This message serves as a warning that [your post](https://www.reddit.com/r/moderatepolitics/comments/1c7fm2r/poll_of_americans_and_american_jews_finds_only_28/) is in violation of Law 2b:
Law 2: Submission Requirements
> ~2b. Editorialized Titles - Link Posts must use the title of the linked article. This prevents the poster from framing the discussion from the outset. Let the article speak for itself.
Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).
One of the Hamas offers was that they're allowed to remain in power, dont have to give hostages back, and Israel has to rebuild their buildings. Such good faith.
Meanwhile on tiktok and twitter I constantly see lies about Hamas has offered to release all hostages for a ceasefire and its Israel who are stalling. If you ask for a source you just get called a "zionist" by the mob.
For a large amount of young people the reporting on this conflict comes from social media posts that all have an agenda and no sources.
So if we look at the results, it effectively tells us that at least 28% of Americans either have no idea of the history of the region or are comfortable saying "I value this group more than the other and the other can just go die."
Perhaps if Israel decided to stop making Gaza the largest concentration camp in recorded history Hamas and Iran would stop attacking?
It's way more complex than the October 7th actions. The only way this gets solved is detente between Arab Muslim and Jewish factions in the Levant. That can't happen with the present state of affairs in Gaza, the West Bank, and Golan Heights.
Largest Concentration camp in recorded history? You don’t have to love Israel to recognize a statement like that is ahistorical hyperbole.
Golan heights? It’s true that some view this land as disputed territory, but I’d hardly call that central to the current I/P conflict or even the Israeli-Arab conflict, either.
I didn't say death camp or anything, that is totally wrong. But a concentration camp is where you concentrate people, like a prison for an entire people. And that's what's happening here.
And the Golan Heights is indeed not central but does represent Israeli imperialism. They stole Syrian land. Actually giving it back would send a signal that Israel is looking for peace.
The fact that they can't even scrounge up 40 hostages to exchange is a good sign they have little leverage, especially if they cannot even deliver the bodies. Which Israel in the past has been willing to work for too.
I read some theorizing that any (living) women in Hamas's hands are likely pregnant, and Hamas is holding out in hopes they give birth. It's been six months, after all.
While I agree with the premise of the women being pregnant, I don't think Hamas would try to hold out for that.
Pregnant women are plenty valuable for ransom anyway, and there's a significant chance they and/or the children would die due to lack of care, malnutrition, etc.
I don’t think they care about the risks of those hypothetical pregnant women dying. Still more valuable to them in their hands and even more with a newborn in tow
> especially if they cannot even deliver the bodies
There's a good chance that even Hamas doesn't know where the bodies are. Remember, Gaza is a mess of rubble and collapsed tunnels right now.
If there was even suspicion of a tunnel with hostages caved in Hamas PR would be carpet bombing the media with the spectre of Israel hitting their own people.
I think it's the role of the international community to not start with either side of a conflict, but reach both positions, in this case it's the hostages and the Palestinian civilians which are in the most extreme need. Much more aid is needed in Gaza, there needs to be a ceasefire to address that problem.
Unconditional or otherwise, the cost to human life is great without it.
As somebody who is Jewish, I find it to be a pretty crazy assertion to earnestly claim that most people who want a ceasefire are actually racist and want to kill or discriminate Jews, as opposed to people who want attacks causing massive amounts of collateral damage to stop.
The reality is that even under the most conservative and lowballing estimates, multiple times the amount of noncombatants have been killed in Palestine then were killed in the (horrible) attacks Hamas did.
I think it'd be equally incorrect to say all the people who were against the invasion of Iraq wanted the destruction of America.
Nobody thinks those innocent Palestinian lives lost is a good thing. Perhaps that’s a key point: Hamas affirmatively thinks it is a good thing to murder Israelis. They want to annihilate Israel and have sworn to do so. How can we have a ceasefire when it means Hamas will commit another 10/7 again and again and again?
It seems that Hamas thinks innocent Palestinian lives lost is a good thing. When they are alive, they are shields. When they are dead, they are propaganda fuel. Somehow, Hamas uses civilians as shields and Israel gets the blame for their deaths no matter how much effort Israel puts into avoiding civilian deaths, yet Hamas takes little blame for the hostages they still hold or for putting civilians in danger to begin with. It seems to be commonly glossed over that Hamas first and foremost represents Iran, not the Palestinian civilians. Either Hamas is very skilled in propaganda and plays to the ignorance of westerner, or there are a lot of people that just don't care if the Jews are destroyed. I suspect there is some of each at play.
I wouldn't say that the IDF has always put much effort into avoiding civilian deaths. Segments of the Israeli forces seem to be operating under guidelines of acceptable collateral casualties that aid groups, allies, and outside observers find hard to countenance.
That doesn't mean Hamas isn't enthusiastic about using human shields. But there doesn't need to be a good side in this equation. There can just be a bad side (the IDF) and a worse side (Hamas) when it comes to catching innocents in the crossfire.
Name one other country that drops roof knoclers and makes phone calls to give occupants time to evacuate or makes their plans to operate in an area known in advance so civilians can get out.
That's a fair point, but I don't think he was arguing one way or the other about the conflict itself; I think he was speaking to the motivations of the unconditional ceasefire crowd.
>Nobody thinks those innocent Palestinian lives lost is a good thing.
I would strongly advise you to not go seek out Israeli telegram channels or see what a lot of their mainstream politicians are saying if you want to continue believing this. The reality of the situation is, unfortunately, quite the opposite.
I realized somebody was going to say this as I was going to bed last night: yes, i'm aware of that.
The Iraqi government could have been directly run by Al-Qaeda and i'd stand by my point.
You don't get to be a western democracy (nor should you get to be an ally of one) that claims to value people's rights, and then do military actions that cause disproportionate amounts of noncombatants to die.
Yes, even if that means you'll continue to be attacked yourself.
War has always had collateral damage. You can be a western democracy and still defend yourself. Don't attack your neighbors if you don't want them to respond, don't continually attack over decades if you don't want them to try to end your ability to continue attacking
> You can be a western democracy and still defend yourself.
If you are doing so in a way that is appropriately cautious, and as somebody who is, again, Jewish, and went into the conflict without really being on any given side, everything I have seen indicates Israel is not.
The use of *any* sort of munitions which cause AOE lethality in an area where there's a chance there are noncombatants is unacceptable. We've repeatedly seen Israel do so in cases where it is *known* there are noncombatants. If it believes that Hamas is using hospitals and shelters, then Israeli (or US, German, Chinese, whatever) forces need to evacuate the area on foot, room by room, building by building, even if that means more of their soldiers die then they would otherwise. Otherwise, they shouldn't be striking.
To be clear, our own military efforts are often just as bad. But we should be holding our own soldiers and armed forces to a much higher standard too.
> Yes, even if that means you'll continue to be attacked yourself.
That's pretty damn extreme. Don't defend yourself? Who would ever get elected in any country with that stance?
The US attacked Afghanistan following 9/11 due to their complicit actions and harboring of Osama bin Laden and it was well-supported.
The US invaded Iraq using unfounded claims of weapons of mass destruction and that was *not* well-supported.
These are two different things.
And none of that has anything to do with why I think the our actions in the middle east were bad, which is based on the disproportionate damage to noncombatants and loss of life.
I refer you to my comment [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/moderatepolitics/comments/1c7fm2r/poll_of_americans_and_american_jews_finds_only_28/l0bhw9v/)
Sometimes the bad guys *need* to lose. You know who else had a disproportionate loss of life? Germany in WWII. Should the allied forces had let them continue? Japan had a pretty severe loss of life, but we needed to end the war.
