USA Politics (redux)

[BasilValentine]

there are other much worse things nobody seems to care about. You think Eno and Waters are on it because of U.S. aid? Maybe. I'm not saying they shouldn't advocate for their cause. Everyone can do what they want. I'm just curious why this gets so much air. If the U.S. cut aid do you think Eno and Waters and "the squad" would cool their jets? I'm skeptical.

The current kerfuffle is purely political. A corrupt politician appealing to his right-wing base by evicting Palestinians and harassing them in their places of worship. It's the usual symbiotic relationship between extremists on both sides. Said corrupt politician gives his yahoos what they want in violation of international law to force a response from Hamas, thereby making himself seem indispensable to Israelis and Hamas temporarily seem good for something to the Palestinians. The same kind of symbiotic relationship U.S. politicians maintained for decades with Castro.     

[drogulus]

The current kerfuffle is purely political. A corrupt politician appealing to his right-wing base by evicting Palestinians and harassing them in their places of worship. It's the usual symbiotic relationship between extremists on both sides. Said corrupt politician gives his yahoos what they want in violation of international law to force a response from Hamas, thereby making himself seem indispensable to Israelis and Hamas temporarily seem good for something to the Palestinians. The same kind of symbiotic relationship U.S. politicians maintained for decades with Castro.     

     Hamas is a beautiful enemy to have.

     

[milk]

Ha!!  That certainly sounds like Whataboutism.

As for there not be anything "necessarily wrong" with criticizing Israel, there is something very right about it.  And as for Israel's supporters having rejoinders, their favorite and classic still seems to be that criticism  of Israel is ipso facto anti-Semitic which is a logical fallacy.

no, it's not. I didn't deflect any criticism. Let people criticize.  It's merely a question: why do they care so much about this one issue over all others, especially when there are much worse conflicts in terms of death and human rights. I am not saying they shouldn't criticize or care. I'm just curious what makes so many prominent people focused on one thing. It's a simple question. I accept the partial answer that it has to do with U.S. aid. That's AN answer.

[milk]

The current kerfuffle is purely political. A corrupt politician appealing to his right-wing base by evicting Palestinians and harassing them in their places of worship. It's the usual symbiotic relationship between extremists on both sides. Said corrupt politician gives his yahoos what they want in violation of international law to force a response from Hamas, thereby making himself seem indispensable to Israelis and Hamas temporarily seem good for something to the Palestinians. The same kind of symbiotic relationship U.S. politicians maintained for decades with Castro.     

This sounds about right. The Palestinians seem to win on sympathy and increased attention to their plight, Hamas justifies its existence, and Israel gets rid of all those rockets and tunnels. Why does Hamas waste their time and moral capital on the rockets? I guess it's partially cynical since the death that comes back brings martyrdom and attention?

[drogulus]

     Why do I care about Israel and Palestinians more than I care about Boko Haram or Tigray? Or, how come I care so much about Nigeria when there are so many people starving in StarvingPeopleLand? What's wrong with my priorities? This mode of argument should die.

[Fëanor]

no, it's not. I didn't deflect any criticism. Let people criticize.  It's merely a question: why do they care so much about this one issue over all others, especially when there are much worse conflicts in terms of death and human rights. I am not saying they shouldn't criticize or care. I'm just curious what makes so many prominent people focused on one thing. It's a simple question. I accept the partial answer that it has to do with U.S. aid. That's AN answer.

I suppose another part of the answer is that, since inception, Israel has claimed a moral high ground it has never deserved and the USA has uncritically supported it on that basis.

[SimonNZ]

no, it's not. I didn't deflect any criticism. Let people criticize.  It's merely a question: why do they care so much about this one issue over all others, especially when there are much worse conflicts in terms of death and human rights. I am not saying they shouldn't criticize or care. I'm just curious what makes so many prominent people focused on one thing. It's a simple question. I accept the partial answer that it has to do with U.S. aid. That's AN answer.

The people you're grouping together are not interested in just this one issue alone.

I would imagine many have written or made public statements and the arguments in those might go some way to answering your questions.

[BasilValentine]

This sounds about right. The Palestinians seem to win on sympathy and increased attention to their plight, Hamas justifies its existence, and Israel gets rid of all those rockets and tunnels. Why does Hamas waste their time and moral capital on the rockets? I guess it's partially cynical since the death that comes back brings martyrdom and attention?

