[Aesaar]

The comments section is all over the place. So many completely different reactions to the article.

Yeah well, what isn't all over the place in the longest lasting conflict in human memory?

Um...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hundred_Years'_War

But I do of course see your point.

Lightweight.

[Lorric]

@ Aesaar

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.

He also needs calling out on this bull**** he keeps trying to pin on Sandwich. And yes I said bull****, because I'm that confident. I'm curious, does anyone else think Sandwich is any of hateful, racist, neo-colonialist, etc. ?

Sandwich has only ever as far as I can tell taken issue with Hamas, not the Palestinian people, and I'm sure we can all agree that Hamas is the biggest problem in this conflict.

[Dragon]

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.

Stalin didn't actually say that. Still true, though. Many people simply ceased to care about those places. Also, Gaza is something they could relate to somewhat better. Israel is, afterall, a "1st world country", while internal squabbles in the "3rd world countries" are of no interest. Media prefer the conflict in Gaza, and because you hear about it much more from them, more people discuss (and protest about that).
IIRC, there were public protests over the events in the Middle East when the Arab Spring started. People over the world cheered for the rebels. The "regular business", no matter how outrageous, rarely gets mentioned, but when something distinctive happens, people are quick to jump on it.

[Phantom Hoover]

Sandwich has only ever as far as I can tell taken issue with Hamas, not the Palestinian people, and I'm sure we can all agree that Hamas is the biggest problem in this conflict.

"the Palestinian/Islamic culture of incitement, hatred, and death needs to stop before anything resembling a real peace can be achieved"

[Lorric]

Here it is:

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.

Okay. But it's still in direct response to talking about Hamas, the primary source of that culture in the area. He's still talking about Hamas.

[Lorric]

Posting jr2's video for context.

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

[Luis Dias]

I'd love all these goons who declare their love for martyrdom and death and so on to just, you know, actualize this immense love ****ing already. Jesus ****ing Christ.

[Lorric]

I'd love all these goons who declare their love for martyrdom and death and so on to just, you know, actualize this immense love ****ing already. Jesus ****ing Christ.

Yeah, when do you ever see someone of some prominence actually do what they preach to their followers?

[Dragon]

I'd love all these goons who declare their love for martyrdom and death and so on to just, you know, actualize this immense love ****ing already. Jesus ****ing Christ.

Yeah. If death, martyrdom and pain is are so noble, why can't we all take a lead pill every day and die a slow, painful, early death? Me? I'd rather live for my ideals rather than die for them. I know something about it, because Poles love martyrdom just as much as Arabs. Must be a religious thing, since we can also be just as bigoted as them, and if it wasn't for the fact we don't have that many AKs, just as violent. I prefer being noble in life, by doing things like helping people, donating to charities and other stuff that actually make things better. The whole concept of martyrdom is ridiculous, and probably invented by those who needed people to throw themselves at the enemy without worrying about death.

[Phantom Hoover]

Of course that's where it comes from, and it has nothing to do with religion either.

[The Dagger]

AFAIK martyrdom in religions is about been forced between renouncing your faith or die and choosing to die, considering the first to be worse than death. It is related to religious oppresion and non-violent response and is a self-imposed hard choice between the material and the transcendental. To transform that into killing other people and be killed in the same act is somewhat peculiar to say the least, and religion per se has nothing to do with it. But maybe I shouldn't be surprissed, "[...] For it is often easier to fight for principles than to live up to them." (Adlai Stevenson).

[Lorric]

I think suicide bombers would do a lot better at advancing their cause if they took out the bomber part.

Which is more likely to garner sympathy? Walking into a crowded place and detonating a bomb, killing a bunch of innocent people, or walking into a crowded place and killing only yourself, leaving something behind on your person to signify why. Or just with a cry of "For Palestine!" or something.

[Ulala]

So self-immolation then?

[Lorric]

So self-immolation then?

It would have to be something quick and irreversible. Cut your throat. Suicide pill. I doubt people would just let you pour petrol over yourself and set yourself on fire. And even if it did get that far, someone might tackle you and put you out. There's also the danger of setting other people on fire. And it blocks you from leaving something behind like a note or a recording as it would burn.

