recogitare.com

President Bush wrote: ↑Mon Dec 18, 2023 5:13 pm Young people invoking the idea ¨from the river to the sea¨.

Looks like Prime Minister Netanyahu´s son is no different:

https://www.instagram.com/yair_netanyahu/?hl=en

Well....sort of.

He's saying, "Let's keep the country that is already there." instead of saying, "Let's throw out the people who are already there."

Only one of those requires ethnic cleansing, and would almost certainly result in genocide..

Unless the kid was talking about annexing the West Bank, too.....which would actually be a good thing to do, but the Israelis don't want to do it because then the Palestinians who live there could vote, and the Israelis, at least the majority Jewish Israelis, don't want that, because there are enough Arabs that they would end up winning election, and would then rename the place and get a new flag.

Which, in my opinion, also wouldn't be a bad thing, if that's all that happened. If the new land of Palestine were a liberal democracy where everyone had equal rights and religious freedom, then I would say to Hell with the people who demand a "Jewish state". States shouldn't have a religion anyway.

Sadly, that's not what would happen. The optimistic assessment of a non-Jewish state that consists of Israel+West Bank +Gaza would be yet another "Islamic Republic". That's what the world needs for sure.

Meadmaker wrote: ↑Mon Dec 18, 2023 5:59 pm

President Bush wrote: ↑Mon Dec 18, 2023 5:13 pm Young people invoking the idea ¨from the river to the sea¨.

Looks like Prime Minister Netanyahu´s son is no different:

https://www.instagram.com/yair_netanyahu/?hl=en

Well....sort of.

He's saying, "Let's keep the country that is already there." instead of saying, "Let's throw out the people who are already there."

Only one of those requires ethnic cleansing, and would almost certainly result in genocide..

Unless the kid was talking about annexing the West Bank, too.....which would actually be a good thing to do, but the Israelis don't want to do it because then the Palestinians who live there could vote, and the Israelis, at least the majority Jewish Israelis, don't want that, because there are enough Arabs that they would end up winning election, and would then rename the place and get a new flag.

Which, in my opinion, also wouldn't be a bad thing, if that's all that happened. If the new land of Palestine were a liberal democracy where everyone had equal rights and religious freedom, then I would say to Hell with the people who demand a "Jewish state". States shouldn't have a religion anyway.

Sadly, that's not what would happen. The optimistic assessment of a non-Jewish state that consists of Israel+West Bank +Gaza would be yet another "Islamic Republic". That's what the world needs for sure.

Might makes right.

That apple didn't fall far from the tree.

I am fucking shocked.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/israel-c ... a98426441c

Everyone deserves a turn at playing jack boot thug and brown shirt. In fact, Israel should be given a few extra days of sadism for what they suffered.
And when they're satisfied with the carnage, a new, more potent Jew hater will rise, with a very clear mission to get them all this time. Hate is an energizing feeling, i guess. The act of murder must be a charge of feeling and being alive that is like no other. Evidently, that buzz is worth the hell it leaves, because it keeps selling.

So let's think about this.

The evidence doesn't show it was a "command center", which was what the IDF said.

But, it does show that there were tunnels underneath, that connected to the overall network of tunnels.

There is an awful lot of evidence showing that Hamas had control of the hospital and that there were parts of the hospital where doctors weren't allowed.

There's video of one of the Israeli hostages in the hospital. (My guess is being treated, but there's no actual evidence of that. This "no evidence" thing is kind of interesting.)

Moreover, how did the patients who died at the hospital die? What was the cause? Did they die during the raid? It would seem not. According to the article, they died because of lack of electricity. Lack of food.

In the days preceeding the entrance of the IDF into the hospital, I quoted from a number of articles that described fighting "raging" in the neighborhood near the hospital.

Fighting was raging. Let's translate that. People were shooting at the IDF. The hospital had no electricity. There were shortages of food and water. People were shooting at the IDF.

It seems like bad things could happen as a result of all that shooting.


It's all well and good to call the IDF murderers, and I think it's fair to say that preservation of civilian life has not been the IDF's top priority. They're kind of indifferent as best I can tell. It's kind of like the Red Army as they approached Berlin. Back in those days, is there anything Hitler could have done to minimize civilian casualties? I mean, the Red Army was the group that were killing civilians, but could anyone other than the Red Army done anything to reduce the suffering?

