Hamas Attacks Against Israel

[Fergasun]

The former Bucs QB?  I am so confused why he'd be involved....

[Fergasun]

Social media giving me a headache.  Apparently, no one is able to express any sympathy/empathy for the 97.5% of Gaza residents who aren't in Hamas without being an antisemite. 
 

I understand the need to root out Hamas, just like al Qeada.  How is killing 10, 20, or 30 thousand Palestinians not going to be a horrible consequence to avenge athe October 7 terror attacks.  

 

As an American who felt our response to 9/11 was 100% justified as far as Afghanistan went, my stance is dripping with hypocrisy.  I even saw most Americans now no longer support Afghanistan. 

 

At the same time, watching people in London march and chant true anti-semetic chants is also unnerving as heck.  A synagogue president was just murdered in Detroit. 

 

Both sides are convinced the other will, or is in the process of genociding them.  

[Larry]

34 minutes ago, Fergasun said:

 

Both sides are convinced the other will, or is in the process of genociding them.  

 

True. But then, so are probably half of the MAGAs. 

[Barry.Randolphe]

2 hours ago, Fergasun said:

At the same time, watching people in London march and chant true anti-semetic chants is also unnerving as heck.  A synagogue president was just murdered in Detroit. 

 

 

What's being chanted in London? I haven't seen this

[ixcuincle]

[Fergasun]

2 hours ago, Barry.Randolphe said:

 

What's being chanted in London? I haven't seen this

"From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free..."

 

This chant can be understood as a call for a Palestinian state extending from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea, territory that includes the State of Israel, implying the dismantling of the Jewish state. Indeed, this rallying cry has long been used by the anti-Israel terrorist organizations such as Hamas and the PFLP, which seek Israel’s destruction through violent means.

[Renegade7]

 

 

 

6 hours ago, Fergasun said:

Social media giving me a headache. 

 

The number of comments made on social media are dominated by a fraction of the people using it, which is still just a fraction of the overall population.

 

Here in the States, it feels like we're practically begging left-wing politicians to stop being afraid of left-wing Twitter like they are the true voice of their constituency...its because they aren't, but are still so loud and visible folks are still learning how to view it without ignoring it.

 

That's different to me then what happened to the Rohingya...case can be made social media was turning into a vicious cycle of cultivating the hatred necessary for their damn near genocide and push from their country...to point it's hard to say if social media was merely the tip of the iceberg of how bad it really was.  I personally don't believe it would've gotten that bad without social media, they've been there for a while prior to it.

 

I don't live there, I live here, and most people I talk outside of social media to aren't taking stances that amount to looking for attention when the topic of whats going on in Israel comes up.  I don't believe the number of people that genuinely want the worst to happen from this situation in Gaza outnumber folks that want to see the best.

 

It only takes one to walk into someone's house and stab a kid 6 times,  but that doesn't speak to all of anyone.  That bothers me more then huge segments of the population with opinions either way on this matter, it's these select individuals planning to take stuff in their own hands that are borderline detach from reality in the first place to be able to do something like that.

 

It's more frustrating to me when I see stuff like that because we either didn't see it coming (in that stabbing case the mom said she didn't) or we find out some people did (nearly every mass shooter has a friend that knew they were going in this direction only after it happens), and this is not limited to violence directly related to what's happening in Gaza right now.  We are in a weird place right now of how to stay ahead of folks who mean what they say online and where that falls into staying a free country.

 

What helps me sleep it night is believing this is a minority of our population, not a majority.  We've always had crazies that will take it there hiding in the shadows of people that are typically just talk.  That talk potentially being their fuel is the real paradox that social media companies have given up on in the name of making money off it. 

 

Efforts to address that are being framed as effort to limit free speech, but we've already established limits in a country that prides itself on protecting it. You can't yell fire in a crowded theater or openly say you plan to kill the president, nor do we have the right to lie in court, that's called purgery.

 

This shpeel is brought to you by the reality of what you're describing is a symptom of a larger problem not just limited to issues like what's going on in Gaza, and will be here after whatever happens in Gaza next is over. 

 

Thankfully, I don't believe Biden is basing his decisions on how to address the potential invasion of Gaza on what he reads on social media, or worse seeking it's approval.  Sametime our courts are getting in the way of him trying to slow down social medias impact on the conversation and how it can bleed into our lives via actual violence, not jus talk. 

 

Elections matter.

[ixcuincle]

Humanitarian aid enters Gaza as Egypt opens border crossing https://www.cbsnews.com/news/israel-gaza-humanitarian-aid-rafah-crossing-egypt/

[ixcuincle]

 

 

[Cooked Crack]

 

[ixcuincle]

 

 

 

[The Sisko]

Just like U.S. Tя☭mp, Israeli Tя☭mp needs to be in a jail cell. This totally jibes with my first post in this thread.

 

Quote

Benjamin Netanyahu failed Israel

We can now be sure: His policy of repressing Palestinians doesn’t make Israelis safe.

