• Dr. Dabbles@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    118
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    8 months ago

    Great, then we should stop funding their government and military spending. If they won’t stop, we can. Of course we won’t, but we could and should.

    • Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      40
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      8 months ago

      I cannot find a single person on earth that can give a valid reason for sending them any money or armament whatsoever. We gain absolutely nothing from supporting them. Nothing at all.

      Conservatives cry crocodile tears about “wasting money”. Every penny ever sent to Israel has been wasted. It’s not an investment. There is no return. There is no political or financial gain of any kind for us.

      • Maalus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        32
        arrow-down
        17
        ·
        8 months ago

        US gains an ally in a very important region of the world. They have huge strategic value. Saying there is nothing is misguided.

        • cogman@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          17
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          We have an ally next door, Jordan.

          We’d probably have more allies if we dropped support.

          What we are doing is equivalent to us deciding to support North Korea and being shocked that all of a sudden we lose regional support from just about everyone.

          Israel, especially with an ongoing genocide, is toxic to stability and alliances. It isolates more than it gives strategic advantage.

          • ???@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            Everyone keeps ignoring Jordan but it literally has the best cultural and economic relations with the US. Were they not even together in the anti ISIS coalition?

            But nope, Israeli lobbying is stronger than all of our voices combined.

        • fustigation769curtain@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          8 months ago

          Looks like allying with Israel has only been detrimental to the US. It’s been great for Zionists who need the US’ protection, though.

          Osama bin Laden cited US’ support for Israel as one of the reasons for the 9/11 attacks.

          Think about the billions, or perhaps trillions, of dollars the US has lost out on because of its support of Israel.

          We need to drop them like a bad habit.

          • Maalus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            14
            ·
            8 months ago

            Okay, what’s your point? I’m stating a fact. They have high strategic value. I don’t need to be convinced that it’s expensive or risky

              • ???@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                8 months ago

                Drop that reddit shit and just explain when someone asks.

              • Maalus@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                8
                ·
                8 months ago

                I re read it. I still don’t see why you decided to respond to me stating a fact with a rant. I don’t really care about your opinion and I’m not here to debate whether the US should still support Israel.

            • SulaymanF@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              8 months ago

              You say they have value as an ally. What benefit has the alliance had for the US? Did Israel contribute soldiers to Iraq or Afghanistan? Did Israel support the Obama administration’s JCPOA or did they try to undermine it and kill it?

              It’s a one-way alliance.

          • Maalus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            8
            ·
            8 months ago

            What do you mean, they are still there, the US can still use their shit if they need to.

            • ghostdoggtv@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              8 months ago

              Tactical value is fleeting. Israel is the reason we can’t afford anything for domestic civilians since 2001.

        • Kiosade@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          Why do we need to be involved in the region at all? We’ve only done more harm than good.

            • Kiosade@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              8 months ago

              Because you said they provide huge strategic value. What value is that? Why do we even need to have bases in that area to begin with?

              • Maalus@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                8 months ago

                Because it’s part of the US power projection. Asking that is like asking “why does the US need to do anything outside their borders”.

      • frezik@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        8 months ago

        Keep protesting. It’s giving the political capital needed for US politicians to say “hey, maybe we should change our relationship with Israel, here”. I know that doesn’t sound like much, but in terms of world politics, it’s a huge change already for them to be able to say that.

      • Seleni@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        8 months ago

        Yes, there is. A lot of the higher-ups in government believe that Israel is necessary for the Rapture to take place. All the Jews will go there, and then get killed, and all the rich white men here will go to heaven.

        I wish I was even joking, but I’m not. They’ll keep Israel going at all costs because of this.

        • unphazed@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          8 months ago

          Seven Mountain followers want this fight to end horribly. They’re actually attempting to hasten it.

      • Cethin@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        I saw a comment the other day that she’d a lot of light on this. Us Military aid to Israel suppresses Israeli arms manufacturing, because they have less need, and boosts their reliance on US arms. It essentially promotes US arms sales not just in Israel, but across the world, as Israel has a fairly strong military industrial complex as is.

        Is this a good reason? That’s debatable. It’s a better reason than none though, and it makes things a lot clearer.

      • Dr. Dabbles@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        8 months ago

        In theory, you could make an argument about defending the people living in a hostile region. In practice the government of Israel has been on a hard right slide for decades and have been openly denying basic human rights to the people stranded in Gaza.

        • Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          In theory, you could make an argument about defending the people living in a hostile region.

          There are vulnerable groups in the middle east. Why lavish only this one with billions of dollars of munitions? We do not have any valid reason to support them any more than any other vulnerable group.

      • halferect@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        Strategic Military advantage and I assume access to massad or some collaboration with them and if we stopped every Muslim country would eradicate Isreal at which point the same people yelling genocide Joe would be screaming for us to help Isreal. It’s global politics and its not black and white. Oh and global weapons sales, after all the united states government is more or less just a weapons dealer

      • 【J】【u】【s】【t】【Z】@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        Sure you can you’re sticking your head in the sand.

        It’s to maintain Israel’s defensive posture as to Iran.

        Our weapons and money is not necessary for Israel to carpet bomb all of Gaza and the West Bank several times over before suspending aid altered Israel’s posture as to Gaza.

        So right now cotinued support is America’s only leverage. See? Not complicated at all.

  • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    87
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    8 months ago

    Sounds like Bibi is trying to implement some sort of “final solution” with regards to the Palestinians.

    It is truly flabbergasting to watch the Israeli government categorically ignore the incredibly obvious and terrible irony here.

    • stoly@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      Ironically Israel was never really against holocaust, they just want to make sure that it’s Arabs instead of Jews.

    • theangryseal@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      It just proves to me that people are people.

      How can we get to the root of our problems if we continue to group people from different regions as separate and distinct?

      We’re all the same species. We’re humans dehumanizing humans to make killing humans easier under the leadership of a tiny fraction of our species fighting to go down in history. Same as it ever was.

      Even when we do our absolute best to be good to each other, we still break ourselves into groups. “You can’t wear braids, that’s cultural appropriation!” The person who says that means well, but ultimately we have to stop treating each other as, well, other.

      The only thing that makes us any different is actually something that we should strive to see as similarity. That is which individuals from which time influenced what area and how that don’t really matter and was just luck (or bad luck) of the draw.

      So what if 3,000 years ago some dude thought it was cool to paint stripes on his face and wear a big hat which lead to millions painting stripes on their faces while wearing big hats over there in a distant land.

      It’s the same damn thing as some dude over here thinking that a white wig and a big frilly shirt was rad and millions following in his footsteps.

      It really is simple. Our cultures are built from people who came and went before us and folks following them and spreading the rad (or ugly) shit they did.

      Our culture has to reach a point where it is considered a collective and shared human culture.

      Who fucked who, where, and how much influence they left on their descendants and how much we give a shit about the where isn’t helping us. If an alien abducted 10 humans from different regions they wouldn’t even give a thought to how our history separates us. They’d just have 10 of a species from the planet earth.

      I hope we get it together one day. It breaks my heart that those people are suffering so terribly right now. The malnourished kids in those photos remind me of the ones from the holocaust.

      It would be nice if the people in power could relate their suffering to that of their grandparents. It really would.

      Sorry I’m all over the place.

      • Fluke@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        8 months ago

        I disagree. You’re pretty on target with that.

        The diversity we have as a species is -and always has been- our greatest strength. It means a subset of us can usually do at least “ok” under any given situation.

        The same thing is what made some poxy little island able to rule a vast swathe of the planet. The UK took the best of everything it encountered, and added it to it’s own, like the Borg. Of course, like everywhere else that’s run by plutocrats, in an effort to keep us all divided anything “foreign” is currently bad, and to be shunned.

        • Milk_Sheikh@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          The UK took the best of everything it encountered, and added it to it’s own, like the Borg.

          The Empire was built from the Agricultural and Industrial Revolution, and the +15 year head start the British got over the rest of the world. The coupling of massive domestic economic growth with an international system of spoils and conquest lead to the Age of Sail and the gilded era for Britain, not an adherence to objective, rational facts and ideas.

          The advantage of developing earlier lead to much of the leading research, science and practices coming from Britain, but they certainly had enough hubris to ignore better ideas that weren’t their own

      • Harbinger01173430@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        Easiest suction is to make first contact and turn an entire alien species into the ‘other’ we always need to have and hate. Humanity will learn to cooperate by force then

      • in4aPenny@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        Same as it ever was.

