Israel at war!

[Odine]

I was gonna say something but fuck it it's futile 

[Zathras]

I know what you mean, Odine.  What pisses me off is Israel is running amok killing everything is site, including health care aid workers, and Netan-yahoo is thunmbing his nose at Biden when asked to cut back on killing innocent civilians.  Biden should CUT OFF any more weapon shipments to Israel.  Period.

[Odine]

It's straight up genocide, and was right from the beginning. 

There are Israeli property development companies already selling beachfront property shortlists, for the redevelopment of an Israeli Gaza. 

Netanyahu needs a bullet to the back of the skull, and every member of his regime should be tried for war crimes. 

 

But unfortunately there is no justice in the world. So who knows how this ends.. a two state solution hopefully 

[Zathras]

I agree with you on that.  It is genocide.  You would think the one nation that would be sensitive to genocide, Israel, would be the first to not do it.  But, I think Netan-Yahoo and the majority of Israelis are bloodlusted right now.  Hitting food and medical convoys are warcrimes and the world should stand together against Israel.   But like you say, the universe is indifferent to Gaza's suffering, which is terrible.  I doubt there will be a 2 state solution.  

[R.CAllen]

You are both looking at events and seeing a huge heap of violence and somehow you all just want MORE violence to happen. In this particular respect neither of you seem all that different than a trigger-happy IDF soldier. Or a Hamas/PIJ terrorist. You all think that things will be better if the right people just die. I don’t have some magic toggle switch to change anybody’s mind — surely arguing about things online in this forum won’t do that — but I still felt I needed to type these words.

[Zathras]

Who said I wanted more violence to happen?  I think we should stop funding and arming Israel.

[Odine]

21 hours ago, R.CAllen said:

You are both looking at events and seeing a huge heap of violence and somehow you all just want MORE violence to happen. In this particular respect neither of you seem all that different than a trigger-happy IDF soldier. Or a Hamas/PIJ terrorist. You all think that things will be better if the right people just die. I don’t have some magic toggle switch to change anybody’s mind — surely arguing about things online in this forum won’t do that — but I still felt I needed to type these words.

I think Netanyahu deserves death, yes.  And his regime needs to be tried for war crimes.

I'm saying nothing particularly controversial given the context. No different from saying Hitler should've been assassinated and saved the world a lot of trouble. 

[R.CAllen]

3 hours ago, Zathras said:

Who said I wanted more violence to happen?  I think we should stop funding and arming Israel.

Given that you’ve repeated yourself I suspect you may already know my answer to your question.

“Biden should CUT OFF any more weapon shipments to Israel. Period.” and “I think we should stop funding and arming Israel.” are wanting more violence to happen.

No one can predict the future but cutting off weapon shipments to Israel would result in a full-scale invasion by Hezbollah in the short-term. And in the long-term the consequences of every American ally knowing that the USA will switch off the spigot when things get bloody would probably be worse in terms of body count.

[R.CAllen]

3 hours ago, Odine said:

I think Netanyahu deserves death, yes.  And his regime needs to be tried for war crimes.

I'm saying nothing particularly controversial given the context. No different from saying Hitler should've been assassinated and saved the world a lot of trouble. 

 

If someone assassinated the Prime Minister of Israel (again!) and then abducted everyone in Israel’s thirty-seventh government and put them on trial the outcome would not be good. I don’t think the thirty-eighth government would be any nicer. Like, who would lead it? I guess considering that Gantz’s presence in the war cabinet means he would probably count as part of “his regime” I suppose that would make Yair Lapid the next — wait, no, realistically speaking it’d be some brand new fascist nobody who would be swept into office by promising to invade Holland or whatever.

[Zathras]

8 minutes ago, R.CAllen said:

Given that you’ve repeated yourself I suspect you may already know my answer to your question.

“Biden should CUT OFF any more weapon shipments to Israel. Period.” and “I think we should stop funding and arming Israel.” are wanting more violence to happen.

No one can predict the future but cutting off weapon shipments to Israel would result in a full-scale invasion by Hezbollah in the short-term. And in the long-term the consequences of every American ally knowing that the USA will switch off the spigot when things get bloody would probably be worse in terms of body count.