Hamas was defeated a long time ago. They should stop fighting. At least for now. They can try again with another war later.

Meadmaker wrote: ↑Sat Dec 23, 2023 3:00 am So let's think about this.

The evidence doesn't show it was a "command center", which was what the IDF said.

But, it does show that there were tunnels underneath, that connected to the overall network of tunnels.

One tunnel, apparently.

Meadmaker wrote: ↑Sat Dec 23, 2023 3:00 amThere is an awful lot of evidence showing that Hamas had control of the hospital and that there were parts of the hospital where doctors weren't allowed.

That's not what I read, in fact, the article suggests the opposite.

Meadmaker wrote: ↑Sat Dec 23, 2023 3:00 am Moreover, how did the patients who died at the hospital die? What was the cause? Did they die during the raid? It would seem not. According to the article, they died because of lack of electricity. Lack of food.

Caused by the IDF.

Meadmaker wrote: ↑Sat Dec 23, 2023 3:00 amIn the days preceeding the entrance of the IDF into the hospital, I quoted from a number of articles that described fighting "raging" in the neighborhood near the hospital.

Fighting was raging. Let's translate that. People were shooting at the IDF. The hospital had no electricity. There were shortages of food and water. People were shooting at the IDF.

I'm not convinced there was much return fire at all. What I see is Israeli tanks and grunts shooting up everything with very little return fire. There don't appear to be Israelis getting killed, so if Hamas is fighting back heavily on the ground they're pretty fucking useless at it.

dup

Admin wrote: ↑Sat Dec 23, 2023 9:16 am That's not what I read, in fact, the article suggests the opposite.

Indeed it does, which is sad.

The news feeds are today full of all sorts of stories that say things like, "Report shows Hamas did not use al-Shifa."

What is actually true is that there isn't suffiicient evidence to show that al-Shifa was a "command center", as the IDF claimed.

But the evidence for Hamas being present and in control of the hospital is overwhelming. Have the hostage videos been debunked? I haven't seen it. There was only one tunnel? Well, yes. What would be the point of having two? Why was there one? I have seen reports in the useful idiots branch of the media saying it was a supply center where oxygen and other medical supplies were stored. Hmmm....that entrance doesn't really seem conducive to that sort of use. I would like a wider stairway for that sort of thing.

Hamas was the government of Gaza. Of course they had control of that hospital. Of course they took some of the hostages there. Where else would they take them if they were wounded? I'm assuming that's why the hostages were there. I assume they were being treated. Some of them would have been injured in the fighting when Hamas stormed a dance party and kibbuts, but didn't kill everyone. They just killed some people, and took others hostage. Well, there's some benefit to keeping hostages alive, so they might want to use a hospital to help achieve that end. The video evidence corroborates that they did exactly that.

Well,,,,maybe not. Let's play the "no evidence" game. There's no evidence the hostages shown at the hospital received medical treatment.

Caused by the IDF.

Caused by war.

I'm not convinced there was much return fire at all.

But there was return fire. Right? And there still is.

I would absolutely agree that the IDF is using overwhelming force with very little concern about civilian casualties.

if Hamas is fighting back heavily on the ground they're pretty fucking useless at it.

Agreed. They should stop.


There are demands for a cease fire. Well, either side could initiate one, and if either side did, there would be no more firing, assuming either side also did one or two other little things. Like, if the IDF initiated a cease fire, and removed their forces to allow Hama to resume control of what was left of Gaza, there would be no more fighting. If Hamas initiated a cease fire, and allowed unrestricted control of the Gaza strip by Israel, there would be no more fighting.


However, in my opinion, the latter will happen regardless. Israel will once again be the government in Gaza. It's all over except the dying. Israel has won yet another war that began with an attack by the Arabs. It's time to surrender, and regroup for another attempt later.

Or.....maybe, there might be some other future possible. I doubt it, but you never know. At any rate, further fighting is just killing people with no end. The conquered military should surrender.

eTA: Here's another headline today:

"Fighting rages in northern Gaza after U.N. stops short of ceasefire call " (Reuters)

Rages. Maybe it's just hype.

