Former President Barack Obama said a way forward for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is only possible if people acknowledge the “complexity” of the situation.
“If there’s any chance of us being able to act constructively to do something, it will require an admission of complexity and maintaining what on the surface may seem contradictory ideas that what Hamas did was horrific, and there’s no justification for it. And … that the occupation and what’s happening to Palestinians is unbearable,” Obama said in an interview on the podcast “Pod Save America.”
The former president’s comments come as the Israeli military focuses its offensive against Hamas in Gaza City and northern parts of the enclave.
He also said:
If you want to solve the problem, then you have to take in the whole truth. And you then have to admit nobody’s hands are clean
which is something I totally agree on. There is no “good or bad” team in the Middle East…all parties are involved in this conflict and it’s cause!
Hey, don’t forget those of us who made this mess and walked away, and every country on Earth that continues to keep the whole Middle East area relevant through our continued oil addiction.
Hey, don’t forget those of us who made this mess and walked away,
The early 20th century British Empire?
through our continued oil addiction.
Israel, let alone Gaza, don’t exactly produce a lot of oil, and I certainly don’t know that they sell it.
This whole conflict in Israel is more about land, and the West supports Israel bEcAuSe DeMoCrAcY in an otherwise unfriendly region. The region as a whole might be messy “because oil,” but that’s rather tangential to this conflict.
Israel is adjacent to an incredibly strategic shipping location - the Suez Canal. The Suez Canal links the Mediterranean to the Indian Ocean without having to go around Africa or around Siberia.
Israel isn’t strategically important because it has big oil reserves. It’s strategically important because it’s near a lot of important things. Oil and shipping play a bigger role than you’d think.
You mean the canal that is entirely within Egypt? That argument seems like a stretch to me, and clearly wasn’t the argument the above was trying to make either.
They’re a democracy and have historically been opposed to many counties the West was already opposed to. Their strategic importance is military, not oil.
Israel, the UK and France invaded Egypt in 1956 after Egypt expropriated the Suez Canal from its French & British owners. Then they fought a war in 1967 to keep it open. The conveyance of European trade through the Suez Canal is a major part of Israel’s geopolitical importance.
Great point.
deleted by creator
look around
“You take my water, burn my olive trees, destroy my house, take my job, steal my land, imprison my father, kill my mother, bombard my country, starve us all, humiliate us all, but I am to blame: I shot a rocket back.”
Of course. Those kids in refugee camps, hospitals and ambulances have their hands soaked in blood.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Sadly, there is no way forward. The leaders of both sides want the complete elimination of the other.
So remove the leaders of both sides.
Unfortunately Hamas hasn’t held a single election since they were elected in 2006, and Netanyahu is looking similarly autocratic. The recent escalation is only going to make both sides more antagonistic.
In other words, this shit ain’t going away any time soon.
Why should hamas keep down their arms when they see what is happening in disarmed Westbank?
-
Unarmed protest is always an option. It’s a harder option, but it is an option.
-
Hamas could keep their weapons, and target actual military targets in Gaza.
-
Israel already withdrew from Gaza in '06, but Hamas is happy to launch rockets at civilian targets in Israel.
-
Hamas could launch rockets at civilian targets in Israel from non-civilian locations in Gaza, instead of using schools and hospitals.
Hamas has consistently picked the most hostile options because Hamas doesn’t just want a free Palestine, Hamas wants the destruction of Israel and rejects any territory existing as an Israeli state. Gaza isn’t even fully isolated by Israel, but Egypt wants nothing to do with Hamas either.
I’m not even saying armed resistance is wrong, but what Hamas does is. And yes, Israel’s government is also just as wrong, if not more so.
You must be new to the world then.
- Unarmed protests are not an option as evidenced by the great march of return in Gaza. Israhell knee capped Palestinians with bullets.
- How exactly? Are you providing them with precision weapons. Also Hezbolla is exclusively targeting military and Israhell killed Lebanese civilians. Hezbolla responded by promising to kill 1 Israeli civilian for every Lebanese civilian killed by Israel. Also you might not be familiar with Dahiya doctrine of Israel.
- Gaza does not exist in a vacuum. Gaza and hamas can see the occupation and annexation of the Westbank. They can see the desecration of Aqsa.
- You are pretending everything Israel says is true even though you know they lie all the time.
