“We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented” is a quote by Elie Wiesel from his 1986 Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech.
At my university the police literally threaten anyone who tries to be pro Palestine… every Jewish group is pro zionist
Centrist opinions be like Six million Western European Jews were killed in the holocaust so millions of Eastern European and American Jews, who were supported by the Nazi’s, deserve to kill any middle easterner that stands against the formation of their own imperialist state
If you don’t support indigenous resistance to occupation, you’re on the side of the occupation. There is no center.
Lets see your opinion on Uyghurs and Ukraine.
Pro Ukraine Pro Uyghur Pro Palestine Pro Kurd
Based af
if I also support Armenia as a Turk do I become even more based?
Please stop I can only be so turned on.
Or the US
When one side is committing genocide and the other side wants no genocide, you don’t pick the middle and support half-genocide.
More accurate would be “Committing genocide” and “Wants to commit genocide but doesn’t have the guns”, with the majority of the actual population on both sides (rather than the politicians and emboldened extremists) just wanting to not be genocided. Personally I’m picking the “chuck the politicians in a hole and let the people live” option. No idea what the ideal solution looks like but I feel like getting the fascists and religious extremists on both sides out of the equation would be a good starting point
Just have to love that you get downvoted for this. Delusional people here as if Hamas would not murder them all. What they had in their constitution does not matter, because they are ignorant.
The difference is the US isn’t sending billions of dollars in bombs to hamas
How many 100s of millions went into Gaza as aid every year? How much of that was actually funneled into other things? Also, aid to Gaza:
The United States has been a major donor, providing more than $5.2 billion through USAID since 1994.
Whoops!
They sent 20 billion in weapons just in August and you are talking about a quarter of that in aid over 30 years?
They said bombs, not aid. Also, Israel blocks the aid you’re talking about, kills aid workers, and massacres civilians seeking what little gets through.
So we pay to bomb them and to feed them…
You’d have to ask Netanyahu, he funded Hamas.
Hamas isn’t Palestine and Zionists aren’t Israel.
Yep. Also calling it the“Israel-Hamas war” is propaganda. Makes it sound like the only people dying in Palestine are Hamas soldiers, which is obviously nowhere near the truth.
Centrists are literally just anti-opinion and spineless.
Free Palestine.
Yep we totally need a middle ground between settler colonialism, genocide and apartheid and not that. There is obviously no right side maybe we can have a little settler colonialism, gentler apartheid and a gentler genocide.
What I’ve seen plenty of those alleged “centrists” doing is the opposite - removing the nuance. For example, conflating the four sides (Israelis, Palestinians, State of Israel, Hamas) into two.
How is “Everyone needs to end the violence and seek an ideal solution for everyone involved.” a nuanced position? That’s what I expect every person to believe when they first start thinking of Israel and Palestine.
How is “Everyone needs to end the violence and seek an ideal solution for everyone involved.” a nuanced position?
It’s not nuanced, just naive. You’ll never get Israel as it currently exists to willingly acknowledge that Palestinians deserve human rights, which is exactly why the non-violent option already failed multiple times.
Same thing the other way around. Both sides hate each other.
Israeli peace initiatives from after 1948 failed? Because I know of literally zero of those.
It’s not true the other way around and has never been, that’s again more propaganda.
Hamas proposed a full prisoner swap as early as Oct 8th, and agreed to the US proposed UN Permanent Ceasefire Resolution. Additionally, Hamas has already agreed to no longer govern the Gaza Strip, as long as Palestinians receive liberation and a unified government can take place.
Gaza has never stopped being under Israeli occupation since 1967. Israel has always been the obstacle for peace, and has been the one preventing a ceasefire.
De-development via the Gaza Occupation
Between July 1971 and February 1972, Sharon enjoyed considerable success. During this time, the entire Strip (apart from the Rafah area) was sealed off by a ring of security fences 53 miles in length, with few entrypoints. Today, their effects live on: there are only three points of entry to Gaza—Erez, Nahal Oz, and Rafah.
