As far as the cultural distinction, Christian faith tends more towards fideism (justification by faith) and the Eastern traditions more towards forms of gnosticism (saving insight). But so far as secular culture is concerned, while they're worthy of respect as elements of human culture, they're not truth-bearing in the way that scientific observation can be. — Wayfarer

Interesting you mention this issue of justification, i.e. one being 'made righteous' in the eyes of God or otherwise as in the case of secular moral philosophy. I never saw this topic dealt with when I studied philosophy. In any case, the idea of justification by faith alone was revitalized by Luther in the 16th century (imho his thinking on this topic is an accurate representation of Christ's own teachings) in opposition to Catholic doctrine that righteousness is imputed through both faith and works (deeds). If we broaden our scope to monotheism in general there is Judaism that is more works-based as is Islam, I think.

Moral ethicists, last time I checked, tended to be either utilitarians, kantians, or perhaps virtue ethicists. the utilitarians or the kantians may be able to describe what makes an action good, but what about what makes a person good? maybe I missed something. In any case, I realized that these philosophies have a ~200-300 year history while monotheistic commentary exploring such questions goes back millennia.

While I found that modern secular analytic philosophy can help one think and write well, it didn't particularly help me address the 'big questions' or understand myself at all.

I agree much of the Bible is great literature and great literature may do as you suggest. It may help people to understand the human condition and live better lives. It is all about how best to live this life, and worrying about an imagined life to come after this one is not the best way. — Janus

Sure. I just go one step further: While reading it, I found some of the dialogues on certain topics e.g. disability, to be absolutely amazing to the point where I would consider it effectively "divine revelation" due to the brilliant handling of it. I was taught knowledge comes through two channels: a priori and a posteriori, but the bible reaches conclusions that don't really fall into either category yet I find myself irrevocably drawn towards. Can I definitively prove that God spoke to Moses in such a way? Of course not: I don't even know what it would mean to prove such a thing! For instance, if a booming voice from the sky spoke down to Moses does that mean it's God? Beats me. In any case, focus on the afterlife comes much later along the biblical timeline.

I disagree with this. The 'higher' animals also reason in their own ways in my opinion. You should have (provisional) faith in yourself and your convictions, while remaining open to other ideas and constantly testing them and your own ideas against your own experience. — Janus

Agree.

Reason alone tells us nothing, it must be applied to experience. For the free spirit accepting dogma is the way down, the way back, not the way up or the way forward. — Janus

Yes I spent most of my life gaining knowledge/adopting my beliefs through reason and experience.

But for the believer what is at stake is much more than a belief, but the fate of their immortal soul, which is something of absolutely momentous importance. That's what I meant by 'asymmetry', although I'm not going to go into bat for belief in God.

Theist here: It should be about more than just "getting to heaven." The bible contains unbelievably sophisticated dialogues and discourses between "God" and "man" which helps man frame and understand his world/his self. The "divine revelation" contained in the bible helps me understand myself, which extends to the world and its various phenomena. It's also just an astoundingly wise and radical work of literature to have been written in antiquity (or for any time, for that matter.)

IMHO remove those guideposts and we're in a very different type of world... human reason is very, very late to the scene, evolutionarily speaking, and as well as biased and if you rely on it for everything as the philosopher tends to do you just end up with an enormous faith in yourself and your own convictions as I've seen time and time again. Reason has its place but to say that one's entire worldview can be constructed from reason is just folly.

I don't agree with Nietzsche that Christians hate this world. — Ross Campbell

Jesus preaches against Pharisaic materialism. The emphasis of the Pharisees was on the world, or as they would have put it, balancing divine obligations with material ones. But Jesus will have none of this -- "If your right eye causes you to sin, take it out and throw it away. It is better to lose one part of your body than to have your whole body thrown into hell."

Jesus is a dualist and what is of ultimate importance is the final destination of the soul; not the health or longevity of the body. Jesus never tell his followers how to lengthen their natural lifespan or attain a stronger body, rather it is about attaining eternal life in the hereafter. Jesus dies at 33 and in a very fitting way given the message he preached.

I know that in Hebrew (and possibly Aramaic) the word for slave and servant is the same, but Christianity is 1000% servant morality: Jesus tells his followers "the greatest among you will be your servant" and he washes the feet of his disciples. The Pope does the same.

Jesus is the very encapsulation, the very essence, of servant/slave morality. IMHO the gospels usher in a moral revolution.

The Nazis used Christianity opportunistically but their inner circle were not Christian.

