A flurry of Harvard students and groups are trying to backtrack on their support of a letter blaming Israel — as some business titans seek to blacklist them from future jobs.
Ahh so the Iranians are Palestinians now… how would controlling the air space east of Israel prevent Iran, a country west of Israel from dropping bombs? Controlling their airspace is just another way to control the flow of vital goods.
Are you being intentionally obtuse? Iran drops weapons in Gaza. Iran delivers weapons to Gaza. They’re not dropping bombs, they’re delivering weapons, that’s why I said that they were delivering weapons, and not that they were dropping bombs.
Yeah, beheading a baby and airstriking a baby both end with two dead children. Also… what evidence do you have that babies have been decapitated? We’ve seen this or things similar to this be falsely broadcasted to justify war in our lifetime.
I supplied plenty of evidence above.
Hamas targets babies and cuts their heads off point blank.
Hamas fires rockets from a building, Israel targets the building, Israel warns the people in it, and Hamas refuses to evacuate babies, because they know dead babies help draw sympathy and perpetuate the conflict.
These are both tragedies. They are not the same.
Discord isnt just Skype for gaming, it means argument or disagreement. Israel has rejected all other form of argument, and thus there will be violence.
lol, so you said:
It’s foolish to think that there wouldn’t be a violent reaction when Israel has rejected all other forms of discord.
and you meant:
Israel refuses to disagree! It won’t engage in conflict! How dare they!
… okay, sure. Uh… yeah, no, I would not expect a violent reaction to a country that refuses to sew the seeds of discord.
Now, if Israel had refused discourse, that might have been a problem, but that’s not how it is. (It’s also not a justification for raping teens or burning babies bodies or any of the other shit they’ve done, but you don’t seem to care when Hamas does unjustifiable things, so let’s put that aside).
Lol, a deal implies two willing parties.
Fine, the Olmert proposal.
The realignment plan was a unilateral border change where Israel attemped to legalize their illegal settlements by claiming they’d disengage from the West Bank.
Olmert proposed a proposed deal to Abbas in 2008. He offered, in a short negotiation in principle, over 93% of the west bank, with land swaps in return, giving East Jerusalem to the Palestinian people, acknowledging it as their capitol… Israel only wanted a small sliver of the land it already controlled and offered an equal amount of land in return, including East Jerusalem! And peace. That’s all they wanted. A few land swaps and peace.
And Abbas didn’t go for it because he knew Hamas would not abide it. There is no such thing as peace when Hamas is present.
They could have said that the land swaps only occur after Israel has withdrawn other settlements under such-and-so conditions, they could have cut a deal around that negotiation in principle, but Abbas just couldn’t negotiate.
No, I was not talking about a unilateral move. Although if that had happened, the West Bank would be free now.
Yes, and terrifyingly he’s been your PM six times… over a decade and a half of creating the perfect environment for extremism.
I’m American.
You know how he won in 2009? Olmert backed out of Gaza, terrorism spiked, and Netanyahu said “I told you so.”
Less occupation, more violence? Yeah, that’s a recipe to fuel war hawks.
I don’t think your people are going to look back with any pride for what is going to unfold in the next few months.
No, of course not, they didn’t want this to happen. You think they would have looked back with pride if they sat around and did nothing?
I can’t do this again, I haven’t been getting any work done, getting caught up in internet debates with people who don’t want to sympathize with Jews in the first place. I’m going to mute you now. Or block you, because kbin only has one button, and it’s really a mute feature, but… I can’t keep doing this.
Are you being intentionally obtuse? Iran drops weapons in Gaza. Iran delivers weapons to Gaza. They’re not dropping bombs, they’re delivering weapons, that’s why I said that they were delivering weapons, and not that they were dropping bombs.
“more of an issue of Iran dropping weapons in by air” isn’t exactly specific, bombs are weapons. Plus, I don’t really think airdropping weapons is very feasible considering the expanse of the Israeli Air Force. Even if Israel allowed people into enter Palestinian airspace, I doubt they’d want to risk their limited supply of cargo planes. Especially when they can just snuggle them in via Syria.
supplied plenty of evidence above.
You supplied literal hearsay. Again, I’m not saying that it’s impossible, just that it’s unlikely.
Hamas fires rockets from a building, Israel targets the building, Israel warns the people in it, and Hamas refuses to evacuate babies, because they know dead babies help draw sympathy and perpetuate the conflict.
You have described one type of airstrike out of hundreds… The idea that Israel warns hamas every time they conduct an air strike that will kill civilians is ridiculous considering how many Hamas leaders have been killed by said air strikes.
has rejected all other forms of discord.
Meaning that they have rejected all other forms of argument…
Not “Israel refuses to disagree! It won’t engage in conflict! How dare they”.
Now, if Israel had refused discourse, that might have been a problem, but that’s not how it is.