        Only since around 600BC when coin turned money from a quantitive measurement of debt into a protection racket against soldiers, mercenaries and thugs (military colonialism wouldn’t be possible without this redefinition of money). Yeah, there were always societies with ruthless hierarchies, but they weren’t the norm. Yeah, there was always inequality in wealth or physical ability, but wealth wasn’t always used to lord over and deprive from eachother. The norm for most of humanities 200,000+ years were societies of cooperation, a colourful carnival of experimental politics of the likes we couldn’t even dream of nowadays. Ruthless and brutal hierarchies famously collapse because communities actively decided to abandon them, move elsewhere, and create something new and better. Human history is marked by stories of societies who reject arbitrary authorities, the ability to go elsewhere, and most of all have the expectation that wherever they go they’ll be cared for. None of these freedoms exist anymore, so the question is how and why did we lose these freedoms? And who benefits from these losses of freedoms? After accepting that society is what we make of it, defined by rules on how to live amongst one another in a bottom->up direction, then why are we so eager to blindly accept arbitrary authority, stay put, and fear our neighbors?

  • NABDad@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    77
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    8 months ago

    Israel has decided to implement a “final solution” to the “Palestinian question”.

    • adONis@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      actually…Israeli Hitler would be more appropriate. Not all Jews support Ben (and Israel in that matter) … But most Israelis do seem to support Ben, otherwise they could’ve just just gathered around the gov building and demanded his step-down.

      • pjwestin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        No, he’s pretty unpopular there, most polls say that Benny Gantz would beat him easily in an election. That doesn’t mean that they object to his approach to Gaza, or that Gantz would be any better for the Palestinian people.

  • IndustryStandard@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    52
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    8 months ago

    And after all Palestinians in Gaza are murdered, Netanyahu will bring up that Hamas is also in the West Bank and Lebanon.

    • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      40
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      And after that, maybe Jordan. Then perhaps Syria. Fascists can’t stay in power without whipping up xenophobia.

    • 【J】【u】【s】【t】【Z】@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      All Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank, too? At this rate it will take Israel another 67 years! And then also Lebanon? Lebanon has a million more people than Gaza and the West Bank combined. Won’t check the math on this one but that’ll make it like what, another 90 years.

  • GrymEdm@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    49
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    I’m sure AIPAC has told Netanyahu they won’t let US politicians stop the flow of money and arms to Israel (AIPAC is spending 100 million to keep progressives out of office). The criticism is just theater. Biden only started changing his language when people started voting “uncommitted” in battleground states, and he is still shipping arms to Israel every 36 hours. The Israeli blockade of humanitarian aid is barely mentioned officially, the air-dropped aid is woefully inadequate and little more than virtue signalling. 3 months ago, when Gazan civilian casualties were at 21,000+, Congress passed a bill making criticizing Zionism/Israel legally equal to antisemitism. All this shows that Netanyahu just needs to keep accepting aid and let Biden talk for political reasons until he’s re-elected.

    • Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      8 months ago

      The US needs to stop funding genocide.

      Use the word. It’s important. It’s what it is. This is a modern holocaust happening before our eyes, and we are complicit in it.

      • mods_are_assholes@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        8 months ago

        How the fuck are ‘we’ complicit in it when our government only follows the average citizen’s will in 10% of their policies?

        You’re just like the megacorps chiding us for not recycling our water bottle caps.

        • SulaymanF@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          The American public isn’t trying to recall or remove politicians who support unrestricted arms sales to Israel. Both Biden and Trump are for unrestricted sales, it seems.

            • SulaymanF@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              8 months ago

              If Biden wants to ignore the will of voters then he can win his own election without us.

              I want Trump to lose too, but Biden has been really insulting to the pro-Palestine voters, which is unlike any presidents before him. He couldn’t even bring himself to acknowledge or pretend to grieve for dead Palestinians although he publicly hugs families of Israeli victims.

                • go_go_gadget@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  That cuts both ways. We don’t believe Biden along with his moderate and liberal voters are taking the threat of Trump seriously when they refuse to compromise with leftists and progressives they’re depending on for votes. If you believe Trump is half as dangerous as you say he is then cutting off weapon shipments is a bargain. Refusing to block strikes is a bargain. Pick a lane.

