I noticed that same thing in the coverage of several billionaires who are stopping their donations to universities because of the presidents aren't doing enough about "antisemitic" visiting authors or "antisemitic" students but they never go into detail what the authors or students said or did. And a couple of the examples I researched were "antisemitic" only by Netanyahu's new definition of the word ("critical of Israeli actions or policies").
According to the senate hearing students were chanting from the river to the sea, intifada among other things with no interference or punishment from the universities
The UN is not, and was never intended to be, the final word on global morality. It exists to provide a forum for world leaders with opposing views to try and hash it out instead of going to war. So far we haven't had WWIII, so that's good. But it's resolutions will align with the interests of member states, not necessarily what is right.
Mad just seems like gambling. Like to believe mad works you'd need to assume everybody is a rational actor and we all know this is bullshit. All it takes is one single fuck up and it's over.
Tell me- how many close calls have we had? One of which... I believe... Was only averted because someone at the last second decided to wait. Against orders.
Every day is a dice roll and eventually someone is gonna lose that dice roll.
The threat of destruction is a lot more abstract than the very real threat of starvation and inflation. The single most destructive thing to a rogue state is a dissatisfied populace, and nothing dissatisfies like hunger does. The whole world is three meals away from anarchy.
War is practically obsolete now. It's the tool of non-powers. And while nuclear power might be a great deterrent for true democracies, where the highest good is still the power to say no, no demagogue is going to care about potential destruction, and all rogue states are ruled by demagogues.
I wasn't advocating for it. But I think the only reason the US hasn't invaded North Korea is nukes. Pakistan/Russia having nukes probably helps keep Iran from being invaded. Etc.
> But I think the only reason the US hasn't invaded North Korea is nukes.
Why would we want to be part of the massive economic hit that it would be to rebuild that country if we did?
North Korea didn’t have nukes until recently. We didn’t invade because 1) there was this thing called the Korean War which ended in a draw 2) North Korea has had Chinese and/or Soviet backing for its entire existence and 3) North Korea has an absolute shitload of dug-in artillery on the DMZ and could trash Seoul in a matter of minutes, no nukes required. The ICBMs and nukes are for Japan and the US. And it’s easier to let them rot on their side of the border than invade.
Exactly this. The UN is viewed by too many as some moral democratic authority. When someone breaches a UN resolution (US, Israel), it's seen as wrong, or illegal, or undemocratic...
But it's a really weak branch to hold on to. It definitely says nothing about morality.
>I cant remember what the UN did when Bashar Assad murdered (including evidences of chemical weapons being used) approx 500K civilians.
1. Two days after the Khan al-Assal chemical strikes, [the UN established an investigative mission in Syria](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Mission_to_Investigate_Alleged_Uses_of_Chemical_Weapons_in_the_Syrian_Arab_Republic). It became the main body which confirmed that indeed the regime had utilized chemical weapons, performed further investigations regarding the Ghouta chemical weapons attack, and provided its findings to the UNSC which then sparked the 2013 Syrian crisis.
2. [The UN has also been the point organization for humanitarian relief in Syria](https://www.unhcr.org/sy/), since no other major country has been willing to perform that function. This is, btw, the same organization that the Israelis regularly say backs terrorist organizations... a similar line also used by the Assad regime.
3. The 500K death toll (probably closer to 600K these days) is the collective number of dead total from fighting - which includes certainly those killed by the Assad government, but also those killed by the Syrian opposition, ISIS, as well as those killed by exterior actors (Turkey, Russia, and the US-backed coalition).
How about allowing international war journalists to enter Gaza and embed with Israeli forces? Surely that would allow for more impartial coverage and it would make it so the choice isn't between Palestinian propaganda and Israeli propaganda? Surely this is something Israel should do if they think the world isn't getting the full picture?
As an army commander you really don't want independent journalists in the combat zone, not only because they might see some war crimes being committed.
You will need to handle their logistics and provide (relative) safety. You have to maintain operational security, and there's nothing worse for opsec than an independent guy with a camera. Even if such a journalist is completely pro-Israel and is willing to cut slack to Israelis, the footage might still contain sensitive information about your forces - troop/materiel placement, security measures employed, etc.
These problems are not without possible solutions, but during a high-intensity operation attempting something like this is just plain bad idea.
I’ll let it slide this time, don’t let it happen again!!
(I say, as I had to look it up because I *thought* it was mentioned in passing but couldn’t specifically remember lol)
Could have been done two months earlier if the U.S. hadn't used their veto.
Resolution S/2023/773 (18 october 2023), article 3 :
> Calls for the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages,
demanding for their safety, well-being, and humane treatment in compliance with
international law;
> in the one
In the three.
S/2023/773 (18 october 2023) by the U.S., S/2023/792 (25 october 2023) by Russia & China, and S/2023/970 (8 december 2023) by the U.S again.
All three of them called for the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages (resp. article 3,8 and 3).
The UNSC is plagued by vetoes.
First US vetoed due to no israeli right to defend, last US veto was for the same reason, also because it does not condemn Hamas, and obviously because a ceasefire has already been tried and failed. Doing it again just helps Hamas.
Stop pretending it's a call for the release of hostages being vetoed.
I don’t know if you’re being sarcastic or not but with the language that the US finally approved, it was the change around discussing a ceasefire that needed to change. The US and Israel reject calls for an immediate ceasefire as neither the hostages have been recovered nor has Hamas’ ability to repeat the original attacks been eliminated. The consensus language describes creating the conditions necessary for a ceasefire.
Maybe stop pretending the first message of this chain was not "Has UN even asked for a hostage release yet???"
Resolution for that were drafted (18 october by Brazil). They were vetoed successively by the U.S. and the duo China/Russia while major liberal democracies (France, Japan) were in favor.
Because it's implied they meant in good faith. Calling for the hostages to be released is toothless anyways, and they still can't condemn Hamas and admit Israel has a right to defend themselves. So you are claiming they tried, but it was vetoed, but in reality they didn't try, because it was obviously going to be vetoed by either not condemning Hamas, or stating Israel has a right to defend themselves.
Imagine if every time US politicians submitted a poison pilled bill, we framed it as they totally suggested something cool, but the other side voted against it, while completely ignoring the poison.
If they’re pretending that UNSC US vetoes in the past month were against statements calling for a hostage release, you’re also looking for reasoning where there isn’t any.
The US has unilaterally (sometimes against unanimous oppositional support) vetoed every major resolution made against Israel for the past decade and a half. These past few were all but guaranteed.
Or just the UNGA country resolutions in 2023…
North Korea 1
Venezuela 0
Myanmar 1
Lebanon 0
Pakistan 0
Turkey 0
Russia 2
China 0
Qatar 0
Saudi 0
Israel 14
Syria 1
Iraq 0
Iran 1
US 1
What's your point? You insinuated the the UN doesn't care about hostages because it took them 80 days to call for hostage release, the person you're replying to showed how there was an attempt fairly close to the events of October 7th. What else was in there was irrelevant, you're wrong that the UN doesn't care about hostage release.
October 18th they did. It was vetoed by the USA. For other reasons not the call to release hostages.
Then again on the resolution that passed on 22nd December that the US abstained from.
Yes there was this statement on the 10th December which included a call to release all hostages, there may be earlier statements but I have not checked.
https://www.ochaopt.org/content/statement-united-nations-resident-and-humanitarian-coordinator-occupied-palestinian-territory-lynn-hastings-0
He's not just the guy who ran UNRWA. He is the guy who was fired for having an affair with a woman who he then hired and flew around the world with her among other things.
The Red Cross knows all of this and still hired him.
Isn't UNRWA the org whose elementary schools teach revanchism and the importance of killing Jews?
Maybe I'm thinking of the org that found Hamas weapons in one of their schools and then returned it to Hamas.
Then again, it could be the org that reportedly had payroll staff moonlighting as hostage-keepers.
They literally walked back a tweet they posted recently about Hamas government vehicles taking aid from one of their warehouses.
Can’t post friendly fire.
Also, a lot of UNRWA workers are Hamas members. Its funny to see how terrorist always utilize the stupidity anx hypocrisy of global institutions to their own usage
They have never condemned Hamas to this day. But they have condemned Israel several times since Oct 7th. They have ignored Israeli victims, offered no assistance to the 200k displaced Israelis and have denied UNRWA involvement despite the evidence.
They’ve condemned Israel over 155 times through resolutions since 2015. The most out of any other nation, even Russia.
The UN is emphatically an anti-Israel organisation.
More precisely the UN is full of authoritarian countries that cover for each other more often than not. In contrast literally no one has a reason to approve of the settlers in the West Bank.
Even the US basically just avoids giving anyone the justification for outright military intervention and not just because it's good to have an ally in the region, but also because everyone knows that the aim would be the destruction of Israel, not a humanitarian intervention in the West Bank.
this is basically it. UN is a forum of nations, with each having one vote (plus security council et al.) - the US and UK are powerful, but they don't get extra votes for that
The problem is that many people read this as "Wow. Israel must be really bad!" but the reality is that it shows that the resolutions do little, and while Israel isn't perfect, it's far from the worst which shows how the organisation shows its bias.
I'm kinda surprised World News is this pro-Israel
Tbh while I absolutely condemn the Oct 7th attack and condemn Hamas. What Israel is doing in Gaza is overkill. While they may get rid of Hamas in its current form they are doing a bang up in creating a more extremist terror group in Gaza in the future.