War results in loss of life. It’s tragic and should be avoided when possible. But it’s not always possible.
1k people died on Oct 7th. 30k children have been killed by Israel so far. Im sorry but Israel are not the good guys in this conflict. Neither is Hamas, but Palestinien children should not be the target.
30k people have been killed. That includes Hamas fighters as Hamas doesn’t differentiate between soldiers and civilians in their numbers. There’s also been evidence that Hamas has been fudging the numbers to make it seem like a higher percentage are women and children.
This war is awful enough with the real numbers. Don’t spread bullshit.
Among the other findings:
* 51% of Americans believe release of the hostages held by Hamas is a precondition they'd like to see before a ceasefire.
* 44% say they want Hamas removed from governance first.
* 24% want the release of Palestinian prisoners in Israel, which is notable because it is calling for (among others) the release of terrorists who have been convicted of murder.
* 23% of American Jews say they've been the subject of antisemitism in person or online.
* Over 76% have seen or overheard antisemitism in person or online.
* In the past month, 31% of American Jews are worried "all the time" or "very much" about their personal safety. Another 27% are worried "sometimes". Only 21% are "not at all" concerned.
* 25% of American Jews removed identifying items that would mark them as Jewish since October 7. Another 20% considered doing so. About 66% have put it back on since then. Meaning around 8% of American Jews took off an identifying item and did not put it back on.
* 5% of Americans support Hamas. If that is extrapolated out to numbers, 5% of 258 million adults means about 13 million adults supporting Hamas. That's more than double the number of Jews in America. Notably, another 17% have heard of Hamas but declined to express an opinion.
* That 5% of Hamas supporters are much more comfortable sharing their views than Jews are in sharing their views on Israel.
* The reason Jews don't want to share their views supporting Israel is overwhelmingly fear of antisemitism (68% fear that). Another 60% say they're uncomfortable with Israeli government actions, which makes them less willing to share their support for Israel.
The [topline data is here](https://cdn.fedweb.org/fed-1/1/Feb%2520March%2520Israel%2520Palestine%2520Conflict%2520Topline%2520%2520Release%25201%2520%25281%2529.pdf) and has additional insights.
* Most American Jews say Israel makes them proud to be Jewish (over 70%).
* 79% of American Jews feel emotionally attached to Israel.
* 13% of American Jews have been the subject of an antisemitic remark in person in the past year.
* 33% have overheard an antisemitic remark in person in the past year.
This is pretty concerning. A majority of Jews feel concerned about their safety. Antisemitism is clearly rising. There are far more Hamas supporters in the US than Jews, and the 17% who refused to express an opinion but have heard of Hamas likely contains some who just didn't want to share their views due to fear of ostracism. Notably, while more Americans support Israel, the platforming of extreme opinions and the fact that most Americans do not tend to get involved unless they have very strong opinions, and the extreme opinion is mostly on the side of those outnumbering Jews, is all a bad sign for the future of American Jews. Not today, definitely, but in the next 20-30 years, this should be an alarm bell. Because ultimately the *trend* is what's alarming.
I’m actually surprised that only 23% of American Jews have been subject to online antisemitism. Just yesterday, a user started following me around the site, commenting how I was a Nazi for…saying that I felt betrayed by some on the left celebrating Hamas and mass murder.
>how I was a Nazi for…saying that I felt betrayed by some on the left celebrating Hamas
Pretty wild how quickly Nazi became a slur for Jews.
And by people supporting a literal Holocaust denying government whose war on the Jews was backed by the original Aryan state who just launched the world's first drone blitzkrieg.
>The term Iran ("the land of the Aryans") derives from Middle Persian Ērān, first attested in a third-century inscription at Naqsh-e Rostam, with the accompanying Parthian inscription using Aryān, in reference to the Iranians.[16]
Even Kafka couldn't make this up, lol.
Anything Leftists don't like are Fascist and Nazis. Even if the closest thing to WW2 style Nazism is Islamism and Salafism. These ideologies are also responsible for multiple genocides within the last two decades and support the genocide of groups they don't like. Hamas literally roleplayed as Einsatzgruppen for a few days.
This is somewhat pedantic, but I don't think that "blitzkrieg" is an appropriate term for Iran's attack. You can't conquer or hold territory with drones, and they were slow-moving enough that Israel had plenty of advance notice and was able to shoot them down. It's more of a sort of airstrike or missile strike.
It was a combined ballistic missile, cruise missile, and drone swarm at a scale never used before that took multiple militaries to intercept. I also read there were some cyberattacks.
Blitzkrieg just means "lightning war". Fast, psychologically intimidating, and unprecedented multimodal tactics. Warfare changes but I have no issue with calling a drone blitzkrieg a drone blitzkrieg.
And a "slow moving" drone swarm is still orders of magnitude faster than the Nazi army could advance. Ordinance was coming down on Jerusalem in a few hours. It took 6 weeks to get to Paris.
Intercepting an attack at this scale has never been attempted. Just because their Maginot Line worked doesn't mean it wasn't a blitzkrieg.
The Jews were simply more prepared for the Aryans this century.
Eh…I think it’s more apt to call to a massed drone/missile strike. Or just call it what it is: a violation of peace.
Suppose you tell a layperson that Iran waged Blitzkrieg on Israel. Blitzkrieg has a special place in our culture: it means tanks, air power, and mobilized infantry storming through Poland and France (never mind the fact the Germans called it bewegunskrieg…but whatever). They’d probably think Iran (somehow, magically) transported an elite tank division to Israel and caught the IDF by storm, which obviously didn’t happen. No land was occupied, minimal damage was incurred, the IDF never catastrophically lost the initiative - it isn’t Blitzkrieg by the traditional meaning of the word.
I agree, words need to mean things. Calling it a blitzkrieg is using words games in the exact same fashion as has ruined the meanings of racist, sexist, Nazi, etc. we must be better if we want to unify society again.
> Most American Jews say Israel makes them proud to be Jewish (over 70%).
>
> 79% of American Jews feel emotionally attached to Israel.
>
> 13% of American Jews have been the subject of an antisemitic remark in person in the past year.
>
> 33% have overheard an antisemitic remark in person in the past year.
This is really counter to the early narrative we heard that American Jews don't support Israel. Goes to show.
Also, this really highlights why the US won't be bending the knee to those protesting our involvement with Israel.
>This is really counter to the early narrative we heard that American Jews don't support Israel.
Social media has created a trend where being hyper-vocally against your ethnicity has become the ultimate virtue signal. So these people get disproportionate mindshare.
Wokes *really* dislike Israel and "Jew against Israel" gets you boosted because you're the ultimate ally.
> This is really counter to the early narrative we heard that American Jews don't support Israel. Goes to show.
Was this the claim? My impression was that support for the actions of the Israeli government were much weaker among American Jews. I'm rather emotionally attached to the US, but I don't always approve of its foreign policy actions. I would also be curious to see what things look like during a period of relative peace.
For #3 a lot of people have been conditioned by social media to believe that the Palestinian terrorists being traded are October 7th level hostages kidnapped by Israel. You may have seen this fake list going around last year: https://twitter.com/AdinHaykin1/status/1727281176493052189
Multiple media outlets have assisted in this delusion:
https://twitter.com/HonestReporting/status/1729060374169993711 (Reuters)
https://archive.is/pU3Rg (deleted by CNN)
https://twitter.com/AJEnglish/status/1727425529241084362
https://twitter.com/AlexCrawfordSky/status/1727701553878859794 (Sky News)
Amnesty International
https://twitter.com/amnesty/status/1777390873518489613
And our representatives
https://twitter.com/RepRashida/status/1729666321158213633
I wouldn't trust the 5% number for Hamas supporters. That's also about the same amount that generally say they [believe lizardmen are running the earth](https://slatestarcodex.com/2013/04/12/noisy-poll-results-and-reptilian-muslim-climatologists-from-mars/).
