domain:science.org
HereAndGone
13hr ago
Try not rounding up the civilian population into camps, or shooting people rushing forward for food aid because they're starving. It's amazing how not being stormtroopers helps shift the views of the people on the other side.
Yes, I said stormtroopers. I don't think the IDF is behaving in an honest fashion. I'm hearing news reports on our national broadcaster every morning about what's going on in Gaza. Unless you want to convince me every single one of the people, the doctors, the volunteers, the journalists, the UN observers, interviewed on those reports is secretly a Hamas mole, horrible things are going on and Israel is doing them.
HereAndGone
13hr ago
You know, it took a lot to get me to this position, but here I am: yes, Israel wants the Gaza problem solved by having them disappear. Deported out of the country if possible, but dead works too.
Settlers running amok and nobody stopping them, with the Israeli authorities (police on up) just winking at burning land belonging to Palestinians, shooting at them, and moving in and taking over land. Too many "oopsies, we didn't mean to hit that target" events. "Oh yeah sure we'll let in the aid convoy - oh no, we can't, security issues y'see".
Israel wants the entire territory to belong to them, and they don't see the Palestinians as any kind of citizens to remain there. "It's all Hamas propaganda, nobody is starving, if only they turned on Hamas then there would be peace". If they turned on Hamas, then they would just be bulldozed into the ground even quicker.
I'm not supporting Hamas. I think they're terrible. But I also understand why a lot of Palestinians will support them, in the face of "we're shooting people queuing for water, we're blocking aid so babies are starving to death, and if anyone says anything then we cry anti-Semitism and invoke the Holocaust".
I don't believe in Israeli good intentions anymore, if ever I did.
Jews have historically generally been pretty leftist and involved in leftist organizations, including pro-immigration organizations. Is that because they hate white people, or because their religion tends to be a liberal-leaning religion? The "impression" that Jews are all disloyal parasites because of the ADL is no different from any other generalization constructed by taking the worst attributes of the worst people in the group you don't like and claiming they define the very character of that group.
You are vastly underselling this- the thrust of Jewish influence in all areas of American politics and culture has been enormously weighted towards social movements advocating for non-whites and social criticism of white culture, religion and racial identity. From Hollywood to Academia to the NGO apparatus, these criticisms and cultural movements defined the Twentieth century. But then Israel comes along and violates every cultural theory and social norm Jews have advocated among Gentiles for a century, the sheer hypocrisy is too much, they won't get away with it without both the American Left and Right abandoning them. The lack of introspection among Jews and Israelis is astounding, they always blame everyone else in the entire world except for their own behavior.
It is very, very easy to see why the cultural and social movements that Jews spearheaded for the past 100 years is in undeniably stark contrast with Israeli geopolitical ambitions and Israeli treatment of the Palestinians. The sheer hypocrisy is the cause of the seismic shift in opinion on Israel and proliferation of anti-semitism, not unavoidable historical circumstances.
netstack
Texas is freedom land
13hr ago
Ha. No, but it’s amazing what people can do to this game.
I did play through Elden Ring Reforged using the Seamless Co-op mod. Changes the game entirely.
cjet79
13hr ago
Might be a bit of a u shape phenomenon. They exist at low wealth and high wealth. It's not just big cats, but big predators in general.
Urban areas are voting for policies of allowing predators to live among their nearby rural areas. The rural areas hate those policies for obvious reasons. Happened in Colorado where they were releasing wolves.
FlyingLionWithABook
Has a C. S. Lewis quote for that.
13hr ago
Israel has been asking the UN to send the trucks in, it is the UN who has been refusing to do so as long as the Israelis are the ones distributing it.
oats_son
14hr ago
If they're in camps, then the guards control what comes in and what goes out. Basically harmless except for his ideology, and I now see the problem you've pointed out. It's even worse than I imagined writing that comment. It seems there really are no ways for Israel to solve the problem that would be acceptable to anyone involved or anyone watching from afar.
FiveHourMarathon
Wawa Nationalist
14hr ago
Does Hamas control anything at this point, in the sense that I could go to an office and talk to my local boss to get something?
charlesf
14hr ago
- 350 miles
- 50 miles. In the state capitol. Its not a very high end one though, clients are mostly politicians and local lawyers it seems.
- <1 mile. Tobacco.
- 8 miles
- 8 miles
- 50 miles
ABigGuy4U
14hr ago
The American government sponsored multiple real life cross-border terrorist attacks into Canada. The Fenian Brotherhood was pretty well behaved towards civilians but they did kill dozens of Canadian soldiers.
quiet_NaN
14hr ago
There is no exception to the requirement to let humanitarian aid through if your enemy uses it to gain a financial advantage.
Also, I doubt that the average Gazan has a lot of savings which they could pay Hamas by now, and Hamas certainly has other ways to extract any resources from the Gazan population. For example, they might require a donation to be exempt from human shield duty. Also, flooding Gaza with food (to the degree that NGOs are able to provide it) would likely collapse the food prices in Gaza and cut out that stream of resources for Hamas.