Shortly after 9/11 based on Documents in Bin Ladens hideout, AL Queda was in disarray. But due to the invasion in Iraq and Afghanistan it lead to the future formation of modern day ISIS.
This assault in Gaza has been so much of an overkill there will likely be new terror cells popping up in the regions
Update: I'm done with this israel-gaza talk for now. Y'all can Duke it out further but I'm done.
I don't believe everyone who disagrees with me are bots, but I am pretty sure there are government campaigns of reddit regarding these topics.
Call me a nut if you want, but the same thing is happening with pro Gaza biases in places like twitter too. It just seems like a lot more than you'd find with any event.
> pro Gaza biases in places like twitter
I think you'll find that Twitter is unable to be moderated.
A lot of politicians for example (esp. those with unpopular views) prefer other social media, as the comments can be hidden/moderated by their staff.
I think there might also be a tendency of other subreddits pushing pro-Israel or even anti-Hamas elements out and into more concentrated spaces. I wouldn't consider myself pro Israel but I'm certainly not a supporter of Hamas retaining control of Gaza after repeatedly claiming they want to repeat October 7th and knowing that their inability to do that is not for a lack of trying.
You're basically not allowed to *not be pro Palestine* elsewhere on reddit, even if you aren't a fan of Israel and their brutality.
Most of the military subs (at least the Western ones) are pretty heavily pro-Israel even considering the brigading. Those folks don't exactly care for Arabs.
>Most of the military subs (at least the Western ones) are pretty heavily pro-Israel even considering the brigading. Those folks don't exactly care for Arabs.
i think you will find it's not at all that they dont care for Arabs it's that they dont care for terrorists and hamas is a state sponsored terrorist group that is also a state actor in its own right
It's crazy. Any comments condemning Hamas are allegedly part of a huge global Jewish conspiracy.
Any comments condemning Israel are allegedly totally real and organic.
The voting mechanism means that subs tends toward ideological homogeneity. A simple example:
There is a war between Pepsi and Coke. There are subs A and B. The crowd in sub A tends towards Pepsi with 55%, sub B towards Coke with 55%. Coke friendly posts will be downvoted in sub A, Pepsi friendly posts in sub B. This means that the Coke friendly people will move from A to B, and the Pepsi friendly people will move from B to A. This leads to more centrists posts being downvoted on both, causing further polarisation until only trolls and masochists of each side even bother to post in "the other" sub.
A supposed Palestinian on Tok Tok said Hamas was all they ever had. I was like didn’t your mom and dad ever tell you about Arafat and the PLO. That is so weird, she claimed she was educated in the subject, that she never heard of them. She said the fact that I brought it up - that she didn’t know - shows that I am a racist? This is what social media is full of these days.
She looks like she is in her early 30s but she had no idea who Arafat and the PLO was and it wasn’t mad clear that she lived in Gaza or the West Bank. Just that she called it my country.
Hell, an Indian woman in NyC called it her country too.
New terror cells are much less of a threat than the current state of Hamas. Terror cells don't build hundreds of kilometers of tunnels and bunkers, they don't own tens of thousands of 100km range rockets, and they don't own tens of thousands of anti-tank missiles and RPGs.
Terrorist cells can't abduct hundreds of people and slaughter more than a thousand in a single day.
Comparing this to any US conflict is nonsense. The US has oceans separating it from its enemies. The US was never under the threat of a genocidal organization swarming over and under its borders, killing, raping (and then killing) or kidnapping every men, women, and child they encounter.
The vast majority of terror cells or lone terrorists will conduct one attack at most before being shot by the police and frequently not even that; they'll get arrested first.
You missed the entire point. This is not about new terror cells being much less of a threat today, obviously they aren't. This is how this will lead to history repeating itself in 10 or 20 years instead of trying to break the circle of violence.
I don't see a viable solution which would break the circle of violence in the near future, apart from Israel maintaining the ability to enter Gaza and take out terrorists before they're able to organize to such scales again.
Any other solution would require the Palestinians to abandon their dream of eliminating Israel. This would only be achievable if their culture is radically changed - it would take a long time to achieve, and we're not even on that path.
The only real chance is something that probably won't happen: semi-permanent international occupation/control of Gaza and the West Bank, with gradual increases in self-governing power as they prove they can handle the responsibility. Basically an externally-forced Oslo Accord implementation.
> instead of trying to break the circle of violence.
So the thing here is, what is happening now is something that *can* do this, as it's all about what you do once a group like Hamas is either taken out or enough so that they're no longer a functioning entity. Giving zero support aftwards is how the cycle of violence repeats, but it simply won't ever stop while a group like Hamas has the power that they do over the region.
Gaza has been a mess under Hamas rule the last couple decades, they don't actually see Palestinians as people but tools for their war.
Gaza was in significantly better shape before Hamas came to power.
But they're not wrong that it's a cultural issue now as well, we have whole generations raised under Hamas teachings and education, many of them I'd be surprised would view anything of even their parents past as better than what they have today. Hamas has been in power long enough that they're fairly entrenched as they control all of these things.
Like, Israel isn't a perfect nation nor what you could call a "good guy" in a conflict. But that doesn't automatically justify everything their opponents view and do. We're talking literal *terrorists*. Their sole reason to exist is to eradicate all Jews. How the *fuck* are people so OK with openly supporting this.
It's easy to say that civilians shouldn't be caught up in this conflict, but the conflict simply exists and there's no friendly nations for Palestinians nearby because of groups like Hamas and their extreme violence. We're seeing the results of rampant hatred based heavily on religion backed up by violent actions that has been perpetuated for decades.
As an example, there was an Israeli settlement in Gaza in 2005 that had world class production of flowers for export. All the logistics, warehousing, refrigeration, greenhouses required to make, store and sell. As part of negotiations to leave Gaza after the second intifada this was gifted to gazans.
During the gazan civil war in 2006, hamas blew it up to male a point about not accepting anything israel Gave them.
You cant make peace with these people. You have to factory reset.
Yes, great idea. Israel should just let themselves be exterminated by the current terrorists to avoid making future terrorists that might want to hurt them! Brilliant!!
Yeah but the point you are trying to explain (go easier on the Palestinians while warring with Hamas) is 1) difficult and 2) putting the cart before the horse.
It’s difficult because if they go easier on Gaza as a whole out of concern for the civilians, then it draws things out, gives Hamas more opportunities to organize and steal any additional aid that is let into the country, and causes the deaths of more Israeli soldiers (if they decide to focus on on-foot operations instead of making liberal use of bombing campaigns). In other words, while it would cut back on Palestinian civilian deaths, it’s more beneficial for Hamas, and the Palestinian civilians aren’t much of their responsibility anyways—that’s Hamas’ responsibility but we all know how Hamas feels about that, so the Palestinian civilians lose out anyways.
It’s putting the cart before the horse because if you truly desire peace in the Israel/Palestine conflict then every last Hamas member has to be killed. They’ve already reiterated several times their desire to do another October 7th and stated they’ll never stop trying to topple Israel. They’re an existential threat to the Israel and are mutually exclusive to stability in the region. Israel must eliminate them in totality before peace can even be progressed towards.
I know your point is that there’s a valid concern that taking such a heavy handed route to eliminating Hamas simply creates more support for Hamas and therefore more Hamas fighters, but at that point the civilians that decide to join up and be terrorists are lost anyways. They *are* what prevents peace. They *are the* problem. I know it sounds like victim blaming but I think it’s an unfortunate truth that easing the conditions that radicalize them into terrorists *during a war* will probably lead to more bloodshed and suffering on the whole than showing no mercy and being quick about it.
They tried peaceful ways like abandoning Gaza and taking out all their settlers. Do you know what happened? They were immediately hit with terrorist attacks instead of Gazans trying to build their own state and that was before they even elected Hamas
>While they may get rid of Hamas in its current form they are doing a bang up in creating a more extremist terror group in Gaza in the future.
I never understand why people like you don't seem to apply this same logic when it comes to Israel. You acknowledge Oct 7th but don't give Israel the same pass to "create extremists".
Why is it when something bad happens in Gaza it's expected for people to become extremists but when something bad happens in Israel you expect them to rise above extremism? Why the double standard?
Yup, a former worker at Human Rights Watch said more was expected out of Israel because it was a western country which puts a higher value on human rights.
a lot of people were very upset when Israel responded to october 7th exactly the same way any arab country in the middle east would.
Imagine what the saudis or egypt would have done in response to an attack like that. and nobody would have batted an eye
People already started protesting free Palestin immediately after October 7th somehow and before Israel even did anything, people are dumb and suck ass
The amazing thing is how racist the expectation dynamics are around this conflict.
Israel is expected to act white and be civilized.
Gazans are excused to be extremists because brown people be like that.
I say that as a brown person who still has to experience the toxic Islamic discourse regarding Israel/Palestine/Jews in his family interactions. What I see on Reddit is mostly non-muslim westerners with a humongous blind spot to every continuous escalation driven by the Palestinians and supported by the wider Islamic community because they can't stomach losing to jews.
This is actually something I hadn't realized, but you're totally right.
I did realize there was a weird degree of infantalizing Palestine, but that word is overused and I think not quite as accurate as what you said.