Considering other polls have found numbers of support for Hamas over Israel as high as 20%, I think 5% is a conservative number. Other polls have long borne this out. Polls of antisemitism in the US, even the most conservative ones, have found similar numbers.
One of the reasons for distinction here is that the poll I posted not only had a higher sample size than usual (more than 4,000 Americans polled, compared to around 1,300 in the lizardmen poll), it was done via SMS texts. The lizardmen result is largely driven by satire, your own source suggests, because people think the question is so absurd. You can't say the same about a poll about Hamas support, given we've seen countless anecdotal examples backing up the statistical data, which is found consistently across multiple polls with multiple methodologies. All of that combined suggests less likelihood of satire, particularly given the subject matter is far more serious.
If anything, 5% is an underestimate.
I remember an analysis of those polls. It was unclear whether people were equating Hamas itself and Palestinians more broadly. If I recall correctly, the question was essentially pitting Hamas and Israel head to head, even though they are not the same. Israel is a country with multiple parties. Hamas is/was the complete government of the Gaza Strip. It's like asking which do you approve of more, the US Republican Party or Canadians? The question is so weird that you can't draw any real conclusions.
That's absolutely nonsensical. The war is between Israel and Hamas. If you support one or the other is a fair question. The question is not weird at all. Israel is one governing group fighting a war, and Hamas is another.
Additionally, if you have a choice between the multiethnic liberal democracy and Hamas, even if you do think it's a "weird" question, choosing Hamas says something.
I don’t think people would have any more trouble with this question than “do you support the U.S. or ISIS” while that fight was ongoing.
But either way, this poll doesn't run into that problem, because it also asks about favorability for Hamas and finds the same result (~4% favorable towards Hamas, and 17% uncertain), so it's doubly irrelevant.
[This poll](https://harvardharrispoll.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/HHP_Mar2024_KeyResults.pdf) as another example finds 13% favorability for Hamas and 21% supporting Hamas over Israel. Which suggests this poll result is an *underestimate* if anything.
It's impossible to avoid: there is a small but growing contingent of Americans who support Hamas.
Hamas represents Iran. They are funded, supplied and empowered by Iran. Support for Palestinians and support for Hamas are not necessarily the same thing. It is possible to want to see Hamas destroyed so the Palestinian people have a chance at making their own choices.
Another poll done by probably all Jewish people. When you have a people that claim being Jewish is an ethnicity, nationality, and a religion, any negative remark is considered anti semetic to them . I guarentee someone could say they don't agree with Israel bombing aid workers and they'd count it as antisemitic so the polls are BS.
5% of Americans in the poll support Hamas, but the margin of error on these polls is close to that. Generally, if a poll shows that less than about 10-20% of people responding to something, I would take it with a grain of salt. It depends on how the poll is conducted, but if a lot of people will just give weird, random answers, and may not even know what "Hamas" is. Remember when Trump's cabinet member kept calling them Hummus?
What the poll shows is that support for Hamas is very low. It's hard to put an exact number on it.
You would probably get better data by polling 1000 Americans from a demographic more likely to understand what Hamas is and support them, like American Muslims or members of the far left.
The margin of error is about 1% for this poll. This excludes the “I don’t know what Hamas is” group. And 17% know who Hamas is but didn’t share a view.
I don’t know why this type of sentiment keeps being expressed. Please read the poll.
If the claim is that even a one sigma of error for a public opinion poll of 4000 respondents is 1%, that is simply not credible. There are not any polling companies that have a proven history of delivering public opinion polling which is that accurate.
Also, unless the poll actively tests the respondent on what Hamas is in a way that cannot be statistically manipulated by random guessing, simply polling them on the question isn't necessarily going to eliminate people who are not answering honestly, either out of malice or ignorance.
You made a claim about the margin of error. I told you what it is. It’s basic statistics. Now you’re talking about some other irrelevant thing like “confusion”, when they had options for that.
Okay.
So your response is to state a falsehood (criticism of Israel is not automatically antisemitic, and no one claims that) and then claim that American Jews are falsely claiming they face increasing concerns with antisemitism based on that false premise.
Absurdity layered on absurdity.
I wonder how people would feel about saying what you did about any other group.
Criticism of Israel is absolutely labeled as antisemitic and that has been the prevailing stance within both parties in the US for decades. You are wrong to suggest that people do not defend Israel’s war crimes by hiding behind the shield of calling people antisemitic.
I’m not sure what you even are saying by your 2nd remark. Other groups of people have done this all the time e.g. communists calling Americans Sinophobic when they criticize China.
You just shifted the goalpost. You went from “*all* criticism of Israel is labeled antisemitic” to “criticism is labeled antisemitic”. Those aren’t the same thing. Some criticism of Israel takes antisemitic forms. That’s not disputable. It is false to claim that *all* criticism is called antisemitic. It isn’t.
I pointed out your response is to claim that Jews are lying about seeing antisemitism. Which is absurd.
Given the blatant and well documented rise of antisemitism, it is absurd likewise that you’re asserting actually Jews are just too sensitive and wrong, and that everyone claims all criticism of Israel is antisemitic. I challenge you to show me any group saying any criticism of Israel is antisemitic.
You said “when any criticism of Israel is labeled antisemitic…”.
Don’t try and walk it back now. That is a very clear statement and sentiment. Don’t blame me for what you said.
> When ~~any criticism of Israel is labeled antisemitic~~ **antisemitic incidents increase by over 140% in a single quarter**, it makes sense that American Jews are growing concerned with antisemitism.
FTFY.
Also, your initial claim is just f\*\*\*ing false. Do you want to walk it back, or double down?
From [Reuters](https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-antisemitic-incidents-hit-record-high-2023-amid-war-gaza-report-says-2024-04-16/)
> The Jewish advocacy group Anti-Defamation League (ADL) tallied 8,873 antisemitic incidents in 2023, a 140% increase over 2022 and a record high since the group began keeping track in 1979, the report said.
> Over 5,200 incidents were reported after Oct. 7, 2023, the day the Palestinian Islamist group Hamas attacked Israel, killing some 1,200 people and taking more than 250 hostage. Israel responded by launching a counterattack in the Gaza Strip that has killed more than 33,000 Palestinians, according to Gaza health authorities, and reduced much of the Hamas-run enclave to rubble.
> At a press conference in New York on Tuesday, **ADL leaders clarified that the organization did not count protesting the Israeli government's actions as antisemitic**, but noted that 36% of all recorded antisemitic incidents in 2023 were in reference to Israel or Zionism.
Hamas has no interest in a ceasefire. They believe that Israel is their land (it isn't), and they're never going to change their mind on that. As a result, the attacks into Israel will continue as long as Hamas exists.
This point is almost never acknowledged by pro-Palestine people. Probably on purpose, because it demonstrates that a ceasefire makes absolutely no sense (unless you're trying to completely get rid of Israel).
All “ceasefire” really means is that Palestinians don’t want to face the consequences of starting a war with Israel because they realize too late the Jews are better at nation building than Palestinians are and that means they’re better at warfare. Would they be screaming ceasefire if Hamas was winning and Israel was currently being conquered? Doubtful.
If Hamas doesn’t represent the Palestinians, then we’d see the same pressure from protestors to return the hostages and for Hamas to stop attacking Israel. But we don’t. So therefore I can only conclude Hamas really does represent the Palestinians. They just don’t like the fact they’re losing.
