DannyL

Wild Horses
I posted that piece on FB and a friend posted a solid critique. I'll post that here:
Danny - I think this is as one-sided as anything on the Israeli side. It completely ignores Hamas’ role in destroying the Oslo peace process with suicide bombs in Israeli towns & driving the Israeli electorate away from negotiation and into the arms of Netenyahu and then Sharon, with all that that entailed. It ignores how Hamas blocked every subsequent attempt at peace, including Olmert’s to Abbas which went much further than Barak’s.

It ignores the fact that Hamas is as happy with the stalemate with Israel as the article claims Israel is with it, as both they and Netenyahu were able to use each other as reasons not to move things forward and maintain their grip on their respective countries.

It ignores Hamas’ connection & reliance on Iran not only for money & weapons but policy. It’s as much a proxy army for Tehran as Hezbollah is. I don’t think Hamas has ever had an interest in freeing the Palestinians beyond hurting Israel. It can never hope to wipe it out, but has also rejected any peace deal offered by Israel. They, like Netenyahu, have benefitted from the status status quo.

I agree that the current Israeli government is the most virulently Right Wing / ethnonationalist / racist the country’s history and that it has fomented conflict between settlers and the Palestinians of the West Bank. Gallant is the most dangerous man to be put in charge of Israel’s retaliation against Hamas. I agree that Israeli hubris has brought it to this place, and the divisions wrought by Netenyahu’s government have made this an optimum moment for Hamas to attack.

But equally I think this interview *approves* of armed violence in this context, forgetting that there have been opportunities for peace and a just settlement in the past which Hamas *deliberately* destroyed. In talking about the PLO it ignores Black September and the Lebanese Civil War which was triggered by the PLO effectively taking over southern Lebanon violently & using it to attack Israel. Both Lebanon and Jordan were destabilised by the PLO.

I do not agree with or condone the Israeli occupation of the West Bank, the blockade of Gaza or the repeated use of violence to suppress both populations. I don’t agree with land grabs, Israeli settlements on the West Bank or settler violence against Palestinians. Equally I do not and will never agree with or condone the acts of Hamas under the spurious guise of ‘anti-colonial struggles’. Another way was always possible, unless you agree that ‘the anti-colonial struggle’ doesn’t mean a two state solution but the eradication of Israel. If that is someone’s position that someone wants a genocide.

Another way was always possible and Hamas has always blocked it. The Gazans live under two occupations: that of Israel and that of Hamas.
 

Clinamenic

Binary & Tweed
I posted that piece on FB and a friend posted a solid critique. I'll post that here:
Danny - I think this is as one-sided as anything on the Israeli side. It completely ignores Hamas’ role in destroying the Oslo peace process with suicide bombs in Israeli towns & driving the Israeli electorate away from negotiation and into the arms of Netenyahu and then Sharon, with all that that entailed. It ignores how Hamas blocked every subsequent attempt at peace, including Olmert’s to Abbas which went much further than Barak’s.

It ignores the fact that Hamas is as happy with the stalemate with Israel as the article claims Israel is with it, as both they and Netenyahu were able to use each other as reasons not to move things forward and maintain their grip on their respective countries.

It ignores Hamas’ connection & reliance on Iran not only for money & weapons but policy. It’s as much a proxy army for Tehran as Hezbollah is. I don’t think Hamas has ever had an interest in freeing the Palestinians beyond hurting Israel. It can never hope to wipe it out, but has also rejected any peace deal offered by Israel. They, like Netenyahu, have benefitted from the status status quo.

I agree that the current Israeli government is the most virulently Right Wing / ethnonationalist / racist the country’s history and that it has fomented conflict between settlers and the Palestinians of the West Bank. Gallant is the most dangerous man to be put in charge of Israel’s retaliation against Hamas. I agree that Israeli hubris has brought it to this place, and the divisions wrought by Netenyahu’s government have made this an optimum moment for Hamas to attack.

But equally I think this interview *approves* of armed violence in this context, forgetting that there have been opportunities for peace and a just settlement in the past which Hamas *deliberately* destroyed. In talking about the PLO it ignores Black September and the Lebanese Civil War which was triggered by the PLO effectively taking over southern Lebanon violently & using it to attack Israel. Both Lebanon and Jordan were destabilised by the PLO.

