Nicker on 11/12/2023 at 04:46
For decades, if not millennia, two factions (with identical and impossible goals of exterminating the other) have engaged in violent conflict over lands around shores of the eastern Mediterranean Sea. Each faction purports to have deep, irrefutable, ancestral claims to the land, supported by the unconditional blessings of an almighty and merciful god, yet each think nothing of committing crimes of cruelty against their enemy or subjecting their own people to danger, deprivation and death, in order to advance their political and religious aspirations.
One side is wealthy, has superior military might and can afford a go-slow strategy of gradual strangulation. It says little and does much; expanding aggressively, disproportionately retaliating against any resistance, punishing entire families and villages for the alleged crimes of individuals, fighting rocks with tanks and enforcing a casualty ratio well above twenty-to-one.
The other faction is impoverished, out gunned and stupidly relies on desperate, cynical acts of provocation, which dependably result in a worsening of conditions for the very people they claim to protect. They hide fighters in homes, hospitals and schools, then complain about the inhumanity of civilian casualties. They repeatedly ignite armed conflicts which they have no hope of winning and which they must know will only add to the devastation of their lands and people. They use overt savagery against foes and friends alike, then wonder why they cannot elicit universal sympathy for their cause.
On October 7, 2023, after years of grinding and intensifying oppression by the former, the latter again provoked a hopeless war, expecting a preposterous, novel outcome (an enduring victory) despite no change in initial conditions or tactics. The stronger faction unleashed its predictable, amplified and deadly response, demanding that millions of people flee their war machine or accept responsibility for being trapped in its path.
Misery, disease, pain and death. A necessary price that others must pay, so that the two factions can assert the authenticity of their claims and the justification of their evil deeds. While neither side has any hope of annihilating the other, they pursue this goal with gluttonous delight, until exhaustion forces them to negotiate a peace, which both are already planning to violate.
Like furious toddlers, they cannot imagine a world where they do not get their way. Neither do they understand that, while they cling to the robes of their vengeful Father God, they will never, ever grow into adult human beings.
---------
How that other thread should have opened, IMO.
LordBooford on 11/12/2023 at 07:23
40% of Welsh farmers say they like to pee standing in the middle of country roads in the rain.
Cipheron on 11/12/2023 at 08:51
Quote:
For decades, if not millennia, two factions (with identical and impossible goals of exterminating the other) have engaged in violent conflict over lands around shores of the eastern Mediterranean Sea.
That hasn't been happening for millennia, it's just silly to claim that these two factions have been at it for millennia.
First, Israel was a historic nation that ceased to exist around 720 BC. Israel as an entity predates the Athenian democracy, Alexander the Great, and the Roman Empire. So it barely even overlaps what we usually call classical antiquity.
The kingdom of Judah still existed but was assimilated into the Roman Empire, rebelled and was basically destroyed by the Romans from roughly 70AD-130AD.
Then, Islam didn't even exist until the 600s, so there was no overlap whatsoever between Islam and any Jewish-lead political entity, as far as I am aware, and there was about a 1300 year gap between historic Israel and Mohammed,
Zionism itself dates from the late 19th Century. So these being in direct conflict is 100% a 20th century issue. And there were even Palestinian Jews who lived perfectly peacefully in Palestine from BEFORE Zionism:
(
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_Jews)
Quote:
When the First Palestinian Congress of February 1919 issued its anti-Zionist manifesto rejecting Zionist immigration, it extended a welcome to those Jews "among us who have been Arabicized, who have been living in our province since before the war; they are as we are, and their loyalties are our own."
It was clear that what they were rejecting were basically foreigners who's entire public platform said they were going to replace the local population and turn it into their own ethno-state. The pre-existing Arab and Jewish populations had co-existed in the Ottoman Empire for centuries.
The whole "they've been at it for millennia" thing is actually classic both-sides-ism, when it is pretty clear that the whole thing happened because of external colonists coming in with a specific plan of replacing everyone with their own people.
Hamas are not nice people, but they are not nice people in the same sense that American Indians who massacred white settlers were not nice people. The same logic that says Americans had to genocide the American Indians because of attacks on settlers is the logic of Israel bombing Gaza because of Hamas.
So finally, saying this is about "competing religions" is BS. What's playing out in Israel/Palestine is NOT a clash of religions. It's the same pattern that played out with the colonization of the Americas, with Apartheid in South Africa. It's the same as Northern Ireland where there was a component of religion, but ... that was not about "theocracy" at all, it was about a colonial power who had spent centuries trying to replace the local culture with an imported one.
lowenz on 11/12/2023 at 11:57
Colonial power uses theocracies, see Afghanistan in USA vs URSS times.....not-heavy-armed fascism is really convenient for capitalism, regardless the anticapitalistic claims of every fascism.
