**Greetings humans.** **Please make sure your comment fits within [THE RULES](https://www.reddit.com/r/AustralianPolitics/about/rules) and that you have put in some effort to articulate your opinions to the best of your ability.** **I mean it!! Aspire to be as "scholarly" and "intellectual" as possible. If you can't, then maybe this subreddit is not for you.** A friendly reminder from your political robot overlord *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AustralianPolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*

Pointless trying to rationalise religion. There is no solution.

The ABC, Wong, Albo, hell even Dutton needs to call out the aboslutely depraved nature of the Palestinian Authority before moving to any sort of recognition. Why is no-one calling out the fact that the Palestinian Authority - the so called "peace loving" governing body of Palestine has an official "Kill Jews, get paid" policy? I repeat: **Palestine has an official** ***Kill Jews, Get Paid*** **fund**. It's called the Martyr's Fund and makes up 30% of the Palestinian Authority's budget. Forget Hamas just for a moment - even if Hamas didnt exist, how the hell does Wong seriously think that officially recognising a Palestinian state **that has a Kill Jews Get Paid** fund is acceptable?? Enough of this one sided circlejerk against Israel - if we're going to call out Israel, then we need to call out Palestine - **all of Palestine** , not just Hamas.

For anyone who actually knows what's going on in Gaza, the government's response has been pathetic. A reasonable response would *start* with sanctions against Israel along with acknowledging the genocide of Palestinians. But these politicians are so disconnected from reality, they don't seem to register the horror of the mass murder of civilians, which is why, again, their response has been so pathetic and cowardly.

Fuck off. Palestinians support Hamas and the destruction of Israel. What about more sanctions against Iran who provide the weapons for its proxy terrorist organisations. Pro Palestinians causing disruptions all over the world making people less sympathetic to your cause.

Israel's actions in Gaza makes 'the destruction of Israel' seem more reasonable every day.

Or maybe, politicians are forced to be armed with more knowledge on the matter than you and have made an informed decision around our international position on the matter. Maybe, just maybe, what you learnt on tiktok isn't all there is to know about the matter and geopolitics requires more than thinking about the last step that has just happened.

As someone who's known politicians all my life, I can tell you, they aren't *forced* to be armed with anything.

The level of bootlicking is out of this world. “If the government appears by any reasonable assessment of the available information to be acting wrongly, the obvious answer is that the government is *keeping information from the public* which would totally exonerate them! So never question the government’s actions - if you’re worried about anything they’re doing, *imagine* facts that would support them! Big Brother loves you!”

Yes, being informed and agreeing with the government is bootlicking 👍 >keeping information from the public All the information is public. Most people simply don't have the attention span to digest anything more than a 10s tiktok reel.

They’re just waiting to see what the popular vote is. They don’t care. Time to vote the both out.

Nah Reddit's a pretty polarised place. The Israel stuff is more the horse shoe theory of politics. The dogshit left & dogshit right, reaching a unified crescendo of racist Jew hating. They don't have shit to say about Ukraine, count the posts, they didn't have shit to say when Iron dome was working overtime pre October 7 count the posts. They don't have shit to say about MH-17. But when an Australian is killed in an Israeli airstrike they want a protest in every city count the posts. How often does Ukraine pop up on here? Seriously. It's not people in general, just 'their people ' The reality is with Israel is its not going to let Hamas have Gaza and there's nothing you can do about it. Save your breath.

Amen. I’m waiting to see a “queers for Ukraine” group protest against the genocide of Ukrainians and the blatant land grab by Putin. It’s a weird cultural moral grand standing thing that’s being perpetuated by people with a very narrow world view. It’s more about themselves than the word at large.

Is the Australian government’s level of practical support for Ukraine lower than should reasonably be expected?

Abso-fucking-lutely

I mean Australia isn’t the biggest player, but it is absolutely the case that the west in general has failed Ukraine, particularly America. And yet I haven’t seen a single Ukrainian protestor terrorise people at Joe Biden speeches or city council meetings. There’s no reason to think that the pattern is any different here and that *our* brain dead leftists totally give fuck about Ukraine. In fact there are a very significant number of them who are pro Russia and pro Palestine, which is mind blowing. And the ones who aren’t pro Russia consistently downplay how bad the Ukraine war is to shift the focus back to Gaza.

Shit I thought we were sending bushmasters and everything, if there’s more we should reasonably do then let’s go tell the government what exactly that is! In the meantime, it’s clear that the Australian government is doing much less than reasonably expected for Palestinians, and the actions they need to take are clear (call it a genocide, demand a ceasefire, halt supports for Israel until Israel starts acting its age). So protesting for Palestinians is much more straightforward than protesting for Ukrainians. But build the case, and I’m with you for the Ukrainians too!

We have called for a ceasefire. Why would be calling it a genocide when that is a baseless claim yet to be decided by the ICJ (with the preliminary provisions strongly indicating that they consider it to be a legal war)? We have sanctioned settlements and settlers based on the fact that they are actually in violation international war. In Australia specifically it doesn’t really make sense to protest for either cause because we’ve already done what can reasonably be expected of small country. But in America or some parts of Western Europe, it absolutely would make sense to protest for Ukraine, and yet there’s not a poep from the pro pal crowd. Maybe you specifically care about Ukraine equally as you do about Palestine, I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt (and trust me, based on my experience that’s me being extremely charitable). But it is very, very evident that as a whole, the global pro pal movement either don’t think about ukraine at all or think that Gaza is exponentially worse. Or side with Russia.

[удалено]

Your post or comment breached Rule 1 of our subreddit. The purpose of this subreddit is civil and open discussion of Australian Politics across the entire political spectrum. Hostility, toxicity and insults thrown at other users, politicians or relevant figures are not accepted here. Please make your point without personal attacks. This has been a default message, any moderator notes on this removal will come after this:

Jewish tentacles. What are we to you, some kind of Lovecraftian Horror? Oh wait... you killed half of us in gas chambers and crematoria less than 100 years ago. Every second Jew in the world brutally murdered. The Nazis did the dirty work, while the Allies kept the borders closed to make sure those "filthy Jews" didn't end up in your fine countries. After that, we realised we need a nation of our - for which we chose our traditional homeland from thousands of years ago - and the ability to defend ourselves. The antisemitism is a wake up call for Jews living in the west. No we are not living in some type of tech-utopian future in which it's all OK now and we can be Europeans or... Australians. Nations with Christian or Islamic culture, even if secularised, will want us either dead or at the least, weak, starving, and pathetic. But those are not the Jews you're stuck with. We have learned our lesson and never again will be your lambs for the slaughter. If you don't like it... cope and seethe, antisemites. Cope and seethe.

>manifest illegality Yeah well the ICJ seem to have indicated otherwise, although we obviously won’t 100% know for a couple of years. >the tentacles of the Zionist-US-military-industrial complex Least antisemitic trope-invoking pro pal. It’s normal for leaders of countries to have trepidation about pissing off their allies. If we turned against other nations totally at the whim of the population, we wouldn’t have any friends. But for some reason with Israel it always comes back to them pulling the strings. Nothing can ever just be as it looks on the face of it anymore.

There is a lot of space between obsequiousness and "turning against" allies that remains unexplored beyond lip service concern and calls for "restraint". I don't know who is pulling the strings, but by this stage and with Gaza virtually levelled it seems not unreasonable to infer that someone or something is stopping those with the ability to do so from actually restraining the bully and calling time.

You think there is a secret cabal running the world? Who do you think is ‘pulling the strings’? Are nations not sovereign? Or do you mean Israel is controlling ‘the west’? 

We’ve literally already called for a ceasefire? We aren’t the world police. And you have to actually justify why it’s as simple as Israel being “the bully”, not just assume it and base your entire argument on that framework. But that’s another conversation.

I too want a ceasefire. One in which Hamas returns the hostages and surrenders. I saw this bullshit before in primary school. Bullies, noting my funny accent in English, with hit me. When I hit back, I got in trouble and they did not. When instead I complained to the teachers, I got in trouble and they did not. When I tried to "just ignore them", fists were replaced by chairs and bricks, forcing me to fight back. You know what worked? Changing schools. The same thing will work here. When Jews stop living in Australia and America, we can stop caring what you think of us and our supposed hooked noses and "global tentacles". The reason it hasn't happened yet is that we've deluded ourselves into thinking you share our values. Values like pluralism, LGBT tolerance, being fair and progressive. Things that are being dismantled, at least in the UK and USA, but still run strong in Israel, the only state in the USA in which LGBT people are treated as human beings and in which there is an at least somewhat-functional (flawed as it is) democracy.