As stated earlier, the Japanese attack wasn't comparable to a terrorist attack. It really was a traditional military invasion. Remember that the US owned the Philippines and the Japanese invaded your colony. The US was also invaded in the Alaska. That's far off from a terrorist strike.

But sure.

The best comparable situation that comes to mind was when the Austro-Hungarian crown prince was murdered in cold blood in Sarajevo by terrorists that had relations to Serbia. Austro-Hungaria had to declare war!

Pearl harbor was a surprise attack that killed ~2600. The assassination of Franz Ferdinand was a political assassination that killed one. 10/7 was a massacre and attempted invasion that destroyed entire communities and killed ~1200 but Israel has a smaller population so when brought to scale the number is closer to Pearl Harbor numbers.

I can't liken the murder of ~1200, mostly civilians, to the death of one political leader. If Hamas wanted to go that route they could have attempted it. They could target political leaders. But they don't.

Morally speaking, 10/7 is worse than Pearl Harbor because at least Pearl Harbor was a military target. 10/7 was a much greater tragedy than the killing of a political leader, a single person representative of a political party. 10/7 was an assault on civilization and the Jews and revealed the true face of the enemy. There is absolutely zero justification -- even Jews during the Holocaust never did something comparable to German civilians (but German military was targeted) -- yet the world refuses to let Israel mourn its dead and condemns any type of retaliatory strike against such evil. The behavior of the IDF has been remarkable humane, comparably speaking.

I can see that, where will they go?

Maybe Finland could take them in. With ~5.5 million Finns and ~2.2 million Palestinians the Finns will still be in the majority so the country should be fine. Plus, once the Palestinians arrive and attain citizenship they'll be just as Finnish as the natives and it will be a beautiful melting pot of traditions and cultures.

Of course, but this is an issue everywhere. Finland is a nation of ~5.5 million, what if 6 million Muslims were to appear? The UK is currently 6.5% muslim and it's already causing massive social upheaval. In any case, countries have the inherent right to limit their immigration.

And if Hamas were to be eliminated I can assure you Israel has no intention of annexing Gaza and absorbing all of those Gazans into Israel. A one state solution is not feasible. It's just demographics. This isn't a strictly Jewish issue.

Now, does Israel try this? No. It's a homeland for the Jews and others just can fuck off. And that's why in the end it is an Apartheid system, because it has at it's core that similary hostility towards the others, similar to what the white Afrikaaners had in their system for blacks.
↪ssu
I couldn’t have put it more simply myself.
9 hours ago — Punshhh

And Greece is the homeland of the Greeks; they give special immigration privileges to those with Greek descent. Japan is the homeland of the Japanese and Spain is the homeland of the Spanish. If you are a Muslim you can go to ~50 muslim countries and they will rule the way you like. The Jews will have their little sliver of land that Jews can seek refuge in. The Jews will treat the foreigner kindly and with hospitality as their bible demands. There are thriving muslim and other communities in Israel so no, others do not need to "fuck off." Minorities occupy high positions in Israeli society and command great respect. Israel is a little enclave of Jewish culture surrounded by nations which Islam has devoured. Israel won't demand you burqa up or eat kosher either.

Some go with October 7th as the justification for "taking the gloves off" and everything else would be "appeasement" for them. — ssu

I don't think Israel is special in this regard. As an American, Pearl Harbor and 9/11 come to mind as comparable instances casualty-wise -- both of which led to "the gloves coming off." Can you cite me an instance where comparable casualties did not lead to further escalation?

Regarding the "Jewish psyche" mentioned earlier, here's Golda Meir:

“Those that perished in Hitler’s gas chambers were the last Jews to die without standing up to defend themselves.”

As I was saying the glorification of the victims of October 7th to justify ethnic cleansing and genocide. — Punshhh

Oh, I get it- the Jews should just forget about it. No memorials, put it behind them. And definitely don't retaliate against the government that did it. 10/7 was the time to calmly ask Hamas why they did it and solemnly and calmly consider their grievances so that it doesn't happen again. Ok, u/Punshhh, thank you for providing your perspective.

The only genocide here is the genocide against truth and the english language by the pro-palestinian/pro-hamas side.

You ever listen to the phone calls from the murderers on 10/7? "Hey mom, guess what? Killed 10 Jews today!" Some people deserve exactly what's coming to them.

I don't think it's tricky. Where you live and have been born and where your family has lived ought to give the right call that your home. — ssu

Ok but Jews and Palestinians both call Israel home.