Why shouldn’t Hamas continue armed resistance? Westbank is the living example of what happens when resistance dwindles. Israhell takes all. Simple.
-
Do you think an armed Westbank would fair any better?
Yes. If Arabs had helped they’d have their own state by now. But the monarchies helped suppress and kill Palestinian state hood because they are afraid of what the Levant Arab mindset represents. They are afraid of both islamist and secular Levant arab politics because they represent unity beyond borders.
Exactly. I’ve been recently thinking that maybe Israel and Palestine become a new country run by the world. It becomes a neutral globally enforced and patrolled market or exchange. Almost like a U.N. country, but somehow better because the U.N seems like a fucking joke. I’m not sure exactly what I mean here, but essentially, the world removes the two and force them to be one.
Even though it is complex, there are obvious crimes, let alone war crimes happening there. Looking at you IDF with your repeated bombing of civilians and the wounded.
I think you’ve just created a tinderbox of like…well…biblical proportions.
Umm… it’s already burning.
Just saying.
The UN is a pull organization. It has to request forces & money for operations. No nation or nation collective in their right mind would want to shell out the billions required to basically occupy the region, even with Jerusalem.
Make it a global trade hub. All nations will have an interest. With global trade comes investment, and the next thing you know, this small patch of the earth is the most valuable piece on it.
So make a place a global trade hub in theory can be as simple as saying it is so and watching every country trade there, only in one’s imagination.
So now the region is going to be made into a great Singapore for the Mediterranean using billions of dollars of tax money from nations including Egypt, Turkey, Greece, Cyprus, etc?
That’s not a global trade hub. That’s a globally subsidized tax haven. Whose long-term stability Congress from the whim of nations like the USA, China, Russia, the EU, Iran, Saudi Arabia, etc…
With that, it would be infinitely easier and more attractive for any nearby nation to create a special economic area to handle regional trade & take the jobs, and the best part? This would be funded by the respective nation itself.
The way you describe it is a tax haven. Make it not so.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
This is almost an appealing idea in a parallel universe where religion doesn’t exist, but unfortunately that’s not the one we live in. This conflict is one that extends to nearly every avenue, but at it’s core, it’s a religious one. Unless we’re ready as a global community to finally denounce religion and call the practice of it a silly and fruitless endeavor, which to be clear, we aren’t, then we’re never going to get anywhere pretending we can ignore the religious aspect of it. And that includes your utopian suggestion, which aside from all of its other very real problems would also likely enrage an enormous religious segment of the world who would see some of their holiest lands reduced to mere merchants dens. Even if you perhaps try to protect the religious sites, now you’re effectively enforcing a concept of religious sanctity on the global community, which is no less likely to offend.
Your idea is well-intended and nice to think about, but unfortunately unrealistic for many reasons, starting on the ground floor with problem of religion.
Yes, that’s why we don’t stop trying. I might not make a difference, but maybe the next generation or the next after that. The point is I’m not going to stop trying. There is no answer that everyone is going to like, but there is an answer that will help everyone. I mean Israel IS man made.
This is the answer and is being downvoted with no better suggestions. If you don’t have solutions and only criticism, you’re part of the problem.
Criticism, constructively made, helps avoid bad ideas, and makes good ones better. But you don’t always know the better way when you see a bad one— I don’t need to know how to build a boat to know a screen door won’t float.
Part of the problem is one side having a desire for autonomy, and limited, at best sense of self-determination. Robbing them and the state they have grievance with of both their autonomies and capacities for self-determination doesn’t seem like a good answer to the problems they both have.
That’s why you remove all the sides. Corporations already act without boundaries. They actually benefit from country boundaries ie: manufactured in China for cheap and sold in America for massive profit. Corporate interest is what is against no country boundries.
I agree. But downvotes to a legitimate solution without criticism or suggestions is pointless and contributes nothing to the discussion. I don’t care if you even suggest nuking the entire area. Just own it and defend your opinion.
Eh… I think I might care about somebody suggesting nuking the entire area. Not all ideas are created equal, and not all ideas are worth expressing.
I agree that not all ideas are equal, but disagree about their expression. Discourse and communication is the only way we learn and become better people. If I’m wrong, which happens too often, I want someone to be able to explain why. I’d rather the racists hurl slurs, so they can exposed and taught, then to stay silent and never be confronted.