      • nutsack@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        I agree that the word is appropriate, but it’s also problematic because it has legal definitions that are almost never met. Someone will inevitably argue with the use of the term, and the conversation will be completely derailed by a vocabulary debate

        • Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          8 months ago

          They can argue all they want. I really don’t care.

          The legal definitions of genocide are only difficult to meet because they were written by countries with their own histories of genocide. That’s why it’s so hard to prove.

          That’s not a standard we need to hold ourselves to.

          • theotherverion@lemmynsfw.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            17
            ·
            8 months ago

            Because the scale is not comparable. Here, we are fighting in a single city, not across whole Europe, we are not building concentration camps where we are tying together siblings and changing people’s eye colour. Also, the scale is not comparable and the escalation was started by Hamas.

              • theotherverion@lemmynsfw.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                9
                ·
                8 months ago

                Of course, by this logic we can start comparing a murder of 2 people to holocaust because both are murdering people.

              • theotherverion@lemmynsfw.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                8 months ago

                I have not said that. If I murder 2 people, my actions won’t be justified but the comparison to holocaust is completely absurd.

                • ???@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  8 months ago

                  What’s absurd is holding the holocaust to such a standard that we cannot compare it to anything or learn anything from history.

                  It’s disrespectful to holocaust survivors, this shit I see posted here, especially to the ones saying never again now.

                  Don’t use the holocaust to make this genocide okay. That’s antisemitic.

            • Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              8 months ago

              Out of curiosity, what is the actual limit for an acceptable quantity of genocide? Like, I’m trying to understand if there’s a hard number of murdered civilians that Isreal has to reach before we can make comparisons to the holocaust, or if it’s more just a vibes thing?

            • ???@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              Ah yes, I guess this means a “small holocaust” is perfectly fine…

              I thought the survivors said NEVER AGAIN. The scale is irrelevant. Israel created one of the biggest manmade famine in histroy at an unprecedented speed. Why destroy all roads and hospitals and stop aid? I’ll let you answer that one.

              • theotherverion@lemmynsfw.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                8 months ago

                If the scale is irrelevant, then it’s completely irrelevant that Israel killed roughly 30k people because that’s just the scale.

                Famine is, unfortunately, not so rare during wars, hence why especially poor regions that have troubles even without a war should not be aggressive.

                • ???@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  I think that’s BS. Famine at this scale and speed is not common.

            • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              8 months ago

              Israel is killing in Gaza at the speed of a large concentration camp at the peak of the Holocaust.

                • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  If you have enough square miles you deprive of food it’s not Genocide?

                  The definition of Genocide becomes the most arbitrary set of rules ever according to pro-israelis.

  • meep_launcher@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    42
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Am I the only one who has been hearing the frustrations coming from democrats and Biden about Netanyahu? Reading these comments you’d think Biden has been best buddy’s with Netanyahu and all is squeaky clean in their relationship, which is very, VERY much not the case. You’d also think that democratic leadership didn’t just call out Netanyahu and suggest Israeli’s vote him out over Gaza.

    It’s so weird that Biden is simultaneously Genocide Joe and Pro Hamas Biden.

    I know talk is cheap and we are still sending military aid to Israel, but it all comes down to Biden facing daily trolley problems and balancing keeping friendly relationships with our one (nuclear capable) middle eastern country, taking the US seriously as a country that can stop a genocide by saying no to this (nuclear capable) middle eastern country, a reelection, and sending a message to the United States allies and adversaries of if we will or will not support who we say we will support.

    The answer to stop sending arms to Israel is clear to us, but let’s not pretend it’s that easy. The rules for rulers are not that straightforward.

    • SulaymanF@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      I don’t give Biden credit for resisting Netanyahu. During the Trump years we heard endlessly about Republicans who privately criticized Trump but publicly defended him slavishly. They get no credit, so why should Biden?

      Biden’s policy was to publicly hug Netanyahu and hope that doing so would make him easy to pressure behind closed doors. It failed repeatedly. Biden is unwilling to pressure Netanyahu publicly and is instead taking the heat for him, with nothing in return. It’s pathetic and bringing down his campaign.

    • mlg@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      I was here when Trump moved the US embassy to Jerusalem and then democrats used that as justification for why we should vote for Biden

      Talk is not cheap, it is very much free of cost and carries no weight in the modern age of internet where evidence and first hand accounts are so abundant for the public to see.