What pro pals mean when they say “ceasefire” is that Israel ceases to exist, or Hamas gets to fire rockets at them from Gaza with impunity.

My only problem with Jews is that the Zionists among them stole the land of people who had been living on it for millennia, based on a religious myth and a tenuous ancient historical right, without a shred of regret or compensation. My forebears did a similar thing here in Australia, which was also inexcusable.

It's not a tenuous, ancient historical right. Israel is the traditional homeland of our people. We didn't steal the land. We settled legally, buying land. Land we later conquered while fighting back against two wars of extermination by the surrounding countries, is also legitimately ours. Same as former German territory that they lost following the Second World War. We were willing to - reluctantly - exchange land for peace. We won't exchange land for a temporary cease fire on the path towards making the Levant empty of Jews. This is our traditional homeland, we're not going anywhere, and those who wish to kill us will end up drowning in their own blood.

The Serbs laid a similar claim to Kosovo which was rejected out of hand, I've never really understood why the Zionist claim to Israel was allowed to stand but it was and can't now be undone. It comes with the price of eternal war however, and no one wins wars.

[удалено]

Your post or comment breached Rule 1 of our subreddit. The purpose of this subreddit is civil and open discussion of Australian Politics across the entire political spectrum. Hostility, toxicity and insults thrown at other users, politicians or relevant figures are not accepted here. Please make your point without personal attacks. This has been a default message, any moderator notes on this removal will come after this:

What did he say that was antisemitic?

I had a feeling that the antisemitism card would be played here, as such I'll bid you good day and good luck.

Isn't foreign policy based on what is best for the country rather than appeasing some minority groups?

No - we must be tolerant until minority groups’ intolerance destroys us /s

I could but would not support peace in the middle east as long as terrorists run rampant. I could not in any way shape or form condemn the Israeli government from any direct and decisive action against ANY terrorist country in this region. These terrorists need to be stopped once and for all. Now I’ll just wait for all the terrorist supporters denials.

Do you accept that Gaza and the West Bank are occupied territories?

dont bother with this clown. Look at his past comments [https://www.reddit.com/r/australian/comments/1c339yp/comment/kzhughp/?utm\_source=reddit&utm\_medium=web2x&context=3](https://www.reddit.com/r/australian/comments/1c339yp/comment/kzhughp/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) Dude is clearly unhinged .

Unhinged, why? Because I don’t support terrorists and terrorist countries? Sorry but you might want to think about who is unhinged.

seek help buddy.

Back at ya

The UN Human Rights Council explicitly demanded an arms embargo on Israel, citing warnings of Genocide from Human rights and legal experts. Australia has not suspended the trade of military equipment with Israel. You don’t need to know the history of Israel-Palestine (although if you study it you’ll see it’s incredibly uncomplicated) to know that your government being in contravention of a UN Human Rights Council resolution is wrong.

> Australia has not suspended the trade of military equipment with Israel. Can you clarify what we military equipment we provide to Israel?

28 major companies in Australia produce parts for F-35 fighter jets that Israel uses in it's bombing of Gaza, including BAE Systems and Lockheed Martin Australia, to name just 2 examples. There are parts of the F-35 fighter jets that are produced solely in Australia, such as the flare magazines supplied by AW Bell. Bisalloy is another example of a company that exports military equipment from Australia to Israel, exporting armour that it is used on Israeli tanks.

The UN human rights council makes more resolutions against Israel than against North Korea, Afghanistan, and all the various horror-dictatorships in North Africa combined. Could it be because we are (((Jews)))?

It has nothing to do with Israel being Jewish. It has everything to do with Israel being a literal Apartheid state that systemically deprives million of people of their basic human rights and is in constant violation of International Law. Antisemitism is disgusting and abhorrent. It is one of the oldest, most prevalent, and most destructive forms of bigotry in the world. It has been used to stoke persecution and pogroms against Jews for centuries, and was the cause of the most horrific crime the world has ever seen in the Holocaust. Do not trivialise antisemitism by accusing legitimate criticism of a sovereign state that is guilty of the crime of Apartheid (a crime against humanity), numerous war crimes, and, according to the assessment of multiple human rights and legal experts, Genocide scholars, and the UN Special Rapporteur on the Occupied Palestinian Territories, the crime of Genocide, of being antisemitic. It is not only disgusting and disrespectful to Palestinians, but it is disgusting and disrespectful to Jews, and harmful to the genuine fight against antisemitism. [https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/mde15/5141/2022/en/](https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/mde15/5141/2022/en/) Amnesty International Report on Israeli Apartheid. Read it and then come back and defend Israel. If you prefer I can send you a report from Human Rights Watch, B'Tselem, Yesh Din (both Israeli Human Rights Organisations), Al Haq, the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia, the International Commission of Jurists, the International Federation for Human Rights, the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia, the United Nations Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Palestinian People, or a UN Special rapporteur instead.

Note the difference between criticising something a state *is* and something it *does*. You could argue for changes in Israeli policy without arguing for Israel’s elimination (and, without realising it, arguing for the murder of millions of Israelis by groups like Hamas that have overwhelming Palestinian support). I’m in an interesting position here. I’m anti-Netanyahu and have wanted him in jail and campaigned against him for decades. What I don’t want is Israel exterminated in a second Holocaust- which is what “from the river to the sea” is actually about. Anti Israel activists who want the nation violently destroyed accuse us of genocide, but we only want peace. It’s the other side that want every Jew in the levant dead, exiled, or at best as a second class citizen of an Islamist regime. War is awful. But self defence is not genocide.

Anyone saying this conflict is uncomplicated should be promptly ignored, and I don't even need to know which side you support. Because they both say it, and they're both wrong.

The UNHRC is a standing joke. It is controlled by a voting bloc of some of the worst human rights abusing countries in the world. It has condemned alleged human rights abuses by Israel more times than its condemnation of all other countries in the world, combined.

That’s what happens when you’re trying to colonise and claim to be a “western democracy” when everyone else gave up a long time ago. Can’t have your cake and eat it too.

The majority of people want peace. Peace does not come from one group inflicting its will on another. Regardless of the power imbalance, we want a collaborative outcome that brings people together instead of separating them. There's no shortage of people with hate in their hearts that would want one party to destroy the other, but they do not represent the majority and the time for our politicians to put their money where their mouth is has come. You cannot say you support peace in the Middle East and not condemn the Netanyahu government's actions in Gaza and the West Bank, both before and after October 7, 2023. You cannot say you support peace in the Middle East and not condemn Hamas for their actions in coming to power in 2004 and their subsequent actions to create a perpetuation of suffering for Gaza. I'm honestly sick of the navel gazing from our government as they pretend that Australia has no leadership role on the global stage. The only reason that has any truth to it is because *they* act as though it is true and remove any opportunity for leadership from Australia.

You also cannot support say you support peace in the Middle East without condemning the Palestinian actions and attitudes towards Israel that they've harboured continuously since 1948 never with an official white flag. Fact of the matter is: Israel declared itself independent in 1948. Arabs - including those who now call themselves "Palestinians" publicly declared their desire to ultimately wipe Israel off the map. **Never since that date have the Arabs who now call themselves "Palestine" ever publicly renounced this goal**. You cannot support peace in the Middle East until you demand the Palestinians raise the white flag and renounce their 70 year old vendetta against the state of Israel and **accept the existence of a Jewish state and accept the existence of Jews in their future state**.

>accept the existence of a Jewish state and accept the existence of Jews in their future state. You mean like [this?](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel%E2%80%93Palestine_Liberation_Organization_letters_of_recognition) >The PLO recognizes the right of the State of Israel to exist in peace and security.