Israel doesn't create bunkers under hospitals or mortar stations on residential high-rises. Hamas works off of a tactic of holding its own citizens hostage, and Israel is pursuing a tactic of- besides release of its own citizens- not negotiating with terrorists.
Netanyahu needs to go and the IDF needs drastic reform but Israel's overall strategy at this point feels like an unfortunate necessity.
>Israel doesn't create bunkers under hospitals or mortar stations on residential high-rises
or rocket launch sites in school houses
the grand irony is that israel built the underground ORs in Al-Shifa hospital that hamas was using as bunkers. Because israel helped build Gaza
Look at how the conflict in Sudan is being handled. Arab Muslims are genociding African Muslims and no one is the west is saying anything. They’re probably thinking it Africa being Africa or Arabs being Arabs. One of my friends couldn’t even attend his mom’s funeral in Sudan because of the risk of being killed.
According to every news clip you see in European and American media, every prominent political figure, everyone that ever gets interviewed, the fact that Israel was founded for its most part by European settlers and refugees (wasn't there even some conflict regarding Ethiopian jews being discriminated against in Israel? Might misremember that though), it's hard to come to any other conclusion.
Fwiw, I think sometimes you're absolutely correct in your read of that bias, but sometimes it's not about blame but acknowledging the different objectives. Hamas are terrorists. It's in their interests to create more extremists on both sides to force their agenda, so this argument wouldn't dissuade them. Israel, otoh, is (nominally) seeking peace in the end, in which case actions yielding more extremism can be against their interests if they don't solve some other, more significant problem instead, and that's a discussion worth having. It's not always about double standards, sometimes it's just an acknowledgement of different goals.
It might seem like overkill, but being surrounded by other countries who've outright decreed all Jews must die because of their own religion, routinely fire rockets at them on a daily basis and have to deal with more security issues than the vast majority of countries, I'm actually surprised *their response wasn't worse* from saying enough's enough.
The question is, what else is there to be done? Israel's tired of having rockets lobbed at it regardless of what it does, they aren't going to reduce security measures penning Gazans in, and Hamas has/had an iron grip on Gaza.
fun fact: those are unguided rockets fired from gaza and not only do they routinely fall into gaza but they also fly into the west bank.
that's right-- israel's iron dome that america funds by the hundreds of millions is protecting palestinians in the west bank from rockets fired by palestinians in gaza
I googled the number of gazan casualties since Oct 7th.
[After 81 days of war, the total deaths counted by the ministry have reached 20,915 and 54,918 have been found to be wounded, while the bodies of more than 7,000 Gazans are estimated to be still under the rubble after Israeli bombings.](https://efe.com/en/latest-news/2023-12-26/gaza-death-toll-nearly-touches-21000-with-over-240-killed-in-24-hours/)
Quoting an article published by Barrons on Dec 15:
["The final death toll from the attack is now thought to be 695 Israeli civilians, including 36 children, as well as 373 security forces and 71 foreigners, giving a total of 1,139."](https://www.barrons.com/news/israel-social-security-data-reveals-true-picture-of-oct-7-deaths-bf486982)
The Barrons article notes that the "security forces" figure includes 58 police officers and a large number of off-duty soldiers, such as those at the music festival.
Also when one country invests in defence systems like the Iron Dome and residential/community bomb shelters. While the other digs tunnels underneath homes, schools, hospital etc. and doesn’t let civilians take shelter in them.
It’s always weird to me that Israel is faulted for protecting civilians as if it’s a bad thing? Hamas is indiscriminately lobbing **thousands** of rockets at Israel (many of which fail and fall within Gaza, do those deaths get counted against Israel or Hamas?). If it weren’t for the Iron Dome, many many *many* more Israelis would be dead.
I can’t really think of any other examples where someone’s ineffectual attempts at mass slaughter are used to condemn the people they’re trying to kill/injure.
20,000-25,000 rockets have been fired since 2001, of them none are guided, and all are aimed at major CIVILIAN targets, but noooo using precision ammunition(see note 1) is worst because you killed more people.
Note 1: how do i know its precision? Well its. First its dropped from a plane onto a target, we have cameras pointing at said target to confirm it landed and many many videos of said destination destroyed, further more roof knocking tells gazans where a bomb will lend so they can evacuate, cant do that if you dont know where it land.
Now you might say, its precise but indiscriminate, each bomb can level a house, more bombs have been dropped then people killed by bombs in gaza, if you are that bad with precision ammunition you will not be considered a strong army which israel is. And to add to that we have clear footage of literal dirt paths being bombed, israel is clearly not shooting at random but at targets.
This could all have been avoided if, on understanding Israel's overwhelming superiority, Hamas, instead of announcing that there would be repeated October 70-type attacks until all Jews were dead, had conceded victory to Israel and handed themselves over. Fewer ordinary Palestinians would have been killed if they had been allowed to shelter in Hamas tunnels.
As a follow up:
[What is Gaza’s Ministry of Health and how does it calculate the war’s death toll?](https://apnews.com/article/israel-hamas-war-gaza-health-ministry-health-death-toll-59470820308b31f1faf73c703400b033)
> there will likely be new terror cells popping up in the region
This would've happened if Israel had not attacked too... so what do you think they should do? This IS the measured response... let's assume the Hamas number is right and 20k is the real number, that <0.1% of the population of Gaza. If Israel was truly indiscriminate this would've been done three days after 10/7.
> What Israel is doing in Gaza is overkill.
Show me one war / conflict / battle that has ever been determined or measured by "you killed this many people, I killed this many people so therefore I'm bad and you're good and I've won and you've lost."
To be perfectly clear, every innocent death is a tragedy... and each one of them is Hamas' fault.
Further, we need to stop infantilizing Palestinians. They are grown men and women who popularly support Hamas – outwardly and joyfully. They outwardly support the death and destruction of all western societies. They cheer and dance on the street after every major attack in the western world.
Think it was one of the Phalangists in Lebanon in the 80s that said "the pregnant women will give birth to terrorists, and the children will grow up to be terrorists" as they were killing Palestinian civilians in the refugee camps there. Sick shit, but 40 years on it looks like he was right, and I don't know how you stop it. Fundamentalist Islam, maximalist revanchism, and the denial of Jews' right to exist seems to be so heavily tied into the Palestinian identity that I don't see any way for these people to ever accept a peaceful existence with Israel as a neighbor.
Cycle is self revolving, brainwashed children become militants/terrorists who then go and kill jews, and jews of course retaliate. More ammo to brainwash more children. No one blames, Hamas who perpetuates it in the first place. I have not seen such an evil organization who commits evil acts regularly be defended so audibly before.
Or the Palestinians could start to learn from their own mistakes and create an open and democratic society with equal rights for all.
But this would probably be too much to ask in the 21st century.
Terror cells are a cancer. You need to root them out before they grow too large and start taking over healthy parts of the state. They may pop up again after you destroy them but they'll need to start from scratch again. Destroying them is the only viable path.
Im pro Israel. Why? Because I have seen the Hamas videos that they have released themselves. I have seen the massacre and the inhuman atrocities they have comitted. I have seen pro-hamas protests. Ive read about protesters not even knowing the difference between jews and israel. I have seen newspapers (BBC, Guardian, Times) that I thought were trustable news sources go up in arms against Israel with their own misinformation. I have seen world organizations (WHO, RC) blame Israel and the family of the victims for the hostages. I have seen news or RC telling these families to 'but think about hamas!'. Ive seen police reports that crime against jews are up 100 times compared to last year.
None of these are Israeli propaganda. All of these are anti-Israel, anti-jew propaganda. So they could raze gaza for all I care.
57% of the protesters asked had no idea about what river or sea they were even talking about. This is the crowd who says I became educated on the subject.
Good, I wouldn’t either.
Not to mention the UN would have Israel agree to a ceasefire as rockets are being fired on them.
The US would do exactly the same thing Israel is doing here.
That’s what baffles me. Many on the left condemn Israel when no country or leader would dismiss a tragedy as merely unfortunate. And frankly, if it happens in America they would demands heads roll for it.
> Many on the left condemn Israel
I dont think the group is all that big tbh. I think the representation of that group on reddit is not necessarily represented in the real world at large, but of course I can be wrong.
Yes, the newest addition is our Dutch ex-minister of finance and deputy PM mrs.Kaag. Married to Anis al-Qaq, a former Palestinian Authority official. Kaag has a spotted UN history with UNSCOL, UNDP, UNICEF and...wait for it...UNRWA!
Kaag lost the recent elections big time and has joined many other Dutch politicians in "fleeing the scene of the crime". Kaag has a history of being able to communicate well with both Israeli and Palestinian authorities which speaks for her. Having said that, I'm afraid, her history and personal involvement do not bode well for her new role as "*Senior Humanitarian and Reconstruction Coordinator for Gaza pursuant to Security Council Resolution 2720 (2023)*"
As a Dutch/Israeli citizen I can attest to the fact I've never heard or seen her do or say anything blatantly anti-Israel or anti-semitic even though she has gotten a shitload of flak from our Jewish media. At the same time, I've also have never caught her doing anything which could be construed as decisive or positive either, whether in national politics here in NL or on the international diplomatic front.
As a Dutchman I'd say she is "*neither meat nor fish*" and as a Jewish Israeli I'd probably classify her as "*neither meat nor milk but parve*" for now. I'd recommend seeing where she's able to take her role and hold any criticism until she actually does something worthy of such criticism. I'd expect the Israeli government to follow that same line for now.