I do not agree with or condone the Israeli occupation of the West Bank, the blockade of Gaza or the repeated use of violence to suppress both populations. I don’t agree with land grabs, Israeli settlements on the West Bank or settler violence against Palestinians. Equally I do not and will never agree with or condone the acts of Hamas under the spurious guise of ‘anti-colonial struggles’. Another way was always possible, unless you agree that ‘the anti-colonial struggle’ doesn’t mean a two state solution but the eradication of Israel. If that is someone’s position that someone wants a genocide.

Another way was always possible and Hamas has always blocked it. The Gazans live under two occupations: that of Israel and that of Hamas.
From what I understand, I agree with this response, and I just got a similar response from my journalist friend, after I re-shared the article you shared.

This was my response to my friend (may as well just copy it here, as I'm interested in how folks here may respond or correct me):

"Yeah right now, as someone only shallowly familiar with the situation, my position is that there are innocent people on both sides, that Israelis and Palestinians both deserve homelands and neither should be treated as second-class citizens, that the "bad" parts of Israel are the forces suppressing innocent Palestinians, that the "bad" parts of Palestine are the islamist forces that actually want to eradicate Jews, and that Islamism (not Islam) is more a part of the problem than part of the solution, if we consider something approximating liberal democracy to be the solution."

A lot of my ignorance seems to be around the nature of islamism, which seems to me to be a militant politico-ideological outgrowth of Islam, and often (if not inherently) genocidal and crusade-like in nature. How accurate is that understanding?
 

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
From what I understand, I agree with this response, and I just got a similar response from my journalist friend, after I re-shared the article you shared.

This was my response to my friend (may as well just copy it here, as I'm interested in how folks here may respond or correct me):

"Yeah right now, as someone only shallowly familiar with the situation, my position is that there are innocent people on both sides, that Israelis and Palestinians both deserve homelands and neither should be treated as second-class citizens, that the "bad" parts of Israel are the forces suppressing innocent Palestinians, that the "bad" parts of Palestine are the islamist forces that actually want to eradicate Jews, and that Islamism (not Islam) is more a part of the problem than part of the solution, if we consider something approximating liberal democracy to be the solution."

A lot of my ignorance seems to be around the nature of islamism, which seems to me to be a militant politico-ideological outgrowth of Islam, and often (if not inherently) genocidal and crusade-like in nature. How accurate is that understanding?
Well Islamism is inherently opposed to liberal democracy to about the same extent that fascism and Stalinism are, so you'd have to be pretty naive to think that Hamas's end game involves anything approaching liberal democracy, any more than it involves peaceful coexistence with Israel.

It also brooks no rivals, as demonstrated by its civil war with Fatah since 2006. I don't know the ins and outs of it, and maybe Fatah is as much to blame as Hamas is, but it wouldn't surprise me if Hamas were the main aggressor, as it's universally regarded as the more extreme of the two organizations. (Fatah's ideology is secular social democracy, they recognise the existence of Israel, and they have nothing like Hamas's generalized antisemitism.)
 

chava

Well-known member
The fundamental flaw the left commits is that they believe this bs theory of violence:

"Since oppression is the root cause of violence, to end all violence -- the initial and ongoing violence of the oppressor and the reactive resistance of the oppressed -- we must act to end oppression." - taken from this almost tragicomical statement from the BDS site:

 

chava

Well-known member
Yeah I guess Hamas just arbitrarily hate Israel because they're irrational savages and for no other reason.
Hamas has their perfectly rational reasons. And there are Palestinians that does not hate Israel as well.
 

droid

Well-known member
Sorry to disagree, but this is mostly awful.

I posted that piece on FB and a friend posted a solid critique. I'll post that here:
Danny - I think this is as one-sided as anything on the Israeli side. It completely ignores Hamas’ role in destroying the Oslo peace process with suicide bombs in Israeli towns & driving the Israeli electorate away from negotiation and into the arms of Netenyahu and then Sharon, with all that that entailed. It ignores how Hamas blocked every subsequent attempt at peace, including Olmert’s to Abbas which went much further than Barak’s.
This hugely simplistic and pretty much flies in the face of the historical record around Oslo and Israel's motivations and attitude towards negotiations in general and seems like a misunderstanding of Israeli internal politics and the context around the second intifada.

It ignores the fact that Hamas is as happy with the stalemate with Israel as the article claims Israel is with it, as both they and Netenyahu were able to use each other as reasons not to move things forward and maintain their grip on their respective countries.