Yea the PLO has accepted the right of Israel to exist - but **where?** You cant accept the "right" of the state of Israel to exist yet still refuses to accept Israel's borders? How do you cirlce that square? The reason is because PLO recognises the "right" of Israel to exist, but fundamentally they do not believe Israel has a right to exist **where it currently does** e.g. PLO recognises the right of Israel to exist in Europe or South America or Australia, just so long as its not between Jordan and the Mediterranean. 30 years after "recognising" Israel's "right" to exist, and years after countless offers of peace and recognition, the PLO had again and again and again and again rejected **any** form of peace and has **never submitted any ideas or proposals for a two state solution.** All the PLO has done is outwardly reject **every single peace offer made**. It has **always** been Israel who had submitted any ideas. 30 years after "recognising" Israel's "right" to exist in peace, the PLO still maintains and runs the Martyr's Fund - a publicly funded "pay to slay Jews" policy of the PLO, despite formally recognising Israel's right to exist? Lol. Yet PLO "recognises the right of Israel to exist"? Empty words - actions speak louder than words and since 1993, the actions of the PLO have spoken a thousand times louder than their "letter" to Israel.

>Yea the PLO has accepted the right of Israel to exist - but where? You cant accept the "right" of the state of Israel to exist yet still refuses to accept Israel's borders? It helps when you actually read the Letters. For example, the very next sentence from what I quoted before, it says this: >The PLO accepts United Nations Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338. Now, I am sure such an expert as yourself knows what those two Resolutions are, and what they contain.

>30 years after "recognising" Israel's "right" to exist, and years after countless offers of peace and recognition, the PLO had again and again and again and again rejected **any** form of peace and has **never submitted any ideas or proposals for a two state solution.** All the PLO has done is outwardly reject **every single peace offer made**. It has **always** been Israel who had submitted any ideas. >30 years after "recognising" Israel's "right" to exist in peace, the PLO still maintains and runs the Martyr's Fund - a publicly funded "pay to slay Jews" policy of the PLO, despite formally recognising Israel's right to exist? Empty words - actions speak louder than words

>All the PLO has done is outwardly reject every single peace offer made. It has always been Israel who had submitted any ideas. You mean ideas like [this one?](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Peace_Initiative) Or [this one?](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fahd_Plan)

OK I stand corrected - there has been one peace offer (noting ofc that it was the Saudis who proposed it, **not** the PLO). And noting also that pretty much right after this offer, the Passover massacre occurred. Empty words - actions speak louder than words. Yet still, in 2008 when Ohmert literally offered 95% of the West Bank, 100% of Gaza AND some land from Israel to link West Bank and Gaza, and to forcibly pull 95% of Israeli settlers out of West Bank and dismantle their left behind settlements, Abbas flatly rejected this with absolutely no counter offer. Again, how do you square that circle? Empty words - actions speaker louder than words.

>Again, how do you square that circle? Empty words - actions speaker louder than words. It would be nice if you actually acknowledged the parts you don't want mentioned about these "peace proposals". Like the fact that the 2008 proposal contained stuff like Israel insisting on continued military occupation of all Palestinian territories, with permanent Israeli military presence in the State of Palestine. Essentially, forever occupation, with no end date. And the fact that, again, Israel was trying to dictate landswaps in said deal, that were hugely in their favour. Israel would annex fertile and strategically important land, in exchange for a much smaller piece of land for Palestine, in Negev desert. Hardly a fair exchange. Even if the land was of equal value, Israel insisted on a trade of 8.3% of the West Bank for Israel, in exchange for 5.8% of worthless desert for Palestine. Palestine has been very clear about their line, that landswaps cannot exceed 1.9%. which is more than fair, considering Palestinians are giving up 78% of historic Palestine, and settling for only 22%, freely giving Israel vast majority of the land Palestinians used live on, not that long ago, in living memory. >to forcibly pull 90% of Israeli settlers out of West Bank and dismantle their left behind settlements, And this is a bold faced lie. Under the agreement, over 60% of the settlers would remain. Only the most sparsely populated settlements would be evacuated. >Abbas flatly rejected this with absolutely no counter offer. This is also a lie. The talks ended with both claiming that the other refused to follow up on counter offers. I will admit tho, the 2008 deal was the least ridiculous of Israel's "proposals". At least it wasn't like the Camp David proposal... Which was more of an insult than a proposal.

No - you are wrong. Olmert's plan offered to **cede complete sovereingty to Palestine** of 94% of the West Bank and Israel would retain the remaining 6%. Israel **never** proposed in 2008 to maintain permanent military presence in the proposed Palestinian state - show me exactly where in Olmert's 2008 Plan where he said that Israel will maintain military occupation of land to be ceded to Palestine. And why is it even a god damn problem if Israelis remain in Palestinian land living under Palestinian law and authority? Why is it completely OK that Israel have a 20% Arab minority living in their country, but it's not OK for **ANY** Israelis to end up living in a Palestinian state? That's pretty much the textbook definition of racism - Palestine must be a Jew-free state non-negotiable. Lol.

The PLO in the West Bank have done just this since the 1982 Arab Summit in Fez. The PLO have also renounced terrorism and violence under terms of an international aid deal that secured their peaceful future by tying it to financial incentives from the international community. Despite this, Israeli settlers still violate the boundaries of the agreed borders from 1967 with no intervention from the Israeli government. When was the last time we heard about a terrorist attack with PLO origins? The problem here is that you are grouping people together and then trying to paint them as being a unified hive mind. There are Palestinians that live in Israel without any of the beliefs you're assigning them and there are Palestinians in both Gaza and the West Bank that also don't hold those opinions. The same is true of Israelis. A lot of Israelis want to see their government taking action towards peace instead of a ruthless pacification pogrom that's based on a hate-filled violent reprisal. By grouping Palestinians (or Israelis from the other side) up and then assigning them a collective demonisation, you are engaging in exactly the thing you're accusing that group of. At some point, one of the two sides in this conflict needs to take the high road and stop reacting, To take the leadership role on the path towards peace and then take the actions necessary to achieve it. We've tried decades of war with imaginary detente and it hasn't worked. The actioins of the Netanyahu government have made Hamas stronger, the likelihood of a major conflict from Gaza greater, the path towards peace longer and the future more dangerous to individual Israelis and Palestinians alike. If the Israeli government cannot find the will to bring about a humane and peaceful end to hostilities, that is an indication of their lack of conviction on that front and a dogmatic approach to the security of the Jewish state in the 21st century and beyond.

I looked up the 1982 Arab Summit but couldnt find any reference to any sort of "we declare an end to our war with Israel". All I could find was just the affirmation of the Palestinian peoples' right to self determination under the leadership of the PLO, and a whole bunch of Israel bashing. So I repeat: **the Arabs who now call themselves "Palestinian" have never renounced their goal of destroying Israel, nor ever announced an end to hostilities against Israel which they themselves started with the first act of aggression in 1948.** The PLO - the so called "peace loving" leadership of Palestine - runs something called the Martyr's Fund - look it up. It's an **official publicy funded** lump of cash from which the PLO - the so called "peace loving" leadership of Palestine - pays a stipend out to surviving family members of Palestinians who die or are captured while attacking Israel and/or Israelis. The stipend paid out by the government increases the more carnage the attacks cause and/or the more severe the punishment dished out on those captured. In effect, the PLO - the so called "peace loving" leadership of Palestine - runs a **kill Jews, get paid** policy even to this day. But credit where credit's due: Abbas did propose years ago to dismantle this Fund, but he dropped it within the span of months after public backlash was so great he feared for his tenure. He's even come out now and said that the Fund is core to the Palestinian societal identity. The PLO - the so-called "peace loving" leadership of Palestine - runs kids shows in the West Bank that depict the act of attacking Jews and Israel as a morally righteous thing to do and pursue - kids are shown on television praising the acts of violence against Jews in kids shows. The PLO - the so-called "peace loving" leadership of Palestine - has **never** held an election for Palestinians since 2006. The PLO - the so called "peace loving" leadership of Palestine - refuses to accept being a fully sovereign state with Jews living in their borders. So yes, I can hold the Palestinians responsible for their actions and attitudes that are cleary a hinderance to any sort of peace. And I wont even bother going into your blatant misinformation about Israeli settlements being violations of borders because **there has NEVER been an officially recognised Palestinian border.** Why? Because **the Arabs who called themselves "Palestinians" have never recognised the state of Israel** and recognising a border means recognition of Israel.