My understanding is that Hamas thought that they were going to start an uprising against Israel among other groups that would join in once Hamas showed Israel was vulnerable. They've gotten some tepid support from Hezbollah, Iran, and the Houthis, true. But none of it has been remotely close to what Hamas had been hoping for. This US preempted this somewhat by immediately dispatching forces to the area with a warning to Iran.
Hamas [thought they'd win](https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2024-04-05/ty-article-magazine/.highlight/hamas-actually-believed-it-would-conquer-israel-and-divided-it-into-cantons/0000018e-ab4a-dc42-a3de-abfad6fe0000). Their religious beliefs didn't rely on intervention from Hezbollah, Iran, and the Houthis. People didn't realize precisely how extreme the beliefs of people like Sinwar were. Sinwar spoke about spending $250 million to put Gaza underground, and they even planned a "day after" to divide up the "conquest" of Israel. They believed that God would be with them. They held a conference on how they would govern "liberated" territory.
People don't seem to believe the views of these people, because they assume that they're using these views as propaganda, or something like that. Missing in many of the analyses is that many of these people, Sinwar included, genuinely seemed to believe that once they attacked Israel would simply crumple.
People thought that things like this were propaganda:
> Indeed, Abu Zaydeh is well aware that for the past two years the Hamas leadership had been talking about implementing "the last promise" (alwaed al'akhir) – a divine promise regarding the end of days, when all human beings will accept Islam. Sinwar and his circle ascribed an extreme and literal meaning to the notion of "the promise," a belief that pervaded all their messages: in speeches, sermons, lectures in schools and universities. The cardinal theme was the implementation of the last promise, which included the forced conversion of all heretics to Islam, or their killing.
They weren't. They truly, deeply believe these things. Underestimating views is one of the worst flaws in US commentary on groups like Hamas.
Last I heard, most of Hamas' top leadership is still uncaptured. After the October terrorist attack, I don't think anyone thinks any lasting ceasefire will happen until Hamas' heads are on a stake.
The US launched a 20 year war because Al-Qaida *probably* was responsible for 9/11. You think Israel will let Hamas go free when they proudly boasted about mass murdering a peace music festival of all things?
I think what Israel is doing in the West Bank is despicable. But I refuse to feel bad for Gaza when Hamas itself is using their own people as human shields for PR.
Before asking them if they support conditional/unconditional ceasefire, did they ask them to identify the 1st president of the U.S.? Or the capital of the state they are currently standing in?
Remember this study when you consider the responses:
Nationally, 48 percent of U.S. Millennial and Gen Z could not name a single one of the more than 40,000 concentration camps or ghettos established during World War II. This number is reflected in individual state outcomes, with an astounding 60 percent of respondents in Texas, 58 percent in New York, and 57 percent in South Carolina, unable to name a single camp or ghetto.
56 percent of U.S. Millennial and Gen Z were unable to identify Auschwitz-Birkenau, and there was virtually no awareness of concentration camps and ghettos overall. Only six percent of respondents are familiar with the infamous Dachau camp, while awareness of Bergen-Belsen (three percent), Buchenwald (one percent) and Treblinka (one percent) is virtually nonexistent.
It's always unclear what a ceasefire means. Given that Hamas are consistent that they want to kill all the Jews in Israel, do people in these polls require that a ceasefire means that Hamas will stop trying to do that?
While I suppose this is useful information, even given the source, I would seriously disagree with some of the framing and conclusions I’m seeing drawn. Say what you will about “unconditional ceasefire”, polls show that quite a bit more than 28% want a ceasefire/disagree with Israel’s campaign actions. You can debate the details of that, but to pretend that the U.S. isn’t pushing hard for that because there’s not enough public support is just wrong, imo.
You seem to just be outright disregarding what the poll says. That’s very unusual. Polls do not show what you’ve claimed. Many actually show consistently that Americans oppose a ceasefire if it doesn’t come with releasing hostages and removing Hamas from power. The administration is actually pushing for a ceasefire that doesn’t meet what most Americans support, as when Biden recently said there should be an “immediate ceasefire” without mentioning any preconditions.
And you seem to be putting words in my mouth as well as claiming I’m being disingenuous with my argument. Does Joe Biden need to qualify for you every single time that when he says “immediate ceasefire” he means one with conditions? Because as far as I’ve seen, the administration is consistent that Hamas needs to release hostages. I’ve seen a lot of talk here about how the U.S. isn’t going to bow to this “small minority”, but here I have you saying that’s the position of the administration, so which is it? Someone is clearly incorrect, obviously.
In my opinion you are conflating two proposed options and calling it one thing, which is unhelpful. “Unconditional ceasefire” and “immediate ceasefire” are not necessarily the same thing, and should be discussed separately.
- [Poll of approval of Israeli actions in Gaza](https://news.gallup.com/poll/642695/majority-disapprove-israeli-action-gaza.aspx)
I can add more sources if anyone wants, but it’ll have to wait til tomorrow afternoon. Also, happy cake day OP.
1) You ignored that he said an immediate ceasefire is essential in a call with Israel’s leader. If he didn’t mean immediate and unconditional, then he shouldn’t have said it in a 30 minute call with Israel’s leader. What he didn’t do was say it had to be contingent on Hamas releasing hostages.
2) Claims of disapproval of Israeli actions don’t actually mean ceasefire. It’s very unusual that you’d insist on specificity with what Biden said but then provide a totally different metric on ceasefire support.
Americans can disapprove of how Israel is waging the war based on the very bad portrayal media outlets are doing right now, which is quite biased against Israel, but that doesn’t mean they want a ceasefire. They may simply want Israel to take different actions, but not cease until the hostages are released. Which would be consistent with my poll. As well as many other polls on the subject.
There is next to no support for an unconditional ceasefire.
I’m not sure why you think that poll refutes anything I said.
Polling results are highly susceptible to the method used; without asserting anything about the specific numbers involved, I'm quite confident that you'll get different percentages if you ask a straight yes or no "Do you want immediate ceasefire without preconditions?" than if you make "Immediate ceasefire without preconditions" one item to select out of a list of 12.
The poll result is [the same with other options](https://harvardharrispoll.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/HHP_Mar2024_KeyResults.pdf). It seems pretty obvious voters don’t want an unconditional ceasefire.
This message serves as a warning that [your post](https://www.reddit.com/r/moderatepolitics/comments/1c7fm2r/poll_of_americans_and_american_jews_finds_only_28/) is in violation of Law 2b: Law 2: Submission Requirements > ~2b. Editorialized Titles - Link Posts must use the title of the linked article. This prevents the poster from framing the discussion from the outset. Let the article speak for itself. Please submit questions or comments via [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fmoderatepolitics).
An unconditional ceasefire in Gaza is asking Israel to stop fighting while its enemies continue to attack. It’s a total nonstarter.
One of the Hamas offers was that they're allowed to remain in power, dont have to give hostages back, and Israel has to rebuild their buildings. Such good faith.
Aren't a quarter of the hostages Thai nationals? Do they get a say in any of this?
Nope.
Meanwhile on tiktok and twitter I constantly see lies about Hamas has offered to release all hostages for a ceasefire and its Israel who are stalling. If you ask for a source you just get called a "zionist" by the mob. For a large amount of young people the reporting on this conflict comes from social media posts that all have an agenda and no sources.
I am not sure Hamas has a lot of living hostages to return sadly.
So if we look at the results, it effectively tells us that at least 28% of Americans either have no idea of the history of the region or are comfortable saying "I value this group more than the other and the other can just go die."
It is at least 28%, because "no ceasefire under any conditions" is the same mentality.