Perhaps the most dramatic and painful aspect of Sharon’s campaign was the widening of roads in the refugee camps to facilitate military access. Israel built nearly 200 miles of security roads and destroyed thousands of refugee dwellings as part of the widening process.’ In August 1971, for example, the Israeli army destroyed 7,729 rooms (approximately 2,000 houses) in three vola- tile camps, displacing 15,855 refugees: 7,217 from Jabalya, 4,836 from Shati, and 3,802 from Rafah.
- Page 105
Through 1993 Israel imposed a one-way system of tariffs and duties on the importation of goods through its borders; leaving Israel for Gaza, however, no tariffs or other regulations applied. Thus, for Israeli exports to Gaza, the Strip was treated as part of Israel; but for Gazan exports to Israel, the Strip was treated as a foreign entity subject to various “non-tariff barriers.” This placed Israel at a distinct advantage for trading and limited Gaza’s access to Israeli and foreign markets. Gazans had no recourse against such policies, being totally unable to protect themselves with tariffs or exchange rate controls. Thus, they had to pay more for highly protected Israeli products than they would if they had some control over their own economy. Such policies deprived the occupied territories of significant customs revenue, estimated at $118-$176 million in 1986.
- page 240
In a report released in May 2015, the World Bank revealed that as a result of Israel’s blockade and OPE, Gaza’s manufacturing sector shrank by as much as 60% over eight years while real per capita income is 31 percent lower than it was 20 years ago. The report also stated that the blockade alone is responsible for a 50% decrease in Gaza’s GDP since 2007. Furthermore, OPE (combined with the tunnel closure) exacerbated an already grave situation by reducing Gaza’s economy by an additional $460 million.
-
Page 402
-
The Gaza Strip: The Political Economy of De-Development - Third Edition by Sara M. Roy
Blockade, including Aid
Hamas began twenty years into the occupation during the first Intifada, with the goal of ending the occupation. Collective punishment has been a deliberate Israeli tactic for decades with the Dahiya doctrine. Violence such as suicide bombings and rockets escalated in response to Israeli enforcement of the occupation and apartheid.
After the ‘disengagement’ in 2007, this turned into a full blockade; where Israel has had control over the airspace, borders, and sea. Under the guise of ‘dual-use’ Israel has restricted food, allocating a minimum supply leading to over half of Gaza being food insecure; construction materials, medical supplies, and other basic necessities have also been restricted.
The blockade and Israel’s repeated military offensives have had a heavy toll on Gaza’s essential infrastructure and further debilitated its health system and economy, leaving the area in a state of perpetual humanitarian crisis. Indeed, Israel’s collective punishment of Gaza’s civilian population, the majority of whom are children, has created conditions inimical to human life due to shortages of housing, potable water and electricity, and lack of access to essential medicines and medical care, food, educational equipment and building materials.
- Amnesty International Report pg 26-27
Peace Process and Solution
Both Hamas and Fatah have agreed to a Two-State solution based on the 1967 borders for decades. Oslo and Camp David were used by Israel to continue settlements in the West Bank and maintain an Apartheid, while preventing any actual Two-State solution
How Avi Shlaim moved from two-state solution to one-state solution
‘One state is a game changer’: A conversation with Ilan Pappe
Human Shields
Hamas:
Intentionally utilizing the presence of civilians or other protected persons to render certain areas immune from military attack is prohibited under international law. Amnesty International was not able to establish whether or not the fighters’ presence in the camps was intended to shield themselves from military attacks. However, under international humanitarian law, even if one party uses “human shields”, or is otherwise unlawfully endangering civilians, this does not absolve the opposing party from complying with its obligations to distinguish between military objectives and civilians or civilian objects, to refrain from carrying out indiscriminate or disproportionate attacks, and to take all feasible precautions to spare civilians and civilian objects.
