• APassenger@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      70
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s this part.

      We’re telling them they’ve gone too far, seeing rules… and giving them weapons. Are we giving them seasons so they listen?

      And if they don’t listen, doesn’t this make us complicit and with exceedingly poor intensional optics?

    • ghostdoggtv@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      29
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      How much Israeli money do you reckon went into the pockets of members of the fascist “freedom” caucus?

    • fosforus@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      40
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Perhaps stop funding Hamas. USA has given Palestine several billions of dollars in aid, which they divert to the hands of Hamas. Ditto for rest of the western world. It isn’t just Iran and Qatar who enable them, it’s all of us.

      • treefrog@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        22
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Your post uses double speak. Opening with Hamas and switching to Palestine.

        Hamas was democratically elected but they stopped allowing elections. They don’t represent Palestine and intentionally conflating relief efforts with funding Hamas comes off as more than a little racist.

        If you’re parroting some news source you may want to look for your news someplace else. If these are really your own views you may want to examine them if you don’t like sounding racist.

        If you don’t mind, then by all means, carry on. Just don’t expect to be taken seriously outside of right wing circles.

        • Tony@lemmy.stad.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          16
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Also worth adding, since people don’t seem to realise this: The majority of Palestinians alive today were not of voting age when Hamas won those elections, and a very substantial proportion were not even born.

          And even then, of course, while Hamas won the largest number of votes, even back then they still only had the support of a minority (ca. 44%) of the electorate.

          Exit polls during the same election showed near 80% support for a peace agreement with Israel, and 75% who wanted Hamas policy towards Israel to change. In other words: It’s also disingenuous to see even the support for Hamas that was there in elections as support for the more extreme aspects of Hamas’ actions.

  • PugJesus@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    114
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Biden: “For fuck’s sake, Israel, don’t do something this monumentally stupid.”

    No points for guessing what comes next.

    • khepri@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t see why they’d need to occupy anything. Occupation would imply that you wanted to control that area and those people. I think Israel knows occupation would never work and wouldn’t try it. They’ve preferred to wall-off people in enclaves, slowly squeeze all life out of those regions, and when the people they have cornered inevitably violently lash out against their own slow-motion genocide, it’s time to flatten the area with bombs again. Israel calls it “mowing the grass” and I don’t think a massive occupation fits with that strategy. I think they want to break the region, scatter the people, and leave it to rot, not occupy and be forced to manage it into the future indefinitely.

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I have 500 on anyone who evacuated the Northern area is denied re-entry and the maps change to gaslight the world into thinking Gaza was always that small.

    • APassenger@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      32
      ·
      1 year ago

      Biden needs to be primaried.

      The democratic party keeps making the mistake of picking a winner early.

      • Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s too late. None of the state parties have any of the setup done for a primary. Once an incumbent president (of either party) declares they’re running again their party automatically backs them. I just feel lucky we have incumbent primaries for Congress.

        • Thief_of_Crows@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I mean, I’m voting for West. Democrats only hold power if we say they do. Just don’t vote for Democrats ever again. The only control we have is over ourselves let’s exercise it

          • Maggoty@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            If there’s a chance then sure. But I’m not exactly going to stick a fork in my eye just to spite the Democrats.

            • Thief_of_Crows@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Voting for Democrats will only exacerbate our problems. Democrats have never made societies problems meaningfully better, at least in the modern era. Its not spiting them, it’s not signing off on the thing we all know will definitely happen. Voting for Biden will make things worse. Voting for West might possibly make things better. The choice is obvious.

      • Jaysyn@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        33
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        The USA could end homelessness or hunger (and maybe both) nationally for the amount of money we sent to Israel each year.

        • Earthwormjim91@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          34
          ·
          1 year ago

          No, no they could not lol. Not even remotely close.

          The US spends $2 Billion a year on aid to Israel.

          They spend $105 Billion a year in direct payments to SNAP (food stamps) recipients.

          And $32 Billion a year on section 8 housing vouchers.

            • treefrog@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              12
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              The problem is starving homeless children. Feeding them and giving them housing fixes this. It also gives them more opportunities, which makes it more likely they contribute to society in meaningful ways (including paying more in taxes than we spend helping them, especially when factored over generations). The alternative is often a bigger tax burden via the criminal justice system. (Prison is much more expensive than housing vouchers and food stamps).