It ignores Hamas’ connection & reliance on Iran not only for money & weapons but policy. It’s as much a proxy army for Tehran as Hezbollah is. I don’t think Hamas has ever had an interest in freeing the Palestinians beyond hurting Israel. It can never hope to wipe it out, but has also rejected any peace deal offered by Israel. They, like Netenyahu, have benefitted from the status status quo.
Yeah, this is like sophomore stuff. I mentioned the Hamas/Hezbollah/Iran split a few pages back they were literally killing each other 10 years ago in Syria and afaik, things havent improved much.

The suggestion that Hamas has rejected every peace deal is patently false, if anything you could ague that they have been quite active in pursuing peace in order to maintain their domestic stranglehold on power. I remember going through all this on a thread years ago in relation to just one of the many wars, 2008 maybe, but we can see the tacit and then explicit acceptance of Oslo principles and the slow moderation of Hamas leadership going back to Khaled Meshaal and Ghazi Hamad over a decade ago. Of course the process isnt helped by Israel's tendency to assassinate the most moderate Hamas leaders. And then there's stuff like this:


I agree that the current Israeli government is the most virulently Right Wing / ethnonationalist / racist the country’s history and that it has fomented conflict between settlers and the Palestinians of the West Bank. Gallant is the most dangerous man to be put in charge of Israel’s retaliation against Hamas. I agree that Israeli hubris has brought it to this place, and the divisions wrought by Netenyahu’s government have made this an optimum moment for Hamas to attack.

But equally I think this interview *approves* of armed violence in this context, forgetting that there have been opportunities for peace and a just settlement in the past which Hamas *deliberately* destroyed. In talking about the PLO it ignores Black September and the Lebanese Civil War which was triggered by the PLO effectively taking over southern Lebanon violently & using it to attack Israel. Both Lebanon and Jordan were destabilised by the PLO.

I do not agree with or condone the Israeli occupation of the West Bank, the blockade of Gaza or the repeated use of violence to suppress both populations. I don’t agree with land grabs, Israeli settlements on the West Bank or settler violence against Palestinians. Equally I do not and will never agree with or condone the acts of Hamas under the spurious guise of ‘anti-colonial struggles’. Another way was always possible, unless you agree that ‘the anti-colonial struggle’ doesn’t mean a two state solution but the eradication of Israel. If that is someone’s position that someone wants a genocide.

Another way was always possible and Hamas has always blocked it. The Gazans live under two occupations: that of Israel and that of Hamas.

A few vaguely correct generalities amongst a torrent of historical illiteracy. 2/10
 

droid

Well-known member
"Yeah right now, as someone only shallowly familiar with the situation, my position is that there are innocent people on both sides, that Israelis and Palestinians both deserve homelands and neither should be treated as second-class citizens, that the "bad" parts of Israel are the forces suppressing innocent Palestinians, that the "bad" parts of Palestine are the islamist forces that actually want to eradicate Jews, and that Islamism (not Islam) is more a part of the problem than part of the solution, if we consider something approximating liberal democracy to be the solution."
It's a sad state of affairs where this cliche ridden, childlike tripe is actually a galaxy brained take compared to most of the shit online.
 

padraig (u.s.)

a monkey that will go ape
Well the IDF has issued a completely impossible order for 1.1 mn Palestinians to evacuate northern Gaza in 24 hours, presumably heralding - at least - a major ground operation. There's no electricity, hospitals are running out of basically everything, and people are going to start starving at some point here.

They're really gonna do it this time. They're not just gonna to the edge of the cities and camps, they're gonna go all the way in and get into exactly the street by street house by house ugliness that the IDF has always studiously avoided as much as possible, and Hamas has undoubtedly been preparing for 2 years and it's going to be Stalingrad and many, many people are going to die.
 

chava

Well-known member
Well the IDF has issued a completely impossible order for 1.1 mn Palestinians to evacuate northern Gaza in 24 hours, presumably heralding - at least - a major ground operation. There's no electricity, hospitals are running out of basically everything, and people are going to start starving at some point here.

They're really gonna do it this time. They're not just gonna to the edge of the cities and camps, they're gonna go all the way in and get into exactly the street by street house by house ugliness that the IDF has always studiously avoided as much as possible, and Hamas has undoubtedly been preparing for 2 years and it's going to be Stalingrad and many, many people are going to die.
They can go to Egypt, but obviously nobody wants a refugee population where 25% are radicalized, even the kids
 
Top