The whole idea of seeking justification for this from some ancient history is wrong in my mind. It's the problem itself! — ssu

I am fine with the status quo. The Palestinian governments are not. Right wing Israeli settlers also seek to expand and these acts should be discouraged/condemned but 10/7 is in no way a justified response to settler aggression. They didn't even target settlers. Hamas was just trying to open the gates to hell and they did it.

Gaza was a prison even before Hamas. People couldn't get in an out without the permission of Israelis. And Netanyahu supported Hamas, as it was perfect for him to show that you cannot negotiate with the Palestinians. — ssu

Yes because of the intifadas Israel established these checkpoints. Before then it was easy to travel. To my understanding Netanyahu supported Hamas as a check against the PLO. I believe he tried to play them off against each other.

At some point, it all just becomes this urge for reprisal, for retribution. Hell with anything else!!! — ssu

I think what we're seeing here is the 3rd intifada and the gloves have come off. It feels like you're advocating for appeasement/negotiations but you haven't spelled it out yet. Hamas has rejected a number of a ceasefires in exchange for releasing the hostages.

(And btw, how many of decapitated babies were there actually?) — ssu

This feels like a gotcha but it really isn't. Many women were brutally raped and had their heads stamped in and pelvis bones destroyed, and the UN refused to acknowledge it. Families were burned alive hiding away in bomb shelters. I could go on. Israel could play nice, but the pro-Palestinian crowd would still hate it and say it deserved 10/7, so I say Israel should go hard. Israel has given ceasefire offers to Hamas but Hamas rejects it. You know Israel offers to release many Palestinian prisoners for every 1 Israeli hostage released and Hamas still refuses. Culture of life versus culture of death.

I once watch a video of a little Palestinian girl commenting on the IDF soldiers. She commented how they were cowardly hiding behind their tanks and taking precautions with their lives. I wish I could find the video, but she was probably like 6. Statements like this are not unusual. They are not just a one-off, but rather representative of a culture.

Well, for them every dead Hamas fighter is a martyr. In fact every killed Palestinian is a martyr. For them, Israel has just shown it's real face. — ssu

Yes, they are martyrs who go directly to Jannah (Islamic heaven as per Hamas's theology). So Israel is, in a way, is doing them a favor. If they want to be martyrs we should let them. Works out for everyone. Hamas doesn't let its own civilians use bomb shelters because it encourages this type of martyrdom and doesn't see why it needs to be interfered with.

A traumatized event leaves politicians to do something dramatic. It cannot be something of the ordinary or otherwise the leaders are seen as timid, indecisive or simply cold to the suffering of the people when the trauma hits the population. — ssu

What is the protocol when 1200 are killed, 300 kidnapped, and many other raped? As an American, it is war. Anything else is out of the question.

The obvious myth here is that somehow people that have lived ages ago somewhere before, have then more justification for the land while if people who have lived there, but haven't had a sovereign state, are somehow less justified. — ssu

It's a tricky issue who is justified to a piece of land. Were European settlers arriving in the Americas in the 1600s justified in taking land? In hindsight, the natives should have stopped them had they known what was coming. But I'm an American so I'm ultimately okay with Europeans colonizing it; worked out well for me. But if I were native american I'd likely have a different view.

So of course I believe Jews have a claim on Jerusalem/Israel. Jerusalem is the cultic center of Judaism. Do the Palestinians have a claim? I don't mind giving them Gaza; that was historically Philistine land and not Israelite land. But to claim that the entire West Bank belongs to Arab muslims to me seems excessive. I do not agree with such an idea. There has been a continuous Jewish presence in the West Bank since antiquity. Jews built and cultivated parts of it, though I am not an expert on the region.

And more over, because Zionism is a creation of the 19th Century, so actually your ideas are not so old either.

Hertzl may have reinvigorated it or invented "modern political Zionism" but Zionism is ancient as Judaism.

Jews migrated to Europe even during the Roman Empire, so they had been here for quite a while until Zionism came along (and Hitler, obviously too). — ssu

yes because they were expelled in two big waves: 70 ad and 135 ad, but jews even in the middle ages would still make aliyah, including some very famous rabbis. i don't have numbers for you, but even in those times the jewish connection to israel was never severed. there was a continuous flow of jews to israel at that time despite the perilous journey.

And overall if we generalize, this kind of thinking, that one people have more right to territory than others living there, then puts any kind of immigration and migrants to have less claim to the home they have, which at worst can be and is a form of racism. If Finns and the few thousand Sami people have lived on the same place since Antiquity, that surely doesn't mean the few people whose ancestors have migrated here later are somehow less justified to be here. Someone who has gotten citizenship should have equal rights, obviously. — ssu

I see what you're saying. Yes we should be respectful and welcoming to immigrants, generally. It really does depend on the type though, as we can see now in Europe.