      The only critical reason Biden has an issue with Netanyahu is because:

      1. He’s damaging Biden’s election campaign
      2. He’s not directly controllable or influenced like how the leaders of the surrounding shill arab countries are (ex: Sisi), which is just an extension of the first reason

      As long as Israel has money to pay for weapons and the US has an interest in Israel (military complex and lots of technology), very little will change even with strained relations.

      The best chance of anything changing is if the conflict became wider and suddenly started costing the USA resources, which is what the Houthis were trying to achieve by sabotaging the red sea shipping lanes.

    • MisterD@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      We almost have our four horsemen of the apocalypse:

      Putin = war Trump = petulance (disease via COVID) Netanyahu = famine (at least it Gaza)

    • juicy@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      8 months ago

      The second half of your comment shows you know the answer to the first half. Yes, it is that easy.

    • Milk_Sheikh@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      The needs of Israel outweigh the Netanyahu.

      Him trying to doggedly ‘crush’ Hamas (an impossible goal politically) whilst refusing to see the larger picture is an outstanding dereliction of duty to the country as a whole

      The northern border is increasingly heating up with Hezbollah targeting IDF bases directly and with larger ordnance - in a few months it has progressed from lowly ATGMs and 80s tech, to Grad and Burkan rocket artillery. There’s now more frequent attacks on northern towns and settlements because of their increasing firepower brought in

      International condemnation is widespread, your neighbors to the east and south are publicly taking about ‘changes in security treaties’ with Israel and threatening unilateral action, an ICJ judgment that is sustained into war crimes investigations, and top US official and leaders are talking about ‘red lines’ and implicitly threatening continuing US military aid - that’s a big problem.

      Even if you accept the ‘4D chess’ angle that Bibi is dealing with Iran Hamas completely to remove that threat before taking care of Iran Hezbollah, that ignores the global reality that the world, not just the Arab/Islamic world, isn’t going to sit by and let you ignore ~2 million Palestinians, today or tomorrow.

      Israel is totally capable of winning the battle against Hamas, no doubt. But by doing so they will loose the wider war, isolate themselves politically, and make their own survival harder without friendly nations in a rough neighborhood.

      • theotherverion@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        Good point, the scale of this military operation is useless considering the goal. Even if hamas is completely removed, another radical group would probably emerge somewhere nearby.

        • SulaymanF@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          Netanyahu only sharpened the resolve of the Palestinian public. He banned peaceful protest, he punished Palestinians for boycotts or asking the UN for help. He sidelined moderates and undermined the PA. When you get rid of moderates and nonviolent protest, you can’t be surprised when people turn to violence.

            • SulaymanF@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              The 2018-2019 nonviolent protests in Gaza that the Israeli military fired on and killed 226.

                • SulaymanF@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  8 months ago

                  Israel creates racist apartheid laws and illegally starved Gazans in a blockade and you’re mad that people nonviolently broke some of those laws in an attempt to demand their human rights?

                  Human rights violations and unjust imprisonment of an entire population are not something anyone should be expected to just “obey.” Next you’ll be telling me Jews were breaking laws when they tried to escape the Warsaw ghetto.

  • unphazed@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    Do I see a little moustache growing on Benny’s lip? Total Victory kinda sounds similar to “Final Solution”

  • BeautifulMind ♾️@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    “total victory” sure sounds like they’ve given some thought to their objectives and it’s no accident they’re killing lots of civilians

    • MonsieurMack@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      I wonder how synonymous “total victory” would be with “final solution” if this guy was German in the 1940s

      • febra@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        It surely reminds me of the Sportpalast Speech also known as the Total War Speech of Joseph Goebbles.

        Do you believe with the Führer and us in the final total victory of the German people? Are you and the German people willing to work, if the Führer orders, 10, 12 and if necessary 14 hours a day and to give everything for victory? Do you want total war? If necessary, do you want a war more total and radical than anything that we can even imagine today?

    • Asafum@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      “total victory” is no Palestinians and all the land.

      Fucking religion and real estate all mixed together and killing innocent people…

      Almost everything I hate about the world all in one disgusting package.

      • isles@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        There are so many justifications for fascism within religions (Maybe most especially, but not exclusively, Abrahamic)

  • Laura@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    8 months ago

    total victory sounds like “wollt ihr den totalen krieg”