Perhaps you aren't aware that tunnel systems are also maintained to allow the flow of commerce that Israel strangles? As for the rockets, it's all they have and resisting an armed occupation is the right of any oppressed people.   

[Daverz]

no, it's not. I didn't deflect any criticism. Let people criticize.  It's merely a question: why do they care so much about this one issue over all others, especially when there are much worse conflicts in terms of death and human rights.

But it's not a serious question. 

[milk]

The people you're grouping together are not interested in just this one issue alone.

I would imagine many have written or made public statements and the arguments in those might go some way to answering your questions.

I don't think so. I really doubt it. But I haven't been through all Brian Eno's tweets. Maybe he's big into Sri Lanka.

Perhaps you aren't aware that tunnel systems are also maintained to allow the flow of commerce that Israel strangles? As for the rockets, it's all they have and resisting an armed occupation is the right of any oppressed people.   

I think firing rockets into cities has the same moral problem from whichever side they're shot. Plus, there's a doctrine in just war that can be applied about winnable strategies. The Hamas rockets don't accomplish any objective other than causing more death and martyrdom. Unless you believe killing yourselves and your enemy is justified in order to create more media. The Israeli actions can be seen to transgress different rules about proportionality and just cause. That's if you care about Just War Theory which I admit is quite flawed.

     Why do I care about Israel and Palestinians more than I care about Boko Haram or Tigray? Or, how come I care so much about Nigeria when there are so many people starving in StarvingPeopleLand? What's wrong with my priorities? This mode of argument should die.

no. I made no such argument. You're free to care about any issue you want. There's nothing wrong with caring about the atrocities in Israel. I'm just curious why this conflict gets the attention. I don't see why anyone should be defensive about the question.

[milk]

I suppose another part of the answer is that, since inception, Israel has claimed a moral high ground it has never deserved and the USA has uncritically supported it on that basis.

What's the moral high ground?

[milk]

But it's not a serious question.

I don't understand what you mean. I'm asking it seriously.

[JBS]

Perhaps you aren't aware that tunnel systems are also maintained to allow the flow of commerce that Israel strangles? As for the rockets, it's all they have and resisting an armed occupation is the right of any oppressed people.

That last sentence is a bit of moral depravity. Sadly it is typical of the Left. No sensible definition of resisting includes killing civilians going about their normal lives.  No sane morality says that Hamas firing those rockets was justified.
If you think otherwise, you're saying it's okay for Hamas to kill Israelis and kill Jews worldwide.

You are saying that since I am a Jew it's okay if someone murders me in the name of Palestine.  That's what your statement about the right of resistance actually means.

You want a Free Palestine? Hamas oppresses the people of Gaza and has killed more Palestinians in the last 17 years than Israel. You should be demanding the world force Hamas out of Gaza. You should be demanding the PA leadership be replaced with people who are not kleptocrats. You should be demanding Assad be held to account for killing over 4000 Palestinians in Syria and destroying Yarmouk, one of the largest Palestinians camps in the world. You should be demanding Lebanon vaccinate the Palestinians who now live there (currently Lebanon refuses to do so), and allow Palestinians the right to work in jobs of their choice ( currently it does not).

But if you are like the average Leftist you have never heard any of the things I referred to. You just pretend that Hamas's goal of killing the 7 million Jews is a project worthy of your support.  And then you wonder why Jews decide the Left is irredeemably antisemitic. Last week a crowd marched through London shouting the Khaibyr chant, the Islamic version of "Kill the Jews". And all Jeremy Corbyn could do is complain they were "undermining" the Palestinian cause, and add a platitude about how antisemitism is bad just like all other forms of racism. Truth to tell that's better than a lot of other Leftists.

Feanor is repeating a trope that became antisemitic canon with the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, and which the British Left channels under the guise of control by the Board of Deputies. But at least he doesn't defend killing Jews as a legitimate enterprise.  Basil isn't criticizing Israel. He's pretending we should have no objection to Hamas's efforts to kill Jews.

All week long when I go online I've seen antisemitism in its most basic forms. GMG is supposed to be a haven. Now I come here and find a member defending the idea it's okay to murder me.  Sorry if this post seems a bit over the top. It'd actually restrained.