This is a semantic dispute in nature, but discourse and discord are interchangeable, discord just carries connotations of disagreement.
It’s also not a justification for raping teens or burning babies bodies or any of the other shit they’ve done, but you don’t seem to care when Hamas does unjustifiable things, so let’s put that aside).
Lol, when have I attempted to justify the actions of Hamas? Explaining why 9/11 happened isn’t explaining that it was justified.
You could do the same and say that you think the actions of Hamas is a terrorist group the treatment of the Palestinian people is unjustified. However, you have chosen to spend the entire argument validating the human rights violations against Palestine.
Olmert proposed a proposed deal to Abbas in 2008. He offered, in a short negotiation in principle, over 93% of the west bank, with land swaps in return, giving East Jerusalem to the Palestinian people, acknowledging it as their capitol… Israel only wanted a small sliver of the land it already controlled and offered an equal amount of land in return, including East Jerusalem! And peace. That’s all they wanted. A few land swaps and peace.
In 2008 the deal had already been reversed to 70% present, the 90% proposal was made in 2007. The innate problem is that unilateral agreements are self governed, there is no guarantee that a future government just won’t reneg the agreement. It’s the same reason Israel didn’t agree to the hamas proposal in 06.
And Abbas didn’t go for it because he knew Hamas would not abide it. There is no such thing as peace when Hamas is present.
And you think the Israeli population was keen on giving up 90% of West Bank? Why do you think they dropped it to 70% within a few months…
You know how he won in 2009? Olmert backed out of Gaza, terrorism spiked, and Netanyahu said “I told you so.”
Less occupation, more violence? Yeah, that’s a recipe to fuel war hawks.
It’s almost as if making unilateral concessions doesn’t automatically solve problems that require actual state crafting. We have already established that both Hamas and netanyahus are co dependent on each other for a base of support. Meaning that attempts by hamas to inject political chaos into the Israeli state need to be ignored as an attempt to cause reactionary policy.
No, of course not, they didn’t want this to happen. You think they would have looked back with pride if they sat around and did nothing?
I don’t think they wanted this level of mass casualty event to occur, but I don’t think even you could say that netanyahus didn’t want a justification to destroy Palestine while also consolidating power.
can’t do this again, I haven’t been getting any work done, getting caught up in internet debates with people who don’t want to sympathize with Jews in the first place.
I honestly have a lot of sympathy for both Palestinians and Israeli, I just despise both of the governments. My biggest concern is truly that the Israeli government will commit to a response that will be unjustifiable even to the Israeli people.
I’m not sure how old you are, but atmosphere this conflict is creating is eerily familiar to the days and weeks after 9/11, and that should be concerning not everyone.
I guess this doesn’t really matter if you’ve already blocked me. But I do empathize with your people, and i just hope you find it in your heart to have empathy for Palestine. Half of which are children, who have nothing to do with the ongoing violence.
Thanks for following through on this even if that guy did have cotton in his ears. Your closing sentiment is pretty much the exact one I share. I remember being in school and watching the planes hit on tv, thinking this is the worst thing that could ever happen. What we didn’t get to see was the horrors that followed that we justified with lies. Iraq is now littered with depleted uranium rounds poisoning the land and a death count that will continue to rise even after you and I are gone.
It’s frightening to see how people act when they get set on a roll like this. How far they’ll go to justify their decision to support heinous acts of retribution. It feels a lot like how under fascism your enemies are all at once completely inept and feeble while being overwhelming monsters whose cunning and strength is endless. It’s making them out to be boogeymen that no longer resemble humanity, so that when we commit the atrocity it barely even registers that it was against a person and not an animal.
It’s slightly heartening that at least some people are starting to come around to this. I would like to think it’s more than in the past but it’s so hard to say. Sometimes it feels like this cycle will only end once we’ve all but obliterated this world and all the people in it. The headline like some bad The Onion article “Last human perishes, world peace achieved!”
Are you being intentionally obtuse? Iran drops weapons in Gaza. Iran delivers weapons to Gaza. They’re not dropping bombs, they’re delivering weapons, that’s why I said that they were delivering weapons, and not that they were dropping bombs.
I supplied plenty of evidence above.
Hamas targets babies and cuts their heads off point blank.
Hamas fires rockets from a building, Israel targets the building, Israel warns the people in it, and Hamas refuses to evacuate babies, because they know dead babies help draw sympathy and perpetuate the conflict.
These are both tragedies. They are not the same.
lol, so you said:
and you meant:
… okay, sure. Uh… yeah, no, I would not expect a violent reaction to a country that refuses to sew the seeds of discord.
Now, if Israel had refused discourse, that might have been a problem, but that’s not how it is. (It’s also not a justification for raping teens or burning babies bodies or any of the other shit they’ve done, but you don’t seem to care when Hamas does unjustifiable things, so let’s put that aside).
Fine, the Olmert proposal.