 

In the past 24 hours, two reports out of Israel have pointed to a striking conclusion: that the failure to prevent Hamas’s murderous assault on southern Israel rests in significant part with the government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

 

First, the Washington Post’s Noga Tarnopolsky and Shira Rubin wrote a lengthy dispatch on the many policy failures that allowed Hamas to break through. They find that, in addition to myriad unforgivable intelligence and military mistakes — especially shocking given Israel’s reputation in both fields — there were serious political problems. Distracted by both the fight to seize control over Israel’s judiciary and their effort to deepen Israeli occupation of the West Bank, Netanyahu and his cabinet allowed military readiness to degrade and left outposts on the Gaza border in the south unmanned.

 

“There was a need for more soldiers, so where did they take them from? From the Gaza border, where they thought it was calm ... not surprising that Hamas and Islamic Jihad noticed the low staffing at the border,” Aharon Zeevi Farkash, the former head of the Israel Defense Forces’ military intelligence, said in comments reported by the Post.

 

Second, a columnist at Israel’s Ha’aretz newspaper unearthed evidence that Netanyahu has intentionally propped up Hamas rule in Gaza — seeing Palestinian extremism as a bulwark against a two-state solution to the conflict.

 

“Anyone who wants to thwart the establishment of a Palestinian state has to support bolstering Hamas and transferring money to Hamas,” the prime minister reportedly said at a 2019 meeting of his Likud party. “This is part of our strategy — to isolate the Palestinians in Gaza from the Palestinians in the West Bank.”

 

These exact comments have not yet been confirmed by other sources. But the Times of Israel’s Tal Schneider wrote on Sunday that Netanyahu’s reported words “are in line with the policy that he implemented,” which did little to challenge and in some ways bolstered Hamas’s control over the Gaza Strip. Moreover, Schneider notes, “the same messaging was repeated by right-wing commentators, who may have received briefings on the matter or talked to Likud higher-ups and understood the message.” Some Netanyahu confidants have said the same thing, as have outside experts.

 

Put together, these two pieces tell a larger story: that the strategic vision of Netanyahu’s far-right government is a failure.

The notion that Israel can deliver security for its citizens by dividing and conquering Palestinians, crushing them into submission as a kind of colonial overlord, is both immoral and counterproductive on its own terms. Recognizing this reality will be crucial to formulating not only a humane response to Hamas’s atrocity, but an effective one...

Edited October 23, 2023 by The Sisko

[CousinsCowgirl84]

2 hours ago, Cooked Crack said:

 

Netanyahu is dangerous leader, but I don’t think the fact that Israelis are rallying around their military is a good sign for peace. From what has been reported, the IDF wants to start the ground invasion now and it is the political faction (Netanyahu) who wants to delay.

[Spearfeather]

 

 

How many more ?

 

How many more Israelis. 

How many more Jews, Ilhan ?

 

How many more Palestinians  ?

Would that include Hamas ?

 

[The Sisko]

1 hour ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

Netanyahu is dangerous leader, but I don’t think the fact that Israelis are rallying around their military is a good sign for peace. From what has been reported, the IDF wants to start the ground invasion now and it is the political faction (Netanyahu) who wants to delay.

I think even Netanyahu knows, an IDF ground invasion is a losing proposition. Gallant says it would be over in a month or two. Assuming he's not just talking about a limited incursion to kill a few Hamas leaders, that's nonsense, and everyone knows it. I think Hamas is counting on them coming in so they can chew up as many IDF soldiers as possible. In the end, Israel will be able to kill a lot of Hamas fighters. However, for every one they kill, they'll create two more. Before too long, it'll be a quagmire, and Israel will pull out, leaving Hamas 2.0 in place.

[tshile]

Just now, The Sisko said:

I think even Netanyahu knows, an IDF ground invasion is a losing proposition. Gallant says it would be over in a month or two. Assuming he's not just talking about a limited incursion to kill a few Hamas leaders, that's nonsense, and everyone knows it. I think Hamas is counting on them coming in so they can chew up as many IDF soldiers as possible. In the end, Israel will be able to kill a lot of Hamas fighters. However, for every one they kill, they'll create two more. Before too long, it'll be a quagmire, and Israel will pull out, leaving Hamas 2.0 in place.

or they’ll annex the land and remove the people and let Israelis settle the newly acquired land. 

Not to mention West Bank will be done for. I don’t think they even stand a chance of being difficult compared to Gaza. But I’m just guessing based on the very different ways the population is laid out 

But I do agree - if Israel’s plan is to go on there and weed out the terrorists… that’s a failure before it begins. 
 

that doesn’t work in these areas… it just doesn’t. You either take total control and conquer, or shell it until you grow bored and wait for the next time they give you a reason to shell them again. 

[tshile]

So the NYT issued a lengthy apologize for how they covered the breaking news of the hospital attack. 
 

