Jump to content

Featured Replies

46 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

If Iran directly (not through Hamas or Hezbollah) attacks Israel...it's going to be a full scale war. I can't imagine the Israelis will hold back from responding, 

I can't imagine Iran is stupid enough to strike Israel directly. but this is the biggest risk. that's putting it mildly obviously.

 

  • Replies 8.6k
  • Views 173.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Most Popular Posts

  • I'm here, thanks VaBeach. I appreciate all the EMB members that support us in these days, I does matter. The members that support the other side… I'm speechless.  

  • Propaganda? Or hard truths terrorist sympathizers don't want to hear?

Posted Images

  • Author
2 hours ago, vikas83 said:

If Iran directly (not through Hamas or Hezbollah) attacks Israel...it's going to be a full scale war. I can't imagine the Israelis will hold back from responding, 

 

Yep, this is the nightmare scenario

1 hour ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

liberating the Palestinian people is at best a happy consequence of Israel's war. 

I don't believe it to be in any way a goal of Netanyahu.

this is a difficult war to approach from a moral standpoint, insofar as how much morality plays in to such things.

because on one side you have a state gov't that was put into power by a people almost 20 years ago - in local terms that's probably a generation given the living conditions - that is operating as a terrorist regime with no regard for the local population excepting how that population can be used as a propaganda tool against "the west" and Israel. this state gov't launched a surprise attack on civilians to kick this hornet's nest open, and has total culpability for everything that's ensued.

but on the other side you have a corrupt gov't headed by one of the most corrupt politicians of our time, who may well have not only welcomed this war but may have even devised the conditions under which Hamas was able to conduct the Oct 7th attacks, handing Netanyahu casus belli to do what he's long wanted to do: conduct a war in a manner that brutalizes Gaza, expands Israeli controlled territory (with settlements already in progress), and ensures that any possibility of a resolution (because that's not in his party's interest) is buried for another generation. 

this after a period of time where Gaza has spent decades getting the screws tightened on them, increasingly isolated, with very little effort from the Israeli government to mend relations. 

so neither of these state actors are "good guys". Hamas is absolutely a terrorist organization, and Israel has every right to seek and destroy with extreme prejudice. But Israel is also hardly blameless, and even if Hamas never was put into power the people of Gaza have legitimate grievances. 

I've largely stayed out of this thread because I cannot in good conscious support Israel without reservation - even as I firmly support them relative to Hamas & Gaza - in how they've conducted themselves at least in my lifetime, even as I recognize their right to exist AND their right to defend themselves against Hamas. 

and I'll go ahead and do a "I have black friends too" when I say that most of my Jewish friends broadly agree with me. (my closest friends are Ashkenazi Jews whose families escaped persecution following WWII, many of whom have taken advantage of the birthright trip) 

I'd say at least 50% of the people I deal with on a daily basis are Jewish -- half our company is Jewish as well. Those I know are no fans of Netanyahu and were against (i) the settlements in the West Bank and (ii) his government trying to become more authoritarian and limit the power of the courts. They'd all be happy to see him gone AFTER this is over. But they are all in agreement that the hostages (or more likely at this point, their corpses) must be returned and Hamas must be destroyed. If the hostages were returned tomorrow with a pledge that Hamas would be removed and Gaza would be put under a multi-national, regional security force (led by Arab neighbors like Saudi, Egypt, Jordan, etc.), they'd want the war over and Netanyahu out. 

The part none of them understand is why morons are calling for a cease fire without the return of the hostages and the dismantling of Hamas.

  • Author
2 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

The part none of them understand is why morons are calling for a cease fire without the return of the hostages and the dismantling of Hamas

the answer

2 hours ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

 

so neither of these state actors are "good guys". Hamas is absolutely a terrorist organization, and Israel has every right to seek and destroy with extreme prejudice. But Israel is also hardly blameless, and even if Hamas never was put into power the people of Gaza have legitimate grievances. 

 

When dealing with war trying to label anyone as "good guys" is childish.  Even when one side is the clear belligerent, when it's all said and done, the other side will have ended up having to do some horrible s*** out of necessity. 

12 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

I'd say at least 50% of the people I deal with on a daily basis are Jewish -- half our company is Jewish as well. Those I know are no fans of Netanyahu and were against (i) the settlements in the West Bank and (ii) his government trying to become more authoritarian and limit the power of the courts. They'd all be happy to see him gone AFTER this is over. But they are all in agreement that the hostages (or more likely at this point, their corpses) must be returned and Hamas must be destroyed. If the hostages were returned tomorrow with a pledge that Hamas would be removed and Gaza would be put under a multi-national, regional security force (led by Arab neighbors like Saudi, Egypt, Jordan, etc.), they'd want the war over and Netanyahu out. 

The part none of them understand is why morons are calling for a cease fire without the return of the hostages and the dismantling of Hamas.

Have you tried telling them about the Ottoman Empire?

22 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

*no fans of Netanyahu

*against the settlements in the West Bank

*against the government trying to become more authoritarian and limit the power of the courts

*the hostages must be returned

*Hamas must be destroyed

sorry for bullet-ing your post - but it's amazing how reasonable all these positions are - really for both ends of the political spectrum, yet...