No, we absolutely do not nuke the area. That’s what Buttholeyahu wants to do. You know the corrupt leader of Israel. What about America, yeah there’s a shitload of corruption here too and it’s still wrong.
Another thought that I had was having international governing bodies get together and force Israel to pay for the relocation, education, housing, and UBI for every single Palestinian citizen for the remainder of their lives if they would agree to peaceful relocation to another host country. This is a much less preferable idea to the previously mentioned one, but it seemed like a potentially feasible one.
Forced migration, which this would be, is a bad idea, as has been born out repeatedly through history.
- if it’s to many countries, it splinters communities.
- if it’s to just one country, few are open to taking even small numbers of people in, let alone five and a half million.
- if one was open to it, none have the infrastructure in place to receive so many people.
- people get attached to land, and the idea of it.
To that last point, that land is not interchangeable, and any assumption that it is is remaining ignorant of some of the desires of the parties involved.
I could go on, but I don’t think that would add to discourse. This is a hard problem, renewed with every moment of violence. I don’t believe we should expect any of the grievances each side has stacked up to be let go of without honouring their non-violent desires.
I’d just take Israel paying for their relocation.
If you think you can reduce the solution to this problem (or even a proper description of the problem itself) into a quick reply on a web forum, you’re part of the problem.
Honestly, everyone I’ve seen weigh in on this has fucked it up, on all sides, at all times, going all the way back.
Maybe a bunch of armchair geniuses should stay out of it, unless they’re willing to drop what they’re doing and go over there to help. Meddling from external parties is part of how this got so fucked up (over and over and over).
The problem is asshole leaders are being petty little brats. There is a solution, but both parties involved are being selfish assholes and the citizens end up dying and suffering. There are easy solutions to everything when you remove the angry assholes.
A child knows right from wrong until they are corrupted by an adult. The answer is easy. The evil ones who benefit are making it hard.
While you armchair genius. No insight. No congregation of minds to develop even a strategy of a path forward. Just criticism for those who want to make the world better. Pathetic. I assume you’re commenting from Gaza because you went over there to help.
Edit: That was reactionary and uncharacteristic. Some of us want to learn from each other and try to understand the situation to build a consensus for what a solution might look like.
Well done; you missed the point entirely, slung some useless mud, and figured out a way to turn it into self- praise. You should run for office.
Everyone stop what you’re doing at look over here at… “TokenBoomer”… they’ll get to the bottom of this, on a web forum, deep in a thread with… Hey! 5 boosts! We’re almost there, I can feel it.
Like and subscribe, thoughts and prayers.
Fuck thoughts and prayers. They have done nothing. Thoughts and prayers are tools of the usless and inept.
I understood your point. I just don’t agree with it. This is a social space. We can only learn by participation. My statement could have been phrased better. But I still agree with the sentiment. I’m no one special and have no misconceptions about solving the world’s problems. But I do have opinions, and enjoy learning from other’s perspectives.
The greatest danger to our future is apathy.
Jane Goodall
Take away their toys and put them in time oot.
Ah. Yes. That’s the easy way to do it.
And make sure they are both secular.
Lol not true. Palestine disarmed in the Westbank and got nothing except brutal apartheid and evictions as a result.
And we can stop giving them money unless they start playing nice.
It’s not the government who is settling the West Bank. Yes, it is their policy, but it’s regular Israeli citizens who are killing Palestinians, burning their homes down or taking their homes from them and driving them away.
I mean, the government is incentivizing it and enabling it.
Settlers wouldn’t settle the West Bank if the Israeli military wasn’t protecting them. The government is absolutely the problem.
Go try and take someone’s home by force. It won’t go well. But it will go a lot better when it’s sanctioned by an overwhelming military force.
And in turn, Western governments are enabling the Israeli government. If the West sanctioned Israel as hard as they sanctioned Iran or Russia, they’d probably think twice about annexing the West Bank. But instead of sanctions they get weapons.
enact a european style democratic state with no official religious affiliation. problem solved. jews and muslims don’t actually hate each other. they live side by side all the time.
Could we have this guy back, please?
Nah, he might seem reasonable here but his foreign policy scatterbrain pattern is part of why Ukraine is in such dire straights now. Man hesitated to stand up to Russia when they went into crimea, the point when they could have been stopped, and where Ukraine could have been swept into the EU orbit with far less bloodshed.
Obama standing up to Russia during the Crimea invasion would make for some interesting alt-history.