Israel:
Additionally, there is extensive independent verification of Israel using Palestinians as Human Shields:
Deliberate Attacks on Civilians
Israel deliberately targets civilian areas. From in general with the Dahiya Doctrine to multiple systems deployed in Gaza to do so:
-
The Dahiya Doctrine & Israel’s Use of Disproportionate Force
-
‘A mass assassination factory’: Inside Israel’s calculated bombing of Gaza
Israel also targets Israeli Soldiers and Civilians to prevent them being leveraged as hostages, known as the Hannibal Directive. Which was also used on Oct 7th.
They had it in their constitution and you want to tell me that is just propaganda. Holy cow. Here you go, in case you actually care.
That’s absolutely an important aspect to learn about, yeah. The 1988 Charter of Hamas, which while fucked up for wanting Sharia Law and belief in the antisemitic conspiracy theory of the Elder Protocols of Zion, does not call for the extermination of all Jewish People nor all Israelis.
Hamas wants an end to Israel as an Apartheid State, not an extermination of all Israelis. Under Ahmed Yassin in the 1990’s, truces were offered in exchange for Israeli to withdrawal from Gaza and the West Bank to the 1967 borders. The 2017 Charter explicitly accepts a Two-State Solution of the 1967 Borders. Check Article 7 and 13 of the 1988 Charter to see yourself, compare it to Article 20 and 24-26 in the revised charter.
Palestinians are not fighting back out of some inherent Antisemitism, they are fighting back for their livelyhood against ethnic cleansing. To Palestinians who have only ever known life under a violent oppressive supremacist Apartheid regime, Israel is synonymous with that existence. Destroying Israel refers to the end of the Settler Colonialist Regime, which includes the Apartheid and Occupations. And instead a Regime Change in Palestine that has equal rights for both Israelis and Palestinians. It does not refer to the ethnic cleansing of all Israelis, that kind of mentality of ‘Transfer’ is central to Zionism, not Anti-zionism.
Any kind of conflation of Judaism and Zionism needs to be called out, regardless of who says it. That includes any members of Hamas, any other resistance group, or any Israelis who conflate them, intentional or not.
It’s also important to recognize where this conflation is coming from. Israel intentionally does this conflation to deflect any criticism as simply antisemitism, which comes at the expense of a rise of genuine antisemitism as they then point to the actions of Israel as representing all Jewish people. Which is obviously untrue. When the IDF destroys your house and kills your family, and then says it’s in the name of all Jewish people, it becomes harder for those people to got their house destroyed to make that distinction between Judaism and Zionism. So it is equally important to condemn the conflation and understand the context behind it.
Because people aren’t interested in solutions. They really just want to talk about the genocidal colonialist imperialist western project. And then move on. With little consideration or forethought for either the Palestinians or the Jews - literally anyone living in the region.
Case example: Hasanabi fans cheering Hezbollah rockets hitting areas inside Israel. But because the rockets have incredibly low precision they were frequently hitting Arab quarters in Haifa and elsewhere.
To sum up: whenever you talk to anyone about me or ip first establish how much they actually understand about the conflict before continuing the conversation any further. My experience is that most people online are locked behind memes and virtue signaling while having absolutely no comprehension of what in actually going on there
The problem is, it very much feels like the “middle of the road” opinion on this issue is “both nations have the right to exist.”
Both sides are going to tell you that you are supporting genocide. And now you’re a centrist for thinking everyone is shit in the terrorist vs right wing government fight…but that’s enough about the IRA.
People have a right to exist and to self-determination, not nations. “Israel has a right to exist” is just a strawman argument.
Especially since the Israeli people already have self-determination and overwhelmingly support their government committing countless crimes against humanity to ensure that Palestinians never will.
“Imagine” if they wrote a song about this roughly 50 years ago.
Mockery is always an airtight defense for binary thinking on any issue.
They aren’t centrists, they’re just people who prefer to think for themselves.
