@pm_me_passion's banner p

pm_me_passion

אֲנָשִׁים נֹשְׂאֵי מָגֵן וְחֶרֶב וְדֹרְכֵי קֶשֶׁת וּלְמוּדֵי מִלְחָמָה

0 followers   follows 1 user  
joined 2022 September 05 06:00:05 UTC

				

User ID: 464

pm_me_passion

אֲנָשִׁים נֹשְׂאֵי מָגֵן וְחֶרֶב וְדֹרְכֵי קֶשֶׁת וּלְמוּדֵי מִלְחָמָה

0 followers   follows 1 user   joined 2022 September 05 06:00:05 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 464

99.9% It was some Gazan org that hit a parking lot. Evidence: nobody cares about it anymore and the 500 dead claim disappeared in the morning light. If it were Israeli forces, it would still be in the news.

I was discussing US politics with my wife, as one does, and immigration laws came up. I briefly told her about sanctuary cities, and in response she asked why anyone would support that. I had no answer.

I googled a bit and got some very bad answers, so I’m turning to the motte.

Can the motte provide some pro-sanctuary arguments, and some pro-illegal immigration arguments in general? Consider that you’re giving these answers to a none-American from an ethno-state that enforces its immigration laws, and generally frowns on immigration to it from different ethnicities.

If your position is practical, rather than moral, wouldn't it be simpler and cheaper to stop sending aid to Gaza and Yemen, and let the populations there starve to death? It would be much more effective than bombing weapons caches, and nobody seems to care about starving Yemenis anyway.

Hopefully, they can pull US military aid out of Israel. Israel will have to resort to using more dumb bombs, until local industry catches up with demand. With less leverage on Israel, the Arabs in Gaza will suffer more - and hopefully some will be forced out, though that’s more of a longshot.

Since the American defense lobby likes money, all this probably won’t happen.

I don’t know how western states will react. My gut says “they’ll probably do nothing”, but I’m not sure. History shows that the world at large is actually very tolerant of atrocities, especially if they happen fast enough. It’s not like they can be undone after the fact anyway.

In the case of other terror orgs, I think it will substantially lower the violence against Israel. The arab orgs are much weaker than the IDF, and so far relied on Israeli good will to survive, basically. If they’ll think that Israel might cleanse them, they won’t be as trigger happy.

No telling what other Arab states will do. They don’t seem to actually care about the Palestinians, but they do have to keep up appearances.

There’s also the option of not needing specifically credit history to get a loan or further credit, if you have other financial info available. For example, in Israel you can get a loan from your bank based on your salary income, which is known to your bank anyway.

Yes, it has. I’m a member of a few groups that advocate for gun rights in Israel - membership has gone up significantly.

There is an extra Israeli specific issue to consider, though: most Jewish Israelis don’t want Arab Israelis to have guns, with a few obvious exceptions like Abu Gosh residents and Druze outside the Golan heights. The way to filter out such “disloyal” populations from owning a gun is to require military service of some sort for a gun license.

In the more immediate term, license requirements have been relaxed slightly just last week - allowing a few hundred thousand more Israelis if the “right” sort to qualify, myself included.

Additionally, city watches are forming in more cities further away from the borders. These watches are normally armed with a rifle of some sort.

Evidence? The equivalent, Hamas hitting an Israeli hospital, has already happened twice. Did you hear about the that?

Turning Gaza into Singapore is not so much “throw the Israelis' game back in their faces” as much as “literally doing exactly what they hoped for in 2005”. The Singapore analogy was thrown around quite a bunch at the time, and even since.

(They can’t buy land in Israel though, it’s all owned by the government or a proxy)

So far Hamasniks have been surrendering just fine. They’re also perfectly capable of dying en-mass. Only their leadership in Qatar remains untouchable to us (Israelis) for now, but hopefully that will change once the hostages are out, or at least accounted for.

What, specifically, do you think would have happened if Israel did not respond?

If I were the czar of Gaza, I would declare an independent state which in theory includes Judea and Samaria but in practice encompasses only Gaza. I would build up the economy, utilize foreign aid for the benefit of my citizens, absolutely forbid any violence towards Israel.