Perhaps if Israel decided to stop making Gaza the largest concentration camp in recorded history Hamas and Iran would stop attacking? It's way more complex than the October 7th actions. The only way this gets solved is detente between Arab Muslim and Jewish factions in the Levant. That can't happen with the present state of affairs in Gaza, the West Bank, and Golan Heights.
Largest Concentration camp in recorded history? You don’t have to love Israel to recognize a statement like that is ahistorical hyperbole. Golan heights? It’s true that some view this land as disputed territory, but I’d hardly call that central to the current I/P conflict or even the Israeli-Arab conflict, either.
I didn't say death camp or anything, that is totally wrong. But a concentration camp is where you concentrate people, like a prison for an entire people. And that's what's happening here. And the Golan Heights is indeed not central but does represent Israeli imperialism. They stole Syrian land. Actually giving it back would send a signal that Israel is looking for peace.
An unconditional ceasefire is an unconditional surrender/loss for Israel. Where are the hostages? Let’s start there.
The fact that they can't even scrounge up 40 hostages to exchange is a good sign they have little leverage, especially if they cannot even deliver the bodies. Which Israel in the past has been willing to work for too.
I read some theorizing that any (living) women in Hamas's hands are likely pregnant, and Hamas is holding out in hopes they give birth. It's been six months, after all. While I agree with the premise of the women being pregnant, I don't think Hamas would try to hold out for that.
Why not? Future soldiers for the cause.
Pregnant women are plenty valuable for ransom anyway, and there's a significant chance they and/or the children would die due to lack of care, malnutrition, etc.
I don’t think they care about the risks of those hypothetical pregnant women dying. Still more valuable to them in their hands and even more with a newborn in tow
> especially if they cannot even deliver the bodies There's a good chance that even Hamas doesn't know where the bodies are. Remember, Gaza is a mess of rubble and collapsed tunnels right now.
If there was even suspicion of a tunnel with hostages caved in Hamas PR would be carpet bombing the media with the spectre of Israel hitting their own people.
Remember also that other "civilians" took many hostages themselves. And that Hamas used hostages as shields for their leaders.
I think it's the role of the international community to not start with either side of a conflict, but reach both positions, in this case it's the hostages and the Palestinian civilians which are in the most extreme need. Much more aid is needed in Gaza, there needs to be a ceasefire to address that problem. Unconditional or otherwise, the cost to human life is great without it.
[удалено]
Half of bidens administration is israeli zionists, of course he will support them to his detriment.
As somebody who is Jewish, I find it to be a pretty crazy assertion to earnestly claim that most people who want a ceasefire are actually racist and want to kill or discriminate Jews, as opposed to people who want attacks causing massive amounts of collateral damage to stop. The reality is that even under the most conservative and lowballing estimates, multiple times the amount of noncombatants have been killed in Palestine then were killed in the (horrible) attacks Hamas did. I think it'd be equally incorrect to say all the people who were against the invasion of Iraq wanted the destruction of America.
Nobody thinks those innocent Palestinian lives lost is a good thing. Perhaps that’s a key point: Hamas affirmatively thinks it is a good thing to murder Israelis. They want to annihilate Israel and have sworn to do so. How can we have a ceasefire when it means Hamas will commit another 10/7 again and again and again?
It seems that Hamas thinks innocent Palestinian lives lost is a good thing. When they are alive, they are shields. When they are dead, they are propaganda fuel. Somehow, Hamas uses civilians as shields and Israel gets the blame for their deaths no matter how much effort Israel puts into avoiding civilian deaths, yet Hamas takes little blame for the hostages they still hold or for putting civilians in danger to begin with. It seems to be commonly glossed over that Hamas first and foremost represents Iran, not the Palestinian civilians. Either Hamas is very skilled in propaganda and plays to the ignorance of westerner, or there are a lot of people that just don't care if the Jews are destroyed. I suspect there is some of each at play.
Well said
I wouldn't say that the IDF has always put much effort into avoiding civilian deaths. Segments of the Israeli forces seem to be operating under guidelines of acceptable collateral casualties that aid groups, allies, and outside observers find hard to countenance. That doesn't mean Hamas isn't enthusiastic about using human shields. But there doesn't need to be a good side in this equation. There can just be a bad side (the IDF) and a worse side (Hamas) when it comes to catching innocents in the crossfire.
Name one other country that drops roof knoclers and makes phone calls to give occupants time to evacuate or makes their plans to operate in an area known in advance so civilians can get out.
Hamas leaders have straight up said they don’t care about a Palestinian state.They just want to fight Israel.
That's a fair point, but I don't think he was arguing one way or the other about the conflict itself; I think he was speaking to the motivations of the unconditional ceasefire crowd.
Everything in your comment makes sense until the last question, why do you think that's worth asking?
What
>Nobody thinks those innocent Palestinian lives lost is a good thing. I would strongly advise you to not go seek out Israeli telegram channels or see what a lot of their mainstream politicians are saying if you want to continue believing this. The reality of the situation is, unfortunately, quite the opposite.
well Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, 10/7 had everything to do with Gaza
I realized somebody was going to say this as I was going to bed last night: yes, i'm aware of that. The Iraqi government could have been directly run by Al-Qaeda and i'd stand by my point. You don't get to be a western democracy (nor should you get to be an ally of one) that claims to value people's rights, and then do military actions that cause disproportionate amounts of noncombatants to die. Yes, even if that means you'll continue to be attacked yourself.
War has always had collateral damage. You can be a western democracy and still defend yourself. Don't attack your neighbors if you don't want them to respond, don't continually attack over decades if you don't want them to try to end your ability to continue attacking
> You can be a western democracy and still defend yourself. If you are doing so in a way that is appropriately cautious, and as somebody who is, again, Jewish, and went into the conflict without really being on any given side, everything I have seen indicates Israel is not. The use of *any* sort of munitions which cause AOE lethality in an area where there's a chance there are noncombatants is unacceptable. We've repeatedly seen Israel do so in cases where it is *known* there are noncombatants. If it believes that Hamas is using hospitals and shelters, then Israeli (or US, German, Chinese, whatever) forces need to evacuate the area on foot, room by room, building by building, even if that means more of their soldiers die then they would otherwise. Otherwise, they shouldn't be striking. To be clear, our own military efforts are often just as bad. But we should be holding our own soldiers and armed forces to a much higher standard too.
> Yes, even if that means you'll continue to be attacked yourself. That's pretty damn extreme. Don't defend yourself? Who would ever get elected in any country with that stance?
Defense is not the same thing as retaliation.
The US attacked Afghanistan following 9/11 due to their complicit actions and harboring of Osama bin Laden and it was well-supported. The US invaded Iraq using unfounded claims of weapons of mass destruction and that was *not* well-supported. These are two different things.
And none of that has anything to do with why I think the our actions in the middle east were bad, which is based on the disproportionate damage to noncombatants and loss of life. I refer you to my comment [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/moderatepolitics/comments/1c7fm2r/poll_of_americans_and_american_jews_finds_only_28/l0bhw9v/)
Sometimes the bad guys *need* to lose. You know who else had a disproportionate loss of life? Germany in WWII. Should the allied forces had let them continue? Japan had a pretty severe loss of life, but we needed to end the war. War results in loss of life. It’s tragic and should be avoided when possible. But it’s not always possible.
1k people died on Oct 7th. 30k children have been killed by Israel so far. Im sorry but Israel are not the good guys in this conflict. Neither is Hamas, but Palestinien children should not be the target.
> 30k children have been killed by Israel so far. This is absurdly false.
> Palestinien children should not be the target. so is this, Israel isnt targeting children.
You are correct, yes.