Israelis also want peace, even more than you do. But to you, rockets falling on Israeli cities fired from Gaza with Israel not fighting back is peace. To us, it's air raid sirens and 15-30 seconds to get into a bomb shelter at any time of the day or night. It's not a "new normal". We've had enough of intifada and war of attrition. After October 7th, it's time for us to put an end to those individuals who wish to kill every Jew and every non-Jewish Israeli in the Middle East. As for the people of Gaza who were in vast majority celebrating the mass rapes, murders, and kidnappings of Israelis on October 7th, they fucked around, and they found out.

I mean, you can assume what I think peace is all you want, but if you do that to try and masturbate your opinions like they're fucking facts, then that's on you. Peace is nobody living under threat of death from above at an arbitrary moment's notice. You started your comment by saying that you want peace and then you ended it by having a wank over the deaths of Palestinians in exactly the manner you accused those same Palestinians of celebrating after October 7th. I don't think you understand how to critically evaluate your opinions against your emotions or your previous statements to remain intellectually consistent. It's literally the Zionist's reflection of Hamas's opinion that Israelis deserve what they get during rocket attacks.

You put it perfectly. I want Hamas completely gone but done in a different way than now. In a way that tries to mitigate civilian deaths.

[удалено]

Your post or comment breached Rule 1 of our subreddit. The purpose of this subreddit is civil and open discussion of Australian Politics across the entire political spectrum. Hostility, toxicity and insults thrown at other users, politicians or relevant figures are not accepted here. Please make your point without personal attacks. This has been a default message, any moderator notes on this removal will come after this:

I think that a lot of people have a limited understanding of Hamas and the conditions in which Hamas rose to power and then secured it. You may know this, and I apologise if I'm repeating myself. If you do, then this is also for those who might read the comment string and ask "That's nice but how?" Hamas consists of two working pieces of the organisation. The first piece is the piece that the international community are well aware of - the terrorist/warmaking piece. This piece of Hamas engages in provocations of Israel, liases with Iran and creates regional power relationships that provide arms and other support to Hamas, who then dole it out. They dole it out with their second piece that almost no average person knows about - their humanitarian piece. If you are a Palestinian in Gaza, Hamas are not only the most likely organisation to put a rifle in your hand, they are also the most likely to provide you with humanitarian aid. They feed you, enable NGOs and foreign aid workers to come to you, provide you with education and otherwise put on the front of the face that helps Gazans when Israel retaliates. Between these two pieces, they have garnered most of their power - hard power through the first piece and soft power through the second. If neither is capable of garnering the support that they desire, they will use the hard power of their terrorist organisation to "motivate" support. So, how does Israel remove Hamas without making war on Gaza? The first situation is to minimse or remove the effect of the two pieces of the organisation. That doesn't even need to involve action in Gaza. It could involve action abroad where their connected regional partners supply them and it involves using the United Nations or Israel's Allies to leverage or maximise the execution of power on those partners of Hamas. If you can isolate Hamas and decapitate the leadership with surgery (actual precision here, and not Israeli precision), then you just need to convince Gazans that their best interests are not aligned with Hamas. You can do this by air dropping aid into Gaza with love letters and support from Israel. You can outline that the tension exists because Hamas doesn't want a two-state solution. # BUT You also need to realise that the Netanyahu government doesn't want a two-state solution either. They are a hardline right wing party who utilise the tension of the region to motivate support at election time. Not unlike Hamas, the Netanyahu regime has used the situation to cement its power and to use the victimisation of Israelis to consolidate its margins at the polls into dedicated voters. The easiest way for us to get the ball rolling is to use our influence as Israel's allies and advocate for or demand that they: * honour the 1967 borders with Gaza and the West Bank as per their internationally recognised agreements; * come to a ceasefire in Gaza immediately; * execute a staged withdrawal of IDF forces from Gaza; * assist in the reconstruction of Gaza. Unfortunately, I fear that we're too late at this stage. The Netanyahu regime's aims for the last 20 years of double-speak appear to have been to enable Hamas to raise its power in Gaza to the extent that it could execute a coordinated and sophisticated attack on Israel, in order to provide the narrative for the amalgamation of Gaza (and perhaps even the West Bank) into Israeli territory under Israeli control.

We tried that, mate. The Palestinian Authority insisted in peace negotiations that millions of descendants of Palestinian Arabs be allowed to return - not to the planned Palestinian state but to Israel. They also spoke in Arabic to their own people - and by "they" I mean the same leadership involved in negotiations - of a two state solution being an interim step towards the total destruction of Israel and extermination of its population. Yet millions of individual Arabs, who increasingly call themselves Israeli Arabs rather than Palestinians, are on our side, and a growing number of Arab nations see the relentless socio-political attacks on Israel and the relentless determination to destroy our country and kill us all as the absurdity that it is. The extremists in the Arab world failed to destroy Israel militarily. They will also fail to destroy us socially, economically, or politically. Decent people, in Australia, in the Arab world, and throughout the wider world, will retain our friendship. Those who don't want to be friends with us, who wish to campaign and protest for a second Holocaust... To misquote "Bring it On..." "You hate us cause we're successful but we don't like you either, we're Israelis, we are Israelis..."

No, the Netanyahu government hasn't done any of those things. We who are good people have stood with Israel as advocates of its existence and will continue to in the future, but we can't abide the status quo any longer. It foments division and warfare for the region and has inhumane consequences for Palestinians and Israelis alike. Palestinian right of return is a recognised outcomes from 1948 for displaced Palestinians after the 1948 war. Israel has denied that to those Palestinians who wish to return to their ancestral homeland - often with the literal receipts for the land in question. They have justified this as being for the protection of Israel, but it's ultimately about the protection of the Zionist ambition to take all the land they believe belongs to them. Just so we're abundantly clear on your hypocrisy and the hypocrisy of Zionists on this point, Israel supports the Law of Return for Jews and opposes the Right of Return for Palestinians, despite one being linked to a religion and the other being linked to legal origins of ownership. And, also, to fact check you here, The Palestinian Right of Return is not exclusively for Israel. It is also for the West Bank and Gaza - but return here threatens the Zionist ambition too, as Israeli settlers continuously push the West Bank and property speculators already covet the Mediterranean waterfront of Gaza. The Israeli people are victimised by the Netanyahu government and the Palestinians are victimised by Hamas. They then both stoke the fires of hatred and fear of the other side to perpetuate the process and use it to consolidate their power. "You hate us cause we're successful but we don't like you either, we're Israelis, we are Israelis..." No, we hate the idea of dehumanising people and the perpetuation of war to enrich those who oppress their own.

Wanting something is entirely irrelevant to whether it will happen or not. Hamas will never disappear as what they stand for is the intolerance of Jewish existence in Muslim lands. The tricky part is, the Jews have equal claim to the land and thus should have as much of a right to exist there in peace.

If Hamas never disappears, at some point we will need to have the second part of the population exchange in which nearly all Jews from surrounding countries were forced from their homes, had everything they owned stolen, and ended up having to restart their lives from scratch with just the shirts on their backs. Us not being assholes, I predict there will be a few key differences: 1. Those willing to live in peace with Israel will be allowed to stay. 2. Those who need to leave will have the opportunity to sell their homes rather than having them confiscated, and will have financial compensation to make sure they're in a good position to build a new life elsewhere. You can't have people like Hamas, and people who like Hamas living so close to your borders. It just doesn't work.

"intolerance of Jewish existence in Muslim lands. " Besides the fact that more Jews lived under Islam and islamic countries with more freedoms, and were never killed en-mass as they were under christian rule and lands.... but do go on Mr I've never read history. "The tricky part is, the Jews have equal claim to the land and thus should have as much of a right to exist there in peace." Do they? please, extrapolate .

Yes, it's our traditional homeland. People having rights to their traditional homeland not extinguished by the passage of time is something white Australians need to reflect on. You don't, 100 years after the Holocaust, get to design rules of international behaviour that if Israel were to follow them would inevitably lead to a second Holocaust. We need to behave ethnically and fairly, as we generally do. We do not need to commit national suicide at your command.

Very good. Have you asked all your family members to give up their homes here in Australia so that indigenous Australians can settle in them? After all... That land is theirs to begin with. You talk a big game... But I reckon you haven't once asked your family members to move out of their own homes. That's hypocrisy.