With Russia under stronger sanctions earlier, perhaps they would have less opportunity to feed and fund the alt-right to the same extent as it has been.
Please, they’ve been stirring shit up on a shoestring budget for decades. It’s almost impressive what they’ve been managing to do.
They should run a frugal youtube channel and teach the CIA how its done.
The “lead from behind” guy who delivered $4 billion in cash by US military to Iran? No Thanks
The guy whose quantity of melanin drove Bubbas insane?
“It’s the WHITE HOUSE!”
The drone strike guy who didn’t close gitmo?
What israel is doing in Palestine is what oBomber did during his entire presidency.
Let’s judge people on their actions instead of hollow words. Even the walking orange did better than Obama when it comes to foreign policy by withdrawing from Afghanistan.
Don’t forget the tan suit and bicycle helmet!
Worst president ever, ever!
/S
Obama is a Centrist-Democrat. Right-wingers AGREED with his policies enough that all they complained about was how much melanin his clothes lacked and lack of head protection. That meant the policies and actions were favorable to Right-wing nuts :-( Cancelling student debt, bailing out families in need, reinforcing the Social-Security, VA, CDC, EPA, FDA and making Roe-Wade into law ( along with the ACA ) in so many ways were sidelined and ignored while 2008 taught the lessons that werent learnt, 2019 hit so hard and so fast nothing could have been effective at stopping the long plunge into the depths.
Centrists do nothing except maintain the status-quo while silently allowing everything that failed to stay broken, while the next cycle of things to break happens over and over again until that deep dark pit becomes the new reality.
Do you think anyone outside of the 30% of Confederate descendants in the US agrees with you?
Isn’t it sad that you’re so fixated on defending “lefties” that you’re willing to ignore that Obama was a warmonger that indiscriminately targeted civilians to further US imperialism?
But keep going about the repubs vs dems circlejerk.
Isn’t it sad that you ignore that the Republican presidents didn’t close gitmo either and that Trump actually increased the drone strikes?
Lol I hope you’re getting paid to do your farcical trolling. I said nothing about repubs vs dems - YOU did. I just mentioned the racists, sexists and bigots that are the only ones on your side of this argument.
I’m sorry was my side the one supporting a racist apartheids state akin to literal Nazi’s?
No, your side are actual Nazis.
Which side is that? Your only rebuttal is tu quoque but I haven’t declared support for any party.
Or is it a law of nature that if you criticize precious GenocIde Joe that you must vote on the elephant logo?
Does noise constantly echo in your empty skull?
No because the words of western leaders are so hollow that the echo cancels out. You should try taking both your eye patches off.
No. I need my left eye patch. I’m a pirate. You’re a loser.
bloppydee dooo dee dooo! lmao
Is it hard keeping up with all the accounts you’re in charge of at The Troll Farm, tovarisch?
Not really since every rebuttal I receive here cannot seem to reason past the level of ad-hominems.
High school never ends [for now]. Remember that, people.
And when you distill complex conduct into easy bites about said high schoolers, the other high schoolers of the world will take high schooler level actions.
Perhaps we need a more educated world to move forward…
We certainly are catering to the least intelligent among us in almost every respect. Oddly enough I was thinking about this earlier tonight.
I went to use the bathroom at a restaurant and they had some framed newspapers hanging up in there that were run by the local newspaper in 1918. The whole front page was news about WWI but it looked very different from war coverage in newspapers today. Each article was very detailed and covered distinct parts of the conflict during that week. There were sections on American, Canadian, and English troops detailing whether they had advanced or retreated, how much fighting they had to do, and references to commanding officers, obscure geographic landmarks, and lines from speeches made by foreign leaders. It was clear from the way they were written that the author expected his audience to be familiar with all of this to the point that he could mention them in passing without offering any explanation as to how they were related or what significance they held.
This is in stark contrast to current reporting on the Palestinian conflict and to a lesser degree the war in Ukraine. Journalists rarely mention details in such a way and when they do they offer much more context, assuming the reader is unfamiliar with much of what is being discussed. Of course, they’re not wrong in that assessment but I do wonder how much of that has to do with the public being slowly conditioned to expect simplicity in reporting. These articles often read more like a political interpretation than a description of events. Nuance and the expectation of sustained interest in the subject seems almost entirely absent.