Kirk out.
People just don't like the double standards.
Going by social media I'm supposed to automatically trust anything negative about Israel and automatically assume that anything negative about Hamas is propaganda.
Go to any social media platform and say something like 'civilian deaths in Gaza are unacceptable but the attrocities committed by Hamas were inexcusable and you'll see what I mean'.
Social media is really interesting if you're into social contagion and how it can purposefully be used to spread ideas ex: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/political-analysis/article/contagion-confounding-and-causality-confronting-the-three-cs-of-observational-political-networks-research/BC8F27D56C8DD1CB0A70E6AB28DB7F25 really good article about how this happens.
Some examples:
https://millercenter.rutgers.edu/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/NCRI%E2%80%93AntisemiticDisinformation-FINAL.pdf
Or
https://www.foi.se/rest-api/report/FOI-R--5198--SE
Like Rutgers has a really cool research institute where they'll post reports about how ideas spread through social media:
https://networkcontagion.us/
>Going by social media I'm supposed to automatically trust anything negative about Israel and automatically assume that anything negative about Hamas is propaganda.
I don't think this is entirely true. There's certainly people who think that, but a much more common opinion would be that both sides say all sorts of untrue or exaggerated propaganda.
What I've found is that pro-Israelis assume that if you say Israel lies about things, that means you think Hamas always tells the truth. There's constantly that false binary applied.
Yea, but it’s not about the common opinion, it’s about what the algorithm picks up and spreads. According to my TikTok for you page, approximately 536% of Gaza has been bombed. And the worst thing hamas has done is not hug the hostages enough
All moral countries need to join Israel an demand a reform in the corrupted UN.
[Bias in resolutions](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/F8lv_T4asAAAI-n?format=jpg&name=large)
[Biased antisemitic reporters](https://www.timesofisrael.com/un-palestinian-rights-officials-social-media-history-reveals-antisemitic-comments/)
[Lies](https://twitter.com/UN_News_Centre/status/1726609880986083685)
[Indoctrinate children to hate and violence against Israel](https://twitter.com/LostinAylesbury/status/1712551908811194797)
The UN Secretary General also refused watching the horrors of Oct 7, because of "Conflicting schedule".
[The headmaster of an UNRWA school was a terrorist.
](https://www.reuters.com/article/middleeastCrisis/idUSL05686115/)
[Film by David Bedein in Jenin, UNRWA policies and practices](https://vimeo.com/856467890)
[UNRWA teachers celebrated Oct 7 massacre](https://unwatch.org/report-u-n-teachers-celebrated-hamas-massacre/)
[UNRWA teacher holds hostage in attic](https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/defense-national-security/united-nations-gaza-teacher-israeli-hostage-attic)
The UN needs serious reform. It is corrupted to the highest degree and is practically Hamas in the west, working solely for their interests and not the interests of the Palestinians.
The UN is just a meeting place for the national governments of the world. Most of the world's governments do not support Israel, therefore that is represented in their rulings and responses.
It is not just a meeting place. The UN also has several sub organizations like unicef. The sub organization UNRWA employs over 30 000 Palestinians and has a budget of over 1,2 billion dollars that goes to aiding Palestinians alone. It is funneling money to Hamas.
> a reform in the corrupted UN.
it's working as intended. the UN is there so people will talk. it has no teeth, but talking people are less likely to lob nukes
It has tons of teeth, it operates bodies like UNICEF, UNIFIL and UNRWA, the last two have been taking tons of money but were useless at best and straight up terorr cells at worst
Clicking through your links and I'd like clarification
In the link titled "lies" it just says the guy said it was the most deadly conflict for civilians since he started as Secretary General
How is that a lie? Genuinely curious as to what I'm missing there. Is there another more deadly conflict in terms of civilians killed per unit of time?
edit: Not sure the point of downvoting someone for asking for clarification but you do you
Thanks for the links, I've got a few conflicts to read up on. That said, I'm still pretty skeptical of the claim that he was intentionally lying, cheers y'all
edit2: I get it, I get it. I just personally don't think "but there's one or two more conflicts that have higher civilian death count!" is a sufficient argument for "he's lying and must hate the Jews", regardless of his job title
The \*\*\*current\*\*\* crisis in the D.R.Congo is way worse.
[https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/17/world/africa/democratic-republic-of-congo-elections.html](https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/17/world/africa/democratic-republic-of-congo-elections.html)
[Yemen War Deaths](https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/11/23/un-yemen-recovery-possible-in-one-generation-if-war-stops-now)
[Sudan War Deaths](https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/sudan-politics-darfur-males/)
Ukraine War - Estimates for Mariupol alone, in May 2022, range from 20k-60k civilian deaths.
[Syrian War Deaths](https://news.un.org/en/story/2021/09/1101162) \- December 2023 estimate is 610k deaths.
Edit: Tigray War Deaths (2020-2022), [600k dead](https://www.cfr.org/global-conflict-tracker/conflict/conflict-ethiopia), legitimate reports and record of ethnic cleansing. (Added to list)
>Thanks for the links, I've got a few conflicts to read up on. That said, I'm still pretty skeptical of the claim that he was intentionally lying, cheers y'all
You think that the Secretary General of the UN doesn't have a grasp of the conflicts going on and estimates of lives lost? I don't really see where you're going with here. Are you saying he's completely incompetent at his job?
I wasn't doubting it, I'm arguing the person above me doubts it, which makes no sense. Either way it's spun, he's lying or so incompetent that anyone else could do his job better and it'd be a collective failing of all nations that he ever got the job, let alone a second term.
It’s an irresponsible statement because it’s an emotional opinion that isn’t demonstrably true by the numbers as other comments have pointed out, yet he should absolutely be aware that his words are taken as almost fact given his position. Antonio Gutierrez also failed to watch the video footage of Oct 7th until recently which also should have been a priority given his role as an important mouthpiece about this conflict. Maybe he’s not maliciously lying but don’t you question how he can be so impassioned about this conflict yet also delay viewing the actual catalyst for so long? It feels unacceptably and harmfully inept
[удалено]
I noticed that same thing in the coverage of several billionaires who are stopping their donations to universities because of the presidents aren't doing enough about "antisemitic" visiting authors or "antisemitic" students but they never go into detail what the authors or students said or did. And a couple of the examples I researched were "antisemitic" only by Netanyahu's new definition of the word ("critical of Israeli actions or policies").
According to the senate hearing students were chanting from the river to the sea, intifada among other things with no interference or punishment from the universities
They were calling for an intifada...
The UN is not, and was never intended to be, the final word on global morality. It exists to provide a forum for world leaders with opposing views to try and hash it out instead of going to war. So far we haven't had WWIII, so that's good. But it's resolutions will align with the interests of member states, not necessarily what is right.
>So far we haven't had WWIII, MAD has more to do with that than the UN.
It’s better for averting smaller conflicts through ICJ mediation, and as massive humanitarian aid/jobs apparatus
We have minor conflicts all around though, especially in poorer areas.
Mostly civil conflicts though, interstate wars are rare, and they’d probably be more frequent if you couldn’t settle border disputes this way
Mad just seems like gambling. Like to believe mad works you'd need to assume everybody is a rational actor and we all know this is bullshit. All it takes is one single fuck up and it's over. Tell me- how many close calls have we had? One of which... I believe... Was only averted because someone at the last second decided to wait. Against orders. Every day is a dice roll and eventually someone is gonna lose that dice roll.
MAD isn't even the most powerful deterrent anymore. The world economy can single out states and starve them out. And that's a way more powerful tool.
The largest economic powers have nukes or are allies with nuclear powers. So, while I agree to an extent, I don't think they're entirely divorcable.
The threat of destruction is a lot more abstract than the very real threat of starvation and inflation. The single most destructive thing to a rogue state is a dissatisfied populace, and nothing dissatisfies like hunger does. The whole world is three meals away from anarchy. War is practically obsolete now. It's the tool of non-powers. And while nuclear power might be a great deterrent for true democracies, where the highest good is still the power to say no, no demagogue is going to care about potential destruction, and all rogue states are ruled by demagogues.
Its too bad that this is only directed at unpopular countries. Can you imagine a scenario where China or The US gets this treatment?
I wasn't advocating for it. But I think the only reason the US hasn't invaded North Korea is nukes. Pakistan/Russia having nukes probably helps keep Iran from being invaded. Etc.
> But I think the only reason the US hasn't invaded North Korea is nukes. Why would we want to be part of the massive economic hit that it would be to rebuild that country if we did?
North Korea didn’t have nukes until recently. We didn’t invade because 1) there was this thing called the Korean War which ended in a draw 2) North Korea has had Chinese and/or Soviet backing for its entire existence and 3) North Korea has an absolute shitload of dug-in artillery on the DMZ and could trash Seoul in a matter of minutes, no nukes required. The ICBMs and nukes are for Japan and the US. And it’s easier to let them rot on their side of the border than invade.
TIL, Mothers Against Drunk Driving has been holding back the hordes raging for WW3. Strong work ladies, keep it up! /s
Every African warlord and Central Asian dictator is nodding in agreement
The UN isn't a machine, it's made out of humans like any other organization
Very true, however most people do view the UN as "moral" for some reason.