These kinds of attitudes are so similar how (Putin's) Russia thinks and belittles Ukrainians and Ukraine itself. The state of Ukraine is "artificial" to them and quite in a similar way that Palestine and Palestinians "raise your eyebrows". — ssu

I'm fine with giving them Gaza as are most Israelis -- and I think most Jews would be willing to give them some of the West Bank, but this has not at all led to peace as even before 10/7 the muslims in the region sought to eat Israel. It's been a continual thing. If Ukrainians only began existing as a people in the 1960s I would be skeptical of them as well. It's not the same thing though. Their roots go back much further.

The name "Palestine" was also used by the Romans to de-Judaize the land after they expelled the Jews and destroyed the temple in 70 AD. So yes the "Palestinians" pick up a deliberately obnoxious term and designate themselves an entirely new people in the 1960s. Arabs definitely have history in the region; palestinian history apparently begins in the 1960s and population has caused an enormous amount of problems both for its arab neighbors and israel.

I think it's quite apt in this occasion. — ssu

IMHO as long as Hamas, a totalitarian regime, controls Gaza -- Gaza will be a prison for the palestinians.

"I am no fan of Hitler but he perpetrated the Holocaust for obvious reasons." - senior Palestinian official Abu Sido of Fatah, the moderate party.

+30,000 Palestinian noncombatants killed — 180 Proof

False. Gazan figures do not distinguish between civilian and fighter.

400,000 muslims dead in yemen. 500k-1 mil dead by assad. 1 mil muslims in concentration camps in china. much greater muslim suffering across the world, but how dare 1 jewish missile inadvertently kill a palestinian child in a home where weapons are stored and there's mass protests and synagogue burnings. palestinians are sacred victims. how dare those jews do that!

Now I'm even more confused. You do realize that we have been around as an independent state only from 1917, so I really don't know what you are talking about. — ssu

Ok, perhaps I remembered incorrectly, but I do recall you bringing up an instance where Finland was on the defensive, and in gaining victory gained a little more territory from the aggressor. If there is no such instance it is not important, as it is a common historical pattern - a country wins a war and gains territory.

The typical racism that jingoists use. Reminds me of the Serbs and their fixation with Kosovo Polje and how important for Putin is ancient Rus being the craddle of Russia, hence Ukraine and the Ukrainians are so artificial. It always starts from despising the other and questioning their overall existence and mythologization of one's own past.

But seriously, what has happened to Palestinian burial grounds? — ssu

No, racism, no mythology, only the facts from me:

If you'd like to disregard Genesis as myth that's fine. Archeology has clearly uncovered Hebrew/Israelite burial grounds from the ~6-7th century BC w/ inscriptions of the Torah. Israel has their ancient burial grounds.

"Palestine" has always described a geographic location. It did not become a people until the 1960s. So yes that will raise eyebrows. "Palestinians" are a people without a history, at least not one that extends back further than the 1960s. They are a recent invention.

...and then continued the open air prison of Gaza by closing the land and sea borders and had the occasional bombing of the place. That just now has hit a new crescendo. — ssu

With the support of Egypt. The Arab countries don't want them in either due to their history. Whether "prison" is an appropriate term is debatable. Gazans can certainly get out of Gaza and there are beautiful homes there. Ultimately, no one really trusts them with their borders... and who would? I'm sorry, but national security comes first. Tons of aid has come to Gaza. By letting them control their own border and imports that creates a serious national security threat. It's not just Israel -- none of their neighbors want them having unfettered access to their borders where they'll be able to import whatever.

I think the reason is that they formed a country called Israel and usually the citizens of that country are refered to being Israelis. The Jewish homeland and all that, remember? — ssu

States are relatively recent inventions in the near east. We keep the discussion simpler by just referring to Jews, Christians, and Muslims. "Palestine" was the name of a land, not a people... until the 1960s when it was adopted by a certain group.

On the contrary, that state of Palestine is a non-exist is quite true. There's Israel and it's occupied territories. — ssu

Israel unilaterally withdrew from Gaza in 2005.

The idea that Israel ought to surrender the entire WB is absurd and takes zero consideration of the history and development of the region. Israel has shown a willingness to negotiate for much of it though.

Jews are indigenous to the region with our texts and archaeology finding e.g. ancient burial grounds all around the area, including a very famous one in Hebron that is described in Genesis as a burial plot purchased by Abraham (~early 2nd millennium BC) where the 4 patriarchs (Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph) are buried. Jesus was born in Bethlehem, in Judea, in the WB. So much history there.

