the USA, Israel, and national interest

Also, I happen to believe that the post-WWII Jewish community didn't do anything wrong by moving to Israel. I think they had a crisis of placement (for reasons the Palestinians aren't to blame for), and they wanted to return to a historical, cultural and, yes, religious homeland. And until the 6DW, they didn't throw any Palestinians out of their homes.

Oh come on, Mordy. Maybe we could have avoided all of this if the Marshall Plan had included a free boat trip and USA citizenship coupon for any survivor who wanted out of Europe.

Maybe, but it didn't. My point is just that blaming the Jews in Israel for displaced Palestinians is fucked up. Yes, there are displaced Palestinians, and yes, that needs to be fixed. But the Israeli's didn't /do it/ to them.

(please nobody show up and tell me that the marshall plan did in fact have that somewhere in it)

They weren't innocent victims. This isn't like the English settled Native American territories, and killed and displaced them to take their land.

I think the Marshall Plan explicitly didn't have that. Don't remember it totally off-hand, but I think the US pretty clearly did not want all those survivors.

haha "explicitly"

SECTION 33B-II
THERE WILL CERTAINLY NOT BE ANY PROVISIONS MADE TO OFFER CITIZENSHIP COUPONS OR FREE BOAT RIDES TO SURVIVORS OF HITLER'S ATTEMPT AT GENOCIDE NO NO NO NO NO

Right. I remember that section.

In a surprising twist, that particular article was lobbied for most heavily by none other than Dr. Brown, who some have speculated was acting on behalf of established northeastern deli operators who didn't want any more competition.

back to being vaguely serious, I think it's funny how easily the current situation regarding israel gets reduced to "displacement" when nobody would think to say the same thing about similarly dire and ludicrous shit happening in India and Pakistan, despite the fact that as far as I can tell there was no nationalized effort to systematically exterminate Hindus in the past century.

It's because, like I said earlier in the thread, people expect more from white Israelis and think that all those third-world people are too stupid to not kill each other.

(Not actually sure if this is true, but sometimes people's justifications for Hamas terror certainly sound like they think Palestinians are unable to act like normal people.)

I wouldn't put it all down to crypto-bigotry as much as everybody feels entitled to have an asshole about the Holy Land (also lol white people think the bible is about them) while they never had to learn about the babri mosque vs the ram mandir.

a moral argument for human shields.

I'm not sure where morality comes into it. Just try to imagine how fucking desperate you'd have to be to use your own most vulnerable people as shields for your own weapons. There's nothing moral about it. But there is a logic to it.

What human shields? Fucking hateful construction that.

Just try to imagine how fucking cynical you'd have to be to use your own most vulnerable people as shields for your own weapons.

What is this desperation bullshit? Loads of just as (or more) desperate people DON'T kill people.

Jeez, but I am stupid, I broke an unwritten law never to get involved in anything whatsoever on the internet about Israel, never never never be so stupid

There's nothing moral about it. But there is a logic to it.

^^^ could refer to a LOT of things on BOTH sides.

also I'm not sure hamas can really be called 'desperate'. there's some very simple things they could easily do to improve their own situation and the lives of the palestinian people, like say, stop shooting rockets and have a dude say "we recognize the state of israel." but I guess that'll happen when they're REAL desperate though? until then, human shields.

So your they're not desperate, just fundamentally depraved?

(Note how I am completely granting that "human shields" are an ongoing Hamas tactic, when I have no idea if anything of the sort is true)

I don't think the Palestinian people are depraved. I think they are in a tough position with bad leadership. I do believe that the people who abuse their own people, put children in harm's way, and attack innocent civilians are fundamentally depraved.

Hamas?? Yes.

In fact, I would argue that if these actions aren't actions of depravity, then there are no depraved actions in the world.

OK good to know.

I do believe that the people who ... attack innocent civilians are fundamentally depraved.

IE the fucking IDF.

No?