During my relatively long life I’ve witnessed journalism morph from giving information to forming opinion. Sometimes they do it openly, sometimes they try to pass it as the context you mention.
I believe context is necessary now because of how fragmented people’s attention is. We used to have 5 tv channels and two main newspapers and that was it. It was easier to keep the focus and remember the context back then.
Or, rather, we were all inside the same information bubble. Now everyone is in their own bubble, and there’s no more common understanding of reality.
This conflict makes it super clear, because of its complexity and long history, that people don’t have the time or bandwidth to understand the whole thing and end up repeating what they hear inside their bubble.
For example: your opinion is largely influenced by your location and your own history, much more than by the facts of the conflict. I come from Argentina, where most people support Israel, and I live in Ireland, where most people support the Palestinians. There’s understandable reasons for that. Argentina suffered two Islamic terrorist attacks against local Jewish institutions, while Irish people identify with Palestinians because of the British oppression.
I personally live in my own bubble of course, we all do. I know my opinion is heavily influenced by my own history.
As a consequence I end up getting involved in online discussions where I argue for nuance and against simplification, but that just puts me on the “wrong side” of both “sides”. So for my own mental health I’ve been trying to stop participating. I only wanted to chime in here because your comment seemed to capture some of what I think.
I know exactly what you mean about being on the wrong side of both sides. In the US our two political parties are so ingrained in culture that people feel like they can’t disagree on any subject without being cast out. I’ve always thought the idea that you would fall perfectly into one of two categories was asinine. That’s led to me taking positions on many subjects that aren’t extreme enough for the purists on either side. It’s incredibly annoying because you can tell that for many of them the things they’re saying aren’t deeply held beliefs and yet they’re defended as if they are. Really though, they’re simply the dominant narrative in that person’s bubble.
I just posted a video about this in the Breadtube community if you’re interested. It’s about being able to disagree without disrespecting.
Please share.
Sure.
Loved the video. Is that you?
Please participate. Your perspective is important. You’re referencing consensus reality and it is indeed disintegrating.
I’m here for comments like yours. Thanks.
Thanks! I’m glad you found it interesting. It’s sometimes hard to know if other people enjoy what I write or if I’m just rambling into the void for no reason.
A more educated world, or a less educated one. If there is nobody around to teach the tradition of violence in the region, nobody would have any interest in perpetuating it.
maybe I just need coffee but this seems completely incoherent to me
Or did your education stop at middle school?
If the entire holy land was nuked and radioactive, people would still try to occupy the wasteland so they could get back in first. Don’t think there is a solution
Honestly, this is nonsense.
They aren’t fighting over Jerusalem or Bethlehem or Jericho. This is a war over grazing lands and a beach town.
If you look away from Gaza for a moment to the other Palestinian territory – the occupied West Bank – you’ll see gangs of a hooligans in pickup trucks with ski masks smashing water wells and killing cattle in small desert towns like it’s high noon at the O.K. Corral.
The whole religious component is largely a distraction. There are people living on real estate that other people who have much bigger guns want. The solution is the same as it’s always been: give folks a fair deal.
It’s not a coincidence that this latest conflict is in Gaza. Gaza isn’t religiously significant. It’s just the densest, most brutal concentration camp in Israel. This is not over religion.
But it’s in the name of religion, so it draws in the Christo-fascist zionists alongside the Israeli ones. They don’t need educated support, just support. Religious nuance helps increase that.
That’s totally true. I only mean to say that the fundamental drivers are typical to those outside of the holy lands. But you’re right that the religious component is definitely leveraged. I’ll also credit @keardap@lemmy.selfhost.quest for pointing out that the American Evangelical Christian nationalist movement is a huge contributor to the conflict. They’re far more numerous than American Jews, and seem to be have greater influence on American policy in Israel than American Jews do.
That’s really what I was insinuating as well. The National Prayer Breakfast needs to be ignored wholly by our politicians, but members from both “sides” attend because it’s politically advantageous.
A documentary called The Family does a great job at explaining this.
There is oil just off Gaza’s coast. But Israhell already controls that.
There are people living on real estate that other people who have much bigger guns want.
What is the big distinction between the “people” and the “other people” that makes them different groups of people? Hint: the word starts with an “r” and ends with “eligion”.
Flood it. God.did; worked apparently.
*Albeit briefly. So, I reckon we can shift the gulf some.
I think the proposal to nuke it may also leave it flooded - depends on the yield and qty.