Of course, it would be best if no one had to die. But better this than a suicide bomb.

[Dragon]

Which is more likely to garner sympathy? Walking into a crowded place and detonating a bomb, killing a bunch of innocent people, or walking into a crowded place and killing only yourself, leaving something behind on your person to signify why. Or just with a cry of "For Palestine!" or something.

This was done, you know? Indeed, one guy (I think in Syria) did just that and pretty much kicked off the rebellion. I think in front of a police station, but I might be mixing two events up. Also, in Poland, an old soldier did that in main square, in Krakow, to protest the lies of the communist regime. There is a memorial now, "Unable to live a lie, he died in the truth" (loose translation). Notice the sites of suicide bombings only commemorate the victims and you'll see the difference clearly.

Self-immolation is actually a powerful way of making a point, much better than any suicide bombing. But it also requires a lot more balls and actual belief in your cause. Hamas lacks either, as they showed multiple times. Heck, I don't remember Hamas doing even suicide bombing, or at least not recently. They've always been bloody cowards when it came down to it. Same goes for most terrorists, TBH. It's easy to talk about about dying for your cause, but when someone actually does it, on his own will, this is another story entirely.

[Lorric]

I do remember hearing of at least one self-immolation case, and if pulled off it is probably the most powerful way to make the point. I don't think it would work in a crowded location though and would be dangerous.

Unfortunately someone I knew did this to make the point to his ex. Killed himself with fire in her garden. It was very sad and no one remotely saw it coming.

[DarkBasilisk]

He also needs calling out on this bull**** he keeps trying to pin on Sandwich. And yes I said bull****, because I'm that confident. I'm curious, does anyone else think Sandwich is any of hateful, racist, neo-colonialist, etc. ?

Sandwich has only ever as far as I can tell taken issue with Hamas, not the Palestinian people, and I'm sure we can all agree that Hamas is the biggest problem in this conflict.

I disagree with the intensity of the objection but not so much in the objection itself. Sandwich does a lot better than I have to deal with reading on reddit but still has taken points to mention the things from the list of Israel-state responses to criticism that are less than great responses

• Made the "they're not occupied territories" claim => Israel is the main one to say this while most international judgements say "Yes they are"
• "This is all the Palestinians fault, they just need to disarm" claim
• "You're being anti-Israel for not prioritizing Syria and others in your outrage" claim
• "This is just self-defense!" claim

I will say this in a dangerous way, but only because I know of no other way to state it. Therefore i'm going to highlight something several times in this paragraph and outside of it : I do not think Sandwich is a shill. I do not think Sandwich is a shill. But, some of the times (presumably because he's too busy, you know, being effected by this to write long posts like myself and others are doing), the messages he's left sound similar to some of the things being said by less than nice people on this matter. There's been both intense nationalist fervor as well as heavy astroturfing during public discussions of this conflict. People who've been spending a lot of time reading those kind of posts/messages/news-bites are going to read his posts and jump on the points of overlap (even when there may not actually be overlap or similarity in intentions). I do not think Sandwich is a shill.

Is this unfair? Probably. But it's a known human reaction. Been having to explain this to other people for other topics, particularly with one friend who's extremely rational and overall a good person, but doesn't realize the way he opens some arguments sound exactly like the stuff the bigots say, and people typically don't wait the requisite amount of time it'd take to tell the difference. (Good guy overall, who may or may not be reading this *waves*). The point where one can tell the difference between an aggressive centrist and a silver-tonged bigot is sometimes 50-60% of the length into the argument. Unfortunately, most people do not want to wait that long and instead go by the judgement of "first 20% sounds like misinformed or hostile, therefore assume hostile."

Again, I do not think Sandwich is a shill, apologist, bigot, or any such negative things. Really. I wish him the best and as you might guess by my lessened number of posts in the thread, I don't have any desire of furthering the incorrect notion that I dislike anyone else posting in this thread. Disagree with on this topic, maybe feel frustrated that a better consensus couldn't be reached? Sure. But that's about it.