 

which. Great. You said you’re sorry. 
 

but the damage was done the instant you decided to cover it that way. Apologizing and retracting it later does nothing to help with that. 
 

none of them have the journalistic standards in place to prevent this sort of screw up. 
 

instead they just depend on saying sorry later. 

[TheGreatBuzz]

GO NAVY!!!

 

They used a gun to shoot that **** down.  Hahahaha.

 

 

 

 

[CousinsCowgirl84]

4 hours ago, tshile said:

So the NYT issued a lengthy apologize for how they covered the breaking news of the hospital attack. 
 

 

which. Great. You said you’re sorry. 
 

but the damage was done the instant you decided to cover it that way. Apologizing and retracting it later does nothing to help with that. 
 

none of them have the journalistic standards in place to prevent this sort of screw up. 
 

instead they just depend on saying sorry later. 

The media isn’t getting it right still. Most of the article are like Israel says or “what our analysis discover about the hospital attack” instead of just the facts “errant Hamas missile kills hundreds”

[Gurgeh]

5 hours ago, tshile said:

or they’ll annex the land and remove the people and let Israelis settle the newly acquired land. 

Not to mention West Bank will be done for. I don’t think they even stand a chance of being difficult compared to Gaza. But I’m just guessing based on the very different ways the population is laid out 

But I do agree - if Israel’s plan is to go on there and weed out the terrorists… that’s a failure before it begins. 
 

that doesn’t work in these areas… it just doesn’t. You either take total control and conquer, or shell it until you grow bored and wait for the next time they give you a reason to shell them again. 

 

Moving the whole population of Gaza doesn't seem feasible, no-one will take them in, certainly not Egypt, and would likely trigger a very dangerous war if it was tried.

 

They'll likely just do as much damage as they can to Hamas and the other smaller groups, declare the job done and leave the Palestinians to a wretched existence amongst the rubble. Which, as you say, just buys Israel a short time until the next generation of terrorists is ready and the never ending cycle of vengeance continues on. This is only going to stop when all the state backers of those involved decide they've had enough, which seems a depressingly long way in the future.

[Larry]

I keep trying to come up with some kind of fictional resolution to this, that's maybe slightly believable, as an "endgame".  

 

Only resolution I can see, that isn't laughably impossible, is:  

 

* A two-state solution.  

* Probably with the 67 borders.  

* Palestine becomes a fully recognized country.  

* But under US occupation (and protection).  At least for a while.  

 

The US would provide them with a LOAD of foreign aid.  Help them rebuild.  Give them reliable infrastructure.  Help them start growing an economy.  

 

And would provide them with protection.  

 

But, would also insist on things like inspecting all foreign commerce.  Inspecting for weapons.  

 

Palestine would get non-weapon things.  (Something which, I understand, Israel often blocks, for numerous reasons.)  But, for obvious reasons, somebody needs to be checking for weapons.  At least for a while.  Maybe a few decades?  We'd try to give them an economy.  Utilities and hospitals.  

 

Yeah, I can see why people will say that this idea is laughably unrealistic, too.  

 

For example, no way Israel agrees to it, without a really big US gun pointed at their heads.  

And I can easily see why the Palestinians would have a problem with trading one occupier for another.  Especially the US.  

And we all know that if we try it, there will be terrorist attacks, against Americans.  

 

But.  I don't see anybody else who could do it.  

 

I think that the same factors that make us appear to be incredibly partisan, in this fight, also make us the only country in a position to maybe do it.  

[CousinsCowgirl84]

US occupation of Palestine? Sounds like a horrible idea. If we were going to entertain a peacekeeping force it would need to be from countries like Qatar, and Saudi Arabia, otherwise it just turn into what it is now, except now terrorists would be taking shots at American troops. Israel isn’t going to trust those those countries enough to be able to insure no weapons are being smuggled. But I wouldn’t entertain it.
 

Until Israel wants a Palestinian state there won’t be one. The United States has guaranteed Israel little risk regarding this war they are embarking on. There won’t be a reason for them to want a Palestinian state in our lifetime.

 

A bunch of people will die then it will go back to the status quo. 
 

There is also a chance (smallish) the thing will blow up into a huge conflict where we are trying to demilitarize Iran and other countries come to Irans aid. 
 

but I highly doubt this thing ends with a Palestinian state. That really would be a huge win for Iran and Hamas.
 

Edited October 24, 2023 by CousinsCowgirl84

[Cooked Crack]

 

[Renegade7]

@Cooked Crack I was just coming to post this, dude...

 

Sounds like US is also trying to convince IDF not to jump headfirst into a pool they don't really know the depth of. 

 

Combining this with the article posted earlier about how badly Hamas had figured them out and caught them off guard comes across like goading them into an invasion they aren't really ready for.

 

That article mentioned the lessons learned between Fallujah and Mosel, two totally different ways of conducting urbanware that still requires a realistic end goal.  Just going in to kick ass is exactly what Hamas wants...

 

 

[ixcuincle]

lot of bots tagging and spamming instagram with pro Palestinian comments. watch out !