Mythology won’t help here. That’s partly the problem already.
disregarding that fucked-ass comment,
God.did
is this a DJ Khaled reference?
Genesis
so it’s racism then
The radioactive halflife of a nuke explosion is quite short, if we want a long term solution we need…Chernobyl 2.
nuclear boogaloo
how about an agnostic democracy that israelis and palestinians can both live in? like a european country or something…
Yeah, but the whole point of Israel, is that it’s a home for Jewish people. That this apparently means an ethno apartheid state, is revolting. I have yet to hear a zionist to provide a good solution.
On that front Obama is correct: how are you going to create a Jewish state surrounded by Muslim states that oppose your existence fundamentally?
But at this point you can argue that living as a Palestinian in Israel and the occupied territories is worse than living in many (but clearly not all) Muslim countries as a non-Muslim.
So religious states, democracies or not, do exist and kinda can make it work in some cases, even if I would prefer a secular democracy for myself any day.
why the fuck do we need a jewish state? do we have a christian state? a buddhist state? not really. religious states are an outdated way to do government.
Breaking my own rule here, but whatever.
There’s no need for a Jewish state per se. There’s a need for a state for Jews, so they can live without fear of being persecuted, like they have been for hundreds of years.
Same reason there’s a need for a Palestinian state.
so a european style democracy with a constitution that has “congress shall make no law” types of sentences in it
And yet, Muslim states exist.
they shouldn’t. it’s an ultra conservative old way of doing government.
As someone living in muslim state: no, religious state shouldn’t exists.
It’s still a good idea.
It’s actually pretty easy if you stop requiring support for settler colonialism. The rest of the world left that behind 70 years ago. Israel doesn’t get to be special they can either give Palestinians voting rights (which would obliterate the idea of a Jewish state) or submit to a UN peacekeeping force between them and the Palestinians on the 1949 borders.
The only reason this is hard is because we keep bending over backwards to support their Apartheid. We know these answers. They’ve been done before.
The rest of the world left that behind 70 years ago.
lol
Okay. Where else in the world is settler colonialism actively being practiced? I’d really like to know, because they need to be put on blast too.
The complexity is that Israel (specifically Netanyahu has gone rouge, saying nothing will stop what they are doing) and that is starting to have consequences for Democrats, and the US world image. This, along with Blinkens recent statements, are a subtle way of telling them to stop, without Biden going back on his full support of Israel.
It is the foundations of deniability, so that if the critiques of war crime and genocide come fully to light in the public eye, the US has ground to shift to. Those drones capturing footage over Gaza can quickly be used to support whatever narrative shift the US deems most advantageous. Can the Dems lose support of Arab Americans and their allies? Can/will they lose Jewish support at home if crimes are unmasked and is that number more or less than being on the “right side” of things?
These are likely the questions that are swirling around the White House and State Department as we speak. Time is of the essence, as 2.5 million people are on the verge of succumbing to dehydration and starvation. If those distributions are equal, a heart breaking cataclysm, in the form of a mass casualty event, could occur at any time. 10,000. 100,000. Who knows how many won’t be able to be saved even once aid comes through. Medical capacity is needed to reverse these things and none exists any longer. The UN is warning of this.
If it happens, blame will need to be swift to maintain appearances and Israel is running the risk of becoming the “Voldemort” of the Middle East overnight.
He wouldn’t be the first powerful guy supported or even brought up by the US going rogue.
We don’t talk about what happened with Sadam…
deleted by creator
There are complex issues to solve, sure, but there’s nothing complicated about the fact that we need to let humanitarian aid in and stop killing children, right this fucking minute. There are no excuses for what is happening right now.
“Stop killing children” should be enforced in both countries, though. It’s not like Hamas is protecting the children in Gaza. Quite the opposite really.
No argument there, and I did not intend for my comment to say anything else.
I’m not saying the details of it are not complicated.
History is always complicated
Present events are always complicated
But the way this is reported in the western media is as though one needs a PhD in Middle Eastern studies to understand the basic morality of holding a people in a situation in which they don’t have basic rights including the right that we treasure most the franchise the right to vote and then declaring that state a democracy
is actually not that hard to understand.
I’m actually not sure which country you are talking about now. I don’t know of anyone who calls Palestine a democracy. I think the reason people call Israel a democracy is that Israeli citizens have free elections and are not oppressed. I don’t think they factor in oppression of other countries when they call something a democracy. If they did, the US and UK wouldn’t count as democracies either.