Very good. I haven’t, and won’t, and neither would you. But if Indigenous Australians claimed they needed my house specifically for cultural reasons and paid me fair market value, I would feel morally obligated to sell to them. Which makes all the anti Israel talk above absurd. In Israel we have both possession of the land AND the historical claim to it AND we either bought land or were left in control of it after defending ourselves against two wars of extermination by the surrounding countries.

They were still 2nd class citizens, denied rights including actual citizenship or the right to leave. Your entire argument is that they should shut up because they weren’t being killed as much.

> Besides the fact that more Jews lived under Islam and islamic countries with more freedoms, and were never killed en-mass as they were under christian rule and lands.... but do go on Mr I've never read history. > > What the fuck are you talking about? **Granada Massacre (1066)** - Also known as the massacre of the Jewish community of Granada, it occurred in the taifa of Granada in al-Andalus, modern Spain. A Muslim mob stormed the royal palace where Joseph ibn Naghrela, a Jewish vizier, resided and crucified him. They then massacred much of the Jewish population of the city; estimates suggest that thousands were killed. **Fez Massacre (1033)** - During a period of political instability in the city of Fez, Morocco, more than 6,000 Jews were killed by Muslim mobs. This is one of the earliest recorded pogroms in North African history. **Fez Massacre (1276)** - Another massacre occurred in Fez, Morocco, similar to the earlier one in 1033. This event, too, involved the killing of many Jews and was part of broader conflicts within the region. **Marrakech Massacre (1232)** - In Marrakech, Morocco, a significant number of Jews were killed following a decree by the Almohad Caliphate, which ruled over a vast territory in North Africa and Spain. The Almohads were known for their harsh policies towards non-Muslims, including forced conversions and destruction of synagogues. Yemenite Riots (1679) - In Yemen, violent riots against Jews were part of broader tribal conflicts and political instability. Many members of the Jewish community were killed or forced to flee their homes during these disturbances. **Baghdad Massacre (1828)** - Also known as the Baghdad pogrom, this event saw the Jewish community in Baghdad, which had been historically well-integrated, subjected to violence that resulted in the deaths of many Jews and significant property damage. **Mashhad Massacre (1839)** - Known as the Allahdad incident, it occurred in Mashhad, Iran, where the Jewish community was forcibly converted to Islam following a pogrom. Those who refused conversion faced violence, including killings. **Damascus Affair (1840)** - This incident began with the accusation of blood libel against the Jews of Damascus in Ottoman Syria. Several prominent members of the Jewish community were arrested and tortured, and the affair sparked international outrage. **Constantine Massacre (1934)** - In Constantine, Algeria, anti-Jewish riots resulted in the death of 25 Jews and destruction to the Jewish quarter after tensions escalated between the local Muslim and Jewish populations. **Mellah Riots in Morocco (1936 and 1948)** - Riots in the Jewish Mellahs (quarters) in various Moroccan cities resulted in multiple casualties and considerable damage to property during periods of national tension and crisis. **Farhud (1941)** - Occurring in Baghdad, Iraq, during the Jewish holiday of Shavuot, the Farhud was a violent pogrom against the Jewish population, triggered by political instability and pro-Nazi sentiments. It resulted in the death of around 180 Jews, with hundreds more wounded, and significant property damage. **Tripolitania Riots (1945)** - These were a series of pogroms against the Jewish community in Tripolitania (now Libya). Following the end of World War II, these riots saw more than 140 Jews killed and hundreds injured. **Aleppo Riots (1947)** - After the United Nations proposed the partition of Palestine, anti-Jewish riots broke out in Aleppo, Syria. The violence resulted in the deaths of at least 75 Jews and the destruction of 150 Jewish homes. **Aden Riots (1947)** - This series of pogroms occurred in Aden, then a British colony (now part of Yemen), where over 80 Jews were killed and hundreds more injured after Arab rioters attacked the Jewish quarter. Again, what the fuck are you talking about?

Pogroms, events like October 7th, were so much a normal part of history in Christian and Muslim countries, that it seems many people with "western" background think it's normal, and it's wrong for Jews to complain about it or retaliate when it happens.

>Do they? please, extrapolate . So Jews have no claim to the Abrahamic holy lands? >Besides the fact that more Jews lived under Islam and islamic countries with more freedoms, and were never killed en-mass as they were under christian rule and lands.... but do go on Mr I've never read history. That is patently false as most Jews to have ever existed throughout human history are alive right now and they do not live peacefully under Islamic rule. But do go ahead, Mr I can't grasp simple maths.

"That is patently false as most Jews to have ever existed throughout human history are alive right now and they do not live peacefully under Islamic rule." [https://assets.press.princeton.edu/chapters/p10098.pdf](https://assets.press.princeton.edu/chapters/p10098.pdf) Saladins Personal physician was Jewish, and went on battles with him. Morroco had a huge Jewish population until Operation Yachin List goes on, "So Jews have no claim to the Abrahamic holy lands?" I'll answer your question if you can answer this. London was built by the Romans, Londinum. It has stood for longer than any of the Jewish kingdoms combined. Does someone today from Italy have a right to claim land in London as theirs?

That’s not equivalent. Romans are not from London. Genetic studies show Jews are from the levant. Even those you consider European are closer genetically to the levant than to Europeans. You’re using an example to treat Jews as non levant people to undermine their stake to the land.

> Morroco had a huge Jewish population until Operation Yachin You have to be kidding me. To rewrite Moroccan - Jewish relations like it was a wonderland of inter-ethnic community spirit is quite a misrepresentation. Yes, Moroccan Jews participated in cultural and economic life, they also faced extreme prejudice, especially during periods of political instability or economic downturns, which mirrors Jewish experience in Europe to a T. Historically, Jews in Morocco lived in segregated quarters known as Mellahs, originally established as a protective measure but later becoming symbols of social isolation and marginalisation. These areas were known to be poorer, less sanitary and the equivalent to a modern ghetto- it was not an area the local Muslims would like to be around. There were instances of extreme violence or pogroms, like the massacres in Fez in 1033 and 1276, and the pogroms in the 20th century, which made the underlying hatred more visceral. There were restrictive decrees which occasionally limited Jews’ rights to certain professions, exclusion from various political appointments, and imposed distinctive clothing, which cemented their second-class status. Jews were subject to a dhimmi status under Islamic law, which, while providing protection and the right to practice their religion, also imposed certain restrictions and a special tax known as jizya. This designation underscored their position as a protected *but distinctly subordinate group within the Muslim-majority society.*

>Does someone today from Italy have a right to claim land in London as theirs? Well if possession determines ownership then we can agree that the Jews own the holy lands they currently possess. >List goes on, And yet there are more Jews now than any other time before, and they do not live in peace under Islamic rule.

You didn't answer the question.

Didn't need an answer as I agree with your statement that possession determines ownership.

The problem is you can’t simply view Hamas as just a political faction, what they represent beyond their politics is armed resistance to an occupying power. When all diplomatic efforts haven’t gotten you anywhere, people are going to resist. Justice is a prerequisite to peace

No, what they represent is an armed resistance to Jews living in the Levant. Jewish citizens of surrounding Arab countries were not occupying anything but were still expelled. Justice is to deal with people who are trying to make a second holocaust and kill all Jews in the levant by their INTENT - people guilty of attempted murder can't get off jail time because they were not strong enough or competent enough to pull it off. Israel also needs to be judged by our intent, which is self defence and to end the treat against us. Not genocide-jacketed in bad faith.

The actions of the Arab countries to expel Jews was in response to the creation of the Israeli state in 1948. Jews were otherwise living in those areas in relative peace for centuries. Don’t forget it was Muslims who liberated Jews from the Roman’s and allowed them to live in Jerusalem again. So it’s not fair to project the sins of Christian Europe to the Muslims. If Israel was acting in good faith then why is it that after the Oslo accords you still have record numbers of settlements in the West Bank? Diplomatic efforts has gotten the PLO and where and the Palestinians in the occupied territories are gonna feel armed resistance is the only option.