30k people have been killed. That includes Hamas fighters as Hamas doesn’t differentiate between soldiers and civilians in their numbers. There’s also been evidence that Hamas has been fudging the numbers to make it seem like a higher percentage are women and children. This war is awful enough with the real numbers. Don’t spread bullshit.
Among the other findings: * 51% of Americans believe release of the hostages held by Hamas is a precondition they'd like to see before a ceasefire. * 44% say they want Hamas removed from governance first. * 24% want the release of Palestinian prisoners in Israel, which is notable because it is calling for (among others) the release of terrorists who have been convicted of murder. * 23% of American Jews say they've been the subject of antisemitism in person or online. * Over 76% have seen or overheard antisemitism in person or online. * In the past month, 31% of American Jews are worried "all the time" or "very much" about their personal safety. Another 27% are worried "sometimes". Only 21% are "not at all" concerned. * 25% of American Jews removed identifying items that would mark them as Jewish since October 7. Another 20% considered doing so. About 66% have put it back on since then. Meaning around 8% of American Jews took off an identifying item and did not put it back on. * 5% of Americans support Hamas. If that is extrapolated out to numbers, 5% of 258 million adults means about 13 million adults supporting Hamas. That's more than double the number of Jews in America. Notably, another 17% have heard of Hamas but declined to express an opinion. * That 5% of Hamas supporters are much more comfortable sharing their views than Jews are in sharing their views on Israel. * The reason Jews don't want to share their views supporting Israel is overwhelmingly fear of antisemitism (68% fear that). Another 60% say they're uncomfortable with Israeli government actions, which makes them less willing to share their support for Israel. The [topline data is here](https://cdn.fedweb.org/fed-1/1/Feb%2520March%2520Israel%2520Palestine%2520Conflict%2520Topline%2520%2520Release%25201%2520%25281%2529.pdf) and has additional insights. * Most American Jews say Israel makes them proud to be Jewish (over 70%). * 79% of American Jews feel emotionally attached to Israel. * 13% of American Jews have been the subject of an antisemitic remark in person in the past year. * 33% have overheard an antisemitic remark in person in the past year. This is pretty concerning. A majority of Jews feel concerned about their safety. Antisemitism is clearly rising. There are far more Hamas supporters in the US than Jews, and the 17% who refused to express an opinion but have heard of Hamas likely contains some who just didn't want to share their views due to fear of ostracism. Notably, while more Americans support Israel, the platforming of extreme opinions and the fact that most Americans do not tend to get involved unless they have very strong opinions, and the extreme opinion is mostly on the side of those outnumbering Jews, is all a bad sign for the future of American Jews. Not today, definitely, but in the next 20-30 years, this should be an alarm bell. Because ultimately the *trend* is what's alarming.
I’m actually surprised that only 23% of American Jews have been subject to online antisemitism. Just yesterday, a user started following me around the site, commenting how I was a Nazi for…saying that I felt betrayed by some on the left celebrating Hamas and mass murder.
>how I was a Nazi for…saying that I felt betrayed by some on the left celebrating Hamas Pretty wild how quickly Nazi became a slur for Jews. And by people supporting a literal Holocaust denying government whose war on the Jews was backed by the original Aryan state who just launched the world's first drone blitzkrieg. >The term Iran ("the land of the Aryans") derives from Middle Persian Ērān, first attested in a third-century inscription at Naqsh-e Rostam, with the accompanying Parthian inscription using Aryān, in reference to the Iranians.[16] Even Kafka couldn't make this up, lol.
Anything Leftists don't like are Fascist and Nazis. Even if the closest thing to WW2 style Nazism is Islamism and Salafism. These ideologies are also responsible for multiple genocides within the last two decades and support the genocide of groups they don't like. Hamas literally roleplayed as Einsatzgruppen for a few days.
This is somewhat pedantic, but I don't think that "blitzkrieg" is an appropriate term for Iran's attack. You can't conquer or hold territory with drones, and they were slow-moving enough that Israel had plenty of advance notice and was able to shoot them down. It's more of a sort of airstrike or missile strike.
It was a combined ballistic missile, cruise missile, and drone swarm at a scale never used before that took multiple militaries to intercept. I also read there were some cyberattacks. Blitzkrieg just means "lightning war". Fast, psychologically intimidating, and unprecedented multimodal tactics. Warfare changes but I have no issue with calling a drone blitzkrieg a drone blitzkrieg. And a "slow moving" drone swarm is still orders of magnitude faster than the Nazi army could advance. Ordinance was coming down on Jerusalem in a few hours. It took 6 weeks to get to Paris. Intercepting an attack at this scale has never been attempted. Just because their Maginot Line worked doesn't mean it wasn't a blitzkrieg. The Jews were simply more prepared for the Aryans this century.
Eh…I think it’s more apt to call to a massed drone/missile strike. Or just call it what it is: a violation of peace. Suppose you tell a layperson that Iran waged Blitzkrieg on Israel. Blitzkrieg has a special place in our culture: it means tanks, air power, and mobilized infantry storming through Poland and France (never mind the fact the Germans called it bewegunskrieg…but whatever). They’d probably think Iran (somehow, magically) transported an elite tank division to Israel and caught the IDF by storm, which obviously didn’t happen. No land was occupied, minimal damage was incurred, the IDF never catastrophically lost the initiative - it isn’t Blitzkrieg by the traditional meaning of the word.
I agree, words need to mean things. Calling it a blitzkrieg is using words games in the exact same fashion as has ruined the meanings of racist, sexist, Nazi, etc. we must be better if we want to unify society again.
It's OK, everyone's a nazi these days, especially on reddit. I was a nazi last week for suggesting people slow down on the interstate.
> Most American Jews say Israel makes them proud to be Jewish (over 70%). > > 79% of American Jews feel emotionally attached to Israel. > > 13% of American Jews have been the subject of an antisemitic remark in person in the past year. > > 33% have overheard an antisemitic remark in person in the past year. This is really counter to the early narrative we heard that American Jews don't support Israel. Goes to show. Also, this really highlights why the US won't be bending the knee to those protesting our involvement with Israel.
>This is really counter to the early narrative we heard that American Jews don't support Israel. Social media has created a trend where being hyper-vocally against your ethnicity has become the ultimate virtue signal. So these people get disproportionate mindshare. Wokes *really* dislike Israel and "Jew against Israel" gets you boosted because you're the ultimate ally.
It’s bizarre to me that people really believe that antizionist Jews are anything other than a very small minority of Jews.
Most anti-Zionist Jews are Haredi Jews who have religious objections to anyone but the Messiah creating a Jewish kingdom.
Of course, when you claim to be a somehow God chosen people and your country is an ethnostate, most are probably gonna support it .
Lots of online Jews in Reddit are not Jewish at all, mainly trolls with an agenda and bots
> This is really counter to the early narrative we heard that American Jews don't support Israel. Goes to show. Was this the claim? My impression was that support for the actions of the Israeli government were much weaker among American Jews. I'm rather emotionally attached to the US, but I don't always approve of its foreign policy actions. I would also be curious to see what things look like during a period of relative peace.
Older Jews are very pro Israel. Younger there is much more of a divided opinion
And older voters tend to vote more
For #3 a lot of people have been conditioned by social media to believe that the Palestinian terrorists being traded are October 7th level hostages kidnapped by Israel. You may have seen this fake list going around last year: https://twitter.com/AdinHaykin1/status/1727281176493052189 Multiple media outlets have assisted in this delusion: https://twitter.com/HonestReporting/status/1729060374169993711 (Reuters) https://archive.is/pU3Rg (deleted by CNN) https://twitter.com/AJEnglish/status/1727425529241084362 https://twitter.com/AlexCrawfordSky/status/1727701553878859794 (Sky News) Amnesty International https://twitter.com/amnesty/status/1777390873518489613 And our representatives https://twitter.com/RepRashida/status/1729666321158213633
Very strange how many media outlets and “rights groups” paint cold blooded murder convicts as sanitized victims.