Wrong.  And that is quite a leap of logic.  Cutting off Israel doesn't mean they are weaponless. They can produce weapons themselves.   The thing is, if Israel is going to wage war in a manner inconsistant with US policy and human rights, they don't deserve US backing.  

[R.CAllen]

Nope! No leap of logic! I don’t believe Israel is weaponless without US weapons. It isn’t! I believe Hezbollah will do a full-scale invasion if the US cuts off any more weapon shipments to Israel and if it stops funding and arming Israel. It might very well do so even if the US does not do that but I think it definitely would if that happened.

You think Israel doesn’t deserve US backing because it wages war in a manner inconsistent with US policy and human rights — does it? I guess we agree! pretty sure Americans would’ve killed millions if there were multiple terrorist attacks in America by Al-Qaeda sympathizers in the six months after 9/11! Israel’s actions so far are thus pretty inconsistent with American policy and the American track record on human rights! — but I think deserve’s got nothing to do with it. Do people in Gaza deserve to die? No. Do people in Israel and in Lebanon deserve to die? No. If there’s something that’ll make more people die I don’t want it to happen. I guess we’re different!

[Odine]

14 hours ago, R.CAllen said:

Nope! No leap of logic! I don’t believe Israel is weaponless without US weapons. It isn’t! I believe Hezbollah will do a full-scale invasion if the US cuts off any more weapon shipments to Israel and if it stops funding and arming Israel. It might very well do so even if the US does not do that but I think it definitely would if that happened.

You think Israel doesn’t deserve US backing because it wages war in a manner inconsistent with US policy and human rights — does it? I guess we agree! pretty sure Americans would’ve killed millions if there were multiple terrorist attacks in America by Al-Qaeda sympathizers in the six months after 9/11! Israel’s actions so far are thus pretty inconsistent with American policy and the American track record on human rights! — but I think deserve’s got nothing to do with it. Do people in Gaza deserve to die? No. Do people in Israel and in Lebanon deserve to die? No. If there’s something that’ll make more people die I don’t want it to happen. I guess we’re different!

The more incursions into Lebanon Israel makes will force the hand of Hezbollah. Hezbollah doesn't want conflict without the help of Iran but it seems as though Netanyahu does want a wider regional conflict to draw the US in and to cling on to his power. 

Former marine and and UN weapons inspector Scott Ritter makes a strong argument on why the US cannot win a war against Iran ( Iran and the US both know this. ) So willingly trying to draw the region into this conflict is totally unhinged. I stand by my statement Netanyahu needs a bullet. 

[R.CAllen]

When I wrote the words “It might very well do so even if the US does not do that” those words meant that Hezbollah might very well do a full-scale invasion even if the US does not cut off any more weapon shipments to Israel and if it does not stop funding and arming Israel. I’m aware of Israeli strikes in Lebanon and, of course, Syria!

[R.CAllen]

You’re both insisting your motives are good so the outcome of what you want to happen would be good. I believe you think you’re good and the violent results of what you wish for will therefore lead to good things. I understand that this is something you both think.

“Violence? Where? Wrong! A leap of logic! I just think there should be more war.”

“Controversial? Me? I just think these Jews are Hitler.”

[Odine]

9 hours ago, R.CAllen said:

When I wrote the words “It might very well do so even if the US does not do that” those words meant that Hezbollah might very well do a full-scale invasion even if the US does not cut off any more weapon shipments to Israel and if it does not stop funding and arming Israel. I’m aware of Israeli strikes in Lebanon and, of course, Syria!

You're missing the point. Hezbollah doesn't want war with Israel. But if Israel continually makes further incursions into Lebanon then Israel will force the hand of Hezbollah to retaliate. Ergo, any Hezbollah invasion would be a direct consequence of Israel's actions. They're bringing it on themselves. 

Ideally, the world should be applying crippling economic sanctions to Israel and enormous diplomatic pressure to force Netanyahu to end the conflict, and they should bring the case of a two state solution to the international courts. Will this happen? I doubt it. Netanyahu seems content to do whatever he wants, international community be damned. So what is your solution? So far it seems to be continue arming the Zionists and resume the status quo. Sorry, but the status quo is genocide, and they won't stop with Gaza as we are seeing already.

[Odine]

On 4/11/2024 at 10:04 PM, R.CAllen said:

 

“Controversial? Me? I just think these Jews are Hitler.”