Realistically, most of the funding of Hamas probably comes from Iran anyhow.
The_Nybbler
In the game of roller derby, women aren't just the opposing team; they're the ball.
14hr ago
I think it will be very hard to starve Hamas to death without starving everyone else to death, too, unless you "ethnically cleanse" the populace by moving them into camps where you can ensure they are all fed safely.
You can't do that either; Hamas will be in the camps.
Totalitarianit
14hr ago
It's coherent but you are invoking a moral truth, whereas I am discussing realpolitik. Can you enforce what you believe in? I think not. Will Israel's "morally bankrupt" actions have consequences down the road? Potentially, yes.
Will you convince an entity who believes that their existence is under threat that they are morally wrong if they feel they are protecting themselves? Maybe later, but not in the moment. What can that moral correctness without leverage really accomplish in the moment?
quiet_NaN
14hr ago
Hamas, as the governing body (such as it is), is the one obligated to provide for their own people's food. This whole thing is predicated on the idea that feeding Gaza is the job of literally anyone else on the planet except the actual people who are responsible for doing so.
I would say that it is not Israel's responsibility to feed the civilian population in Hamas-controlled territories. However, they are obliged to let in humanitarian aid. From my understanding, Israel's refusal to let the trucks in is why Gaza is starving, not because the international community is unwilling to buy food for Gaza.
If Hamas were to burn food as it enters Gaza, then you would be correct to say that Hamas is starving Gaza (but my model of them says they would not actually do that).
Likewise, while you can blame the Soviets for much starvation, you can not blame them for the starvation during the siege of Leningrad. That blood is on the hands of the Nazis who decided not to let any food in.
oats_son
14hr ago
The more I think about it, the more it is clear to me that there is no great way to handle this crisis. Israel can't just march in and put a flag in the center and say "war's over, pick a leader". The USA tried that in Afghanistan, and it worked for a while, but the old regime was just waiting for their chance. If a regime doesn't care about its populace at all, what can you even do to it to draw it out and kill it? It's like natural selection created the most toxic paradigm possible. I think it will be very hard to starve Hamas to death without starving everyone else to death, too, unless you "ethnically cleanse" the populace by moving them into camps where you can ensure they are all fed safely.
ABigGuy4U
14hr ago
Even without Hezbollah, it was very close to major disaster. The Hamas units were not supposed to be stopping to pillage the kibbutz on the Gaza border, they were supposed to be going from army post to army post and wiping them out all the way to the Palestinian Territories. Which if they had maintained their offensive time tables they very well could have, since the IDF units in the area were terribly unprepared and badly disciplined. Fortunately local police units were much more vigilant and trained for this scenario, and they did a good job slowing down the Hamas special forces units that actually were pushing forward. There was one road intersection that the IDF and police narrowly managed to hold on to, if they hadn’t the only line for reinforcements to get into most Southwestern Israel would have been cut.
FiveHourMarathon
Wawa Nationalist
14hr ago
And if my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle.
phailyoor
14hr ago
Nope: https://www.tesco.com/groceries/en-GB/products/314947321
I believe Asahi yanked all of their licenses to local breweries and switched it all to Peroni. I can't say 100% though but at the very least all US and EU and UK is Peroni.
Throwaway05
14hr ago
I've heard some people in gaming think meta refers to "most effective tactics available." Maybe that?
JustAGuy0
Neo-Butlerian Jihad advocate
14hr ago
if that had happened, they probably would've triggered 'Grim Beeper' (nice name) early, and it would've turned Hezbollah's army into a mob with guns
still would've been bad for Israel, but I suspect not bad enough that they'd lose.
Do those human rights exist if neither side chooses to enforce them?
Well, if you aren't a nihilist, yes. The morally correct course of action remains the morally correct course of action even if nobody implements it. Under most western ethical philosophy, the right thing is under no cosmic obligation to be easily achievable for people who are also trying to secure geopolitical goals. Sometimes doing the right thing for the needy means you risk your own comfort and safety, and that's just the way it is.
We instinctively understand this where individual life-or-death situations are involved, eg running into a burning building. But somehow when we're talking about whole populations, both sides of the conversation pretend that a case that XYZ is the right thing to do also needs to prove it's the advantageous thing to do. No. It's perfectly coherent to say "The right thing to do is to prevent children from starving. It might in fact result in losing the war, but it's the right thing to do anyway. A victory that can only be won by starving children to death through inaction would be morally bankrupt and is not worth pursuing."
The aid organizations were helping Hamas and had to be stopped regardless of whether they were also providing food.
I'd also ask just how much "pretty much no one" is and how many are starving now. Hamas is known to have used food to control the people even before October 7, so I do not believe "nobody used to be starving".
More options
Context Copy link