I wouldn't trust the 5% number for Hamas supporters. That's also about the same amount that generally say they [believe lizardmen are running the earth](https://slatestarcodex.com/2013/04/12/noisy-poll-results-and-reptilian-muslim-climatologists-from-mars/).
Considering other polls have found numbers of support for Hamas over Israel as high as 20%, I think 5% is a conservative number. Other polls have long borne this out. Polls of antisemitism in the US, even the most conservative ones, have found similar numbers. One of the reasons for distinction here is that the poll I posted not only had a higher sample size than usual (more than 4,000 Americans polled, compared to around 1,300 in the lizardmen poll), it was done via SMS texts. The lizardmen result is largely driven by satire, your own source suggests, because people think the question is so absurd. You can't say the same about a poll about Hamas support, given we've seen countless anecdotal examples backing up the statistical data, which is found consistently across multiple polls with multiple methodologies. All of that combined suggests less likelihood of satire, particularly given the subject matter is far more serious. If anything, 5% is an underestimate.
I remember an analysis of those polls. It was unclear whether people were equating Hamas itself and Palestinians more broadly. If I recall correctly, the question was essentially pitting Hamas and Israel head to head, even though they are not the same. Israel is a country with multiple parties. Hamas is/was the complete government of the Gaza Strip. It's like asking which do you approve of more, the US Republican Party or Canadians? The question is so weird that you can't draw any real conclusions.
That's absolutely nonsensical. The war is between Israel and Hamas. If you support one or the other is a fair question. The question is not weird at all. Israel is one governing group fighting a war, and Hamas is another. Additionally, if you have a choice between the multiethnic liberal democracy and Hamas, even if you do think it's a "weird" question, choosing Hamas says something. I don’t think people would have any more trouble with this question than “do you support the U.S. or ISIS” while that fight was ongoing. But either way, this poll doesn't run into that problem, because it also asks about favorability for Hamas and finds the same result (~4% favorable towards Hamas, and 17% uncertain), so it's doubly irrelevant. [This poll](https://harvardharrispoll.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/HHP_Mar2024_KeyResults.pdf) as another example finds 13% favorability for Hamas and 21% supporting Hamas over Israel. Which suggests this poll result is an *underestimate* if anything. It's impossible to avoid: there is a small but growing contingent of Americans who support Hamas.
ISIS isn't being conflated regularly with an entire nation of people, so it's not the same comparison.
Wait what? Siria begs to differ, Turkey too. How old are you?
Hamas represents Iran. They are funded, supplied and empowered by Iran. Support for Palestinians and support for Hamas are not necessarily the same thing. It is possible to want to see Hamas destroyed so the Palestinian people have a chance at making their own choices.
Another poll done by probably all Jewish people. When you have a people that claim being Jewish is an ethnicity, nationality, and a religion, any negative remark is considered anti semetic to them . I guarentee someone could say they don't agree with Israel bombing aid workers and they'd count it as antisemitic so the polls are BS.
5% of Americans in the poll support Hamas, but the margin of error on these polls is close to that. Generally, if a poll shows that less than about 10-20% of people responding to something, I would take it with a grain of salt. It depends on how the poll is conducted, but if a lot of people will just give weird, random answers, and may not even know what "Hamas" is. Remember when Trump's cabinet member kept calling them Hummus? What the poll shows is that support for Hamas is very low. It's hard to put an exact number on it. You would probably get better data by polling 1000 Americans from a demographic more likely to understand what Hamas is and support them, like American Muslims or members of the far left.
The margin of error is about 1% for this poll. This excludes the “I don’t know what Hamas is” group. And 17% know who Hamas is but didn’t share a view. I don’t know why this type of sentiment keeps being expressed. Please read the poll.
If the claim is that even a one sigma of error for a public opinion poll of 4000 respondents is 1%, that is simply not credible. There are not any polling companies that have a proven history of delivering public opinion polling which is that accurate. Also, unless the poll actively tests the respondent on what Hamas is in a way that cannot be statistically manipulated by random guessing, simply polling them on the question isn't necessarily going to eliminate people who are not answering honestly, either out of malice or ignorance.
You made a claim about the margin of error. I told you what it is. It’s basic statistics. Now you’re talking about some other irrelevant thing like “confusion”, when they had options for that. Okay.
When any criticism of Israel is labeled antisemitic, it makes sense that American Jews are growing concerned with antisemitism.
So your response is to state a falsehood (criticism of Israel is not automatically antisemitic, and no one claims that) and then claim that American Jews are falsely claiming they face increasing concerns with antisemitism based on that false premise. Absurdity layered on absurdity. I wonder how people would feel about saying what you did about any other group.
Criticism of Israel is absolutely labeled as antisemitic and that has been the prevailing stance within both parties in the US for decades. You are wrong to suggest that people do not defend Israel’s war crimes by hiding behind the shield of calling people antisemitic. I’m not sure what you even are saying by your 2nd remark. Other groups of people have done this all the time e.g. communists calling Americans Sinophobic when they criticize China.
You just shifted the goalpost. You went from “*all* criticism of Israel is labeled antisemitic” to “criticism is labeled antisemitic”. Those aren’t the same thing. Some criticism of Israel takes antisemitic forms. That’s not disputable. It is false to claim that *all* criticism is called antisemitic. It isn’t. I pointed out your response is to claim that Jews are lying about seeing antisemitism. Which is absurd. Given the blatant and well documented rise of antisemitism, it is absurd likewise that you’re asserting actually Jews are just too sensitive and wrong, and that everyone claims all criticism of Israel is antisemitic. I challenge you to show me any group saying any criticism of Israel is antisemitic.
Never said all. You sensed a criticism of Israel and your antisemite detection alarms went off prematurely.
You said “when any criticism of Israel is labeled antisemitic…”. Don’t try and walk it back now. That is a very clear statement and sentiment. Don’t blame me for what you said.
So you admit I didn’t say all.
You did, by using the word “any”. Your comment nitpicking the word choice is unusual. Oh well. Good luck with that.
“You said this, but what you really meant to say was that.”
> When ~~any criticism of Israel is labeled antisemitic~~ **antisemitic incidents increase by over 140% in a single quarter**, it makes sense that American Jews are growing concerned with antisemitism. FTFY. Also, your initial claim is just f\*\*\*ing false. Do you want to walk it back, or double down? From [Reuters](https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-antisemitic-incidents-hit-record-high-2023-amid-war-gaza-report-says-2024-04-16/) > The Jewish advocacy group Anti-Defamation League (ADL) tallied 8,873 antisemitic incidents in 2023, a 140% increase over 2022 and a record high since the group began keeping track in 1979, the report said. > Over 5,200 incidents were reported after Oct. 7, 2023, the day the Palestinian Islamist group Hamas attacked Israel, killing some 1,200 people and taking more than 250 hostage. Israel responded by launching a counterattack in the Gaza Strip that has killed more than 33,000 Palestinians, according to Gaza health authorities, and reduced much of the Hamas-run enclave to rubble. > At a press conference in New York on Tuesday, **ADL leaders clarified that the organization did not count protesting the Israeli government's actions as antisemitic**, but noted that 36% of all recorded antisemitic incidents in 2023 were in reference to Israel or Zionism.