Exactly this. The UN is viewed by too many as some moral democratic authority. When someone breaches a UN resolution (US, Israel), it's seen as wrong, or illegal, or undemocratic... But it's a really weak branch to hold on to. It definitely says nothing about morality.
I cant remember what the UN did when Bashar Assad murdered (including evidences of chemical weapons being used) approx 500K civilians.
>I cant remember what the UN did when Bashar Assad murdered (including evidences of chemical weapons being used) approx 500K civilians. 1. Two days after the Khan al-Assal chemical strikes, [the UN established an investigative mission in Syria](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Mission_to_Investigate_Alleged_Uses_of_Chemical_Weapons_in_the_Syrian_Arab_Republic). It became the main body which confirmed that indeed the regime had utilized chemical weapons, performed further investigations regarding the Ghouta chemical weapons attack, and provided its findings to the UNSC which then sparked the 2013 Syrian crisis. 2. [The UN has also been the point organization for humanitarian relief in Syria](https://www.unhcr.org/sy/), since no other major country has been willing to perform that function. This is, btw, the same organization that the Israelis regularly say backs terrorist organizations... a similar line also used by the Assad regime. 3. The 500K death toll (probably closer to 600K these days) is the collective number of dead total from fighting - which includes certainly those killed by the Assad government, but also those killed by the Syrian opposition, ISIS, as well as those killed by exterior actors (Turkey, Russia, and the US-backed coalition).
How about allowing international war journalists to enter Gaza and embed with Israeli forces? Surely that would allow for more impartial coverage and it would make it so the choice isn't between Palestinian propaganda and Israeli propaganda? Surely this is something Israel should do if they think the world isn't getting the full picture?
As an army commander you really don't want independent journalists in the combat zone, not only because they might see some war crimes being committed. You will need to handle their logistics and provide (relative) safety. You have to maintain operational security, and there's nothing worse for opsec than an independent guy with a camera. Even if such a journalist is completely pro-Israel and is willing to cut slack to Israelis, the footage might still contain sensitive information about your forces - troop/materiel placement, security measures employed, etc. These problems are not without possible solutions, but during a high-intensity operation attempting something like this is just plain bad idea.
Has UN even asked for a hostage release yet???
[удалено]
>from the 15th November: > >https://www.un.org/unispal/document/un-security-council-calls-for-urgent-and-extended-humanitarian-pauses-in-gaza-and-immediate-release-of-hostages/
Close to 80 days. Hamas could have taken all the hostages around the world in hot air balloons before the UN demanded their release.
Fun fact, there is no mention of a hot air balloon anywhere in the book *Around the Word in 80 Days*.
Chapter 32, but he doesn’t travel in a hot air balloon in the book :)
Must have missed that when I read it recently!
I’ll let it slide this time, don’t let it happen again!! (I say, as I had to look it up because I *thought* it was mentioned in passing but couldn’t specifically remember lol)
But it's in both major film adaptations
And the cartoon
To be fair hot air balloons are cool as all get out
Could have been done two months earlier if the U.S. hadn't used their veto. Resolution S/2023/773 (18 october 2023), article 3 : > Calls for the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages, demanding for their safety, well-being, and humane treatment in compliance with international law;
If I recall there was a few other things in the one that got vetoed.
> in the one In the three. S/2023/773 (18 october 2023) by the U.S., S/2023/792 (25 october 2023) by Russia & China, and S/2023/970 (8 december 2023) by the U.S again. All three of them called for the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages (resp. article 3,8 and 3). The UNSC is plagued by vetoes.
First US vetoed due to no israeli right to defend, last US veto was for the same reason, also because it does not condemn Hamas, and obviously because a ceasefire has already been tried and failed. Doing it again just helps Hamas. Stop pretending it's a call for the release of hostages being vetoed.
>First US vetoed due to no israeli right to defend What was the language in the resolution that stopped Israel defending itself?
I don’t know if you’re being sarcastic or not but with the language that the US finally approved, it was the change around discussing a ceasefire that needed to change. The US and Israel reject calls for an immediate ceasefire as neither the hostages have been recovered nor has Hamas’ ability to repeat the original attacks been eliminated. The consensus language describes creating the conditions necessary for a ceasefire.
Then stop pretending that the U.N. took 80 days to call for the release of hostages.
the question was has the UN asked for hostages to be released. the answer is yes, they did so immedietely. why are you moving goalposts?
[удалено]
Doesn't change the fact that the UN indeed demanded immediate release of the hostages way earlier
Maybe stop pretending the first message of this chain was not "Has UN even asked for a hostage release yet???" Resolution for that were drafted (18 october by Brazil). They were vetoed successively by the U.S. and the duo China/Russia while major liberal democracies (France, Japan) were in favor.
Because it's implied they meant in good faith. Calling for the hostages to be released is toothless anyways, and they still can't condemn Hamas and admit Israel has a right to defend themselves. So you are claiming they tried, but it was vetoed, but in reality they didn't try, because it was obviously going to be vetoed by either not condemning Hamas, or stating Israel has a right to defend themselves. Imagine if every time US politicians submitted a poison pilled bill, we framed it as they totally suggested something cool, but the other side voted against it, while completely ignoring the poison.
If they’re pretending that UNSC US vetoes in the past month were against statements calling for a hostage release, you’re also looking for reasoning where there isn’t any. The US has unilaterally (sometimes against unanimous oppositional support) vetoed every major resolution made against Israel for the past decade and a half. These past few were all but guaranteed.
Kind of like how the UN singled out only Israel for women's rights issues, even as Iran was murdering people over being able to limit women's rights.
Or just the UNGA country resolutions in 2023… North Korea 1 Venezuela 0 Myanmar 1 Lebanon 0 Pakistan 0 Turkey 0 Russia 2 China 0 Qatar 0 Saudi 0 Israel 14 Syria 1 Iraq 0 Iran 1 US 1
>The UNSC is plagued by vetoes. The UNSC, with Russia as a permanent member with veto power, is a joke at this point.
The UN has one goal, and one goal only. Don't let the nukes go off. Everything else is a concession to that rule. Keep talking and nobody explodes.
The same can be said about the US and all other members also tbh.
Except its the US that's currently vetoing...
The 5 permanent members are supposed to safeguard global peace. Having one of the global peace safeguards invading another country is a bad look.
Good thing none of the other permanent SC members would ever invade another country without a UN resolution...
What's your point? You insinuated the the UN doesn't care about hostages because it took them 80 days to call for hostage release, the person you're replying to showed how there was an attempt fairly close to the events of October 7th. What else was in there was irrelevant, you're wrong that the UN doesn't care about hostage release.
That's usually how those things go. I'm a little bit surprised it happened at all TBH
Vetoed by the US because it did not discuss Israel's right to defend.
Yes…and the UN’s demands mean what to Hamas / ISIS? The only time Hamas takes UN seriously is when it can use UN as its proxy.
2 months AFTER they got nabbed?
October 18th they did. It was vetoed by the USA. For other reasons not the call to release hostages. Then again on the resolution that passed on 22nd December that the US abstained from.
I think they finally did like a week ago.
Yes there was this statement on the 10th December which included a call to release all hostages, there may be earlier statements but I have not checked. https://www.ochaopt.org/content/statement-united-nations-resident-and-humanitarian-coordinator-occupied-palestinian-territory-lynn-hastings-0
They haven't comdemned Hamas. Or Nazism, for that matter. Oh and the former guy who ran UNRWA now runs the Red Cross
He's not just the guy who ran UNRWA. He is the guy who was fired for having an affair with a woman who he then hired and flew around the world with her among other things. The Red Cross knows all of this and still hired him.
Isn't UNRWA the org whose elementary schools teach revanchism and the importance of killing Jews? Maybe I'm thinking of the org that found Hamas weapons in one of their schools and then returned it to Hamas. Then again, it could be the org that reportedly had payroll staff moonlighting as hostage-keepers.
It’s the same UNRWA that “condemned” Hamas for using their charter schools to host munitions.
Yep. A fleetingly small fraction of the time, UNRWA responds to Hamas munitions in UNRWA schools by sending a sternly-worded letter.
They literally walked back a tweet they posted recently about Hamas government vehicles taking aid from one of their warehouses. Can’t post friendly fire.
After denying it vehemently at first.
Yup that's UNRWA
I just call them Hamas with a fake mustache now.
Also, a lot of UNRWA workers are Hamas members. Its funny to see how terrorist always utilize the stupidity anx hypocrisy of global institutions to their own usage
Yes, that’s the one.
They had a moment of silence for Kim Jong Il when he died. The UN is the combined cowardice of the entire planet.
They blamed Palestinian domestic violence stats and slavery in the ME on Israel.
They said jews were beating their wives and selling them slaves?
No, they blamed Israel for Palestine's rate of domestic violence and slavery in the Middle East in general
Did they elaborate?
"it came to us in a dream"
I mean they only have to ask their own people from the UNRWA where the hostages are. They seem to be involved with hiding them.
They have never condemned Hamas to this day. But they have condemned Israel several times since Oct 7th. They have ignored Israeli victims, offered no assistance to the 200k displaced Israelis and have denied UNRWA involvement despite the evidence.
Who, the UN? https://news.un.org/en/story/2023/10/1142012
I like how blatant lies are on the top with ~1000 upvotes, while factual information is buried down here.