              Bringing people out of poverty is a good economic investment. The only time handouts don’t help is when they go to the financial sector. It doesn’t improve tax income for the State and investors begin to predict bailouts, making risky investments more worthwhile because Uncle Sam will help them out.

              Tax the rich, feed the poor.

          • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            Since ‘48, we’ve sent over 158 billion in aid- without adjusting for inflation.

            It’s more than all other countries combined- including Ukraine.

            Even that 2 billion could go a very long way to helping.

            • yetAnotherUser@feddit.de
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              1 year ago

              You’re right, it could.

              In fact, the US could fund a few wars and conflicts, end homelessness, implement socialized healthcare and fund the world’s best public transit system with affordable high-speed trains between cities simultaneously.

              But they don’t because they don’t want to, not because they can’t.

            • treefrog@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              That’s enough to end homelessness last I checked. (Last year or so I compared median national housing prices and found that Elon Musk’s wealth was enough to take every family and single person in the country off the street. That’s how obscene 150 billion is. It’s enough to end homelessness).

              • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Eh, I’m a bit pessimistic about a 100% solution to it. Can’t save everyone… That’s not a reason to not do everything that can be done, but I just don’t think there will ever be an end.

                And I absolutely agree with how obscene it is

            • Deftdrummer@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              Good thing it’s more than Ukraine too. Wouldn’t want any com block arms dealers mouths to go unfed.

        • torpak@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          That homelessness and hunger are not ended in the USA is not because the money needed is spent on other things, it is because the government doesn’t want to end them.

    • bobs_monkey@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      “Or else we will be very, very angry with you. And we will write you a letter, telling you how angry we are.”

    • Chunk@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Or the region could destabilize and the US has diplomatic cover to limit their hypothetical response to a more defensive set of operations.

  • ObiWon_KanBloMi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    59
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Pro Israel, Pro Palestine, fuck Hamas.

    The Palestinians do have legitimate grievances with the Israeli government that need to be addressed, and Israel has every right to protect itself.

    Hamas uses this for their own sick agendas and to maintain power.

    Someone pointed it out, but how many of the people Hamas murdered do you think have joined the many protests for the freedom of the Palestinian people?

    A lot of Jews in Israel support the freedom of the Palestinians and they have demonstrated such.

    Hamas doesn’t give a shit about the Palestinians.

    And Israel is showing the same by bombing innocents.

    • Cethin@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      It appears that Israel possibly was aware the attack was going to happen and they allowed it. Regardless, Israel supports Hamas. They need Hamas so they can justify their murder and colonialism. I agree Hamas is bad, but the Zionists have done much more harm. Bibi should not be in office.

      • paintbucketholder@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I would need much, much more solid proof for this conspiracy theory before believing it.

        I don’t doubt Israel had some unspecified warnings, but I just think it’s much more likely that it was a mixture of a misguided belief that Hamas was more interested in political power than large scale terrorism, an assumption that any attack would just be “regular” rocket attacks like we’ve seen in the last years, incompetence of Israeli intelligence services, and an over confidence that the fence and Iron Dome would be enough to stop any attack.

        Also, Israel doesn’t need Hamas. Just look at the West Bank where Hamas isn’t in power.

        Agree though that Bibi shouldn’t be in power.

    • Zoolander@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Genuine question… how is killing 1800 people protecting oneself against an attack that killed 1200 people? I would agree that Israel has a right to protect itself from terrorist attacks but I fail to see how killing more people protects anyone. If anything, it’s just instigating the terrorists to continue to try and kill more people.

      • ObiWon_KanBloMi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yes and that is a genuine and valid argument against Israel’s actions. It’s the cycle of violence.

        What Israel is doing in response is wrong.

        But I’m shocked at people actually applauding Hamas and their actions.

    • Thief_of_Crows@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      Hamas is palestines means of fighting back at their oppressors. You can’t say they are separate entities, because without Hamas, Palestinians would all be dead by now. Its like saying “I support having meat, but not the killing of animals”. And why are you pro Israel? They want to do genocide. If the Israeli people are innocent of their countries crimes, they will overthrow the government.