Lol. Jew, singular- Netanyahu. I'm comparing him to Hitler. Not the people of Israel, a large number of whom were protesting his very government before Oct 7.  Many Israelis don't want him.

Regardless of the above, the comparison while tragically ironic does fit. Netanyahu is the leader of a far right ultra nationalist government who wants the expansion of a Zionist ethno-state and the eradication of Arab Palestinians . His intentions are near the same, he's only going after a different "other". 

Afterthought: I find it disturbing and amusing that in 2024 we sling the word fascist around, call people Hitler, seemingly at the drop of a hat. At Trump and his supporters most memorably. Or any right wing metal band. But the second I use it against an actual far-right ultra nationalist with genocidal intentions it gets called controversial because said leader happens to be Jewish.

Like I said, it's a sick twist of tragic irony. 

[Odine]

At what point will the world draw a redline and intervene? He's already leveled Gaza, murdered 30,000 civilians, targeting aid workers, children, medical professionals and the red cross. He's only allowed aid in due to diplomatic pressure, and even then not enough is getting in. There is now a famine in Gaza, totally man made. Check out the holodomor of Ukraine 1932 to see the results of that in a historical context.

Now any ceasefire that is happening is a pause for him to launch a ground offensive in Raffah. Strikes into Lebanon and Syria.

Shall we wait until there are concentration camps for refugees established, mass executions and incursions into the West Bank? Where is the line? 

No. Let's the United Kingdom and USA keep selling arms to Netanyahu and keep the war machine running while simultaneously distancing ourselves publicly from Netanyahu and saying "we need more aid to get through". 

The UK and the US is playing limp wristed appeasement to this psychopathic fuck and the situation is only getting worse every day.

[Odine]

Oop

[Zathras]

Indeed, it's very hard to argue for continuing to supply weapons and money to the Israelis on the basis of "saving" lives, after Gaza has literally been flattened and 32,000+ Palestinians are dead, especially when about 13,000 were children.  By contrast, Israel lost 1200 people on OCT 7, so their response is beyond disproportionate.  Also, how many of the 250 hostages has Israel rescued?  Something like 112 were released, I believe, which is less than half, but only 3 were rescued by the IDF.  Gaza, Hamas or no, has no way of defending itself, let alone invading anyone.  What Netan-Yahoo is doing is nothing less than genocide.  It is one thing if Israel had took out only Hamas command centers and other Hamas sites and equipment, but bombing civilians and aide workers is inexcusable.   Not to mention the nonsense  going on in the West bank, and let's not forget the Damascus bombings that threaten to wided the war with Iran possibly jumping in, too.   I WAS in Israel's corner at first when the OCT 7 attacks occured, but since then, Israel has long since crossed a red line for me.  I can't support them getting more arms and funds from the US, if this is how they want to fight a war.  

[Zathras]

Welp, Iran attacked, and it fizzled.  Still, the Israelis want to counter attack Iran for responding to their attack.  And, this will inevitably lead to the US getting dragged further into this conflict.

[R.CAllen]

On 4/12/2024 at 3:01 AM, Odine said:

You're missing the point. Hezbollah doesn't want war with Israel. But if Israel continually makes further incursions into Lebanon then Israel will force the hand of Hezbollah to retaliate. Ergo, any Hezbollah invasion would be a direct consequence of Israel's actions. They're bringing it on themselves.

 

I said that Hezbollah will do a full-scale invasion depending on what the US does — what Zathras wants it to do! — and that it might very well do so even if the US does not do anything. You decided to tell me about Israeli incursions into Lebanon and how Netanyahu was trying to draw Iran into the conflict by doing this. You made the point of how Netanyahu is trying to draw Iran into the conflict by posting a screenshot about Israeli strikes on Lebanon — which have become somewhat routine over the past few months alongside Hezbollah’s attacks on Israel — rather than, say, a screenshot about the strike on a consulate (!) killing Iranian generals. I was telling you this and that I was aware of what Hezbollah might do no matter what the US does. I said I was aware of what Hezbollah might do no matter what the US does when I wrote the words “It might very well do so even if the US does not do that”.

 

You were telling me something I already said I knew and you were supporting this information with bottom shelf evidence. I was telling you this. I am now telling it to you again.

 

ME: Hezbollah will invade if [x] and it might invade if [not-x].