34 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

I'd say at least 50% of the people I deal with on a daily basis are Jewish -- half our company is Jewish as well. Those I know are no fans of Netanyahu and were against (i) the settlements in the West Bank and (ii) his government trying to become more authoritarian and limit the power of the courts. They'd all be happy to see him gone AFTER this is over. But they are all in agreement that the hostages (or more likely at this point, their corpses) must be returned and Hamas must be destroyed. If the hostages were returned tomorrow with a pledge that Hamas would be removed and Gaza would be put under a multi-national, regional security force (led by Arab neighbors like Saudi, Egypt, Jordan, etc.), they'd want the war over and Netanyahu out. 

The part none of them understand is why morons are calling for a cease fire without the return of the hostages and the dismantling of Hamas.

Yeah I'd say that's about accurate. 

My Jewish friends find the whole thing conflicting in a lot of ways, but of course support Israel's efforts to crush Hamas out of existence.

24 minutes ago, paco said:

When dealing with war trying to label anyone as "good guys" is childish.  Even when one side is the clear belligerent, when it's all said and done, the other side will have ended up having to do some horrible s*** out of necessity. 

That's why I qualified it as "insofar as morality factors in"

For US support I do think we need to apply some kind of value system to when and who we support, and there has to be a moral component on some level. But it can't be at the expense of the greater good. 

If Israeli-Palestinian relations were simple we wouldn't be here.

1 minute ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

That's why I qualified it as "insofar as morality factors in"

For US support I do think we need to apply some kind of value system to when and who we support, and there has to be a moral component on some level. But it can't be at the expense of the greater good. 

If Israeli-Palestinian relations were simple we wouldn't be here.

To be clear, I wasn’t saying your POV is childish. I’m referring to the ones using labels like "good guys”

 

Deport this pig

 

1 hour ago, lynched1 said:

Deport this pig

 

How do you know that she isn't an American citizen?

2 hours ago, Procus said:

How do you know that she isn't an American citizen?

How do you that would matter to me? 

12 hours ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

liberating the Palestinian people is at best a happy consequence of Israel's war.

The "Palestinian people" have been rejected throughout the Arab world.  Other Arab countries won't take them in because they know they'd be trouble.  Lebanon used to be a primarly Maronite Christian nation and a vibrant place to live until Jordan expelled many of its Palestinians there during Black September.  Kuwait doesn't want them after the Palestinians cheered on Iraq during the first Gulf War.  Egypt won't open Gaza's southern border to let them escape to the Sinai.

For that matter, there would be no "Palestinian people" without Zionism.  When the Ottomons ruled the area, it was bleak and desolate.  When the zionist movement started in the latter half of the 19th century, Jews started moving there and building up the area.  Arabs, primarily from Egypt and Syria relocated to the area after the Jews came looking for work and a better way of life.

Gaza is chock full of no good mf'ers - both civilians and members of paramilitary organizations like Hamas and Islamic Jihad.  I do feel sorry for the good people living there, but to liberate them, you have to do more than destroy Hamas - you need to keep the unaffiliated troublemakers over there in check as well.

1 hour ago, lynched1 said:

How do you that would matter to me? 

Wut?

6 hours ago, paco said:

Wut?

It starts to make sense when you're half a case deep. 

7 hours ago, paco said:

Wut?

The word to insert was "know".

I was watching Methany get harassed by the man on OnPatrolLive and posting. 

Sue me.

23 hours ago, vikas83 said:

Obviously, the primary goal is for Israeli security. But destroying Hamas would liberate the Palestinian people from an oppressive regime, so it's a nice secondary benefit.

Of course, most of the Palestinians don't want to get rid of Hamas and be liberated, which is an added complication we apparently can't talk about...

 

22 hours ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

liberating the Palestinian people is at best a happy consequence of Israel's war. 

"Liberating the Palestinian people from Hamas" has to be one of the dumbest takes I've heard on here. Imagine telling these people that they've been "liberated":

image.png.a97f95e6abb5160e5db7622fe04d83e9.png

Pro-Palestinian activist took his message of peace to Australia and took 5 innocents, including a baby, with him.

  • Author
14 minutes ago, The_Omega said:

Pro-Palestinian activist took his message of peace to Australia and took 5 innocents, including a baby, with him.

Where you seeing that?

13 minutes ago, DrPhilly said:

Where you seeing that?

Probably bit chute

1 hour ago, Kz! said:

 

"Liberating the Palestinian people from Hamas" has to be one of the dumbest takes I've heard on here. Imagine telling these people that they've been "liberated":

image.png.a97f95e6abb5160e5db7622fe04d83e9.png

The same way Trump is gonna free us from Biden.  B-)
 

Is it really surprising John Snow and Vikas are using George W. Bush’s language though?  It’s not to me.  Neo-cons are gonna neo-con.  Right out of the Richard Perle playbook

I consider myself more of a neo-liberal if anything.

I'm not a hawk. But I'm also not so naive as to believe war is never the solution.

War should be avoided wherever possible, and I was against the Iraq invasion from the beginning.

Israel & Gaza have a long and complicated past. You can selectively edit history, pick slices of history, or read some revisionist history of the last 100 years in the region and find a way to argue that either side is most at fault. But at the end of the day it's Israel that has been attacked since its inception, and it's Israel that Palestinians and other Arabs want "wiped off the map". 

Without US support there would have been a second Holocaust in Israel. 

stop making sense

Create an account or sign in to comment