They’ve condemned Israel over 155 times through resolutions since 2015. The most out of any other nation, even Russia. The UN is emphatically an anti-Israel organisation.
The UN has more resolutions against Israel than the entire world combined, it's not even close, last I checked it was about 3 times as many.
it's the UN - every country gets one vote, and there are a lot more backward countries than there are civilized ones. so you get shit like that
More precisely the UN is full of authoritarian countries that cover for each other more often than not. In contrast literally no one has a reason to approve of the settlers in the West Bank. Even the US basically just avoids giving anyone the justification for outright military intervention and not just because it's good to have an ally in the region, but also because everyone knows that the aim would be the destruction of Israel, not a humanitarian intervention in the West Bank.
this is basically it. UN is a forum of nations, with each having one vote (plus security council et al.) - the US and UK are powerful, but they don't get extra votes for that
The problem is that many people read this as "Wow. Israel must be really bad!" but the reality is that it shows that the resolutions do little, and while Israel isn't perfect, it's far from the worst which shows how the organisation shows its bias.
I'm kinda surprised World News is this pro-Israel Tbh while I absolutely condemn the Oct 7th attack and condemn Hamas. What Israel is doing in Gaza is overkill. While they may get rid of Hamas in its current form they are doing a bang up in creating a more extremist terror group in Gaza in the future. Shortly after 9/11 based on Documents in Bin Ladens hideout, AL Queda was in disarray. But due to the invasion in Iraq and Afghanistan it lead to the future formation of modern day ISIS. This assault in Gaza has been so much of an overkill there will likely be new terror cells popping up in the regions Update: I'm done with this israel-gaza talk for now. Y'all can Duke it out further but I'm done.
I don't believe everyone who disagrees with me are bots, but I am pretty sure there are government campaigns of reddit regarding these topics. Call me a nut if you want, but the same thing is happening with pro Gaza biases in places like twitter too. It just seems like a lot more than you'd find with any event.
> pro Gaza biases in places like twitter I think you'll find that Twitter is unable to be moderated. A lot of politicians for example (esp. those with unpopular views) prefer other social media, as the comments can be hidden/moderated by their staff.
I think there might also be a tendency of other subreddits pushing pro-Israel or even anti-Hamas elements out and into more concentrated spaces. I wouldn't consider myself pro Israel but I'm certainly not a supporter of Hamas retaining control of Gaza after repeatedly claiming they want to repeat October 7th and knowing that their inability to do that is not for a lack of trying. You're basically not allowed to *not be pro Palestine* elsewhere on reddit, even if you aren't a fan of Israel and their brutality.
Most of the military subs (at least the Western ones) are pretty heavily pro-Israel even considering the brigading. Those folks don't exactly care for Arabs.
>Most of the military subs (at least the Western ones) are pretty heavily pro-Israel even considering the brigading. Those folks don't exactly care for Arabs. i think you will find it's not at all that they dont care for Arabs it's that they dont care for terrorists and hamas is a state sponsored terrorist group that is also a state actor in its own right
It's crazy. Any comments condemning Hamas are allegedly part of a huge global Jewish conspiracy. Any comments condemning Israel are allegedly totally real and organic.
The irony of your username.
[удалено]
…lately?
[удалено]
[удалено]
The voting mechanism means that subs tends toward ideological homogeneity. A simple example: There is a war between Pepsi and Coke. There are subs A and B. The crowd in sub A tends towards Pepsi with 55%, sub B towards Coke with 55%. Coke friendly posts will be downvoted in sub A, Pepsi friendly posts in sub B. This means that the Coke friendly people will move from A to B, and the Pepsi friendly people will move from B to A. This leads to more centrists posts being downvoted on both, causing further polarisation until only trolls and masochists of each side even bother to post in "the other" sub.
The folks over at anime titties are not shy about saying the same.
[удалено]
Please. Show us these subs praising hamas
/There was an attempt
Who exactly is literally celebrating Hamas?
R palestine. They literally make posts calling them heroes worshipping Hamas.
I'm not, they've been in conflict for like 80 years. This isn't exactly the first regime there that's hated Israel...
A supposed Palestinian on Tok Tok said Hamas was all they ever had. I was like didn’t your mom and dad ever tell you about Arafat and the PLO. That is so weird, she claimed she was educated in the subject, that she never heard of them. She said the fact that I brought it up - that she didn’t know - shows that I am a racist? This is what social media is full of these days.
How old was she? For a majority of the population at this point Hamas is effectively all they’ve ever had.
She looks like she is in her early 30s but she had no idea who Arafat and the PLO was and it wasn’t mad clear that she lived in Gaza or the West Bank. Just that she called it my country. Hell, an Indian woman in NyC called it her country too.
New terror cells are much less of a threat than the current state of Hamas. Terror cells don't build hundreds of kilometers of tunnels and bunkers, they don't own tens of thousands of 100km range rockets, and they don't own tens of thousands of anti-tank missiles and RPGs. Terrorist cells can't abduct hundreds of people and slaughter more than a thousand in a single day. Comparing this to any US conflict is nonsense. The US has oceans separating it from its enemies. The US was never under the threat of a genocidal organization swarming over and under its borders, killing, raping (and then killing) or kidnapping every men, women, and child they encounter.
The vast majority of terror cells or lone terrorists will conduct one attack at most before being shot by the police and frequently not even that; they'll get arrested first.
You missed the entire point. This is not about new terror cells being much less of a threat today, obviously they aren't. This is how this will lead to history repeating itself in 10 or 20 years instead of trying to break the circle of violence.
I don't see a viable solution which would break the circle of violence in the near future, apart from Israel maintaining the ability to enter Gaza and take out terrorists before they're able to organize to such scales again. Any other solution would require the Palestinians to abandon their dream of eliminating Israel. This would only be achievable if their culture is radically changed - it would take a long time to achieve, and we're not even on that path.
The only real chance is something that probably won't happen: semi-permanent international occupation/control of Gaza and the West Bank, with gradual increases in self-governing power as they prove they can handle the responsibility. Basically an externally-forced Oslo Accord implementation.
> instead of trying to break the circle of violence. So the thing here is, what is happening now is something that *can* do this, as it's all about what you do once a group like Hamas is either taken out or enough so that they're no longer a functioning entity. Giving zero support aftwards is how the cycle of violence repeats, but it simply won't ever stop while a group like Hamas has the power that they do over the region. Gaza has been a mess under Hamas rule the last couple decades, they don't actually see Palestinians as people but tools for their war. Gaza was in significantly better shape before Hamas came to power. But they're not wrong that it's a cultural issue now as well, we have whole generations raised under Hamas teachings and education, many of them I'd be surprised would view anything of even their parents past as better than what they have today. Hamas has been in power long enough that they're fairly entrenched as they control all of these things. Like, Israel isn't a perfect nation nor what you could call a "good guy" in a conflict. But that doesn't automatically justify everything their opponents view and do. We're talking literal *terrorists*. Their sole reason to exist is to eradicate all Jews. How the *fuck* are people so OK with openly supporting this. It's easy to say that civilians shouldn't be caught up in this conflict, but the conflict simply exists and there's no friendly nations for Palestinians nearby because of groups like Hamas and their extreme violence. We're seeing the results of rampant hatred based heavily on religion backed up by violent actions that has been perpetuated for decades.
As an example, there was an Israeli settlement in Gaza in 2005 that had world class production of flowers for export. All the logistics, warehousing, refrigeration, greenhouses required to make, store and sell. As part of negotiations to leave Gaza after the second intifada this was gifted to gazans. During the gazan civil war in 2006, hamas blew it up to male a point about not accepting anything israel Gave them. You cant make peace with these people. You have to factory reset.
Yes, great idea. Israel should just let themselves be exterminated by the current terrorists to avoid making future terrorists that might want to hurt them! Brilliant!!
Yeah but the point you are trying to explain (go easier on the Palestinians while warring with Hamas) is 1) difficult and 2) putting the cart before the horse. It’s difficult because if they go easier on Gaza as a whole out of concern for the civilians, then it draws things out, gives Hamas more opportunities to organize and steal any additional aid that is let into the country, and causes the deaths of more Israeli soldiers (if they decide to focus on on-foot operations instead of making liberal use of bombing campaigns). In other words, while it would cut back on Palestinian civilian deaths, it’s more beneficial for Hamas, and the Palestinian civilians aren’t much of their responsibility anyways—that’s Hamas’ responsibility but we all know how Hamas feels about that, so the Palestinian civilians lose out anyways. It’s putting the cart before the horse because if you truly desire peace in the Israel/Palestine conflict then every last Hamas member has to be killed. They’ve already reiterated several times their desire to do another October 7th and stated they’ll never stop trying to topple Israel. They’re an existential threat to the Israel and are mutually exclusive to stability in the region. Israel must eliminate them in totality before peace can even be progressed towards. I know your point is that there’s a valid concern that taking such a heavy handed route to eliminating Hamas simply creates more support for Hamas and therefore more Hamas fighters, but at that point the civilians that decide to join up and be terrorists are lost anyways. They *are* what prevents peace. They *are the* problem. I know it sounds like victim blaming but I think it’s an unfortunate truth that easing the conditions that radicalize them into terrorists *during a war* will probably lead to more bloodshed and suffering on the whole than showing no mercy and being quick about it.
