You're a supporter of crimes against humanity who blames victims for those crimes. You're flith.

You've claimed that murdered civilians have "earned" what they got. And you're somehow expecting people to treat this as a serious philosophical position (and respond in kind), rather than what it is? :grimace:

C'mon, man...

The suggestion that Palestinian civilians have "earned many times over" their treatment at the hands of the Israeli security/military forces, treatment that includes murder, violence, apartheid/legal discrimination, and forcible removal from their homes. — Seppo

Same question to you as to 180: Assuming it's all up to the Israelis, what would you have them do?

You're a supporter of crimes against humanity who blames victims for those crimes. You're filth. — StreetlightX

First I'm racist scum, now a supporter of crimes against humanity - which is it? And what crimes, please, against humanity have I supported?

First I'm racist scum, now a supporter of crimes against humanity - which is it? — tim wood

Well you are racist scum because you support crimes against humanity. These things work quite nicely together in your case.

I'd have them stop committing human rights violations, for one thing. Reverse/repeal nakedly apartheid/discriminatory policies. Shouldn't be too much to ask to, you know, NOT murder civilians or steal their homes and stuff like that. But, evidently, it is too much to ask.

Do you actually have anything of substance to contribute?

I do not especially support either side. It does seem to me that the history of Israel has been under the imposed rule that "necessity knows no law." Indeed, in their case, that for the Israeli state, law is a luxury they cannot afford. I do not support this, but suppose it to be the case. And what is the remedy? On the assumption that the Israelis control all matters, what would you have them do?

@Seppo refers to Palestinian civilians. I have no doubt whatever that at least 80% of Palestinians yearn for peace. At the same time, across the years, I cannot recall reference to any Palestinian military. Rather that civilians were "militarized" willy-nilly, so the distinction that most folks might make between civilian and military, for the Palestinians, absent qualification, is disingenuous.

If anything is disgusting here, it is self-righteous preening, the polishing of one's own sensibilities, focusing on particulars at the neglect of broader reality. I have asked several here what they would have the Israelis do. My own suggestion, made long ago in a similar thread, was simply to make Palestinians full citizens, declaring the land a joint homeland. Maybe wishful or foolish thinking, but at least thinking. Anyone else?

what would you have them do? — tim wood

Not commit crimes against humanity.

I'd have them stop committing human rights violations, for one thing. Reverse/repeal nakedly apartheid/discriminatory policies. Shouldn't be too much to ask to, you know, NOT murder civilians or steal their homes and stuff like that. — Seppo

Seems completely fair to me. I would go a lot further, myself. At the same time, though, I would make it clear that terrorism would be punished as a crime, and as well take whatever steps forced to be taken to protect from terrorism. As noted above, as part of this, I would completely enfranchise all Palestinians. And it seems to me that's the only way out - to make everyone a stakeholder - which the Palestinians do not now seem to be.

the distinction that most folks might make between civilian and military, for the Palestinians, absent qualification, is disingenuous — tim wood

This strikes me as completely disingenuous. We're not talking about the killing of non-military guerilla fighters who qualify as civilians under some strict technical definition, but attacks/murder absent any sort of military target or combatants anywhere in the vicinity. Bombing high-rise apartment buildings and restaurants. The killing of women and children. People minding their own business in their homes. Killed by the Israeli military/security forces, with the funding of the US taxpayer.

There's no justification for any of that, none of these people "earned" such treatment, and making excuses for it is stupid and gross.

↪180 Proof Assuming it's all in the Israeli's court, what would you have them do? — tim wood

I've already stated more than a few times on the thread what I think Israel must do to end the status quo of oppression:

:point:

:point:

:point:

:point:

What should the Nazis have done with the Warsaw Ghetto (besides not creating the need for the Uprising in the first place)? Or what should the US have done / do now with its reservations and urban slums / barrios and prison-industrial-complex? David (oppressed) or Goliath (oppressor)?! – tim wood, the crack'd bell fuckin' tolls for thee. Choose! "The banality" – silence / acquiescence / indifference – of "the good people" is, in fact, always the clear and present atrocity. Do you believe Gandhi, King, X, Mandela, Tutu, Wiesel, ... Ho Chi Mihn ... are wrong? :brow:

Do you believe Gandhi, King, X, Mandela, Tutu, Wiesel, ... Ho Chi Mihn ... are wrong? :brow: — 180 Proof

This always feels so disingenuous. They were all wrong, some more so than others, but that doesn’t mean that the causes they are identified with were completely misguided.