In 5-10 years, when things start to improve, I would use diplomatic means and international pressure on Israel to gain control of Oslo A territories in Judea and Samaria (but not B and C), instead of Fatah. There I could build an even stronger economy, again ruthlessly putting down any violence against Israel. At this point I have a state. I negotiate with Jordan and Egypt to allow independent travel between Samaria and Gaza. I’ve already been recognized in the 80’s, so I don’t need to jump that hurdle. I will now solve the refugee crisis by bringing back every descendant of ‘48 to my new state. We are now a thriving state, leaning heavily on international aid and tourism but not blockaded.

This is the hard part, since Israel might interfere from here on out, but I will draw the optimistic scenario. I demand that Israel complies with Oslo, as I have, and gain civil control of Oslo B territories. From here I will use more diplomacy and world pressure to finalize my borders, roughly drawing on the ‘48 armistice line but NOT adhering strictly to it, since it’s mostly meaningless. I offer the settlers in area C citizenship in my country, and since I have shown no violence towards them they might actually accept. We now live in peace. I win.

Edit: I assume your last paragraph is a joke.

In that unsearchable 270 page master’s thesis from the ‘70s, what page is your quote from? Did you just happen to stumble upon this, and read it at your leisure?

So far you’ve been getting a lot of replies saying that the US can only pressure Israel, but not Hamas. This is false. Hamas is not a leaderless organization, it’s actually very well organized and its leadership is known to all.

The heads of Hamas, those that are parallel to its government rather than military leadership, are situated in Qatar. Their locations are known. They frequently fly out of Qatar, to any place they wish, such as Egypt just recently. They are, of course, war criminals. However, there is literally no effort or any calls to bring any of these men to justice, or any sanctions on Qatar. This is despite providing direct monetary aid to Hamas, as well as the aforementioned sheltering of Hamas leadership.

Qatar is a US ally in the region, the US even has bases there (unlike Israel), the US is one of (if not the) largest importer to Qatar. In other words, the US has a lot of leverage on Qatar, if only anyone wished to use it.

Keep all this in mind when reading all these other replies.

I have no idea what you mean by that. Did you reply to the wrong comment?

This doesn’t seem to correspond to the claimed body-count nor the explosion videos, which seemed massive. So Hamas was lying about the deaths, that makes sense, but the videos seemed real enough - so what gives? I’m honestly confused now.

What do you propose Israelis do, that doesn’t condemn us to total destruction?

Very impressive, honestly.

So what is your position re: group responsibility? Are the Israelis of the time, or even today, accountable for the alleged actions of a few?

Thank you for providing an answer. These are the kinds of arguments that I found while googling, and I think they’re pretty bad. They just ignore outright what the laws are actually doing - i.e. allowing anyone who manages to cross the border to stay illegally - in favour of talking about something else or a very small subset of what the policy actually is. For example, the first thing my wife asked was “so criminals and terrorists can just come in?”, and nowhere did I see any mention of it in the pro camp’s arguments. I was hoping for a robust steelman, if one exists.

Such as? Again, be specific please.

More importantly, what do you think would have happened, that it would be in some way advantageous to Israel?

There have always been some Jews who’d rather not be part of the Jewish community. Some succeed, and we never hear of them as Jews again. Some are carried away by the Gestapo.

Every year, and as it happens it’s on this day specifically, we think of them briefly. From the parable of the four sons:

The wicked one, what does he say? "What is this service to you?!" He says “to you,” but not to him! By thus excluding himself from the community he has denied that which is fundamental. You, therefore, blunt his teeth and say to him: "It is because of this that the L‑rd did for me when I left Egypt"; `for me' - but not for him! If he had been there, he would not have been redeemed!"

While opposing the wokest country in the middle east that is flooding Europe with migrants?

Are you talking about Syria or the US? I’m honestly having trouble parsing this line.

It’s not “miracle happens” so much as “violence happens”. If I’m a leader in Gaza then I get to do that. If I can’t do that then what’s the point if the exercise? Just to prove that Gaza’s culture is irredeemable?

Your last paragraph is ridiculous on so many levels. Maybe least of which is that you think it’s possible to send the Temple Mount and Cave of the Patriarch anywhere. I agree it’s ridiculous to expect the Arabs to change, by the way, which is why they must go.

That’s something of a non-sequieter, I’d say. You’re a different profile, care to answer my question re: group responsibility?

Oh, good answer, on both counts. Is the second part something that people actually say out loud, though? Or is it something that they'll think, but then say something else?