In B4 "So Putin is right about USA and Ukraine!!1111" (no, because it's Putin the one using Ilyin-inspired russofascism after the communism evaporation to consolidate the "Ruski Mir", just like it happened here in Italy when the monarchic system was about to end and we got proper fascism in the "authentic" form of a militant spiritualistic idealism to consolidate a not-yet-existent "italian civilisation" thanks to Savoia complete political and social incompetence - just see how they "managed" WW1 front and troops)
RippedPhreak on 11/12/2023 at 13:35
Quote:
Hamas are not nice people, but they are not nice people in the same sense that American Indians who massacred white settlers were not nice people.
See what I mean about how Leftists will always excuse murder (and mass murder) as long as it's against the "right kind of people?"
Nicker on 11/12/2023 at 13:51
My point was mostly that the title and premise of that other thread was already prejudicial and was treating the conflict like it arose almost spontaneously and that the blame was all on one side. Also that the conflict is not between Palestinians and Israelis but between Hamas and Likud, between two fascist factions.
On many points I agree with you and since you took the time...
Quote:
That hasn't been happening for millennia, it's just silly to claim that these two factions have been at it for millennia.
Semite factions have been waring over those lands for millennia. Your rationalization of one claim over another is the misreading of history. The fact that various factions have identified under different names and have had varying degrees of success and failure, does not change the other fact, that this is a continuation of tribal conflicts going back thousands of years. Just because the factions assume new robes and faith doctrines, doesn't change the tribal and historical nature of this war. The history is so deep and entangled and obfuse, assigning blame or claim based upon a particular reading of it is absurd.
"Bothsidesism" is entirely appropriate in this case because justifications for cruelty on both sides are made based largely on the above mangled history and their common, malignant intentions. Likud and Hamas are the problem.
"Bothsidesism" is also appropriate because there is no "one state" solution, only a two party agreement. Even if Likud totally eliminated all Arabs from the region, they would still be surrounded by hostile nations with cause to be furious and suspicious. In addition, the savagery of such actions would turn Israel into a pariah. Similarly if Hamas managed the impossible, the repercussions from the West and Jews around the world would be devastating to the entire Middle East.
Yes this round was ultimately rekindled by colonialism (European and Jewish) but ancient tribal hatreds feed the fire and Abrahamic fervour breaths hot life into it.
Nicker on 11/12/2023 at 13:52
Quote Posted by RippedPhreak
See what I mean about how Leftists will always excuse murder (and mass murder) as long as it's against the "right kind of people?"
No. Nobody sees what you see. Now fuck off.
SD on 11/12/2023 at 14:37
Quote Posted by Cipheron
Hamas are not nice people, but they are not nice people in the same sense that American Indians who massacred white settlers were not nice people. The same logic that says Americans had to genocide the American Indians because of attacks on settlers is the logic of Israel bombing Gaza because of Hamas.
Seems ass-backwards to compare Hamas to Native Americans, when it's Jews who are the indigenous population in Israel.
You're right that it's not a clash between religions, however. It's a conflict between a secular democracy of native people in Israel, and theocratic Islamic imperialists in Hamas, who are really just a proxy for Iran.
Starker on 11/12/2023 at 17:54
Quote Posted by Nicker
Likud and Hamas are the problem.
I don't disagree, but for example Ben-Gvir is from Jewish Power and Smotrich is from Religious Zionist Party. Believe it or not, there are worse organisations and people out there than even Hamas or Likud have to offer.
Tocky on 11/12/2023 at 20:07
Quote Posted by Cipheron
It was clear that what they were rejecting were basically foreigners who's entire public platform said they were going to replace the local population and turn it into their own ethno-state. The pre-existing Arab and Jewish populations had co-existed in the Ottoman Empire for centuries.
Several omissions from history I found amusing, like how Islam was founded at the point of a sword in the first place and how the Romans occupied the Jews (LOL assimilated) but did not wipe them out as indicated. It's as if nobody lived there from 130 AD until 600 AD when the point of sword began swinging.
Another part I liked was the ignoring of how Islam sided with Hitler and found it an excellent idea to carry out slaughters of Jews in the area. Then when their side lost comparing it with an invasion despite getting over 90% of the Ottoman Empire designated to them. That less than 10% irked them into trying to eradicate it for decades after but they failed.
Eh. At least it shows how one can one side history deftly.