YOU: Hezbollah might invade if [not-x] and I have weaksauce proof.

ME: I already said Hezbollah might invade if [not-x]. And if you want to talk about the reason why Hezbollah might invade if [not-x] then you should support it with something better than that. Here you go! Here it is! This is what you should support it with!

 

On 4/12/2024 at 3:01 AM, Odine said:

So what is your solution?

 

You don’t care what I think.

 

On 4/12/2024 at 3:08 AM, Odine said:

Lol. Jew, singular- Netanyahu. I'm comparing him to Hitler. Not the people of Israel, a large number of whom were protesting his very government before Oct 7.  Many Israelis don't want him.

 

I took your words ““Netanyahu needs a bullet to the back of the skull, and every member of his regime should be tried for war crimes.” and “I think Netanyahu deserves death, yes. And his regime needs to be tried for war crimes. I'm saying nothing particularly controversial given the context. No different from saying Hitler should've been assassinated and saved the world a lot of trouble.” and “I stand by my statement Netanyahu needs a bullet.” as directly analogizing assassinating Hitler and saving the world a lot of trouble with killing Netanyahu and trying his regime for war crimes.

 

You were saying Netanyahu and his regime are Hitler and you were saying that you saying this was not particularly controversial. Netanyahu and every member of his regime are Jews. (Are they? I suppose that’s not true in the strictest possible sense. The head of COGAT is Druze!)

 

I characterized the above in the following fashion : “Controversial? Me? I just think these Jews are Hitler.”

 

If you really think I’ve misinterpreted you and what you really meant to say all along, well, fine. I’ll revise. “Controversial? Me? I just think this Jew is Hitler.”

 

On 4/12/2024 at 3:08 AM, Odine said:

But the second I use it against an actual far-right ultra nationalist with genocidal intentions it gets called controversial because said leader happens to be Jewish.

 

It got called controversial because you used the word ‘controversial’.

I don’t know how to explain to anyone who has already attended kindergarten that a bad thing doesn’t become a good thing because you think it’ll make a good thing happen. The prime minister of a parliamentary democracy being assassinated isn’t a good thing. And a moment’s thought from anyone familiar with the particular parliamentary democracy being discussed ought to make anyone realize that the consequences of that happening wouldn’t necessarily and automatically be good consequences. If you want something bad to happen because you think it’ll make good things happen and I pipe up with, “No, that’s bad! And it’d make bad things happen!” you can of course keep insisting that you want it to happen because it’ll be good. It’s up to you. I can’t stop you!

[R.CAllen]

I also think it’s funny — not hah hah funny, it doesn’t make me laugh, but kind of funny in the abstract — how your stance has softened. You go from saying “Netanyahu needs a bullet to the back of the skull” on April 5 to “I think Netanyahu deserves death” on April 9 to “I stand by my statement Netanyahu needs a bullet” on April 11.

I believe you think you stand by your statement, sure. But that’s not what you stated. It’s not all of it! You’re missing a few of those colourful little words at the end. They really set the stage! And you dropped a register there in between. “Deserves death” is just not the same thing as “needs a bullet to the back of the skull” or “needs a bullet”.

Tough for me to imagine a principled character in some old war movie going from saying “Zee Führer must be shot in a humiliating and painful fashion!” in one scene to “I think Zee Führer deserves death” in another to finally settling on “I stand by my statement Zee Führer must be shot” in his last. If I were watching that old war movie I wouldn’t think that this was a guy who really wanted anything but to get mad at someone he’s allowed to get mad at. That guy in the old war movie was just changing the tempo of his tune as he blew off a little steam. Mixed metaphor, sure, but I hope what I’m saying here comes across.

My point is either as far as you’re concerned Netanyahu is Hitler — which would make any deviation or fluctuation odd. you’re talking about Hitler here! are you soft on Hitler? — or he’s not Hitler and you know that and you’re just kind of scrambling around.

It could be I’m wrong. I might be reading too much into it! Maybe you meant the exact same thing all three times. Many people — myself included! — often have difficulty making themselves understood.

[Odine]

My stance hasnt softened, if it seems like it has it's only to the extent that I'm trying not to use inflammatory language for the sake of ruffling minimal feathers. I still think Netanyahu deserves nothing more than being lined up against a wall and unceremoniously shot in the back of the head, and left where he falls.

