who was regularly disregarded by the bulk Arab nationalists operating in Palestine, some of whom later assassinated him.

Mohammad VI, lol


So land transfers are good unless Palestinians get land transferred to them in which case it is bad?


?


So are you actually arguing that the six day war was actually the same as the 1948 war just so you can keep pretending Israel didn’t start it?


What? I genuinely don’t get the point you are trying to make here. Are you saying that Syria and the Palestinians deserved to have their land stolen?


Faisal died of a heart attack? And if you are saying that the majority of Arabs didn’t negotiate in good faith, I could say the same for the majority of Jews.

[Fame And Even More Fame]

So should the US stop supplying free weapons and training to Israeli units credibly accused of human rights violations?

It depends. I favor a partial weapons ban targeting weapons and munitions associated with excessive civilian casualties, something I've supported for months, and a complete weapons ban to any police or military units that have been found to have committed violations of US policy or international law. I do not support, as an example, defunding the Iron Dome to permit Hamas and Hezbollah to murder large numbers of Israeli civilians in the hopes that this will force a ceasefire or level the playing ground.

Israel shouldn’t get bailouts from the West as a reward for committing genocide. Israel’s economy should take the cost of all its military adventures, they shouldn’t be able to offload the price of genocide onto other countries.

[Askio]

An invasion of Lebanon would be morally wrong and is bound to fail in the long run

[Senkaku]

An invasion of Lebanon would be morally wrong and is bound to fail in the long run

Well, it’s boring to be morally good and successful at everything all the time— sometimes you have to do terrible things for stupid reasons with predictably catastrophic results just to shake things up a bit. The Israeli government and military have been living this philosophy for the past year.

Neither of y'all supported a decisive response to illegal terrorism or genocide on October 8th.

The level of international isolation and economic sanctions that I believe is appropriate for both sides of this conflict are identical.

The only difference is that only one side is currently avoiding consequences for their actions. Hamas is, I believe I have already pointed out, currently under blockade.

I can’t say I think Israeli civilians deserve to get put on catastrophic famine rations and have all medical supplies interdicted, and the implication of this passage is quite directly that you think Israel should face a similar “level of international isolation and economic sanctions” as the blockaded Gaza (sorry, “Hamas”). I would hope the move would be more for Palestinians to be allowed to enjoy comparable standards of living to Israeli ones, rather than lowering everyone to the level of queueing in bread and water lines or dying of preventable diseases.

which you previously denied was being violated.

Sen supports a full weapons ban.

See, the difference between us is just that I actually say what I think and mean. There is no such thing as a “partial” weapons ban, it’s politically untenable— if we start enforcing the law against some Israeli units’ atrocities, eventually, probably rapidly, the cancer will spread to encompass all arms shipments, because the cancer of impunity for war crimes has spread through all of the Israeli military, security organs, and political hierarchy, and the people responsible for assessing whether or not we’re legally obligated to cut off weapons supply have known this for quite some time. Your “partial ban” does not exist— you’re in favor of continuing arms exports without restriction (and even more than that, of arguing against cutting them off), but you’d sound more unreasonable if you said that, so now we all have to play along with this absurd pretend notion of a “partial ban” that hits just the right Goldilocks spot for us to wag our fingers at Netanyahu without meaningfully impeding his ability to continue the genocide OR (as you constantly worry about) making him go the sanctioned-Saddam doubling down on brutality route. Oh, sure, we’ll just partially block arms to this one regiment, I’m sure there’s no way we could just transfer the same weapons to a different unit in the same genocidaire army and have them somehow still wind up in the sanctioned extremists’ hands— or will we block arms deliveries to the whole genocidaire army? Illustrate the choice honestly, at least, please, instead of this appeasing triangulation of incompatible political scenarios. The “partial ban” will split one way or the other— either we’ll functionally still be giving the IDF what it wants, through more obscure channels and maybe in slightly reduced quantity or through intermediaries, or we’ll be beginning an irreversible cascade of shutting Israel off from all of our military production streams.