Where are the ancient Palestinian burial plots? Where is there anything that is ancient Palestinian? Jews are the indigenous; Palestinian muslims are the late coming colonizers. Israel will negotiate for the WB (and has offered ~98% of it in exchange for peace), but for the world to tell them that they must withdraw from all of it is absurd. There are 22 muslim countries and 1 Jewish one in the international community, of course they rule against Israel. I-P is the main front in the West versus Islam conflict. That's really what it's about.

I don't hate the Muslims, for the record. They claim to have new revelation and it must be frustrating for them knowing that they have word from God and those stiff necked Jews just won't listen.

What land have we gotten from Russia? I'm confused. — ssu

IIRC you mentioned a historical instance where Finland won a war (against Russia?) and as a result won a bit of land from the aggressor.

t's the same as the "death cult" statements we've seen attributed to Palestinians here because schopenhauer made an observation some time about the Quran. — Benkei

I understand that the history, culture, and religion of a region don't matter to you. What matters is international law and whether it's being followed. And if not according to your view, well then I guess murder is a totally legitimate response. No morality, only law.

80 years ago Jews were stateless, had no rights, and were thus legal to murder. The holocaust was entirely legal so what was wrong with it? or does only international law have that perfect, inviolable character? Why?

Why doesn't the UN go tell Finland to return the land it won from Russia? Or the countless other parcels of land won in war?

Even if 50% or 70% isn't 84%, the idea that Hamas has built in more than 50% of housing a military positions is simply outrageously ludicrous. It simply isn't the case. — ssu

An IDF spokesperson writes in the Wall Street Journal that their military has 'discovered that most homes in Gaza have terror tunnels underneath or weapon caches inside, and the majority of schools, mosques, hospitals and international institutions have been used by Hamas for their military operations.'

Their entire society has been militarized. Then their government starts a war by killing 1200 taking heads and body parts as war trophies, but Israel is called to restrain itself. After all, the indigenous Palestinian population has suffered enough!

Calling them "Palestinians" has to be the greatest psy-op in history. Why are Jews never referred to as Palestinians? There have been Jews living in that region continuously since antiquity. But no, Palestinians are not Jews. They're indigenous to a magical, non-existent land known as "Palestine." None of it makes any sense.

It's just Jews versus the regional Arab Muslims, but more specifically their wicked government. Razing a village could be "genocide" if the inhabitants of that village are designated as their own group.

Would raping, kidnapping, torturing, and murdering white south african civilians under apartheid be justified resistance? What it comes down to is conventional (Judeo-Christian) morality versus this idea of "by any means necessary" which identifies and judges individuals and actions through the lens of group membership.

Violence against X group is justified; violence against Y is not. All members of X are the oppressor group; Y is the oppressed. It's nothing new. But it is sociopathic.

Keep up the good work of defending genocidal rapists, torturers, and murderers. :up:

Hamas uses children in its armed forces. Even if Israel were to only kill Hamas, children would die.

Hey Mikie, why doesn't Hamas stop the fighting? I think they could do it. Do you think they could do it? It might have been nice if they didn't start the fighting, but that's just a fait accompli. — tim wood

:100:

Hamas could stop the fighting if they choose to release the ~150 people they've stolen from Israel.

But Mikie, the victor kills thousands of children

Emotion and pity is not an argument. I could argue like you, it's not hard: "How could you ever go to war and kill people? OMGGG genocide and child murder."

And of course the victor is always in the wrong because, well, he's the victor and inflicts more casualties.

America killed many more Japanese children in WWII. By virtue of simply choosing to go to war with Japan we guaranteed the deaths of thousands of Japanese children. Japan would recruit as young as 15, similar to Hamas.

Fighting the Germans, too, meant sometimes fighting and killing children.

And of course if we wish to avoid all child casualties then it would be child murder to attack the Houthis. :roll:

It seems you don't like Israel because Israel is winning. :chin:

If it were the other way then what? Would you like Israel more? The weaker side gets your support then.

You make interesting points. I'll address two: humanitarianism in war and your point about Gaza as "evil."

Regarding humanitarianism I would tend to agree, and Israel has actually fought this war fairly humanely. John Spencer, who holds a faculty chair position at West Point, concluded:

"Israel has painstakingly followed the laws of armed conflict and implemented many steps to prevent civilian casualties, despite enormous challenges.

Israel's military faced over 30,000 Hamas militants in over 400 miles of defensive and offensive tunnels embedded in and under civilian areas, populations and protected sites such as hospitals, mosques, schools, and United Nations facilities across multiple cities."

