They've already attacked Syria and Lebanon multiple times already. There's no doubt that they're already planning for new wars once this one is over.
Why should Israel allow themselves to be attacked by Syria and Lebanon? Did you miss what Lebanon did to people in northern Israel? Seems like you think Jews should just sacrifice themselves for some reason.
The fascist regime in Tel Aviv has been attacking almost every other country in the region. Israel is a country led by religious fanatics.
Israeli here, can't directly answer your question since I've lived in the US for 99% of my adult life, but I consider myself pro-Israel and resent the way Israel is currently/always being portrayed. I see the key problem as people removing context: Context for why the current situation could easily be different if Hamas acted/acts differently, and context for why there is no "just stop fighting" option that leaves Is…
> why there is no "just stop fighting" option I don't recall many people ever seriously asking for that, though I admit I'm not up-to-date on Israeli affairs. Don't the overwhelming majority of outsiders want a two-state solution, or failing that a more secular Israeli administration? Through a lens of historical context and not just Oct 7th, it's hard for me to believe that Israelis don't know how to attain regional…
But reading between the lines there are not many plausible end states. Its a choice between a return to a status quo where Israel has defended borders. Or a removal of Palestinians from the territory. I think most people in the international community would prefer the former even when they don't come out and say it. And that may reasonably be safer and better for Israeli civilians.
It's the "Jewish" in Jewish state that lies at the root of the conflict, isn't it? There aren't many options to maintain a dominant ethnic identity in a democracy when the land the nation was founded on was already inhabited by people who don't share in that identity. The only option is to either cede that ethnic identity or to engage in mass displacement and disenfranchisement. It's exceedingly subtle the way ethno-…
Jews were kicked out of all the Arab nations they lived in, were persecuted in Europe, and you think that they shouldn’t get a sovereign country for themselves? Should the Kurds get one? Tibetans? Catalonias? Scottish?
The entire bible is a story of the Jewish people losing their land due to moral failings. Repeatedly. From Judges through 2 Kings, Israel repeatedly loses divine protection precisely because of its own wickedness. Being “chosen” meant bearing covenantal responsibility, not enjoying a blank moral check. Deuteronomy 20:15-18 is more appropriate to the current conflict, as it relates to how the Jews should fight wars in…
> The entire bible is a story of the Jewish people losing their land due to moral failings. Plus the general idea that humans in general are morally flawed, sinful, etc. But, "Good news!" If you follow the one true god, that'll all be sorted out. Following the classic marketing strategy of creating a need, and then filling it.
We have come a long way from that kind of thinking. Now we have "follow the one True President".
It's the "Jewish" in Jewish state that lies at the root of the conflict, isn't it? There aren't many options to maintain a dominant ethnic identity in a democracy when the land the nation was founded on was already inhabited by people who don't share in that identity. The only option is to either cede that ethnic identity or to engage in mass displacement and disenfranchisement. It's exceedingly subtle the way ethno-…
There are currently about 40 countries that have a higher Muslim percentage than Israel's Jewish percentage. Many of them much higher. Many of them kicked out all their Jews in recent history.
Check your facts, most of those Jews left due to a) Israeli terrorism (bombing synagogues), b) Israeli policies (Magic Carpet), c) Israel-endorsed or Israel-caused racism that obviously wasn't there before because those populations were living there (including Palestine) peacefully for centuries.
>human-shielding The '''adults''' are not the ones accepting this and other canards that Israel and their apologists keep bandying about.
Do you have the address for the Hamas Dept of Defense HQ, or the present location of their leadership?
I have the address for the many IDF bases that are in residential neighbourhoods, as well as the schools from which their predecessors in the Irgun, Haganah and Lehi stored weapons and hid their soldiers.
So basically the international community should allow a genocide by "whoever" is stronger?
Here's my phrasing: the international community should not expend resources to support people who prefer to fight and die for their land than to live peacefully elsewhere.
One side, a ragtag group of civilians who barely find food, and the other side, a well-armed modern army without too many moral dilemmas.
"Let's not spend resources to support either" looks awfully like allowing a genocide.
Jews were kicked out of all the Arab nations they lived in, were persecuted in Europe, and you think that they shouldn’t get a sovereign country for themselves? Should the Kurds get one? Tibetans? Catalonias? Scottish?
There are two lines of logic that disrupt this reasoning. One is israel as an independent state hasn’t existed for thousands of years. The other is Jews do have refuge and safe harbors in the form of western countries. Plenty of Jews living quite comfortably with no threat of war protected by the largest military on the planet in west LA. So really these people have no reason to be elevated among similarly displaced…
Think about it. You are allowed to take over neighbour's real estate, raze it to the ground, and kill them as you wish without consequences. Would you resist?