If they did, the US and UK wouldn’t count as democracies either
Most political experts agree that they barely classify. The US has a rather unique electoral college system. The UK is most literally a constitutional monarchy. At best, they’re hybrid systems.
holding a people in a situation in which they don’t have basic rights
I’m actually not sure which country you are talking about now.
If the options are Palestine and Israel, which country do you think it is?
Come on, use your brain.
No need to be condescending. With how polarizing this issue is, you are surely aware that there might be people on the Internet who would stand by these claims for either of the two countries. What I use my brain to conclude isn’t relevant, the question is what you used your brain to conclude.
Stella has been all over Lemmy with this BS. They aren’t really worth the effort. Speak to people who might be reading the thread, not to that troll.
Re-read my comment. It applies to you as well.
holding a people in a situation in which they don’t have basic rights
Hamas holding their own population as human shields and failing to provide basic infrastructure, or Israel blocking their own borders that stops Palestine civilians from access to necessity of life.
Im with the other poster, and if you didn’t see both there is already a bias in your head that no reasonable and open discussion of facts would ever overcome.
Lol, what? You’re buying into Israeli propaganda talking points to justify bombing civilians. I’m not going to entertain your bias.
Hamas isn’t denying Gazans basic human rights. Israel is. This isn’t up for debate.
Hamas wasn’t stealing water pipes to make weapons?
(I’m not saying Israel hasn’t done bad things, and I’m not saying one is worse than the other. But Hamas HAS been denying “their people” access to basic human rights in the process of “fighting for their people”.)
Well there are 240 hostages that are held captive in an underground lair by some psychopaths. The PM of Israel may not want to keep those people there any longer than necessary.
Perhaps Hamas should release the hostages so there’s no longer a reason for Israel to deny calls for a ceasefire?
Odd that no one is calling on Hamas to do this, isn’t it? It’s almost like everyone knows Hamas is evil and will continue to keep those people imprisoned. But if we’re demanding Israel to do things we know they won’t do, why not also demand Hamas to do things we know they won’t do?
yes no one is calling for the return of hostages
that is a reasonable thing to say
Jesus man, open your eyes and ears. Nobody is saying Hamas should do that. Listen to what Obama is saying in the video, for the love of God.
Of course we all want civilian hostages released. Don’t be dumb.
Except apparently Israel because they are bombing the event living shit out of Gaza. Hostages aren’t bomb proof, so tell me, how does Israel know they’ve not killed some when they kill 30 civilians to kill a Hamas leader (whose name slips them at the moment)
They don’t and i’d characterize much of their bombing as a war crime.
“Genocide is bad and we should halt donated weapons to countries committing genocide” - very easy policy most people will agree on.
but they won’t agree on what constitutes genocide
Nuance? What’s that? Just say horrific fuckin things to the people who disagree with you! Much more fun that way!
A plea for nuance from the enablers and backers of the apartheid regime is not something I’m going to take on board.
I’m aware of the historical context and Israel has a right to exist and Jews to be safe. But I stand firmly with the Palestinians as the victims of generations of aggression.
The calls to nuance and complexity is insulting, like people can’t see what’s right infront of them and form an opinion of their own. What complexity is there in bombing hospitals, ambulances, schools and refugee camps, while denying food, water, and medical supplies to millions
Ignoring nuance is claiming only one side is right. It’s easy and borderline brainless to simply claim Israel is the only side wrong for bombing hospitals.
But this ignores that Hamas is committing war crimes by using civilian facilities as staging grounds to launch attacks on Israel. This ignores that Hamas’ charter calls for the destruction of Israel, and the only thing stopping them is lack of weapons. This ignores that Hamas, the democratically elected ruling party of Gaza, has continued to use resources to attack Israel instead of building infrastructure to actually function independently.
Ignoring nuance is to ignore history. Ignoring that the West created this whole situation, by both promising one region to two peoples then creating division where there was none to make colonial rule easier, and by also so brutally attempting to wipe out an entire people it created a hardline cultural belief that swift and severe military action is necessary to insure “never again,” (and two wars in '48 and '67 didn’t help either).