      • ObiWon_KanBloMi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        Nah man. Hard disagree with you there.

        There’s no way you can kidnap, behead, rape and kill innocents or attack a music festival and call yourself the good guy. If you do, then you’ve got a fucked up moral compass.

        I don’t like the shit that Israel has done to the Palestinians either, but Hamas is a terrorist organization only using the Palestinians suffering as a weapon of influence for their abominable beliefs.

        They don’t give a shit about Palestinians. They care about power and killing Jews.

        The world isn’t as black and white as you make it out two be.

      • PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        A bunch of 20 year olds raving in the desert are not “the oppressors.”

        You are just stating your opinion.

        The real fascists are netanyahu and his ilk.

      • SCB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Without Hamas, Palestinians would have their own country lol

        Hamas is literally the only reason they do not. Hamas only exists because Israel was finally close to talking Abbas into a two state solution, which he had previously always denied.

        How do you not know this, at this point?

      • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        If the Israeli people are innocent of their countries crimes, they will overthrow the government.

        It never, ever works that way. Seriously, name one time when a government was overthrown by its own citizens for committing atrocities against foreigners.

          • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I don’t believe in setting bars people are demonstrably unable to reach. You’re basically asking people to start a civil war to protect strangers they’ll never meet, knowing the outcome of such a war is far from certain. Even if you win, the damage to your country could be catastrophic, and the odds of ending up with new leaders who are at least as bad as the old ones are pretty high.

            • Thief_of_Crows@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Yes, you should start a civil war to prevent your country doing genocide. Because the alternative is genocide. What exactly is complicated about this?

              • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                You’re not listening to what I’m saying.

                Also, why are you on the internet and not out overthrowing a genocidal government right now? Shame on you!

                • Thief_of_Crows@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I am listening to what you’re saying, you’re making excuses for Americans who don’t care enough to stop a genocide happening on their dime.

                  What do you think the most effective way is for an American to try to prevent this genocide? Your whataboutism isn’t wholly wrong, but I don’t know what I’m supposed to do beyond writing to my senators demanding that they kill the funding. So, what is your answer?

    • Onfire@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      You think Hamas won’t be in power unless majority of people supports it? They celebrated when Hamas murder those citizens.

  • SpiralSong@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    55
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    1 year ago

    Biden “And definitely don’t occupy 5 different countrys at the same time. Some of them for over 20 years. Come on man!”

  • inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    42
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Yeah, what will he or the Democrats do when Israel does occupy Gaza?

    Continue to provide unequivocal support and money to Israel?

    It’s not like they’ll do anything else like officially recognize Israel has been acting as a apartheid state causing mass human suffering which in turn grew more mass suffering and conflict.

    • banneryear1868@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Obama picked Biden for VP because he was a darling of the Israel lobby, who didn’t particularly like Obama. Anyone who’s satisfied by this sort of lip service from Biden were just looking for any reason to absolve the administration to serve a partisan political alignment.

    • Reality Suit@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think it would be the ultimate show of force if the U.S. gives aid to Israel, tells Israel to not go any further, and when they do, the U.S. obliterates their military. “We helped you and you still lost.” I just wish the innocent wouldn’t get killed. The innocent and vulnerable are always the ones who suffer. Fuck war.

  • Copernican@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    “I think it’d be a big mistake,” Mr. Biden told “60 Minutes” on CBS in a conversation taped on Thursday and aired on Sunday night. “Look, what happened in Gaza, in my view, is Hamas and the extreme elements of Hamas don’t represent all the Palestinian people. And I think that it would be a mistake for Israel to occupy Gaza again.” But “taking out the extremists” there, he added, “is a necessary requirement.”

    I’m not sure how anyone is taking this as a controversial take. Logistically, practically, and the urgent bloodthirst for revenge make this fucking hard to do. But this seems to me to be a pretty even keeled non polarizing take on a complex situation where there is justification for military action against a terrorist group, and that military action must be measured against the safety and needs of a civilian population.

  • can@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    1 year ago

    But he said he was convinced that “the Israelis are going to do everything in their power to avoid the killing of innocent civilians.”

