[DarkBasilisk]

Pretty much. As well as the perception that Hamas gets results to a certain extent.

People want leadership, and in the absence of genuine leadership, they'll listen to anyone who steps up to the microphone. They want leadership. They're so thirsty for it they'll crawl through the desert toward a mirage, and when they discover there's no water, they'll drink the sand.

Unfortunately killing more people and blowing up more buildings fits into the speeches Hamas is already making. It may not immediately get them groundswells of support, but it's certainly not hurting their position.

The only way to dismantle something like this is to show people that there is another option. Which is partly on the Palestinians to field more moderate groups, but at the same time, they need an environment where more moderate groups will be able to get any results.

[Dragon]

Unfortunately killing more people and blowing up more buildings fits into the speeches Hamas is already making. It may not immediately get them groundswells of support, but it's certainly not hurting their position.

Which is more than you can say about most Western politicians. Say what you will about Hamas, but at least they're consistent in their politics and quite honest about what they're about. Perhaps this is also a factor giving them popular support. People might not like Hamas much, but anyone new would be completely unknown. For all they know, the new party might turn out even worse than Hamas or sell them out to Israel for a bag of money and a safe trip to the place of their choice. Middle East is rife with corruption, though Hamas is no exception, it's also not the worst offender.

I agree that more moderate groups are needed in Palestine. The problem is twofold: 1). there's a crisis going on, which naturally makes people tend towards extremes. 2). Hamas is actively suppressing any other attempts to form any other "party", moderate or not. Remember, despite the popular support, they do still hold the people by their throats. The first problem could be solved by Israel actively attempting to relax pressure on Gaza and increase humanitarian aid, the latter would be much more difficult, since Hamas isn't exactly the kind to peacefully give up power.

[jr2]

Yeah Hamas is kind of trying to make peace impossible for the next few generations:

[Phantom Hoover]

hamas confirmed as puppetmasters behind entire middle east, news at 11

[jr2]

Haha. Radical (violent flavors of) Islam, maybe.

[Sandwich]

Yeah Hamas is kind of trying to make peace impossible for the next few generations:
*snip*

Yep. Like I said pages and pages ago, the Palestinian/Islamic culture of incitement, hatred, and death needs to stop before anything resembling a real peace can be achieved.


Speaking of going back a few pages:

Please explain what other means they have. The only argument offered so far as been "if you are peaceful, everything would be fine", which is still unlikely considering that Israel can't even play nice with the West Bank.

The West Bank is not the example for Gaza.

Gaza is the example for the West Bank.

The West Bank has had the same status quo ever since 1967 - deadlock, nothing changed, etc. The Gaza Strip, however, was the test tube. What happens if Israel unilaterally (i.e. on her own accord, without any obligation from the other party) pulls out of a disputed territory and gives the Palestinians there completely free reign? First, they fought amongst themselves. Then they elected a terrorist organization into power. Then they went ahead and began launching rockets at our cities, and they've been doing so for 9 years.

So if Abbas has any brains, it'll be patently obvious to him that violent resistance ala Hamas in Gaza is pointless, and that negotiations - without those inane preconditions he's so fond of! - are the only way forward.

Anyway, on to more interesting items.

[Aardwolf]

Is that supposed to apply to anyone here?

[zookeeper]

I believe Mr. Neuer fails to take into account the fact that there's never been a thread about any of those incidents in which one might expect any amount of support for them or which would be read by people who would support them.

I wonder if there's a name for that fallacy, seeing how commonly it's used.

[jr2]

We need a subsection of General Discussion :

Current Events

[Dragon]

Anyway, on to more interesting items.

*snip*

Well, I assure you that people did cry out when those happened, too. I wholeheartedly supported Libyan rebels and the resistance in Syria. I do not support some things Americans are and were doing in Iraq and Afghanistan, either. Just about everyone who ever set foot in the region has blood on their hands. And it doesn't make what's happening in Gaza justified, better or anything. Nobody said Gaza is the only thing deserving condemnation in the Middle East. I'd also add terrible treatment of people in general by their governments, horrible working conditions, lack of education, poverty and rampant corruption.

[Phantom Hoover]

jesus christ sandwich if you want people to support israel maybe stop this racist, neo-colonialist, outright denialist bull**** first

If Israel's best defence of its actions is to compare them favourably to those of tinpot dictatorships and random militants and terrorists, then fine. Good job Sandwich! You're better than Assad and Bin Laden. Great ****ing job.

[Dragon]

Well, remember that it could be worse. Israel could be just as bad as them. To it's credit, it managed not to sink down to the level of it's neighbors. This could have easily happened, especially since Israel has it's share of extremists, too. Also, while people certainly remember the Holocaust, they only seem to see it as a thing that happened to them. One must remember that Nazis were human as well, and that if the Israelis are not careful this could happen again, only this time by their own hands. The Nazis did not invent tyranny, genocide or any of the atrocities they committed. Begin Germans, they perfected them from the technological side, but that's all. Anyone could do it, given enough bigotry and hatred.

The whole idea of Israel being a "Jewish state" sounds fishy to me. It should just be a state, one where Arabs, Jews, Christians and even Pastafaranists could live peacefully. I only accept religious discrimination against Scientology, and that's a special case. Others can be "Muslim states" if they want, but they'll be the ones in the wrong then. If the place becomes primarily Arab through immigration, that's fine, as long the government keeps being modern and progressive. Sticking a "Jewish state", in the middle of a mostly Arab area is never going to get fully accepted. However, sticking a democratic, free state in which a lot of Jews happen to live could work.