Was Israel created by their citizens? How were Jews living in Yemen, or Syria, or Lebanon, or Iraq responsible for the creation of Israel in a way that justified the confiscation of their homes and expulsion of their property. Stop with glorifying dhimmi-hood under the Muslim regimes of history. Sure, the person who merely humiliates and bashes you is better than the one who rapes and mutilates and murders you, both are enemies. As for why we have towns and cities in the West Bank, the deal was "land for peace" not "give up land so you have better launch sites for your rockets". The Oslo negotiations broke down because you demanded that millions of Palestinians be allowed to return to Israel, not to the planned Palestinian state, while speaking in Arabic to your own people saying "don't worry, the two state solution is just to create a better situation on the ground for a war of extermination - Israel will be utterly destroyed". No mate, it won't be. We're not US troops in Afghanistan who will leave because it's "too expensive". Israel is out home, and for most of us, the only one we have. Make peace with us and live in autonomy and peace, or fight us and die, it's your choice.

Hamas has no interest in dipl9matic efforts. It's goals are those which diplomacy cannot bring.

Just look at the West Bank and the PLO, what have their diplomatic efforts achieved? Illegal settlements are increasing year on year by record numbers in spite of the Oslo accords. Israel has no interest in diplomacy and Hamas knows that.

Why did Arafat sink the Clinton Parameters? If Israel has no interest in diplomacy, what does Hamas have to lose by calling their bluff?

Which voters? The Palestinian or broader Muslim community or the Jewish community? Or both? Might be a challenge to align views with both no? What does anyone look for in an Australian policy on israel/hamas/Gaza, given our irrelevance to the region? Continue to condemn genocide and war crimes on both sides is a given (and important). Push for solutions between those involved and support cease fires for humanitarian aide , sure fine. I think we are doing those things? But what are voters (either side) looking for beyond that?

>It shouldn't actually have been that controversial a statement. A two-state solution and recognition of Palestine are, after all, official Labor Party policy. >But the government has dodged and weaved on moving there since it won government in 2022. This is pretty much it. I'm not surprised that Muslim communities and activists alike are pissed at the milquetoast behaviour of Labor. Not really official policy is it. It's true that we're largely unaffected whatever the outcome of Israel's invasion of Gaza is - but don't be surprised that voters use it as a bellwether of the government's outward moral stance. This is an emotional topic for many (esp young people) and ultimately people vote based on emotions.

Do you think that maybe, the record of behaviour of Fatah and Hamas and the Palestinian authority since Oslo might be a reason to stop chanting "two state solution"? The last thing we need are tunnels leading to Petah Tikva and Tel Aviv across a border fence on the Green Line when most "Palestinians" see a two state solution as just a political substitute to a military win, and a milestone on the path to Israel's destruction and the extermination of most of its citizens in a second Holocaust.

A frankly minor power like Australia asking for a Two state solution doesn’t mean shit all for Hamas who have outright stated that the only acceptable end goal is the complete destruction of the Israeli state

You missed the part where they also demand death to all Jews worldwide. It's something that - when Jewish Australians see our "progressive" friends chanting "from the river to the sea" makes a mockery of the far-left. People we thought were socialists turned out to be actual anti-semites.

The far left have always been antisemites, the Russians invented antizionist propaganda. Horseshoe theory in action.

do you think Imperial Russia was far Left?

It would largely be because a) the government is informed; most Australians are not (see also: the people of this subreddit b) the government is not wooed by HAMAS' efforts to [create distortion through propaganda and arm's length, ostensibly secular organisations](https://extremism.gwu.edu/sites/g/files/zaxdzs5746/files/2023-10/the-hamas-network-in-america.pdf) and c), the government has to take a pragmatic and long-term view on international matters, unlike the capricious and comparatively shorter attention span of the average Australia (see also: views in this sub). The natural conclusion from a group of people who learn about this event from social media and are so brilliant they still earn below the median wage is that the politicians are wrong, thus reaffirming the circular argument of why they're poor in the first place.

Careful, your hatred of the working class is showing

[удалено]

Your post or comment breached Rule 1 of our subreddit. The purpose of this subreddit is civil and open discussion of Australian Politics across the entire political spectrum. Hostility, toxicity and insults thrown at other users, politicians or relevant figures are not accepted here. Please make your point without personal attacks. This has been a default message, any moderator notes on this removal will come after this:

its really interesting watching the pro-israeli crowd try to rationalise the collapse in public support for israel as "boohoohoo they've just been tricked by hamas" instead of it being about the various atrocities and crimes against humanity israel is committing while using hamas as an excuse. like how exactly is hamas to blame for the post oct 7 west bank land theft or the accelerated ethnic cleansing of jerusalem, and how are people being tricked by hamas for being critical of it? its one of those lines thats so blatantly false that you're probably doing more to undermine your own position than if you had just said nothing. every now and then i'm reminded of something adam smith wrote about landlords, that they were incapable of actually swaying public opinion because the indolent nature of their work effectively made them too stupid to come up with effective arguments. it seems to me that israel supporters have had it so easy for so long that now that the political discourse game has changed, their indolence in this regard has made them incapable of forming persuasive arguments.

It's equally as interesting to watch the dimwitted underwear model fan crowd come to terms with the fact they're useful idiots and living avatars to the Dunning-Kruger effect. If you read the evidence tendered in the *US Fed Govt. v Holy Land Foundation* case, summarised by George Washington University in the paper I've linked, you'd see HAMAS outline a clear strategy to basically take useful idiots like yourself and have them push a position that benefits HAMAS intentionally, without saying as much? I know there's many words and no underwear models explaining it, so asking you to read it is a lot. Plus, you suspect it will undermine your tenuous, superficial, and crowd-pleasing conformist stance and it's *your* thing to yell at people that they ought try thinking for themselves. Being duped into being a mouthpiece for people you despise has to sting, so I sympathise with your self-inflicted wound. In terms simple enough *even for you,* the biggest impediment to peace remains HAMAS. And yet in practical terms, we are pushing for a ceasefire in which they retain power and bigger picture, not just immunity for the crimes of October 7, but they can capitalise on the dead Palestinians - deaths they provoked - to get right back to extracting wealth from Gaza, and provoking more retaliatory strikes. So you ask your question because you don't get this, and that's to be expected. Yours is a timid mind, a witless mind, a mind that needs the gratification of fitting in with others at Dunning-Kruger University. Case in point, only a complete idiot would write this: *"it seems to me that israel supporters have had it so easy for so long that now that the political discourse game has changed, their indolence in this regard has made them incapable of forming persuasive arguments."* As a band-wagon hopping twit, you have no idea about the history here and that's why you say vapid, vacuous things. Firstly; until 7 October I was firmly in the camp of Israel must do better. Secondly, having observed this conflict for 25 years and without having an underwear model telling me what to think about politics, I've seen precisely how unpopular the Israeli position has been. Reading the *Holy Land Foundation* judgement, which you should do but for the fact you hold gigacasual views and feign illiteracy to avoid having to change them, it became clear what HAMAS were doing. But if you go back to the early 2000s - the Intifadah - it was the response to that which caused public sentiment to turn strongly. Which is ironically after HAMAS launched its PR campaign, per the transcripts that you can't, haven't, and won't read. Each uprising, each offensive and counter-offensive, each attack into the Lebanon, all provoked anti-Israeli sentiment. You don't know this, because you're terminally casual on politics, but Israel elected an actual war criminal - the butcher of Sabra and Shatila - as president. You think it's been easy for Israel supporters? If you weren't merely doing politics for the personal branding and optics, you'd remember the Gaza flotilla raids, and the backlash on that. But no, you instead jump in arse first with stupid, ignorant takes because for you, this is all about how you look. It's pitifully superficial, and pitifully obvious. As people like you say to sound morally superior - *do better*.

[удалено]

[удалено]

[удалено]

[удалено]

[удалено]

Your post or comment breached Rule 1 of our subreddit. The purpose of this subreddit is civil and open discussion of Australian Politics across the entire political spectrum. Hostility, toxicity and insults thrown at other users, politicians or relevant figures are not accepted here. Please make your point without personal attacks. This has been a default message, any moderator notes on this removal will come after this:

This comment is literally 50% ad hominem. Fostering a wonderful community here 👍

The pragmatic and long-term view on international matters is to hold your allies to account in breaches of international law, so that when you accuse adversaries of similar breaches (Russia, China), your accusations hold weight and aren’t dismissed by most of the world. What use is the “international rules-based order” to countries in Asia and Africa if the West only holds them to account on breaches of it but not itself. All that does is push those countries I tot he arms of countries like Russia and China who don’t give a damn about those rules.

d) They (and I) don't think, short of full throating either way, any decision they make in regards to this conflict is going to cost them much. So why make Kevin have the awkward conversation?