Siding with the oppressed does not mean losing any ability to be critical of their methods. It also doesn’t mean that every bad act is an existential threat. We are all born victims of history - some of us better off than others, but none of us responsible for the situation in which we find ourselves. Survival depends upon the consumption of resources - resources which were previously possessed by someone else in a world in which all resources are claimed. The entire world is an oppressive system in which each of us must struggle (alone or in community). Your acknowledgement of one group’s claim to oppression does not mean that it is the only oppression that is meaningful.

It doesn’t take much reading of tea leaves to see the rampant anti-semitism in the hand waving about Palestine. Not because it is about the Jews, but precisely because it is not about the Jews - the state of Israel as a proxy for the modern version of the Christendom vs. Islam renders it nothing but an object to be kicked about without any actual acknowledgment of its interests.

You want apartheid? Go to Saudi Arabia. Bigger population, more oppression, vastly worse, and yet crickets. No endless posts here, or anywhere else really, where people go on and on about how the Saudis should just give up their oppression and return what they stole.

There is a massive difference between Israeli apologetics and seeing Israelis as a group with legitimate interests just the same as Palestinians. Both groups cause harm to themselves and others as they struggle against their oppression.

in all that has flown by, I failed to notice the kitchen sink: did you forget it? You're in the position of the righteous one who points a finger and says, "That's wrong!!" And no doubt it is, if it is as you say it is. And small point: usually when someone says that something "amounts" to something else, he means that it is not that thing, or he cannot establish that it is that thing, for if he could, he wouldn't bother with "amounts to."

But it is easy enough to concede that Israelis do some things that seem bad - I myself do not know why they do - do you? You're sure, however, that occupation = oppression. Certainly it can, but equally certainly not necessarily. And you appear to represent that the Palestinians are the aggrieved party. I submit the Israelis are the aggrieved party and I will merely gesture at the last 75 years of their history as proof.

Lots of people - individuals - want peace. But not enough of them. And when enough of them want it, they will have it. And that likely will involve some major internal housecleaning in the lands and countries surrounding Israel. Until then, Israel is at war. Always has been, and unless big changes, will be into the foreseeable future .

And I have an instructive and unpleasant metaphor, that I claim I have a right to make on personal grounds. A man beats his wife: a terrible and horrible thing. But when you grow up you eventually figure out that, terrible as it is, it also may not be as simple as it seems. The only thing that can help is understanding and accepting responsibility - on all sides - and mutual movement to recover. And this those people have to do. And if you want to be a righteous hand-wringer; if that makes you feel good, then go ahead, but it borders on irrelevancy.

I do not question that Palestinians have a tough go at the hands of Israelis, but have they not earned it many times over? — tim wood

It's almost amusing that you can ask this bigoted question and then complain about being the target of invective.

I do not question ..., but have they not earned it many times over? — tim wood

Ripped this quote or paraphrase from the pages of ... Mein Kampf, I guess. :shade:

You're sure, however, that occupation = oppression. Certainly it can, but equally certainly not necessarily. — tim wood

Tim, even though lots of people are anti-Israeli, it's OK to be on the side of the Israel. What isn't necessary is to bend over backwards to make a positive of everything they are doing. Occupation does pretty much = oppression. What else would it be? European Jews, with the help of Great Britain et al, claimed, occupied, liberated, moved into, invaded, or otherwise came to possess much of the area of Palestine, called Israel and Judea a long time ago.

Of course the residents of that area, who had been living there for hundreds of years, would resent it.

And you appear to represent that the Palestinians are the aggrieved party. I submit the Israelis are the aggrieved party and I will merely gesture at the last 75 years of their history as proof. — tim wood

True enough, the new state of Israel had to fight for its existence from the getgo. It was attacked from within it's newly claimed territory and from without. Just guessing, but the Israelis probably expected this to happen. That's why they built up a powerful military (homemade and bought abroad). Is that how they are "aggrieved?

A man beats his wife: a terrible and horrible thing. But when you grow up you eventually figure out that, terrible as it is, it also may not be as simple as it seems. — tim wood

Oh dear. Tim, when did you stop beating your wife?