None of this is to say Israel is innocent of wrongdoing - they sure as shit aren’t and certainly seem happy to bomb 100 Palestinian civilians if it means they get 1 Hamas fighter. But rejecting nuance pushes a belief one side is right and one side is wrong, and that the only sides here are national ones. Both suck, both are morally wrong. The only “right side” is Palestinian and Israeli civilians being killed because the only “wrong side” - extremist Israeli and Palestinian leaders - are happy to kill as many civilians as possible for some acres of land.
But please, do tell me how my opinion is wrong and there’s no complexity here.
Honestly if the Jews in the Warsaw ghetto didn’t want to get wiped out like that, they shouldn’t have rebelled. Their hands weren’t clean.
There’s nuance to everything but when war criminals like this and other US president speak about it, it loses any shred of credibility. It’s like asking a dictator with a PR team about something that’s happening half way across the globe. Of course they’re going to say include vaguely valid points to take a higher ground.
Take him to hague with rest of the crew and put him on a trial. I’ll want to hear what nuance opinions he has about that.
I think the nuance is understanding the evils of the Israeli state without blaming Jews or endorsing violence against Israeli civilians. You aren’t doing that here, but lots of people are doing this right now (the people “forming an opinion on their own” aren’t always forming great opinions). Anyone suggesting that nuance is unnecessary is begging you to only see their side of things. There are zero issues in the world that don’t require some degree of nuance; why you would think such a complex and long-standing conflict like this one is better without critical thinking is the real insult here.
It’s weird that Obama is being nuanced here, yet the US has been unwavering in supporting Israel, including during Obama’s term. Maybe his stance has changed. Or maybe it’s easy for him to say things when he doesn’t have to act on it at all. Talk is cheap, after all.
People have a right to be safe but no state has a right to exist, let alone a state defined by being a settler colonial project.
Maybe I could agree with you, but they did face an injustice like no other. They have a right to a homeland but it should never have been Israel.
What the hell does ‘right to a homeland’ mean?
Where’s the homeland to rest of the genocides around the world? let’s bring in Uyghur population to Israel too, Rohingya Muslims? Ugandan genocide?
When are they going to get their own homeland?
oh oh but this one is so much more special because it ties in with your religious beliefs in the west, right?
the rest? they just can fucking just get wiped out for all you care.
lose the facade you ducking hypocrites.
Man fuck off, that was a lot of shite you typed. I don’t have religious beliefs for one and you can scroll through my history to see my strong support for Palestine.
Fuck you.
Ok, it’s get real time: the ONLY reason the US supports Israel is because it’s a staging area if shit kicks off in the middle east. That’s it. The “Jesus” stuff if just an excuse to appease the zealots. And my opinion isn’t anti-Semitism. It’s anti-genocide.
Probably one of the most complex issues that I don’t see being brought up is Gaza’s culture built around Sharia law.
Yeah, there are plenty of innocent people are children suffering. This still doesn’t mean that if Gazans had there way, Israel would be a better place.
That said, the US should end all aid to Israel and let them fund their own genocide. They can afford it. They have a fucking intel fab for fuck’s sake.
This feels a bit like saying “you know, the trail of tears was bad, but we don’t bring up the complex issues of Cherokee slavery”.
Sharia law isn’t a monolithic belief and is subject to reform. But it’s entirely a secondary consideration when you have a state committing genocide.
Yes.
Do you have any understanding of the Palestinian history? Isreal funded religious extremism in order to opposed the leftist secularist political organizing within Gaza.
Do you have any understanding of the Palestinian history?
why would they? it’s not like the west has painted muslims and the middle east people as the bad guy for decadessss. From media to hollywood, middle east is a lawless hellhole and they had no hand it making it that way. like at all…
most of them probably can’t even find them in a map, but once they see a middle eastern anywhere, they know they have to instantly hate on them.
‘we didn’t realise they were going to use the weapons like that’
We thought they were going to build schools and hospitals with those bombs!
More breaking news. Obama says breathing is good for your health.
And while you say this, this thread is full of people claiming it is actually very simple. sigh
No shit Sherlock! But the keyboard warriors on the internet with dumb takes aren’t the ones enabling and funding the killing of civilians though, are they?
This guy has been, since well, he’s a US president so it must come naturally.
Christopher Hitchens made an argument regarding the religious undertones of the conflict and why peace cannot easily be found. https://piped.video/watch?v=rc90pcx6kNU
Of course, by this point there’s also hate passed on from one generation to the next.