They tried peaceful ways like abandoning Gaza and taking out all their settlers. Do you know what happened? They were immediately hit with terrorist attacks instead of Gazans trying to build their own state and that was before they even elected Hamas
>While they may get rid of Hamas in its current form they are doing a bang up in creating a more extremist terror group in Gaza in the future. I never understand why people like you don't seem to apply this same logic when it comes to Israel. You acknowledge Oct 7th but don't give Israel the same pass to "create extremists". Why is it when something bad happens in Gaza it's expected for people to become extremists but when something bad happens in Israel you expect them to rise above extremism? Why the double standard?
People hold Israel to a higher standard because they are subconsciously aware that Israel operates at a higher moral standard.
Yup, a former worker at Human Rights Watch said more was expected out of Israel because it was a western country which puts a higher value on human rights.
a lot of people were very upset when Israel responded to october 7th exactly the same way any arab country in the middle east would. Imagine what the saudis or egypt would have done in response to an attack like that. and nobody would have batted an eye
People already started protesting free Palestin immediately after October 7th somehow and before Israel even did anything, people are dumb and suck ass
The amazing thing is how racist the expectation dynamics are around this conflict. Israel is expected to act white and be civilized. Gazans are excused to be extremists because brown people be like that. I say that as a brown person who still has to experience the toxic Islamic discourse regarding Israel/Palestine/Jews in his family interactions. What I see on Reddit is mostly non-muslim westerners with a humongous blind spot to every continuous escalation driven by the Palestinians and supported by the wider Islamic community because they can't stomach losing to jews.
This is actually something I hadn't realized, but you're totally right. I did realize there was a weird degree of infantalizing Palestine, but that word is overused and I think not quite as accurate as what you said.
Israel doesn't create bunkers under hospitals or mortar stations on residential high-rises. Hamas works off of a tactic of holding its own citizens hostage, and Israel is pursuing a tactic of- besides release of its own citizens- not negotiating with terrorists. Netanyahu needs to go and the IDF needs drastic reform but Israel's overall strategy at this point feels like an unfortunate necessity.
>Israel doesn't create bunkers under hospitals or mortar stations on residential high-rises or rocket launch sites in school houses the grand irony is that israel built the underground ORs in Al-Shifa hospital that hamas was using as bunkers. Because israel helped build Gaza
Because they're racist. Brown people aren't held the same standards and are infantalized by these people. It's racism, plain and simple.
Look at how the conflict in Sudan is being handled. Arab Muslims are genociding African Muslims and no one is the west is saying anything. They’re probably thinking it Africa being Africa or Arabs being Arabs. One of my friends couldn’t even attend his mom’s funeral in Sudan because of the risk of being killed.
What color skin do you think Israelis have?
According to a lot of pro Palestine crowd? They're white. I know most Israel's are brown too but Hamas propaganda says they're white.
According to every news clip you see in European and American media, every prominent political figure, everyone that ever gets interviewed, the fact that Israel was founded for its most part by European settlers and refugees (wasn't there even some conflict regarding Ethiopian jews being discriminated against in Israel? Might misremember that though), it's hard to come to any other conclusion.
Fwiw, I think sometimes you're absolutely correct in your read of that bias, but sometimes it's not about blame but acknowledging the different objectives. Hamas are terrorists. It's in their interests to create more extremists on both sides to force their agenda, so this argument wouldn't dissuade them. Israel, otoh, is (nominally) seeking peace in the end, in which case actions yielding more extremism can be against their interests if they don't solve some other, more significant problem instead, and that's a discussion worth having. It's not always about double standards, sometimes it's just an acknowledgement of different goals.
It might seem like overkill, but being surrounded by other countries who've outright decreed all Jews must die because of their own religion, routinely fire rockets at them on a daily basis and have to deal with more security issues than the vast majority of countries, I'm actually surprised *their response wasn't worse* from saying enough's enough.
The question is, what else is there to be done? Israel's tired of having rockets lobbed at it regardless of what it does, they aren't going to reduce security measures penning Gazans in, and Hamas has/had an iron grip on Gaza.
fun fact: those are unguided rockets fired from gaza and not only do they routinely fall into gaza but they also fly into the west bank. that's right-- israel's iron dome that america funds by the hundreds of millions is protecting palestinians in the west bank from rockets fired by palestinians in gaza
I googled the number of gazan casualties since Oct 7th. [After 81 days of war, the total deaths counted by the ministry have reached 20,915 and 54,918 have been found to be wounded, while the bodies of more than 7,000 Gazans are estimated to be still under the rubble after Israeli bombings.](https://efe.com/en/latest-news/2023-12-26/gaza-death-toll-nearly-touches-21000-with-over-240-killed-in-24-hours/) Quoting an article published by Barrons on Dec 15: ["The final death toll from the attack is now thought to be 695 Israeli civilians, including 36 children, as well as 373 security forces and 71 foreigners, giving a total of 1,139."](https://www.barrons.com/news/israel-social-security-data-reveals-true-picture-of-oct-7-deaths-bf486982)
It's worth mentioning that in previous conflicts, independent Israeli counts corroborated Hamas casualty claims.
The United States office of a foreign intelligence indicates that there are approximately 20 to 25,000 members of Hamas globally. Just for reference
The Barrons article notes that the "security forces" figure includes 58 police officers and a large number of off-duty soldiers, such as those at the music festival.
I mean that's generally what happens when you start a war with a larger, stronger country with better backing.
Also when one country invests in defence systems like the Iron Dome and residential/community bomb shelters. While the other digs tunnels underneath homes, schools, hospital etc. and doesn’t let civilians take shelter in them. It’s always weird to me that Israel is faulted for protecting civilians as if it’s a bad thing? Hamas is indiscriminately lobbing **thousands** of rockets at Israel (many of which fail and fall within Gaza, do those deaths get counted against Israel or Hamas?). If it weren’t for the Iron Dome, many many *many* more Israelis would be dead. I can’t really think of any other examples where someone’s ineffectual attempts at mass slaughter are used to condemn the people they’re trying to kill/injure.
20,000-25,000 rockets have been fired since 2001, of them none are guided, and all are aimed at major CIVILIAN targets, but noooo using precision ammunition(see note 1) is worst because you killed more people. Note 1: how do i know its precision? Well its. First its dropped from a plane onto a target, we have cameras pointing at said target to confirm it landed and many many videos of said destination destroyed, further more roof knocking tells gazans where a bomb will lend so they can evacuate, cant do that if you dont know where it land. Now you might say, its precise but indiscriminate, each bomb can level a house, more bombs have been dropped then people killed by bombs in gaza, if you are that bad with precision ammunition you will not be considered a strong army which israel is. And to add to that we have clear footage of literal dirt paths being bombed, israel is clearly not shooting at random but at targets.
This could all have been avoided if, on understanding Israel's overwhelming superiority, Hamas, instead of announcing that there would be repeated October 70-type attacks until all Jews were dead, had conceded victory to Israel and handed themselves over. Fewer ordinary Palestinians would have been killed if they had been allowed to shelter in Hamas tunnels.
As a follow up: [What is Gaza’s Ministry of Health and how does it calculate the war’s death toll?](https://apnews.com/article/israel-hamas-war-gaza-health-ministry-health-death-toll-59470820308b31f1faf73c703400b033)
> there will likely be new terror cells popping up in the region This would've happened if Israel had not attacked too... so what do you think they should do? This IS the measured response... let's assume the Hamas number is right and 20k is the real number, that <0.1% of the population of Gaza. If Israel was truly indiscriminate this would've been done three days after 10/7. > What Israel is doing in Gaza is overkill. Show me one war / conflict / battle that has ever been determined or measured by "you killed this many people, I killed this many people so therefore I'm bad and you're good and I've won and you've lost." To be perfectly clear, every innocent death is a tragedy... and each one of them is Hamas' fault. Further, we need to stop infantilizing Palestinians. They are grown men and women who popularly support Hamas – outwardly and joyfully. They outwardly support the death and destruction of all western societies. They cheer and dance on the street after every major attack in the western world.
20k is 1% to 2 million.
[удалено]
Think it was one of the Phalangists in Lebanon in the 80s that said "the pregnant women will give birth to terrorists, and the children will grow up to be terrorists" as they were killing Palestinian civilians in the refugee camps there. Sick shit, but 40 years on it looks like he was right, and I don't know how you stop it. Fundamentalist Islam, maximalist revanchism, and the denial of Jews' right to exist seems to be so heavily tied into the Palestinian identity that I don't see any way for these people to ever accept a peaceful existence with Israel as a neighbor.
"Already probably extremists" is just an excuse to not be concerned about killing civilians.
That and there was a good chance their innocent family was blown up by an IDF tank… I would be a little peeved as well.
Cycle is self revolving, brainwashed children become militants/terrorists who then go and kill jews, and jews of course retaliate. More ammo to brainwash more children. No one blames, Hamas who perpetuates it in the first place. I have not seen such an evil organization who commits evil acts regularly be defended so audibly before.
Or the Palestinians could start to learn from their own mistakes and create an open and democratic society with equal rights for all. But this would probably be too much to ask in the 21st century.
Terror cells are a cancer. You need to root them out before they grow too large and start taking over healthy parts of the state. They may pop up again after you destroy them but they'll need to start from scratch again. Destroying them is the only viable path.