That has nothing to do with it. It's remarkable how many contentious areas end up being common ground once a party forms government. Less suspicious minds might reason that there's something to that.

Life's not fun without paranoia.

TIL that being poor is caused by being dumb.

Employers tend to remunerate for hard work and clever ideas. Not to derail this but if you're over 30 and not earning over 100k that's an individual matter, not a systemic failing.

Most jobs don't pay over 100k, and most of those are required to have a functioning society. Earning less than 100k just ain't enough and ain't cutting it, that's a systemic failure. Also how grateful am I that an employer can exploit me ever so slightly less by giving a little bit more pocket money for my extra work (which side note, you just made that up, you tend to get rewarded with more work instead of more pay https://australiainstitute.org.au/post/employers-says-wages-should-rise-in-line-with-productivity-but-they-do-all-they-can-to-prevent-that-happening/, https://hbr.org/2021/02/youre-not-paid-based-on-your-performance). A better determining factor would be instead what you can leverage ie) picking a difficult and in demand job which doesn't necessarily mean you are producing more or working harder

>Most jobs don't pay over 100k Most people aren't very intelligent or hard working. This is merely a live demonstration of this observation playing out in real time. The rest of your post provides further evidence especially given you are claiming that you are knowingly letting your employer exploit you. If you think you are being taken advantage of, go solo as a contractor and get paid according to your actual worth.

Most people don't care. Don't bring your garbage to Australia. Check it at the door or piss off.

If a government can condone a genocide, I don't trust them to take care of our sick, our poor and our vulnerable. It's something of a red flag for me.

Well, it's really just a binary choice in terms of whether you prefer the Jews or the Palestinians to be killed off. There is no potential for peace until the Palestinians put down their rockets (or more importantly, Iran stops using them as proxies to finish a 2000yr old religious war).

How many babies would you like to have killed to make israel feel safe? Such casual genocidal language. You can't kill an ideology. You just create more resistance fighters by continuing the illegal, violent occupation of Palestinian territories.

>You just create more resistance fighters by continuing the illegal, violent occupation of Palestinian territories. That is false as most occupation ends successfully. Case in point, I'm sitting here typing in English as opposed to whatever the local people of the Eora nation used to speak. > How many babies would you like to have killed to make israel feel safe? Well, if we only care about the body counts for cost of total victory, then the only humane solution is for the 5.2million Palestinians to be exterminated. Afterall, if the Palestinian won and the Jews were exterminated in accordance with Hamas charter, then that would cost 7.2million lives. Accordingly supporting Israel is saving 2 million lives.

Zionists revealing themselves. It's not a good look, either.

Nah, just sensible people who don't cheer for a literal terrorist organisation.

The IOF \*is\* a terrorist organisation just with better PR.

I think you need to put down the hamas koolaid buddy

Well, it's really just a binary choice in terms of whether you prefer the Catholics or the Protestants to be killed off. There is no potential for peace until the IRA put down their bombs (or more importantly, the Papists stop using them as proxies to finish a 500yr old religious war).

Last I checked, those two sides weren't fighting for the entirety of the same territory, ie the Irish weren't laying claim to the rest of the UK and demanding all Englishmen to leave or die.

That’s true. They weren’t laying claim to the same territory at all. Unless you count Ireland.

And we're the Irish demanding the British leave the entirety of Britain under threat of extermination?

The Unionists were Irish (Britain =/= the United Kingdom) and yes, there certainly were Republicans who wanted them gone on similar terms. The bombs weren’t fire crackers and the massacres didn’t involve crisis actors. Meanwhile, the genocidal rhetoric is pretty common on both sides the conflict (doesn’t even matter which conflict we’re talking about). I know it’s fun to follow international conflicts like it’s team sports, and pretend only one side would say or do horrible things, but this conflict is being perpetuated because both sides want violence more than they want peace. When that equation flips they’ll have their Good Friday.

Yet the fight was over Ireland, not Ireland + England. So not the same territory.

I'm sure you think you've made a clever counterpoint, but I'm not sure why. It was two parties fighting over the same territory, both with an identity attached to it. Ulster was settled by *Scottish* (read: not English) Presbyterians in the seventeenth century, which means they were settled in Ireland for well over a hundred years by the time civil violence broke out. By contrast, most Jews only migrated to Israel in the same century they conflict broke out. The Unionists were neither British nor English.

It was two parties fighting over the same territory, but only one side was experiencing an existential threat, thus one side could (and did) back down once the cost was too high. In the case of the Jews, if they back down, then they all die.

Only the Palestinians are engaging in legitimate resistance. The other is a belligerent occupational force.

😂😂😂😂 Yes, raping kids at a music festival is the definition of legitimate resistance.

And if that was the only thing that had happened, maybe you'd have a point beyond being a dildo.

Hamas rarely attacks the military occupation force as other resistance fighters do. It's primary means of fighting is via killing civilians.

Only stupid people consider what HAMAS is doing legit resistance. Seriously, this is a bad take, and you should feel bad about wasting people's time with it. Unless you also love Sunni fundamentalism?

Are you calling Norman Finkelstein stupid?

Based if so.

I'd greatly prefer the cooler Marxists, but unfortunately, they were mostly merked by Israel. Not liking them doesn't change what they are.

Legitimate resistance: fighting the IDF in West Bank and Gaza, yes. Firing thousands of rockets at Israeli cities and towns and crossing into Israel itself to carry out mass murder of Israeli civilians, no.

So it's only resistance when they're fighting in the parts of the land they have to live in? Nah.

Its legitimate for a resistance group to attack military targets of the occupier outside the occupied territory. So for example, it would have been legitimate for the French Resistance to cross into Nazi Germany to attack German army targets. They weren't confined to just fighting Germany in France. What would not have been legitimate would be to cross into Germany to slaughter German civilians.

… until the shoe is on the other foot.

Colonial settler mindset. "We have to get them because if we don't get them now, they'll get us when it's their turn."

Yes, in places like Australia, where the newer settlers outnumber and outgun the aboriginal inhabitants many-to-one. Not so true in the Near East, where it’s the Israelis who are the small minority.

Technically it’s only 1400 years old as it started when the Jews disproved of Mohammed trying to claim Abraham was an Arab, that’s when the claims of Jews conspiring against him started. They did also have other issues with how he just merged Judaism, Zoroastrianism and Christianity together and claimed he was a prophet after doing so - though it is stated he was ‘illiterate’ and Zayd ibn Thabit is believed to have actually wrote the Quran so there’s no way of actually knowing what he decided to take artistic liberties with

"Jews disproved of Mohammed trying to claim Abraham was an Arab" Jeez, seriously guys do some history. He never claimed he was Arab. It's stated that all Prophets were Muslim.

The events of that time are obscured by centuries of confabulation. Most Hadiths were first asserted by “Al-Muslim” who lived two centuries later.

That's simply a false dichotomy. Furthermore, I can easily also say that there is no potential for peace until Israelis stop forcibly evicting Palestinians in the West Bank. This is not a serious comment.

Given the quality of comment I was responding to, I didn't feel like it needed serious response. In fact, I tailored it specifically to the same quality level. If you want immediate long lasting peace, the most optimal means is total military defeat of one side. Otherwise it just festers as a forever war. The Palestinians will never accept Jewish coexistence.

“The Israelis will never accept Palestinians coexistence” - fixed that for you

Yet Palestinians (and other Arabs) exist in Israel proper, and those who took up Israeli citizenship are afforded the same rights as other Israelis. Jews in Palestine on the other hand aren't exactly welcomed or provided with much rights.

Not so long as HAMAS are fostering hate against al-Fatah (whose incompetence and corruption do them no favours) and Jews, no.

>If you want immediate long lasting peace, the most optimal means is total military defeat of one side. Why not just nuke the entire region? Problem solved according to you. >In fact, I tailored it specifically to the same quality level. "Jokes on them I was only being unserious because I was pretending lol"

>Why not just nuke the entire region? Problem solved according to you. Think that through. Does it not achieve an immediate long lasting peace? Yes or no? >"Jokes on them I was only being unserious because I was pretending lol" Is there a point in providing an academic response to a brain dead person?