Additionally, Israel has not cut out aid for the palestinians. Israel regularly allows in many aid trucks despite Israeli protestors who object that this aid just goes to Hamas (and much of it does as we have video of Hamas stealing it and Palestinian civilians have started demonstrating against Hamas.)

Hamas does have bomb shelters, but Palestinian civilians are not allowed in these bomb shelters. They are for the safety of Hamas fighters. It is also to my understanding that Israel has turned back on the water pipes, although it is strange notion that Gaza is apparently so reliant on Israel for water. Water is not hard to provide for a population. Hamas did ban Palestinian civilians from digging wells however.... In any case, Israel lets in aid despite protesters and very well knowing that much of it ends up in the hands of Hamas.

Regarding winning "hearts and minds" -- sure, but I wouldn't expect too much. Polls show 85% of Palestinians support Hamas's actions on 10/7 so numbers are discouraging, but yes Israel ought to persist and fight humanely as it has done. ~300,000 Iraqi civilians died in Iraq, much less have died in Gaza. Spencer argues it is ill-advised to compare Israel to other modern conflicts:

https://www.newsweek.com/memo-experts-stop-comparing-israels-war-gaza-anything-it-has-no-precedent-opinion-1868891

Regarding Gaza as wicked

I know you will not admit it, but Israel simply wants revenge and the current administration milks that revenge. Gaza is the evil city. They are human animals. They elected Hamas (years ago) so they surely aren't innocent. All this dehumanization works wonders if you want to satisfy the emotions of a people traumatized by October 7th, but it won't help you in the long term. But who cares about that!

Revenge, sure, but also the hostages who are being sexually and physically abused by a government which has the widespread support of the population. But not every palestinian is wicked. Politicians such as Ben Gvir will push the hard right line, but there is also the opposition in the Knesset which includes arab muslims and there was recently a blow up between Ben Gvir and that side. Israel is under unity government. The Knesset represents all stripes of Israel and there is a hard right in every nation.

I don't deny such notions exist. We're only human after all. I have no idea what the post-war order will look like, only that a military response towards Hamas is justified. A ruling body cannot murder, torture, and rape the citizens of another nation and not expect to be hit back. It is time to cleanse the evil that is Hamas. And a return of this evil is not inevitable, at least on the scale it is now.

So no, it won't go that way here as it went with Germany (and Japan) after WW2. Just as Iraq didn't go as Germany. Or Afghanistan. — ssu

How exactly do you want Israel to respond to 10/7? Are they to scurry off to the UN and demand a resolution against Hamas? Is Israel to first gain permission from the UN before it can defend itself?

It will just show how incapable the Arabs are of anything, right? — ssu

Yet Arabs are capable of making peace with Israel. Given that, the Palestinians should be as well (as the Palestinians are really Arabs, the rebranding can be traced to the 1960s for propaganda purposes). But no Palestinian leader would deign to do so, hence a regime change is needed.

I'm sure that similarly the West German response would have been different if you would have based the occupation on that Germany and the Germans are a death cult — ssu

Nazism is a death cult as is the Islamism of Hamas. Ideological deprogramming must occur in both cases. Ideas may be eternal, but the minds that hold them -- lodged in skulls -- are far from eternal.

Special pleading.

A low level of anti-semitism is endemic in Western countries. It’s a hang over from the last few hundred years of persecution and prejudice against them.

If it weren’t there and Isreal were conducting the same actions against the Palestinians there would still be the same level of outrage across the globe. Outrage at a so called civilised country, a Western country confining a population and then starving them to death and bombing indiscriminately. — Punshhh

A low level which has now exploded back to 1930s levels and targets all Jews worldwide.

I don't think so. The hate extends far past the Israeli government. It extends to all Israelis as we've seen in the rape denials and hostage posters being torn down and extends past that to world Jewry. I've never heard of hostage posters of other nations being torn down.

Bombs indiscriminately? I'm sure you're intricately familiar with the IDF's targeting procedures. Surely you've spent some time in their command centers to make that judgment (I actually have worked in one, but not Israel's). The IDF has been quite precise actually and maintained a quite good civilian to terrorist death ratio, comparatively speaking.

Hamas steals their aid by the way. The Palestinians have started protesting/rioting against them. Their own Arab cohorts are starting speaking out against them. It could all be over if Hamas returns the people they stole. And those who do return speak of grievous sexual assault. Sometimes evil just needs to eliminated.