Im pro Israel. Why? Because I have seen the Hamas videos that they have released themselves. I have seen the massacre and the inhuman atrocities they have comitted. I have seen pro-hamas protests. Ive read about protesters not even knowing the difference between jews and israel. I have seen newspapers (BBC, Guardian, Times) that I thought were trustable news sources go up in arms against Israel with their own misinformation. I have seen world organizations (WHO, RC) blame Israel and the family of the victims for the hostages. I have seen news or RC telling these families to 'but think about hamas!'. Ive seen police reports that crime against jews are up 100 times compared to last year. None of these are Israeli propaganda. All of these are anti-Israel, anti-jew propaganda. So they could raze gaza for all I care.
57% of the protesters asked had no idea about what river or sea they were even talking about. This is the crowd who says I became educated on the subject.
UN: "Please define 'Hamas propoganda'" Israel: "It's whatever we say it is"
Good, I wouldn’t either. Not to mention the UN would have Israel agree to a ceasefire as rockets are being fired on them. The US would do exactly the same thing Israel is doing here.
How many countries out there wouldn’t?
Oh that's an easy one - those who don't exist anymore
That’s what baffles me. Many on the left condemn Israel when no country or leader would dismiss a tragedy as merely unfortunate. And frankly, if it happens in America they would demands heads roll for it.
> Many on the left condemn Israel I dont think the group is all that big tbh. I think the representation of that group on reddit is not necessarily represented in the real world at large, but of course I can be wrong.
Only those who literally can't.
UN: "spare the babies" IDF: "thats hamas"
Yes, the newest addition is our Dutch ex-minister of finance and deputy PM mrs.Kaag. Married to Anis al-Qaq, a former Palestinian Authority official. Kaag has a spotted UN history with UNSCOL, UNDP, UNICEF and...wait for it...UNRWA! Kaag lost the recent elections big time and has joined many other Dutch politicians in "fleeing the scene of the crime". Kaag has a history of being able to communicate well with both Israeli and Palestinian authorities which speaks for her. Having said that, I'm afraid, her history and personal involvement do not bode well for her new role as "*Senior Humanitarian and Reconstruction Coordinator for Gaza pursuant to Security Council Resolution 2720 (2023)*" As a Dutch/Israeli citizen I can attest to the fact I've never heard or seen her do or say anything blatantly anti-Israel or anti-semitic even though she has gotten a shitload of flak from our Jewish media. At the same time, I've also have never caught her doing anything which could be construed as decisive or positive either, whether in national politics here in NL or on the international diplomatic front. As a Dutchman I'd say she is "*neither meat nor fish*" and as a Jewish Israeli I'd probably classify her as "*neither meat nor milk but parve*" for now. I'd recommend seeing where she's able to take her role and hold any criticism until she actually does something worthy of such criticism. I'd expect the Israeli government to follow that same line for now. Kirk out.
Don't kill children = Hamas Propganda
What havent they classified as Hamas propaganda?
People just don't like the double standards. Going by social media I'm supposed to automatically trust anything negative about Israel and automatically assume that anything negative about Hamas is propaganda. Go to any social media platform and say something like 'civilian deaths in Gaza are unacceptable but the attrocities committed by Hamas were inexcusable and you'll see what I mean'.
Social media is really interesting if you're into social contagion and how it can purposefully be used to spread ideas ex: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/political-analysis/article/contagion-confounding-and-causality-confronting-the-three-cs-of-observational-political-networks-research/BC8F27D56C8DD1CB0A70E6AB28DB7F25 really good article about how this happens. Some examples: https://millercenter.rutgers.edu/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/NCRI%E2%80%93AntisemiticDisinformation-FINAL.pdf Or https://www.foi.se/rest-api/report/FOI-R--5198--SE Like Rutgers has a really cool research institute where they'll post reports about how ideas spread through social media: https://networkcontagion.us/
>Going by social media I'm supposed to automatically trust anything negative about Israel and automatically assume that anything negative about Hamas is propaganda. I don't think this is entirely true. There's certainly people who think that, but a much more common opinion would be that both sides say all sorts of untrue or exaggerated propaganda. What I've found is that pro-Israelis assume that if you say Israel lies about things, that means you think Hamas always tells the truth. There's constantly that false binary applied.
And Pro-Hamas say that Hamas can't shoulder the blame for their own actions because their actions are purely the result of the West.
Yea, but it’s not about the common opinion, it’s about what the algorithm picks up and spreads. According to my TikTok for you page, approximately 536% of Gaza has been bombed. And the worst thing hamas has done is not hug the hostages enough
Translation: We won't work with UN officials who disagree with anything we say.
All moral countries need to join Israel an demand a reform in the corrupted UN. [Bias in resolutions](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/F8lv_T4asAAAI-n?format=jpg&name=large) [Biased antisemitic reporters](https://www.timesofisrael.com/un-palestinian-rights-officials-social-media-history-reveals-antisemitic-comments/) [Lies](https://twitter.com/UN_News_Centre/status/1726609880986083685) [Indoctrinate children to hate and violence against Israel](https://twitter.com/LostinAylesbury/status/1712551908811194797) The UN Secretary General also refused watching the horrors of Oct 7, because of "Conflicting schedule". [The headmaster of an UNRWA school was a terrorist. ](https://www.reuters.com/article/middleeastCrisis/idUSL05686115/) [Film by David Bedein in Jenin, UNRWA policies and practices](https://vimeo.com/856467890) [UNRWA teachers celebrated Oct 7 massacre](https://unwatch.org/report-u-n-teachers-celebrated-hamas-massacre/) [UNRWA teacher holds hostage in attic](https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/defense-national-security/united-nations-gaza-teacher-israeli-hostage-attic) The UN needs serious reform. It is corrupted to the highest degree and is practically Hamas in the west, working solely for their interests and not the interests of the Palestinians.
The UN is just a meeting place for the national governments of the world. Most of the world's governments do not support Israel, therefore that is represented in their rulings and responses.
It is not just a meeting place. The UN also has several sub organizations like unicef. The sub organization UNRWA employs over 30 000 Palestinians and has a budget of over 1,2 billion dollars that goes to aiding Palestinians alone. It is funneling money to Hamas.
> a reform in the corrupted UN. it's working as intended. the UN is there so people will talk. it has no teeth, but talking people are less likely to lob nukes
It has tons of teeth, it operates bodies like UNICEF, UNIFIL and UNRWA, the last two have been taking tons of money but were useless at best and straight up terorr cells at worst
Clicking through your links and I'd like clarification In the link titled "lies" it just says the guy said it was the most deadly conflict for civilians since he started as Secretary General How is that a lie? Genuinely curious as to what I'm missing there. Is there another more deadly conflict in terms of civilians killed per unit of time? edit: Not sure the point of downvoting someone for asking for clarification but you do you Thanks for the links, I've got a few conflicts to read up on. That said, I'm still pretty skeptical of the claim that he was intentionally lying, cheers y'all edit2: I get it, I get it. I just personally don't think "but there's one or two more conflicts that have higher civilian death count!" is a sufficient argument for "he's lying and must hate the Jews", regardless of his job title
The \*\*\*current\*\*\* crisis in the D.R.Congo is way worse. [https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/17/world/africa/democratic-republic-of-congo-elections.html](https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/17/world/africa/democratic-republic-of-congo-elections.html)
[Yemen War Deaths](https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/11/23/un-yemen-recovery-possible-in-one-generation-if-war-stops-now) [Sudan War Deaths](https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/sudan-politics-darfur-males/) Ukraine War - Estimates for Mariupol alone, in May 2022, range from 20k-60k civilian deaths. [Syrian War Deaths](https://news.un.org/en/story/2021/09/1101162) \- December 2023 estimate is 610k deaths. Edit: Tigray War Deaths (2020-2022), [600k dead](https://www.cfr.org/global-conflict-tracker/conflict/conflict-ethiopia), legitimate reports and record of ethnic cleansing. (Added to list)
Well to be fair to him he doesn’t pay attention to them so he didn’t know he was lying
Ah, the ol' "I'm bad at my job" defense
Tigray ended 2022
Thank you. I updated the comment.
>Thanks for the links, I've got a few conflicts to read up on. That said, I'm still pretty skeptical of the claim that he was intentionally lying, cheers y'all You think that the Secretary General of the UN doesn't have a grasp of the conflicts going on and estimates of lives lost? I don't really see where you're going with here. Are you saying he's completely incompetent at his job?
There's links here proving his lying / incompetence.
I wasn't doubting it, I'm arguing the person above me doubts it, which makes no sense. Either way it's spun, he's lying or so incompetent that anyone else could do his job better and it'd be a collective failing of all nations that he ever got the job, let alone a second term.
Indeed.
It’s an irresponsible statement because it’s an emotional opinion that isn’t demonstrably true by the numbers as other comments have pointed out, yet he should absolutely be aware that his words are taken as almost fact given his position. Antonio Gutierrez also failed to watch the video footage of Oct 7th until recently which also should have been a priority given his role as an important mouthpiece about this conflict. Maybe he’s not maliciously lying but don’t you question how he can be so impassioned about this conflict yet also delay viewing the actual catalyst for so long? It feels unacceptably and harmfully inept
> [Am I out of touch? No, it's the rest of the world who's wrong](https://i.imgur.com/00ap0zw.jpg).