Believe it or not, they actually see you as the idiots for not being open to using your brains instead of subscribing to someone else’s views
You’re right, I don’t have to think for myself to feel that murdering innocent people is wrong. Maybe if I thought about it a bit harder I’d find a way to justify it, like you have.
Removed by mod
Oh, sorry but someone else has already called me a bitch. I can’t believe you’re not open to using your brain instead of subscribing to someone else’s view. I prefer people who think for themselves.
Ironically enough, even the “think for themselves, it’s all nuanced” option often gets picked up from subscribing to someone else’s views, mostly because staying in the middle and considering all options sounds like the ‘smart thing to do’ even if there’s some deliberate ignorance of the facts to retain this position (like with the current Israel Palestine war).
It’s a very similar thing to those kids in school who’d hear the quote “I am the wisest man alive, for I know one thing, and that is that I know nothing”, then go around and immediately start telling everyone how they know nothing to try and appear very deep and smart.
Besides, there’s way less original thought in the world than you think - in order to actually properly research a subject and MAYBE come to a nuanced, informed, open-minded view, you’d have to do a ton of research, know all the history and little quirks, things that most people don’t have time or education to do especially for multiple important events going on at the same time.
Anyway sorry, I write too much
Damn, you sure showed me the light… Do you not realise how self-righteous this sounds?
I guess being against genocide is just being one of the sheeple.
I’m also against genocide. I don’t think advocating for brain use is self-righteous. We don’t have to agree on every minor point is what I’m saying
Edit: I’ve probably blocked any idiots that may have responded but the downvotes on this comment tell me everything. I’d rather talk to those that celebrate brain use.
Let me guess… “Oh so you think…” “How could there possibly be any nuance…” Etc. lol Stfu
The point is that you haven’t given any examples of what you mean at all, you’re just pointing at some vague nebulous ‘problems’ and ‘nuance’ without clarifying what these positions or minor disagreements could be.
Also, it’s very telling you’re doing ad hominem (especially ableist ones) attacks against at least some people who haven’t done the same to you.
Edit: The instance I’m on doesn’t have downvotes and either way I’m far more interested in debating/discussing points than attacking another’s character.
So believing israel shouldn’t be bombing the shit out of palestine and trying to cause their genocide isn’t thinking for myself?
As long as you don’t add nuance to that the mob won’t attack you. Even I agree with you, I mean that’s probably the safest opinion you can possibly have
I’m not sure what possibly reasonable ‘nuance’ there could be when one side is clearly the agressor and has all the power.
Believe it or not
I absolutely believe this.
You’re so close to understanding, I can tell
Yeah… pretty sure genocide is bad everywhere. You’re not going to spin this one, and walk away thinking iM sO SmArT. You’re like a fucking pigeon who knocks over all the pieces on a chess board, takes a shit, and then declares victory over your opponent.
p.s. My wife is a professor, pretty sure the Israel-Hamas war hasn’t come up once while she’s teaching.
What if I don’t want either side to win? Fuck I don’t want Hamas to win anything.
Open your mind a little, this isn’t fucking Star Wars
This isn’t about Hamas anymore. They are genociding an entire group of people (which is ironic considering the Jewish peoples history). The IDF routinely murders children, bombs hospital buildings, and parks for no reason, and then counts the dead as terrorists regardless of who they hit.
Stop reading propaganda pieces. Hamas is bad, nobody is saying that’s not true. But it’s fairly obvious that the Israeli leader doesn’t see Palestinians as people. He wants to anex the entire Gaza strip, always has.
What’s the first thing Israel did when Assad fell in Syria? Congratulate the Syrian people? Push for a democratic regime? Try to provide aid and build relationships with the people and new leaders?
No, they invaded the country and stole more territory for themselves.
Makes sense, doesn’t it? Who knows who will get to power next? And what they do with all the weapons? Better destroy them. That is essential best for everyone, including syrians that will not be killed with them in a potential civil war.