    • Scrof@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      33
      ·
      1 year ago

      It certainly does more than Hama’s ever did. I like how people conveniently forget that not only operating a military HQ bunker under a hospital is a warcrime in and of itself, it also makes it a legitimate war target.

      • ???@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I wrote this long ass comment for another person but I want to put it here too. Hamas having bunkers in a densely populated area under the city is not a “war crime”. The whole thing with Hamas using human shields by setting up camp inside Gaza is BS.

        What I mean to say is that when people say “human shields”, they mean when civilians are forced into crossfire to protect the enemy troops. However, there exists the notion of “proximity shielding”.

        If you check the Wikipedia page for human shields:

        Authors Neve Gordon and Nicola Perugini, elaborating on their book, Human Shields: A History of People in the Line of Fire, discuss “proximate shields”, humans as shields merely due to proximity to belligerents and assert that this type has become “by far the most prominent type of shield in contemporary discourse”. They say that the proximate shielding accusation has been used by States to cover-up war crimes against civilian populations and that human rights organizations frequently fail to question this charge which they claim is being improperly used to justify civilian deaths.[7]

        There are several pieces that discuss this idea, but here are some.

        In this analysis piece of proximity shielding, we read:

        Our research suggests that human rights and humanitarian organizations have been complicit with this framing exercise and that it is urgent to have a frank conversation about human shields and the legal and political implications of the human shielding accusation. Both in our book and in several academic articles, we have shown that hi-tech States spend considerable resources on media campaigns and mobilize legal and military expertise to justify their use of lethal violence in cities where civilians are trapped.[ii] We describe how human shields, and particularly the charge of proximate shielding, are being widely used by States and their militaries to justify civilian deaths in asymmetric conflicts, and how it has become a major tool in what we have called the ‘erosion’ of the civilian. **

        If you turn your eyes back to the wiki page I first linked under the section on Israel and Palestine:

        Israel has used the charge, in what has been termed its ‘infowar’ on social media,[56] to explain the high ratio of civilian vs military casualties in its conflict with Gaza. In Operation Cast Lead 100 Gazans died for every Israeli, and the civilian ratio was 400 Gazans to 1 Israeli. Israeli spokesmen explained the difference by alleging that Hamas used civilians as shields. It has been argued that no evidence has come to light proving these claims.[57][58][59][60] In September 2004, Justice Aharon Barak presiding over the Israeli Supreme Court, issued a demand that the IDF desist from the practice of using Palestinians as human shields, and in October outlawed the procedure.[61] The independent human rights NGOs B’tselem and Amnesty International have stated that ample evidence exists in conflicts after that date that Israel has employed Palestinians as human shields. According to B’tselem, the practice goes back to 1967.[55][61]

        Finally, this article discusses the politics surrounding the idea of human shields

        By these means, entire populations and vast cities are reduced to war space. Prevailing hierarchies of humanity ensure that some places and some people are far more likely to find themselves expendable through the twisted logics and framings of the human shield.

        I hope this makes my point clear but basically: Israel is using proximity shielding (aka accusing Hamas of using civilians as human shields) to justify ethnic cleansing of Palestinians, and has itself had to outlaw the use of Palestinians as human shields because it was a normal part of Israeli military operations and totally allowed until all the human rights groups finally succeeded in outlawing it, and yet Israel still sometimes uses it.

      • Orbituary@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        And yet nobody has ever shown pictures or evidence that they do that. We hear about it constantly, but not one photo to back it up in a world of pocket cameras.

        Hamas are a fucking blight, but I’m tired of the same god damned excuses for Israel’s bad behavior. Fuck the IDF. Fuck Hamas. Fuck the whole lot assholes who put innocents in danger.

        Civilians, Israeli or Palestinian, should not be pawns. The one immutable fact is, only one side here has any real power.

      • dustyData@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        operating a military HQ bunker under a hospital is a warcrime in and of itself, it also makes it a legitimate war target.

        Even if this were true, by International Humanitarian Law it does not make it a legitimate war target. One side committing war crimes is never carte blanche for the opposing side to also commit war crimes.

        An example, just because Russian soldiers raped little kids in Bucha does not magically allow the Ukrainians to bomb hospital or to execute non-combatants. IHL intents explicitly to avoid tit for tat. Remember that the Russians also justify bombing hospitals and civilian residential buildings by accusing Ukrainians of using them as human shields.