Olmert proposed a proposed deal to Abbas in 2008. He offered, in a short negotiation in principle, over 93% of the west bank, with land swaps in return, giving East Jerusalem to the Palestinian people, acknowledging it as their capitol… Israel only wanted a small sliver of the land it already controlled and offered an equal amount of land in return, including East Jerusalem! And peace. That’s all they wanted. A few land swaps and peace.
And Abbas didn’t go for it because he knew Hamas would not abide it. There is no such thing as peace when Hamas is present.
They could have said that the land swaps only occur after Israel has withdrawn other settlements under such-and-so conditions, they could have cut a deal around that negotiation in principle, but Abbas just couldn’t negotiate.
No, I was not talking about a unilateral move. Although if that had happened, the West Bank would be free now.
I’m American.
You know how he won in 2009? Olmert backed out of Gaza, terrorism spiked, and Netanyahu said “I told you so.”
Less occupation, more violence? Yeah, that’s a recipe to fuel war hawks.
No, of course not, they didn’t want this to happen. You think they would have looked back with pride if they sat around and did nothing?
I can’t do this again, I haven’t been getting any work done, getting caught up in internet debates with people who don’t want to sympathize with Jews in the first place. I’m going to mute you now. Or block you, because kbin only has one button, and it’s really a mute feature, but… I can’t keep doing this.
“more of an issue of Iran dropping weapons in by air” isn’t exactly specific, bombs are weapons. Plus, I don’t really think airdropping weapons is very feasible considering the expanse of the Israeli Air Force. Even if Israel allowed people into enter Palestinian airspace, I doubt they’d want to risk their limited supply of cargo planes. Especially when they can just snuggle them in via Syria.
You supplied literal hearsay. Again, I’m not saying that it’s impossible, just that it’s unlikely.
You have described one type of airstrike out of hundreds… The idea that Israel warns hamas every time they conduct an air strike that will kill civilians is ridiculous considering how many Hamas leaders have been killed by said air strikes.
Meaning that they have rejected all other forms of argument…
Not “Israel refuses to disagree! It won’t engage in conflict! How dare they”.
This is a semantic dispute in nature, but discourse and discord are interchangeable, discord just carries connotations of disagreement.
Lol, when have I attempted to justify the actions of Hamas? Explaining why 9/11 happened isn’t explaining that it was justified.
You could do the same and say that you think the actions of Hamas is a terrorist group the treatment of the Palestinian people is unjustified. However, you have chosen to spend the entire argument validating the human rights violations against Palestine.
In 2008 the deal had already been reversed to 70% present, the 90% proposal was made in 2007. The innate problem is that unilateral agreements are self governed, there is no guarantee that a future government just won’t reneg the agreement. It’s the same reason Israel didn’t agree to the hamas proposal in 06.
And you think the Israeli population was keen on giving up 90% of West Bank? Why do you think they dropped it to 70% within a few months…
It’s almost as if making unilateral concessions doesn’t automatically solve problems that require actual state crafting. We have already established that both Hamas and netanyahus are co dependent on each other for a base of support. Meaning that attempts by hamas to inject political chaos into the Israeli state need to be ignored as an attempt to cause reactionary policy.
I don’t think they wanted this level of mass casualty event to occur, but I don’t think even you could say that netanyahus didn’t want a justification to destroy Palestine while also consolidating power.
I honestly have a lot of sympathy for both Palestinians and Israeli, I just despise both of the governments. My biggest concern is truly that the Israeli government will commit to a response that will be unjustifiable even to the Israeli people.
I’m not sure how old you are, but atmosphere this conflict is creating is eerily familiar to the days and weeks after 9/11, and that should be concerning not everyone.
I guess this doesn’t really matter if you’ve already blocked me. But I do empathize with your people, and i just hope you find it in your heart to have empathy for Palestine. Half of which are children, who have nothing to do with the ongoing violence.
Thanks for following through on this even if that guy did have cotton in his ears. Your closing sentiment is pretty much the exact one I share. I remember being in school and watching the planes hit on tv, thinking this is the worst thing that could ever happen. What we didn’t get to see was the horrors that followed that we justified with lies. Iraq is now littered with depleted uranium rounds poisoning the land and a death count that will continue to rise even after you and I are gone.
It’s frightening to see how people act when they get set on a roll like this. How far they’ll go to justify their decision to support heinous acts of retribution. It feels a lot like how under fascism your enemies are all at once completely inept and feeble while being overwhelming monsters whose cunning and strength is endless. It’s making them out to be boogeymen that no longer resemble humanity, so that when we commit the atrocity it barely even registers that it was against a person and not an animal.
It’s slightly heartening that at least some people are starting to come around to this. I would like to think it’s more than in the past but it’s so hard to say. Sometimes it feels like this cycle will only end once we’ve all but obliterated this world and all the people in it. The headline like some bad The Onion article “Last human perishes, world peace achieved!”