[Luis Dias]

I agree with Phantom Hoover here, but there's something else here in motion wherein Sandwhich has a small point as well. We should all remember all the riots in Europe happening regarding what Israel is doing in Gaza. Which, of course, is going way overboard (proving yet once again that the hard line right wing policies of SHOCK AND AWE terror war is exactly what we all knew it was already, namely bloody, criminal, terroristic, etc.,etc.), but what about the riots over what ISIS is doing? Any demonstrations over what Assad did in Syria? Where are the solidarity protests over what is going on in Iraq, Lybia? Where is the popular outrage over the **** that is going on in Egypt?

All ****ing silent over this. And no, I'm not speaking about us people in the internets or forums or whatever. I'm speaking about coordinated protests on the streets, movements, and so on. All these coordinated events only point against Israel. Well while I would agree with them that Israel is behaving on the wrong side of the moral line here, I'm extremely cynical and unsympathetic towards these protesters and movements that rail against Israel and for Palestine. They don't give a **** about human lives, they do give a **** about Israel though, in the worst sense.

[Phantom Hoover]

The fact remains that there are very valid and very serious criticisms of Israel's behaviour, and the default reaction, in this thread and elsewhere, has been to derail them with various flavours of whataboutism.

[Luis Dias]

I think in this case the whataboutisms are actually important and relevant. To portray the Gaza palestinians as this wretched persecuted people by the Israelis also seems to miss a lot about history lessons and so on. I mean, it's not as if the palestinians are without any neighbour arab states where they could move and live their lives exactly on their own terms and be surrounded by people who share their culture and beliefs.

Israel simply cannot state the same thing.

[Phantom Hoover]

For someone who ostensibly isn't pro-Israeli Luis you do spend an awful lot of time defending everything they do.

[Lorric]

Now of course that doesn't mean we can't talk about it and I don't think Sandwich was implying anything of the sort. Especially when he started the thread, the thread has been civilised, and he was and still is happy to engage in the discussion. It's just pointing out the way Israel is unfairly singled out, and indeed I fully agree if someone has nothing to say about all those other atrocities but is happy to go in on Israel, they are indeed anti-Israel. I am absolutely confident it's not directed specifically at anyone here. It's something to make you think. A poweful message that he wanted to share. Obviously if I'm wrong about any of this, he can correct me. But that's the impression I got, and I read it before I read any of the posts following it.

[zookeeper]

I agree with Phantom Hoover here, but there's something else here in motion wherein Sandwhich has a small point as well. We should all remember all the riots in Europe happening regarding what Israel is doing in Gaza. Which, of course, is going way overboard (proving yet once again that the hard line right wing policies of SHOCK AND AWE terror war is exactly what we all knew it was already, namely bloody, criminal, terroristic, etc.,etc.), but what about the riots over what ISIS is doing? Any demonstrations over what Assad did in Syria? Where are the solidarity protests over what is going on in Iraq, Lybia? Where is the popular outrage over the **** that is going on in Egypt?

All ****ing silent over this. And no, I'm not speaking about us people in the internets or forums or whatever. I'm speaking about coordinated protests on the streets, movements, and so on. All these coordinated events only point against Israel. Well while I would agree with them that Israel is behaving on the wrong side of the moral line here, I'm extremely cynical and unsympathetic towards these protesters and movements that rail against Israel and for Palestine. They don't give a **** about human lives, they do give a **** about Israel though, in the worst sense.

I think it's very interesting how, when it comes to perceived injustices, people generally seem to have a strong response to some things and less so to others, even if they're just as bad or the one you have a stronger reaction to is less bad. It's something that I've incredibly rarely seen discussed from the PoV of (serious) psychology, even though it clearly seems like a key factor for example in political partisanship.

I think people protest when they have an emotional reaction to something, and which things people learn to have or not have an emotional reaction towards is a really complicated process, and probably really rare and difficult to unlearn. It's also bit of a taboo; you generally can't go and admit that you're horrified by A but not B if B is just as bad or worse, because that's only going to get used against you. Everyone knows the feeling of reading of an injustice that really makes your blood boil or depresses you, and how some arguably worse things don't have anywhere near the same kind of effect because you just don't get that emotional response from them, but saying how this or that terrible thing doesn't really affect you is rather socially unacceptable and tends to immediately be seen as the same thing as saying that it's a non-issue.

That said, I don't think it has anything to do with whether one's protestations are genuine or not. If someone doesn't feel terrible about A but does about B and therefore directs their attention only at B, then sure it's hilariously difficult to just ignore that apparent inconsistency if you are horrified about A yourself, but ultimately the fact that A doesn't give them sleepless nights isn't really their choice and doesn't affect whether they're right about B or not.

P.S. Why do people keep spelling it "Lybia"? It's bizarre, unless it's a joke.

[Lorric]

What is it Stalin said, a single death is a tragedy, a million is a statistic?

In the likes of Syria, Afghanistan and Iraq, the slaughter is going on daily, and has been for years.

In the Israel conflict, it is sporadic. You can get time to get personally invested in specific incidents. I wonder if that has anything to do with it.

[Luis Dias]

For someone who ostensibly isn't pro-Israeli Luis you do spend an awful lot of time defending everything they do.

Y U troll so lazyly here? It's not as if you are even remotely right about what you are saying here. What the hell are you even doing here but contributing with snark? Do you think this is good use of both my and your time? Come on.