      • tocopherol@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Israeli bombing leveled entire villages in Gaza and the West Bank on the first night after the attack, over 300 children were killed in just that night. They’ve destroyed numerous apartment blocks, hospitals, schools with airstrikes. They struck a convoy of refugees on a road specifically designated as a safe route for evacuation, killing 70 people in one strike, mostly women and children.

      • Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s funny how the IDF just classifies hospitals, apartments, UN camps, and schools as military targets and you don’t ask any questions. Just how many HQs does Hamas have?

      • NoneOfUrBusiness@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        It certainly does more than Hama’s ever did.

        Normally? Yeah I guess.

        Now? No way. People have been bombed while evacuating to supposed safe locations or along safe routes. Like many times.

      • UPGRAYEDD@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Its crazy to me the amount of support HAMAS is getting by random people on the internet.

        Yes, Isreal has done terrible things, but you have to compare it to what their enemies are doing and would do in their place. HAMAS attacked civilians on purpose, executed babies and elderly. Kidnaped, tortured, and raped. Desicrated bodies, dragging them behind vehicles while cheering. Went door to door executing entire villages.

        If roles were reversed, HAMAS would flatten the gaza strip. They wouldn’t give two thoughts about civilians.

        • Kedly@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          Or maybe we’re capable of condemning both! “You have to compare it to what their enemies are doing” hints that you arent. Isreal on the state and military levels is abhorrent shit, AND so is Hamas. One of them being garbage monsters doesnt stop the other one from being

        • tocopherol@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Israeli bombing leveled entire villages in Gaza and the West Bank on the first night after the attack, over 300 children were killed in just that night. They’ve destroyed numerous apartment blocks, hospitals, schools with airstrikes. They struck a convoy of refugees on a road specifically designated as a safe route for evacuation, killing 70 people in one strike, mostly women and children.

          It doesn’t matter what occurred before this, to point out the atrocities still on-going doesn’t mean you are a supporter of Hamas, and within Palestine there are several militant and other political groups. To support Palestine doesn’t mean you support Hamas or terrorism.

  • DreBeast@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    The US is sending mix signals. Biden condemns Hamas, calls them terrorists, and funds the iron dome. Of course Israel thinks they have carte blanche in the region. Surrounded by hostile nations, what other nations in the world acts as aggressive as Israel. They do it because they know they have the full backing of the US. The question is will we live in a world without any Palestinians in the middle east soon - coz that’s where we’re headed.

    Israel misspelled their defense system. Should be called the irony dome.

    • Dubito_Cogito@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      I agree with you. But I’d like to add this. I live in Israel at the moment, I’m not Israeli but I moved here for my job. I live in a pretty safe area, but we still had rockets coming from Gaza and from up north Hezbolla. They were explicitly targeting civilian areas. But iron Dome and the other system, David something intercepted it. Perspective on life changes when you see a flying missile heading your way only to get intercepted by these systems. The area where I live is full of Arabs, Jews, immigrant from Eastern Europe etc. and had several pro-palastine rallies in the past couple of days, and I stand with them. Also, There have been at least 5 to 6 Hamas strikes every hour since last week, they are targeting everywhere around Israel and iron Dome is on full protection.

      I just wanted to add, I don’t know what for…

      • Shyfer@ttrpg.network
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I imagine your perspective also changes if the missiles were landing and killing people, innocent civilians all around you, your house, hospitals, etc. That’s what it’s like for the people in Gaza. It also looks pretty suspicious when there’s lots of immigrants in Israel and mostly Palestinians in a separate cordoned off area (kinda like an apartheid state).

      • phillaholic@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Thank you for adding it. It boils down to regular people being hurt, and as an outsider I feel helpless because there doesn’t seem to be a good solution, just less bad ones.

    • banneryear1868@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Now that it’s been a week since Hamas attacked, there’s all these stories coming out about how the IDF didn’t even respond to the attack for an hour, and how many friendly fire incidents keep happening, and how incompetent the ground troops are in general. The certainty in their military might is completely gone and now there’s no telling what could happen. Western allies have basically given them carte blanch approval for genocide and now some of them aren’t so certain.