It doesn’t take much reading of tea leaves to see the rampant anti-semitism in the hand waving about Palestine — Ennui Elucidator

Its unfortunate how frequently spurious/arbitrary accusations of anti-Semitism are used as an excuse to wave away legitimate criticisms of the Israeli state/military. I'd say that the victims of actual anti-Semitism deserve better than to have it turned into a cheap rhetorical ploy.

You want apartheid? Go to Saudi Arabia. — Ennui Elucidator

Sure. Or to Israel. This is just textbook whataboutism; someone else doing a bad thing (or even a worse thing) doesn't make the bad thing you did any less bad. Israel should not be an apartheid state. They should not be continuing illegal settlements. They certainly should not continue to indiscriminately attack non-combatants and non-military targets. Gesturing at Saudi Arabia isn't a substantive response to any of these criticisms.

There is a massive difference between Israeli apologetics and seeing Israelis as a group with legitimate interests just the same as Palestinians. Both groups cause harm to themselves and others as they struggle against their oppression. — Ennui Elucidator

And there is massive asymmetry between the two groups, since the Palestinian's oppression consists in having the boot of the Israeli military on their throat.

Pretty silly that such a wildly disingenuous post opens with an accusation of someone else (!!!) being disingenuous: my Irony Meter just about exploded!

Israel isn't an apartheid state and is under constant threat from those they engage with militaristically. To hold one side more accountable for carnage that all combatants take an involvement in, is intellectually dishonest. Best to characterize all militaristic organizations as what they are: enemies against humanity.

Israel isn't an apartheid state — Garrett Travers

It sure is: https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/campaigns/2022/02/israels-system-of-apartheid/

Organizations that launch rockets into civilians zones in the hopes of murdering innocent humans that are not their combatants, en masse, are not victims. To characterize murderers as victims because of a vested bias is despicable depravity. Your only considerations should be with the actual victims on both sides of the fence: the civilians who take no part in, and desire to take no part in arbitrary lethal conflict predicated on fales beliefs that each the other's nonsense religion justifies.

has anyone characterized e.g. Hamas militants as the victims? Anyone?? Or, rather, have they characterized the countless non-combatants who had their homes or places of worked bombed as the victims?

Oops, eh? :grimace:

No, it isn't. The actions the Israeli's apropos the settlements are in fact evil, but for it to be an apartheid state, institutional, as in reinforced by the law of the land, segregation would to be in place; you know, like most Arab states run by Islamic authoritarians, that sort of thing. As of now, non-jews of all kinds live in Israel and enjoy rights of labor, property, office, and travel. Not an apartheid state. Call it what it is: A state with highly unethical practices in certion regions that happen to be heavily populated with Arab non-jews.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Israel#:~:text=Some%2074.24%25%20are%20Jews%20of,religious%20law%20and%20persons%20of

has anyone characterized e.g. Hamas militants as the victims? Anyone?? Or, rather, have they characterized the countless non-combatants who had their homes or places of worked bombed as the victims?

Oops, eh? :grimace: — Seppo

If that is what you meant, then you and I are allies. But, the general view of this topic pits Israel against Palestine as institutions, which is nonsense. Nobody better come telling me I'm responsible for what America's leaders have done in the Middle East. That's my perspective. Cool if you share it.

Israel isn't an apartheid state — Garrett Travers

Ok internet random. I guess I'll take your word over Amnesty International.

Ok internet random. I guess I'll take your word over Amnesty International. — StreetlightX

I would highly recommend that. These organizations can't be trusted to tell you shit that isn't meant to make you thin how they want you to think. Go with philosophy, it teaches you how to cut through all of the nonsense and verify everything you read in the news, which, sure as I'm typing to you now, is replete with bullshit.

lol OK random.


Anyway, terrible about that Israeli apartheid state.

Would be nice if they stopped doing the whole ethnic cleansing thing.

Well, yeah, it is. Fairly explicitly so; not just in practice (although it is so in practice as well, obviously).

There is no apartheid, and Arabs hold office, property, and professional careers in Israel. There is no ethinic clensing, you've eaten the propaganda. All those involved in arm conflict are guilty of abhorent evil, same for Israeli settling. My position is far less biased than yours.

Well, yeah, it is. Fairly explicitly so; not just in practice (although it is so in practice as well, obviously). — Seppo

Word, I dig.

Uh huh.

Anyway, Sucks about the apartheid in Israel.