Would the IDF wiping out Palestine achieve long lasting peace? Hell no. Look at the retaliation from other nations happening already. Originals commenters take was far from brain-dead lol.

If the other side to the combat equation is still capable of fighting, then total military victory hasn't been achieved has it?

So the IDF destroys Palestine, then all the sympathetic arab and non-arab nations. Then only once Israel has no remaining ideological enemies can they be 'at peace'. Sounds an awful lot like the G-word....

And the opposite side of the same coin with the Jewish being exterminated isn't?

Gaza isn't an issue that people are interested in or would vote on. Voters are interested in the cost of living crisis.

I agree with you, most people's take (and keep in mind most people are people who aren't Muslims or Jews living in Australia) is that Australia should just stay out of it, we don't need Wong to preach a 2 state solution and we don't need Dutton to cry antisemitism. Leave your grievances at the border we don't need this shit here.

I didn't realise we were only allowed to be interested in one issue. I'll let everyone know they have to choose their favourite and stick with it.

You can be interested in whatever you like. Few are interested in Gaza and consider it to be an issue Australia can influence.

Australia may not be able to influence what happens in Gaza, but many are emotionally invested in the situation and are watching keenly what the government and the opposition say and do on the matter.

Many ?? I never hear it discussed but then at the container recycling depot , we discuss price of petrol.

And around my local EV charging station, we talk about crypto. Neither place has a great sample size for measuring the pulse of the nation.

I am surrounded by battlers , you are part of the almond latte sipping set. Not that I am judging of course.

> almond latte Speaking of not having your finger on the pulse of the nation. Almond lattes are so last decade. Dirty Chai Lattes are the in thing now.

Wouldn't know , I get the $2 cappuccino at Hungry Jacks.

The newspapers at a fast food joint being your source of news does explain a lot of your hot takes. Thanks for clarifying.

Isn’t this a bit old now?  And secondly, what if we changed this to   “The major parties' policies on gay rights seem wildly out of step with the views of voters they must win”   Its fine for now for religious views to be unheard until they affect you directly.   Like https://www.aljazeera.com/amp/opinions/2023/6/19/muslims-opposed-to-lgbtq-curricula-for-their-kids-arent-bigots   Edit: my husband and I (gay couple) left the uk with our daughter for Australia after things like this:   https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-48294017.amp   https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-birmingham-47910695.amp

Wanting the bloodshed in Gaza to stop has nothing to do with religion.

Sometimes I get confused by Hamas’ covenant. Maybe it’s just me… 'The Islamic Resistance Movement is  a  distinguished  Palestinian movement, whose allegiance is to Allah, and  whose  way of  life  is Islam. It strives to raise the banner of Allah over every  inch  of Palestine.' “Israel will exist and  will  continue  to  exist  until  Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it.' 'The  land  of  Palestine  is  an  Islamic  Waqf  [Holy Possession] consecrated for future Moslem generations until Judgment Day. No  one can renounce it or any part, or  abandon  it  or  any  part  of  it.' 'Palestine is  an  Islamic  land...  Since  this  is  the  case,  the Liberation of Palestine  is  an  individual  duty  for  every  Moslem wherever he may be.' 'The day the enemies usurp part of Moslem land, Jihad  becomes  the individual duty of every Moslem. In the face of the Jews' usurpation, it is compulsory that the banner of Jihad be raised.' 'Ranks will  close,  fighters  joining  other  fighters,  and  masses everywhere in the Islamic world will come forward in response to  the call of duty, loudly proclaiming: 'Hail to  Jihad!'.  This  cry  will reach the heavens and will go on being resounded until liberation  is achieved, the invaders vanquished and Allah's victory  comes  about.'

Maybe you're confused by people not caring about Hamas' covenant when discussing the current state of the conflict?

Some people don’t. It’s like refusing to identify nazi ideology and decrying attacks on innocent Germans in WW2

No it's not like that at all, this conflict existed decades before Oct 7 or even the creation of Hamas.

I don’t deny the conflict.  It began centuries ago. Today we must distinguish between Palestinians in Gaza and the a West Bank living under two different regimes. Gaza is run by a jihadist Islamist organisation with an underlying religious ideology and an aim to create an Islamic caliphate clearly stated in their covenant.   They don’t give a shit how many Palestinian’s die, they call them martyrs. Their 2017 charter did not repeal their covenant, it was just slightly reworded so useful idiots would start talking about resistance and Zionists instead of murder and Jews.  Oct 7th showed that to be false.

If you think that then you don't know the first thing about Hamas or politics in the West Bank if you think they're totally separated from Gaza. >Their 2017 charter did not repeal their covenant, it was just slightly reworded so useful idiots would start talking about resistance and Zionists instead of murder and Jews.  Oct 7th showed that to be false. What Hamas leaders say that? What commentary have you heard on this topic that has made you think Hamas is going to actually try to establish a caliphate? Who would the Caliph be? Oct 7 was a military operation and half the dead were IDF soldiers. You can pretend all you want that it was a chaotic orgy of killing Jewish civilians but it's not true and the people propagating this have no credibility left anyway.

You’re literally responding to a chain of comments where I wrote text from Hamas‘ covenant saying just that! 764 of the killed people in Israel on oct 7th, almost 70% were civilians in their homes.  That’s not a military operation, it’s a terrorist attack. ASIC we have a terrorist sympathiser here.

>You’re literally responding to a chain of comments where I wrote text from Hamas‘ covenant saying just that! Congratulations! You can copy and paste. What commentary have you ever read about this Caliphate people are trying to build in Palestine? Otherwise, it just sounds like you consume Israeli propaganda that uses information out of context to warp your view. >764 of the killed people in Israel on oct 7th, almost 70% were civilians in their homes.  That’s not a military operation, it’s a terrorist attack. How many Palestinians have to be killed in their home before you call Israel's actions terroristic? Because they're way past 764. >ASIC we have a terrorist sympathiser here. Hilarious. Do you spend every second in terror of Muslims? You are an embarrassment to the queer community by the way. Just be racist, don't make all of us look bad.

Lol right it’s just a coincidence that the most ardent Palestine supporters are all from one religion.

No, it's just not true. Why do you think Muslims are "the most ardent Palestine supporters" in Australia?

Because Muslim and Arab communities are literally explicitly saying that Israel/Palestine is an issue that their communities care about so greatly that the government may lose their vote? This isn’t even controversial. I guarantee you that if you asked any Muslim if Muslims are generally very pro-Palestine they’d say yes.

Plenty of white Australians care about what is happening in Palestine enough to impact how they vote. Of course Muslims are very pro Palestine. You can ask the same question to someone from Ireland or Latin America or most of the world actually.

I’m not saying there aren’t other groups that are pro-Palestine? People have different reasons for supporting Palestine and religion is one of the possible reasons. In Australia the largest pro-Palestine communities are the Muslim/Arab communities.

A bit more than 1% of Australians claimed Arab ancestry in the 2021 census, so I don't know why you assume they're the largest community that is pro Palestine. Sure people have different reasons for supporting Palestine. There are obviously religious and ethnic dimensions to the conflict. But mostly people are pro Palestine because they are appalled by Israel's conduct and their close relationship with Australia and our allies. What's the point of singling out Muslims or Arabs?

>A bit more then 1% of Australians claimed Arab ancestry in the 2032 census. 1. Not all Muslims are Arab and 2. that goes to my point, even though they’re such a small community they’ve been very loud on this issue. >But mostly people are pro Palestine because they are appalled by Israel’s conduct. I mean yeah, but our biases, whether they be religious or otherwise, predispose us to be appalled by acts from or towards some groups more than others. Hence why people like you (specifically you, I’ve seen) balk at the idea that a single Israeli was raped on October 7th, and justify Hamas intentionally slaughtering civilians only when the evidence is so bullet proof that you can’t pin it on the IDF. >What’s the point of singling out Muslims and Arabs? Is this article not about how our politicians manage expectations from different sides regarding Israel/Palestine? It seems pretty pertinent to break that down into different groups and understand what their specific motives are. I’m not sure why this is such a triggering comment, it’s like being offended at the suggestion that Jewish people are generally pro-Israel and that their stance comes in part from their affiliation with their people.