this post was submitted on 25 Apr 2024

61 points (71.0% liked)

Out of the loop

11025 readers

3 users here now

A community that helps people stay up to date with things going on.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

zachimusprime44

What's the deal with Isreal vs. Palestine side taking in the West? (self.outoftheloop)

submitted 7 months ago by ThePerfectLink to c/outoftheloop

90 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I feel like I've been kind of in the loop for most of the headlines regarding this confrontation. Yet somehow I can't find it within myself to actually care about either side. It seems like both are lead by genocidal parties, hell bent on indoctrinating their populace into hating the other side. Yet at the same time people are able to discern which state is the good one. And some going so far as to believe that one state might even be right over the other.

So far from what I've read and heard, it seems that overall Isreal is just more successful militarily and is encroaching on Palestinian land, and is exhibiting control over some of it. Is that the reason why one might support Palestine? Is it the fact that Isreal has more direct power in the region and thus can easily execute its will a problematic issue for some? From what I can see, both sides have caused massive civilian casualties and neither side wants a two state solution, so neither of those reasons can be a contributing factor to side picking, right? That being said, I can't find a reason for supporting Isreal, so does Palestine win out by default? But what of the people that support Isreal, do they do that purely because they're an American ally? Is any of this side taking have anything to do with the insertion of Jews into the region? What is expected to be done outside of a two state solution or genocide by those taking sides?

I have a lot of questions, and I obviously don't expect all of them to be answered in a single post. So maybe focusing on the elements you're highly informed on would be helpful and then I can kind of piece together the details. Thank you in advance!

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] [email protected] 98 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (7 children)

Okay there are more than 2 sides.

Personally I am on the side of civilians whether they are Israeli or Palestinian or Druze or Bedouin. I am also on the side of the doctors, nurses, and humanitarian aid workers. These are who I consider the Good Guys. "Look for the helpers." - Mr Rodgers.

But to cover your question, there's two separate issues here:

the claims of the belligerents
feelings about what is happening now in the Israel Gaza war

The past claims of the belligerents

I'm not going to go into this, but but it goes back to history and it's where the side-taking on the sides of the belligerents mostly comes from, because different people have different interpretations. Legally speaking Palestine is occupied by Israel (West Bank) and blockaded by Israel (Gaza). No one can get in or out, it's effectively controlled by Israel.

What is happening now

What is happening now is a "war" between the IDF and Hamas. People like me, who are rooting for civilians are upset about:

proportionality (so far about 33,000 Palestinian deaths vs 1,400 Israeli deaths)
mortality (currently over 1.5% of the population of Gaza have been killed)
civilian mortality - high numbers of children being killed (according to aid agencies, one is killed or injured every 10 minutes)
high numbers of humanitarian workers and medical staff being killed
inappropriate weapon choices (hundreds of 2,000lb bombs are being dropped, for reference the US used just one in its war against Isis.
widespread infrastructure destruction, particularly of hospitals and other important buildings
mounting evidence of starvation in the civilian population due to blockade of aid

Personally I am against anyone treating a civilian population like this for any reason, and I believe it amounts to war crimes. I was against the killing of civilians in Myanmar, Rwanda, East Timor, and I am against it now.

Side note: The median age in Gaza is 18, meaning literally half the people in it are still children.

Edit: I haven't given any sources cos lazy. I am happy to give them to OP or anyone in good faith (there are probably a bunch on the post history of my main which is [email protected]). However, I do not speak sealionese.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 7 months ago

good comment. the language or model that there must be “sides” to this is unfortunately an oversimplification. because it is not a two-sided or symmetric conflict. while attrocities are occuring from multiple fronts, almost everything going on can find its roots in the fact that Israel is an apartheid state, and any meaningful peace that exists in the future will only come to be by the dissolution of that apartheid regime.

load more comments (6 replies)

[–] [email protected] 40 points 7 months ago (13 children)

There's sort of 3 sides to the issue.

A pro Israel side, which includes people that believe all of Palestinian land should also be only theirs as well as people that maybe don't care about the land but care that Hamas is defeated and/or the Israeli hostages are saved
Pro Hamas side: people that believe that Israel should be destroyed and Israelis killed, partly because of the damage that they have done to Palestinians
Pro Palestinian side: Don't want innocent Palestinians being bombed, starved or shot by Israel. Some also want a 2 state solutions implemented.

