politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Nope, I never said that. I simply said that Hamas is not the bad guys. What I’m saying is that this idea that there is a binary of “good guys” and “bad guys” is a bullshit narrative believed by naive people that only read propaganda like this story.
For what it’s worth, Israel specifically targets land with civilians on it that they want to settle, blow it up, then claim boogie man “Hamas” did it. They’ve been doing it for DECADES. We’re talking occupied apartment buildings, hospitals, schools…and somehow it never gets covered by the western media. Go look at death and injury statistics for the area. Even western sources will tell you that the Israeli forces are way more brutal than Hamas could ever hope to be.
This isn’t a big surprise to anybody who has observed this conflict for more than a single news cycle.
Indeed. Israel is also in the position of power here. They can choose to start towards a lasting peace but they want all the land instead. Hamas is a symptom of this
Israel tried for a lasting peace a few decades ago. They were rebuffed at the last minute by the PLO. Since then, the PLO has been replaced by Hamas. Hamas' goal, which they've outright stated, is to drive all the Jews into the sea. How do you negotiate with people who want to murder you?
I'm an American Jew and have seen Nazis marching with the swastika flag flying. I've had a person tell me (to my face, knowing that I'm Jewish) that "the only thing Hitler did wrong was not finishing the job." How would you have me negotiate with someone like that?
I'm not claiming that Israel is blameless. Far from it. However, trying to justify attacks like this with "but Israel did X" is minimizing the horror of what was done. Had Hamas attacked military or governmental targets, I'd agree that it was a valid reply to actions Israel has taken. Killing random civilians (many, but not all of whom were Israeli), though, is nowhere near justified by "but Israel did X."
I also won't claim to know the solution to this situation. If I did, I'd be a Nobel Prize winning diplomat and not a small time web developer. I can only describe the situation as I see it. Palestinian groups attack due to (partly) the treatment they're receiving. In return, Israelis, in fear for their safety, elect firebrand politicians who clamp down hard on the Palestinians to prevent future attacks. Mix in some Palestinians who want to kill all Jews and some Israelis (like the settlers) who think all Palestinian land should just be seized for Israel (and who do so) and the pressure/temperature ramps up more and more. Repeat over and over again.
In the short term, Israel is going to retaliate and I can't say that I blame them. I hope they restrict their retaliation to Hamas targets and not civilian ones. Any high ground Israel has from this attack would be instantly lost if they responded exactly in kind. In the long term, we need some diplomats of serious skill to unwind this mess, turn the temperature down, and get both sides talking instead of attacking.
Israel replaced the PLO by supporting hamas
The Palestinians voted in Hamas. You can't blame Israel for the votes of the Palestinians.
It should be noted, though, that Hamas has since cancelled elections. So I'd no longer consider them the rightful rulers of the Palestinian people. Not until free and fair elections are held.
Of course, conflict with Israel is what Hamas wants. Their goal is to push Israel into the sea. If Israel strikes back hard against Hamas' actions, Hamas will spin it with their people as "support us against those evil Israelis." Meanwhile, the right wing elements in Israel don't want peace because they get political power when the people fear they'd be under attack.
I should also point out one more factor in this mess: evangelical Christians in the US. They believe that Jesus will come back when 1) Jews control Israel and 2) Israel is hit with a huge attack. The first part is there. The second part depends on peace not being achieved. If Biden sent a diplomat that was able to magically untangle this mess and forge a lasting peace, the "Jesus returns due to an attack on Israel" possibility would drop to zero. (Well, technically, the chance of an attack would drop. No comment on the "attack on Israel causes Jesus to return" part.)
The evangelicals are huge contributors to the settlers (who take over Palestinian land and then demand that Israel protect them since they are Israeli citizens). The settlers inflame tensions, making attacks more likely. The evangelicals don't care about the Israeli citizens who would suffer from any attack. They think that any Christians in Israel would be pulled to heaven by Jesus and the Jews/Muslims would be tossed into hell. They are mucking in international politics and pushing for violence based solely on trying to get Jesus to return.
Exactly.
Palestinians have rejected peace deal after peace deal for the better part of a century, and have never ONCE offered a solution to this situation that didn't spell the death of Israel.
The idea that Israel had the power to end this is just demonstrably false.
Reducing it to a binary is the incorrect analogy.
The needle of responsibility in this conflict definitely leans toward Hamas.
Every Palestinian civilian death, every displacement, every house bombed, every western country, like Austria, who withdrew support, the imminent reoccupation of the region, it's all on Hamas.
They really really hung themselves on the world stage with this one, they had some excellent PR going too.