Maybe where we disagree, Tracer, is I believe there are some actions that are inexcusable no matter what the circumstances. Maybe you think someone's environment can possibly justify certain behaviors? I mean, this isn't someone mugging a dude for his wallet because he can't afford his rent. This is a guy telling his kid (or his nephew, maybe) to stand in front of the antiaircraft defense so that if Israel strikes, he'll be able to put his kid's picture in the newspaper as an example of Israeli brutality.

If someone in the IDF attacks and kills a civilian with intentionality, then yes. That is also depravity. No question.

So if Hamas are depraved subhuman animals, what does that make the people who voted for them?

I didn't use the words subhuman or animals. I just used the word depravity. Lots of human beings do depraved things. We don't excuse them tho. Madoff is depraved - he is still human.

And the people who voted for them wanted certain social services that it looked like Hamas could provide over Fatah...

Look, are you guys fucking serious?

So if Hamas are depraved subhuman animals, what does that make the people who voted for them?

It makes them some people who voted for some depraved motherfuckers.

I do believe that the people who ... attack innocent civilians are fundamentally depraved.

IE a lot of people on both sides

And if a politician orders an attack, in the full knowledge that hundreds of civilians and children will be slaughtered? Or perhaps orders attacks only on Shia civilians, not Sunni or Christians, as in Lebanon in 2006. Is this depraved?

I'm not sure throwing words like depravity or evil around helps, however much I may feel they apply.

yes

Why do you keep conflating between someone ordering a military maneuver that may result in civilian casualties, and someone ordering an attack on civilian casualties? They are self-evidently different. XP

The former bothers me, but I understand it and can relate to it. The latter is disturbed and depraved and fucking evil.

(And if it makes you feel better, I'm using Hannah Arendt's "evil," not some Biblical definition.)

They are not different, because there is no "may".

Ordering an attack that WILL 100% DEFINITELY NO SHADOW OF A DOUBT result in hundreds of civilian deaths IS an attack on civilians.

If you can't see that, I don't know what to say.

I guess that pretty much includes all wars ever?

are you trying to argue that war is bad?

It's moral cowardice to say anything else. Either it is right to kill those civilians because you believe in your cause, or its not.

Hiding behind "regrettable" civilian deaths, as if they were somehow an accident is just deceitful.

I guess that pretty much includes all wars ever?

Not really

Well, sorry, I don't see it that way. I think sometimes bad things result from necessary actions. I don't think all of our actions can be pure of negative consequences, and often we just need to hedge them to get the most positive consequences. This isn't some Kantian ideology, I understand, but it's what I believe. I wish the other way worked, but I don't think it's pragmatic. I don't think the Allies could have won WW2 without some civilians dying. You should obviously try to limit these deaths to a minimum and take as many precautions as possible.

But certainly if you believe IDF officers ordering attacks that result in civilians dying is depraved, then you agree with me that Hamas is depraved?

I mean, a fortiori.

no Mordy, only one side is allowed to be bad. we need good guys in this movie.

Depraved is not a word I throw about much

spost to Mordy

OK, that's a defensible position, but you are saying we will kill x amount of people for y aim, and its worth it. Hamas are saying we will kill x amount of people for y aim (although x is a very small number here) and its worth it.

To pretend these are somehow morally different is infantile.

So you get down to what are the aims, and how effective are all these deaths in acieving them.

Then you start weeping at the horror of it all.

I said before that I don't think it helps throwing words like depraved around, but do I think Hamas's actions are wrong? Yes. Do I think Israel's actions are wrong? Yes.

There are no good guys.

But that's not equivalent. Israel doesn't say we will kill x amount of people for y aim. Ie: They never say, "We need to kill 20 random people to instill fear in the Gaza population." Ideally, they wouldn't kill anyone, and they take precautions (maybe not enough) to not kill civilians. Hamas says "We will kill 20 random people to instill fear in the S'derot population."

Hamas are saying we will kill x amount of people for y aim (although x is a very small number here)

I agree with your overall sentiment, but I'm pretty sure that the "although x is a very small number here" isn't their reason for killing people.