I'm sure we can all agree that Hamas is the biggest problem in this conflict.

Nope. Don't get me wrong, they're horrible. But they're anything if not predictable in their reaction to everything, which makes it a bit more damning sometimes during various conflicts when people try to say "there's nothing anyone else could have done to prevent this!"

Is there anything you might consider fair to be done is a better question.

But really, when you take a political power that maintains roughly a similar stance and motivation for the long term, and is not only extremely reactionary, but reactionary in incredibly predictable ways, that's fish in a barrel for foreign policy. But instead, in some baffling move, Israel steps right into every one of the plays Hamas makes.

Hell. maybe some of the things raised here are more right than people gave credit for : Maybe the human shield thing is at least partially true (willing to admit it might be to some degree), and maybe the kidnapping/murder of the three teens was directly Hamas orders (evidence seems to indicate otherwise, but it's not outside of realm of possibility). But even if that's true, why in the HELL would you fall right into the playbook as good as they've been doing?

It's a situation where it's hard to find a winning move, granted, but every move played so far, intentionally or otherwise, hasn't just been a non-winning move but has instead been the worst possible move you could attempt in terms of not sparking international outrage. (And for gods sake find the politicians that are making public statements about "we should deport or kill everyone in Gaza" and get them to shut up. Not helping matters right now!)

[karajorma]

Hell. maybe some of the things raised here are more right than people gave credit for : Maybe the human shield thing is at least partially true (willing to admit it might be to some degree), and maybe the kidnapping/murder of the three teens was directly Hamas orders (evidence seems to indicate otherwise, but it's not outside of realm of possibility). But even if that's true, why in the HELL would you fall right into the playbook as good as they've been doing?

Very much this.

Hands up anyone who thinks arresting 300+ people for the murder of 3 was the right thing to do?


If you have evidence that Hamas are behind the murders, ****ing present it. Demand that the government of the West Bank extradite the guilty. Demand that the West Bank act like the independent country you try to claim it is. Even George ****ing Bush tried to do that after 9/11 for the first week or so.


The simple fact is that Israel wanted this war every bit as much as Hamas did. It's a deliberate attempt to try to pay Hamas back for trying to reconcile with Fatah. Because despite their claims Israel very much do not want a more moderate government in the Gaza Strip. Hamas are such scumbags that people have been willing to turn a blind eye to what Israel are doing, even going so far as to blame the Palestinians for it.

[Mr. Vega]

You can always count on Chomsky to make the definitive case for the Palestinians:

http://mwcnews.net/focus/analysis/44265-outrage.html

[Sandwich]

Couple of short points since I should be sleeping now instead of debating things online...

That quote I posted was directed at you forumites as something to ponder, not as an accusation against anyone here. The "accused" - the parties guilty of what the quote refers to - are basically the protesters worldwide, the media, and the U.N. Those are the entities who repeatedly single out Israel for everything from genocide to apartheid to washing whites and colors together, while remaining silent on far greater conflicts worldwide resulting in far greater numbers of casualties. It's a double-standard.

Sandwich has only ever as far as I can tell taken issue with Hamas, not the Palestinian people, and I'm sure we can all agree that Hamas is the biggest problem in this conflict.

"the Palestinian/Islamic culture of incitement, hatred, and death needs to stop before anything resembling a real peace can be achieved"

Just because I identify Hamas as our enemy doesn't mean that the Palestinians are automatically angelic people who can do no wrong. I stand by my statement, and I'll even expand it: Any culture where murder, hatred, bloodlust, and the "love of death" is praised, encouraged, and taught to children needs to change before one can expect to be able to attain a lasting peace with them.

Finally, regarding the accusations that Israel "played" right into the hands of Hamas when it responded the way it did - that's the difference between Hamas and Israel. Hamas is playing games first - media manipulation, world sympathy, etc. - and defending its civilians, well, not at all. On the other hand, Israel is defending its civilians first, and worrying about world opinion later.

So if you want to keep playing your armchair politics and accuse us of anything, Kara, at least accuse us of things we're guilty of - defending our own.