Either way, they really ought to stop shooting at the IDF. No good can come of it.

If i was to play the game, I'd now accuse T.A. of being a classic anti-semite because of the above post. I might even be tempted to lump him into a category that includes various racists, homophobes and religious, anti-science nut jobs. Like, maybe he goes to Nazi rallies and Klan meetings, where his Jew hating ways will be rewarded.

But that would be absurd. I'd need to ignore a lot of previous exchanges.
We should be more careful with our need to make easy categorizations and correlations of others, simply to strengthen our own wobbly positions.
Human nature, I guess. Nothing has made me more aware of this unfortunate phenomena than a critical look at the covid vaccine debacle.
Therein, even raising any objections of the crap science that was used to fast track the new shots, will get you branded with a whole host of other nastiness. A few long time friends here were so appalled by my lost faith in the Moderna jab (which i had 3 of) that they suddenly forgot who i am. One even assumed I was now a Trumper or flat earther. Even though, i'm generally the go to guy in this small community for all things science.
All of that history was instantly ignored by these peers, in favor of a lame defense of a questionable vaccine. Holy shit! How does that happen?

Yeah, i know TA isn't an anti-semite. And i detest that inclination in people to hop onto a few words, taken out of context, to apply an over-riding label to a momentary and unique circumstance.

me, I hate the far right element in Israel that is behaving like murderous assholes, and somehow managed to gain power despite the wishes of the majority population. I don't hate Jews. I do think religion is fucked. All of the Jews i've known are atheists. Not sure why they bother to maintain affiliation with the label. Not sure they know why, either. And i've asked, many times.

Yet the slaughter of the Palestinians, however fast and vicious, is not at all out of step with America's nasty habit. Or maybe we really can't remember our history...even the recent stuff. Remember "Shock and Awe" and our reaction to 911? The media played along nicely as we were unified in our acceptance and zeal for destroying Iraq, under false pretense. Not that long ago. In an eerie echo of Israel's recent blood lust, our military allowed a retreat by a large Iraqi army unit, but then decided to fire on them anyway. McCaffery, iirc, was the heroic leader behind that crime. Despite all the hype at the time of our smart bombs and vast superiority, by gosh, we had to do it again, this time, with the banner "Enduring Freedom".
By some estimates, our deceptive actions killed up to one million Iraqi children. Barely a murmer of resistance back home. The few who risked it were often cancelled or worse. Same with Vietnam at the time, with it's pointless destruction a several nations in S.E. Asia and at least a million kids.

Perhaps our worst war crimes were committed in Korea, where we went the extra mile; killing a good 1/3rd of the population of now North Korea...way beyond what was needed for the stated goal, which was ridiculous in the first place. We lost that war, too. But, hey! If we don't remember it, it didn't happen! It also didn't happen if we trusted our news sources. Before that? more of same. Late entry to WW2; waiting for the Russian's
to lose 25 million while defeating the Nazi's in all but the history books we permit, and thus sitting back as the 6 mil Jews were offed, before rushing in to claim victory and glory. Ironic that Hitler learned of his genetic nonsense from the U.S. Oh well. All that was concluded by the 2 bombs we dropped on civilians in Japan...also unnecessary, as Japan was already basically defeated.

For that matter, it's rather absurd to see Israels' bad behavior as independent of the U.S. war machine. Israel would surely not exist without it.
That we don't have almost any voice for opposing these crimes is stunning to me. Or that the only candidate to address it is a curse word, due to his criticism of some vaccines. It's fucking insane; this priority system. Someone like Arth here will reject all other truths for what he sees as a lie. And because RFK is a liar, then i too am worthy of rejection. Tidy bit of foot work there. I'm fine with being insulted, but alarmed at how easily so called critical thinkers can be neither. For example, say RFK jr is a known as a liar more than as a brutally honest guy...well, so? Do we get to compare that with all the honest politicians that would be the correct choice? Is the implication that Biden is an honest fella? Laughable.

It shows what it is that touches our sore place. We don't mind lies that get a million kids killed, but we draw the line at supposed lies regarding a sketchy drug? Wtf?