Can we please steer away with a very wide birth from the "psyche" of a group of people? Smells too close to racism to me. Cultural and material conditions have caused both sides to have a majority of people that can drink the other sides blood. That is a consequence of a decades long (rather one sided) conflict but little to do with "psyche". After WWII my grandfather-in-law hated Germans for the rest of his life - that was only 5 years of conflict. — Benkei

Not racism, religious difference. Schopenhauer described the Quran as containing a "remarkable contempt for death" as opposed to Judaism, the oldest of the Abrahamics, which has more time to develop/moderate and contains much less eschatology than Islam. In that sense, we can speak of different "psyches" -- not due to race, but by religious/cultural upbringing. According to the Pew Research Center, 85% of Muslims in the Palestinian Territories say religion is very important in their lives.

And note, IDF cannot surely beat the movement called Hamas, but present military units of Hamas the can take out or degrade to a point that they can say to the Israeli public that Hamas isn't a threat. And that's it. That's the objective. Same is for Hezbollah they have a huge stockpile of rockets, so the issue is to destroy the existing capability. — ssu

What if I were to say, "the US and Britain surely cannot beat the movement called Nazism, but only their present military units"... I suppose I would be technically right also but not making much of a point. Nazis do still exist.

Hopefully Israel won't need to "mow the grass" in another decade or two if real, systemic changes can be made and if the Rafah campaign is successful. Several military commentators, including ones from West Point, have commented that Israel is conducting this war quite humanely with less than a 2:1 civilian to terrorist ratio.

Isreal and Bibi react. Then think about tomorrow. 'The distant future' is not on their minds. — ssu

I can't think of another country that doesn't respond similarly when 1200 of its own are slaughtered and ~300 taken hostage. What are we negotiating about??? What's the response? Embargo Hamas? Write them a strongly worded letter from the UN demonstrating international condemnation and a promise to restart the peace process? There is no peace process with Hamas in charge. Or the PA, for that matter. Israel is to be made Muslim according to them.

Another point I thought of regarding anti-semitism: Could you think of another country whose hostage posters would be torn down if its citizens were kidnapped by another group? I struggle to think of one. Israel is regarded as the nexus of worldly evil for so much of the world, especially on college campuses and among the youth. It's disturbing.

Moreover, why are so many of the pro-Palestinian protests violent and destructive while in the pro-Israel ones I've never heard of any vandalism and everyone's sitting around singing "HaTikvah." The difference in "culture" between the two groups is stunning. The Palestinian crowd disturbs cancer wards with their bullhorns. It's self-righteous psychopathy. Extremely dangerous.

Prussia was abolished in 1947, deemed a "bearer of militarism and reaction" by the Allies. Could this be genocide? Genocide of the focal point of German militarism?

The displacement and destruction of an entire regional culture or people is genocide. — Benkei

Do you think a culture can ever be so wicked that it deserves to be destroyed?

So just what you earlier said means that if the IRA had killed 1200, then you would have been totally OK with air strikes! — ssu

You can compare Israel-Palestine to the IRA conflict and I can compare it to Nazism. After all, 1200 is a number reminiscent of early Nazi massacres c. 1941. The reason Israel isn't in more danger is because Israel and Egypt control Gaza's borders and monitor them for weapons.

I'm not hugely familiar with the IRA conflict. If 1200 were killed in the attempt on Thatcher's life in the 1980s with 3/4 being civilians and many rapes occurring and hundreds of Protestants taken hostage in brutal conditions, would the Irish be out on the streets cheering in mass? Beats me. Not my neck of the woods. Would we have seen the Irish beating these hostages as they were paraded down the streets of Northern Ireland because they were English-Protestant? Time to bring back Cromwell I'd be thinking if I were English.

Israel does not bomb neighborhoods because the residents are sympathetic to Hamas; it bombs them because they contain military infrastructure. If Israel bombed a populace because it supported Hamas, virtually all of Gaza would be leveled.

Do you understand that your response can be the intent of the perpetrator? — ssu

Yes. Hamas intended to open the gates of hell on 10/7. I'm sure Japan knew that war would begin on Dec 7 1941. But one ever really argued that bombing Nazi Germany or Japan would just lead to more Nazis or Imperial Japanese. Perhaps the reprisals against those two nations initially did strengthen their resolve?

Do note what Maggie did after the actual bombing: she continued the conference and declared: ""this attack has failed. All attempts to destroy democracy by terrorism will fail." — ssu

The world would have been in a very different place if the IRA had managed to kill ~1200 British in one day, including the Prime Minister... but we enter into thought experiments here.