I don't hear any real Pro Hamas people (since Hamas is very must a terrorist group), other than circumstantial ("Hamas is literally the only option Palestinians have aside the other side that is literally killing them"). Hamas basically wants to destroy Israel, which is what led to the October 7th attacks in which about 1,000 Israelis were killed. They felt that peace with Israel was not helping their goals, as Israel bombing Palestinians would help recruit more Hamas soldier with which to use to help destroy Israel.

The UN and many countries feel that despite Israel having the right to defend its citizens and attempt to infiltrate and destroy terrorists(Hamas), Israel is executing this plan in such a way that is unnecessarily killing thousands of innocent Palestinians(both through weapons but also starvation), about half of which are children.

A lot of the misinformation in regards to this topic are: "If you don't support Israel you're antisemitic", "You're either supporting Israel or you're supporting Hamas", "Palestinians overwhelming support Hamas", "Israelis completely support what their government is doing"

I'm too lazy to source the above so obviously assume I'm lying/wrong (same with anybody else not posting any sources). You should read actual articles from reliable new sources, but hopefully the above gives you some information to understand what those articles are talking about.

load more comments (13 replies)

[–] SmilingSolaris 27 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Just want to throw in. You said both states. Israel is a state. Palastinians do not have a state, they are under occupation and governance of the Israel state. It's similar to South African apartheid. This isn't two countries fighting. This is a colony that has subjugated the local population and are dealing with rebellions. Palastinians have no freedom of travel within Palestine (the geographic name of the area).

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] [email protected] 25 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Most people aren't talking about the political parties but the civilians caught up in the middle.

Israel's government and Hamas are both fucking awful.

Very few people actually support the genocide of Palestinians or the people of Israel.

But genocide is happening to one.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (3 children)

This whole thing is a major political problem that has been brewing pretty much since World War II. I'm by far not an expert so I might get some details wrong but I'll try.

During the war, millions of Jews fled from the Nazis and the Allies were wondering what to do with all those refugees. One option was British-occupied Palestine. The reasoning was that it geographically coincided with ancient Isreael, the Jewish homeland. The problem is that it had been inhabited by Muslims for over 1300 years so obviously the Arab population wasn't too happy about giving up the region their families had lived in for generations just because some western colonial power had decided to give it to some refugees.

The plan was to split Palestine into two states - Palestine and Israel - with Jerusalem as a neutral zone under control of the United Nations. Because of the unstable situation - including terrorist attacks against the British administration - this was never fully implemented. The state of Isreael was officially founded in 1948 but there ~~was never any formal agreement on who controls which parts of the region. The Arabs got driven from their homes and only kept the West Bank and the Gaza Strip but were obviously never happy about that.~~ (Edit: please see correction by @[email protected] below. The situation is even more complicated) While the general population would probably be okay with just being left in peace, there are radical groups like Hamas who want to take back what was taken from them by the British and Israel.

On the other hand, nobody who lives in Israel today was involved 80 years ago when the British decided on their plan. These people were born in Israel and have lived there all their lives. So in a way, both sides just want to keep their homes. There have been several proposals for how we could solve this, including an official two states solution that would regulate the borders (obviously not favored by Palestine), a single state solution (forcing two groups who have been fighting each other for 80 years could be tricky) and reverting everything the British decided and kicking out the Jewish population (obviously not favored by Israel). There just is no good solution and so the situation in the area is heating up more and more. From their own perspectives, both sides have good reasons for what they're doing though the way they're doing it is obviously not acceptable.

(Edit: corrected 1400 to 1300. Math is hard)

[–] Sprawlie 6 points 7 months ago (1 children)

The state of Isreael was officially founded in 1948 but there was never any formal agreement on who controls which parts of the region. The Arabs got driven from their homes and only kept the West Bank and the Gaza Strip but were obviously never happy about that.

This is one place I just want to offer some correction:

There was a formal agreement between UN/West and the Jewish people who occupied the areas that were to become Israel. The British Mandate of Palestine had a sizeable Jewish population already which is why it was also favoured.

It was the Arab nations who completely disagreed and said "NO" to the partition plans. Under which a large portion of the southern half of Israel would become Palestine-Jordan. (Jordan was originally intended to be the Palestinian/muslim portion). The WestBank was accepted as Jordanian in this agreement, as well as Gaza ownership was by Egypt. Israel would originally honour those borders.

Once the British Mandated ended and Israel formed, All the surrounding Arab nations attacked Israel immediately, Calling for all Muslims within the Israel land to leave Israel and fight against it. Israel won this war annexing the entirety of Israel instead.