[Daverz]

Feanor is repeating a trope that became antisemitic canon with the Protocols of the Elders of Zion,

WTF, are you having some kind of vaccine reaction?  There's nothing like that in Feanor's posts.  It looks to me like you just wanted to throw a rhetorical grenade in the room.

[drogulus]

Perhaps you aren't aware that tunnel systems are also maintained to allow the flow of commerce that Israel strangles? As for the rockets, it's all they have and resisting an armed occupation is the right of any oppressed people.   

     Hamas has no rights and recognizes none. The tragedy is that Gazans are held hostage by these "freedom fighters". That's why they are such a gift to Bibi and the other Israeli megacynics who exploit the struggle for their own ends. Perhaps the last few years of Trumpist border sadism casts a different light on Israeli actions.

You are saying that since I am a Jew it's okay if someone murders me in the name of Palestine.

     This doesn't work. Israeli policy would not be any less abhorrent if they were super-Christians. I don't care any more that Bibi is a Jew than I care that some random Hamas terrorist is a Muslim. Hitler was an Austrian, I'm a Texan, though hardly a practicing one, the Myanmar junta is Buddhist. Should I be sensitive about these affiliations so that I neglect to point out the inhumanity of policies in these jurisdictions?

[Fëanor]

What's the moral high ground?

Righteous behavior entitles one to claim a moral high ground;  hypocritical self-righteousness does not.

[Fëanor]

...
All week long when I go online I've seen antisemitism in its most basic forms. GMG is supposed to be a haven. Now I come here and find a member defending the idea it's okay to murder me.  Sorry if this post seems a bit over the top. It'd actually restrained.

Repeating that criticizing the policies of the government of Israel is anti-Semitic doesn't make it so.  Also, insisting that criticizing those policies is justifying the murder Israeli Jews doesn't make that so either.

Palestinian response to the creation of Israel and Israeli policies and action since has be fraught with stupidity and self-abuse.  True, but that does not justify Israeli oppression of Palestinians and its relentless, decades long drive to misappropriated ever more Palestinian territory.

[milk]

Righteous behavior entitles one to claim a moral high ground;  hypocritical self-righteousness does not.

I'm not following you. You are saying that Israelis deserve some special attention for something in particular. I don't know what it is. Whatever human rights transgressions occur should be condemned, wherever they are. But the claim that Israel is special sounds suspicious to me. I can't see how Israel is any better or worse than, say, Sri Lanka, unless you're going on body counts, in which case Sri Lanka seems much worse (although I'm not an expert on this stuff and I could be wrong). But still, I'm not saying Israel has its hands clean. I also don't particularly agree with the BLM delusional narrative that sees Israelis as white racist colonizers. 

[drogulus]

     The moral prestige of all the settler countries has dropped. Israel is facing the same reckoning as other ones have. Sooner or later the local version of "Manifest Destiny" is scrutinized.

I also don't particularly agree with the BLM delusional narrative that sees Israelis as white racist colonizers. 

     Are they an exception? Perhaps colonizers don't all behave the same. People don't always lose their homes by massacre. Sometimes it's done by law or treaty. And as I recall Native Americans engaged in massacres of settlers. The case of Israel is different, like all the other settler country cases.

[milk]

     The moral prestige of all the settler countries has dropped. Israel is facing the same reckoning as other ones have. Sooner or later the local version of "Manifest Destiny" is scrutinized.

     Are they an exception? Perhaps colonizers don't all behave the same. People don't always lose their homes by massacre. Sometimes it's done by law or treaty. And as I recall Native Americans engaged in massacres of settlers. The case of Israel is different, like all the other settler country cases.

I don't see "race" coming into it. And, obviously, half of Israel are probably a similar ethnicity to the arabs in the area and in every country around there that kicked them out. And everything should be scrutinized. I agree. I've no idea if it's possible to sort out that mess or to bring in some kind of acceptable fair agreement. As in Syria, Sri Lanka (etc.) (where the killing is much more extensive), I hope so. There used to be a peace movement in Israel but it seems gone now. It also seems like the woke left, that needs the fiction of race as the core of their ideology, reject a two-state solution now too. So what hope is there? I guess one can hope the regional players will be involved as maybe it's the only chance to get something done. But again, I know very little about Israel, Syria, Sri Lanka, etc. I just read the news.