Just shows how absolutely crazy these "anti-racism" racists are. But naturally there's no logic to these stupidities, it is only a matter of convenience what the present hated or feared group is by the haters, be they the Jews, the Irish, the Muslims, the Japanese, the Chinese, whoever and whatever. — ssu

Some of these groups are nationalities, others are religions -- can one not question an ideology? Or should we just immediately accept it if it's a religion? I'm wary of any religion which seeks to convert the world to its creed.

And that makes my point that religious zealots have hijacked the situation on both sides. — ssu

I'm no expert on Israeli politics, but Netanyahu, while certainly right wing, does not strike me as a religious extremist. I would question his level of observance/religious outlook and I do not group him in with e.g Kach although I understand the relationship between the two groups is nuanced and do share some common goals.

That rise only shows the failure of "Mr. Security", prime minister Netanyahu. Because to assume that people like Ben Gvir will fix the problem is simply delusional. — ssu

What I was saying was if it is true that Palestinians working at these kibbutzim aided Hamas in the 10/7 attacks then that lends credence to Ben Gvir's (and his party, which is the ideological successor of Kach -- Meir Kahane's party; the true far right of Israeli politics) notion of the Arab muslims as a fifth column that clearly threatens the democratic health of the state. It's unfortunate. Israel can attempt to integrate. There are muslim judges and muslims who hold respectable posts in the IDF, but Israel is still a new state and these religious differences are deeply entrenched.

Yep, guess what the response would have been by the IRA? You think they would have less volunteers?

I dislike comparisons between the IRA conflict with Britain and the Israel-Palestine conflict. When 1200 are murdered I'm fine with shelling. I'm fine with air strikes.

Catholics and Protestants are the same religion. Jews and Muslims (Jews and muslims almost surely have more in common than Jews and Christians, theologically) are not -- especially the fundamentalism of Hamas that seeps through the society through every institution. Islam (especially fundamentalist Islam), imho, manages to combine the most dangerous, potent elements of Judaism and Christianity and does so as the youngest of the bunch having undergone the least amount of reform.

I'd be more sympathetic to the IRA/UK comparison if the IRA wanted to capture all of the UK, establish hardline Catholic rule and subjugate the Protestants.

Bibi needs his coalition partners, who actually are quite close to Meir Kahane. That's the problem here. They really are former terrorists... or terrorists that got free and to positions to further their agenda now. — ssu

For sure people like Ben Gvir are right-wing extremists.

Many if not most of the kibbutzim that Hamas attacked on 10/7 were some of the most left-leaning, pro-integrationist settlements in Israel. They would employ Palestinians, drive them to hospitals, etc. It was those Palestinians who gave Hamas the intel it needed to successfully attack. And we wonder why people like Ben Gvir rise to power.

Personally I don't have anything against Jews or Israeli Jews. I've met few, they were very smart people and actually didn't like how politics were going in their country, but naturally were very patriotic. Yes, the truth is that those lunatics dancing around in meetings and purposing new settlements in Gaza with the "voluntary removal" of Palestinians won't create empathy for the Jewish cause.

Yes, it will also increase anti-semitism as there are those that are prone to hate all people of certain group for the actions of either governments or some people (like terrorists). Hatred of Russians is another perfect example of this. But many Russians here were shocked by what Putin had done when attacking Ukraine. Hence I'm not going to for example ban Russian restaurants... they don't have President Putin's photo or the orange-black colours or "Z" up on their walls.

And what "Canary in the coal mine" are you talking about? — ssu

It's more than that, at least in the US. I don't know how things are in Finland. Plenty of countries have right wing leadership and are involved with land disputes with other countries. Yet we don't hear about those, Somalia for instance. Today 19 students from Brown decided to go on hunger strike for Gaza. We're seeing roads get blocked and airports blocked off by protesters for Palestine. IIRC there's been like an 800% in antisemitic incidents or attacks quarterly... city council meetings in California where blood libels about israel stealing palestinian organs are mentioned. numerous violent protests against the police here in the US and across the world far exceeding anything we saw opposing Russia. Public figures such as politicians and CEOs who support Israel are harassed in public and their private events crashed by screaming protesters who have begun hiring their own security services (yellow armbands.) Synagogues faced with bomb threats and graffiti here in the US.

Federal investigations have opened against schools, IIRC, in New York and California for preaching antisemitism. DEI has ignored Jews for decades, portraying them as white oppressors. Dozens of Jewish families have withdrawn their children from these areas. I could go on about this. Check out the Ami Horowitz video where he goes to a college in San Francisco:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nbm4mao4-k0

Much of it occurs in educated cities, liberal areas. By "canary in the coalmine" I see it as an early sign of things to come especially if this remains unchecked.