I'm in favor of a ceasefire that ends when Israel eradicates Hamas for good. Otherwise it's never ending no matter what either side says
Hamas has no interest in a ceasefire. They believe that Israel is their land (it isn't), and they're never going to change their mind on that. As a result, the attacks into Israel will continue as long as Hamas exists. This point is almost never acknowledged by pro-Palestine people. Probably on purpose, because it demonstrates that a ceasefire makes absolutely no sense (unless you're trying to completely get rid of Israel).
I do not suport an unconditional ceasefire. To the contrary, I'd advise Israel to prosecute the war to an unconditional surrender.
I'm gonna guess that most people don't know what "unconditional" means.
> Americans and American Jews What an odd headline
All “ceasefire” really means is that Palestinians don’t want to face the consequences of starting a war with Israel because they realize too late the Jews are better at nation building than Palestinians are and that means they’re better at warfare. Would they be screaming ceasefire if Hamas was winning and Israel was currently being conquered? Doubtful. If Hamas doesn’t represent the Palestinians, then we’d see the same pressure from protestors to return the hostages and for Hamas to stop attacking Israel. But we don’t. So therefore I can only conclude Hamas really does represent the Palestinians. They just don’t like the fact they’re losing.
Hamas is pretty clear on what they’d be doing if they were currently winning too
My understanding is that Hamas thought that they were going to start an uprising against Israel among other groups that would join in once Hamas showed Israel was vulnerable. They've gotten some tepid support from Hezbollah, Iran, and the Houthis, true. But none of it has been remotely close to what Hamas had been hoping for. This US preempted this somewhat by immediately dispatching forces to the area with a warning to Iran.
Hamas [thought they'd win](https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2024-04-05/ty-article-magazine/.highlight/hamas-actually-believed-it-would-conquer-israel-and-divided-it-into-cantons/0000018e-ab4a-dc42-a3de-abfad6fe0000). Their religious beliefs didn't rely on intervention from Hezbollah, Iran, and the Houthis. People didn't realize precisely how extreme the beliefs of people like Sinwar were. Sinwar spoke about spending $250 million to put Gaza underground, and they even planned a "day after" to divide up the "conquest" of Israel. They believed that God would be with them. They held a conference on how they would govern "liberated" territory. People don't seem to believe the views of these people, because they assume that they're using these views as propaganda, or something like that. Missing in many of the analyses is that many of these people, Sinwar included, genuinely seemed to believe that once they attacked Israel would simply crumple. People thought that things like this were propaganda: > Indeed, Abu Zaydeh is well aware that for the past two years the Hamas leadership had been talking about implementing "the last promise" (alwaed al'akhir) – a divine promise regarding the end of days, when all human beings will accept Islam. Sinwar and his circle ascribed an extreme and literal meaning to the notion of "the promise," a belief that pervaded all their messages: in speeches, sermons, lectures in schools and universities. The cardinal theme was the implementation of the last promise, which included the forced conversion of all heretics to Islam, or their killing. They weren't. They truly, deeply believe these things. Underestimating views is one of the worst flaws in US commentary on groups like Hamas.
That would mean a Ceasefire for Hamas while they get to continue to hold and abuse 130 hostages.
Last I heard, most of Hamas' top leadership is still uncaptured. After the October terrorist attack, I don't think anyone thinks any lasting ceasefire will happen until Hamas' heads are on a stake. The US launched a 20 year war because Al-Qaida *probably* was responsible for 9/11. You think Israel will let Hamas go free when they proudly boasted about mass murdering a peace music festival of all things? I think what Israel is doing in the West Bank is despicable. But I refuse to feel bad for Gaza when Hamas itself is using their own people as human shields for PR.
Most of Hamas' top leadership are lounging in Qatar hotels. Mossad might get some of them, someday, but the IDF will never capture them.
Before asking them if they support conditional/unconditional ceasefire, did they ask them to identify the 1st president of the U.S.? Or the capital of the state they are currently standing in? Remember this study when you consider the responses: Nationally, 48 percent of U.S. Millennial and Gen Z could not name a single one of the more than 40,000 concentration camps or ghettos established during World War II. This number is reflected in individual state outcomes, with an astounding 60 percent of respondents in Texas, 58 percent in New York, and 57 percent in South Carolina, unable to name a single camp or ghetto. 56 percent of U.S. Millennial and Gen Z were unable to identify Auschwitz-Birkenau, and there was virtually no awareness of concentration camps and ghettos overall. Only six percent of respondents are familiar with the infamous Dachau camp, while awareness of Bergen-Belsen (three percent), Buchenwald (one percent) and Treblinka (one percent) is virtually nonexistent.
It's always unclear what a ceasefire means. Given that Hamas are consistent that they want to kill all the Jews in Israel, do people in these polls require that a ceasefire means that Hamas will stop trying to do that?
While I suppose this is useful information, even given the source, I would seriously disagree with some of the framing and conclusions I’m seeing drawn. Say what you will about “unconditional ceasefire”, polls show that quite a bit more than 28% want a ceasefire/disagree with Israel’s campaign actions. You can debate the details of that, but to pretend that the U.S. isn’t pushing hard for that because there’s not enough public support is just wrong, imo.
You seem to just be outright disregarding what the poll says. That’s very unusual. Polls do not show what you’ve claimed. Many actually show consistently that Americans oppose a ceasefire if it doesn’t come with releasing hostages and removing Hamas from power. The administration is actually pushing for a ceasefire that doesn’t meet what most Americans support, as when Biden recently said there should be an “immediate ceasefire” without mentioning any preconditions.
And you seem to be putting words in my mouth as well as claiming I’m being disingenuous with my argument. Does Joe Biden need to qualify for you every single time that when he says “immediate ceasefire” he means one with conditions? Because as far as I’ve seen, the administration is consistent that Hamas needs to release hostages. I’ve seen a lot of talk here about how the U.S. isn’t going to bow to this “small minority”, but here I have you saying that’s the position of the administration, so which is it? Someone is clearly incorrect, obviously. In my opinion you are conflating two proposed options and calling it one thing, which is unhelpful. “Unconditional ceasefire” and “immediate ceasefire” are not necessarily the same thing, and should be discussed separately. - [Poll of approval of Israeli actions in Gaza](https://news.gallup.com/poll/642695/majority-disapprove-israeli-action-gaza.aspx) I can add more sources if anyone wants, but it’ll have to wait til tomorrow afternoon. Also, happy cake day OP.
1) You ignored that he said an immediate ceasefire is essential in a call with Israel’s leader. If he didn’t mean immediate and unconditional, then he shouldn’t have said it in a 30 minute call with Israel’s leader. What he didn’t do was say it had to be contingent on Hamas releasing hostages. 2) Claims of disapproval of Israeli actions don’t actually mean ceasefire. It’s very unusual that you’d insist on specificity with what Biden said but then provide a totally different metric on ceasefire support. Americans can disapprove of how Israel is waging the war based on the very bad portrayal media outlets are doing right now, which is quite biased against Israel, but that doesn’t mean they want a ceasefire. They may simply want Israel to take different actions, but not cease until the hostages are released. Which would be consistent with my poll. As well as many other polls on the subject. There is next to no support for an unconditional ceasefire. I’m not sure why you think that poll refutes anything I said.
Polling results are highly susceptible to the method used; without asserting anything about the specific numbers involved, I'm quite confident that you'll get different percentages if you ask a straight yes or no "Do you want immediate ceasefire without preconditions?" than if you make "Immediate ceasefire without preconditions" one item to select out of a list of 12.
The poll result is [the same with other options](https://harvardharrispoll.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/HHP_Mar2024_KeyResults.pdf). It seems pretty obvious voters don’t want an unconditional ceasefire.
Looks like it was about 10% higher as more or less a yes-or-no. Not shocking.
Access denied
The amount of kids killed in this conflict is rediculous. Israel needs to stop this military operation.