Israel would not actually take Gaza or the West Bank until later wars. They took West Bank from Jordan; Gaza and the Sinai from Egypt. They would later return Sinai to Egypt as part of Peace treaty, but Egypt did not want Gaza due their own history with the Palestinian's of the region.

As for the Muslim's who stayed in Israel after its forming? They're citizens and have full vote/power/rights as every single other Israeli citizen. Since Israel is a democracy with a fairly secular government (even if it's currently ran by right wing terrorists).

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Thanks for the corrections. My knowledge about early Israel is fuzzy at best.

[–] Sprawlie 3 points 7 months ago

The situation is even more complicated) While the general population would probably be okay with just being left in peace, there are radical groups like Hamas who want to take back what was taken from them by the British and Israel.

As you said in your edit, the situation is extremely complicated, because it involved groups that are historically opposed for generations, if not centuries.

[+] [email protected] 5 points 7 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

[deleted]

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

Thank you for the nice words. I just felt like with all the discussion of who did what in the last few years, people are forgetting why Israel and Palestine are fighting in the first place.

Of course there is a lot more to this. For example the fact that Jerusalem is considered a sacred place by three different major religions and so the question who controls it is not only political but also symbolic. It was literally the (official) reason for the crusades during the middle ages. In that way, a neutral Jerusalem might have actually been a good idea. Though of course we don't know what other problems that would have caused.

[–] Sprawlie 5 points 7 months ago (1 children)

A Neutral UN city not directly ran by Israel or Palestine would likely have settled a lot of tensions. Firstly, Israel couldn't claim it their capital, which has been a major pain point for decades now. Something Trump further inflamed by moving the US Consulate to Israel in it.

If it were made a place where all religions of all type are allowed in all parts as a historical landmark, maybe there'd be a peaceful place where the three Bbrahamic religions could actually find common ground.

Instead they created a religious McGuffin to fight over.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] takeheart 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

real life lore has multiple videos around the entire Israel Palestine complex, this one for starters:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Jyc-LzXqk0

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] [email protected] 9 points 7 months ago (2 children)

I am by no means highly informed, but so far, I didn't see a few things I think should be mentioned.

Both Israel's government and Hamas are definitely bad guys who found stirring hate towards each other a convenient way of staying in power. After all, If you have the stongest rhetoric towards someone who wants to kill people of your country, of course those people will vote for you and you can get away with things you otherwise couldn't.

There's also another side which I haven't seen explicitly mentioned and should be considered: surrounding islamic countries (who are surely not a homogeneous group). They are in a good position to help palestinian civilians, but don't do very much for various reasons I know relatively little about.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 7 months ago (1 children)

They are in a good position to help palestinian civilians, but don’t do very much for various reasons I know relatively little about.

Palestine is under occupation. Every time anyone tries to help (like aid workers or even NATO), Israel attacks them. People say let them resettle in Egypt. They shouldn't have to resettle, lose their homes, Egypt shouldn't have to provide refugees services, etc. People always say, "Other Muslim countries should help them so they must not care." False.

I'll let others fill in the history of the rest of it. TLDR: Palestinian civilians are not all Hamas, but they are treated as such.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 7 months ago

It can simultaneously be true that Palestinians should not be evicted from their homes and also that nearby countries (including Israel by the way) have an obligation to assist with the refugee crisis. There is no perfect solution to this crisis, and given the lack of collective consensus, each individual actor should be pursuing the least bad option available to them. I think for neighboring countries this includes letting in refugees at a minimum.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] [email protected] 5 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Israel responded with batshit overwhelming force to a terrorist attack by a contingent of Palestinian nationals and has comitted numerous war crimes against innocent civilians in the process.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago

Boy does that sound familiar

[–] kvasir476 3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Check out this video of Michael Brooks succinctly explaining Israel/Palestine even before Oct 7.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] anas 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I can spot a bad faith question when I see one, and your comments confirm it.

[–] ThePerfectLink 2 points 7 months ago

I'm curious as to which side I was taking before I submitted this discussion. Because I think it's quite clear that I simply thought this was just another battle in the middle east sparked by land and racial tensions, and despite one side being much better equipped for extermination than the other, it wasn't particularly notable. My language doesn't feel pro Hamas, maybe It could be seen as pro Israeli because of that though. But I feel like that's exactly what everyone in this thread has been pointing out, that there aren't just two sides, and people aren't picking between Israel and Hamas (or even Palestine for that matter).

Heck I'm not even arguing with anyone here except you, so what do you think I could possibly be trying to achieve? Let me remind you the community we're currently discussing this in is [email protected] .

load more comments