Will good come of that? Probably not. Would the reality of that result in someone worse taking power, given the current situation? Quite possibly. Saying someone needs a bullet or deserves a bullet is not the same as saying "I think that is the most responsible and sensible course of action at the present time".

I think his government needs to be tried for war crimes.  That hasn't softened. 

The reality is, like I said, we (The Us and UK) need to stop arming and supporting Israel, and publicly denounce them, heavy sanctions should be imposed upon them, and they should be brought to heel. There needs to be a permanent ceasfire, and a two state solution needs to be instituted. Will that happen? Probably not. Israel is the US' proverbial air craft carrier in the middle east. The US will be hard pressed to ever directly challenge Israeli policy/actions.

You keep banging on about a possible Hezbollah invasion.. and I keep saying the only person who wants war with Hezbollah is Netanyahu. Hezbollah does not want war with Israel and nor does Iran.

Why? 

Because right now, there is a clean narrative of Israel disproportionately attacking Gaza, expanding it's borders, and committing genocidal war crimes. The US and the UK are beginning to distance themselves from Israel. The rest of the world is alresdy united in disgust with Israel. But as soon as either Hezbollah or Iran get involved it muddies that narrative and the conversation is no longer about Israel and it's war crimes and atrocities, it becomes murkier and about what should be done with Hezbollah and Iran. Then Netanyahu can solidify his hold on to power as a wartime PM. Hezbollah and Iran know this, and understand it's in their best interest NOT to engage with Israel. Meanwhile Israel is trying to provoke both Hezbollah and Iran into an open conflict, as we have just seen yesterday. With Iran launching a counter strike of some 300 missiles as a direct proportional response to Israeli actions taken against Iran.

As for my weaksauce sources. I gave a screen grab of a mainstream news feed simply to highlight that Israel is frequently provoking and engaging with Hezbollah. To highlight my statement that any action from Hezbollah will be a direct proportional response to Israeli actions. And Scott Ritter, who I've mentioned but not directly linked, has dozens or more videos disseminating whats been happening since the begining of the conflict, and is probably one of the most informed and knowledgeable publicly speaking experts on the matters of war and geopolitical conflict. So not sure what is weaksauce about referencing his arguements. If anything is weaksauce it's my ability to retain everything that I've read or listened to, and parce it into a legible post without using too many minutes of my day.

Finally I am interested in what you think, it's why I asked what you think should be done in the first place. Because at the moment it seems like you wish nothing more than for the US to continue to supply arms, and for Israel to continue doing what it's doing. Which is tantamount to appeasement of a genocidal regime.

If you're one of the "Free Palestine from Hamas" folks then just say so and I'll stop wasting my time engaging.

 

[Ms. Spam]

We had protestors block the entrances to a local Valero headquarters in protest of it providing oil and gas to Israel yesterday. I applauded them. I get it’s scary and especially after Iran launched strikes this week on Israel but I feel this is a stark warning if we allow extremist factions of government full rule. No one wants to find common middle ground. 

[R.CAllen]

14 hours ago, Odine said:

My stance hasnt softened, if it seems like it has it's only to the extent that I'm trying not to use inflammatory language for the sake of ruffling minimal feathers. I still think Netanyahu deserves nothing more than being lined up against a wall and unceremoniously shot in the back of the head, and left where he falls.

Will good come of that? Probably not. Would the reality of that result in someone worse taking power, given the current situation? Quite possibly. Saying someone needs a bullet or deserves a bullet is not the same as saying "I think that is the most responsible and sensible course of action at the present time".

So you just want this assassination to happen even though the outcome will be bad. Okay! I like it when bad things don’t happen!

14 hours ago, Odine said:

I think his government needs to be tried for war crimes.  That hasn't softened.

My response to this is to refer you back to what I think will happen if that happens.

14 hours ago, Odine said:

The reality is, like I said, we (The Us and UK) need to stop arming and supporting Israel, and publicly denounce them, heavy sanctions should be imposed upon them, and they should be brought to heel. There needs to be a permanent ceasfire, and a two state solution needs to be instituted. Will that happen? Probably not. Israel is the US' proverbial air craft carrier in the middle east. The US will be hard pressed to ever directly challenge Israeli policy/actions.

Do you know what reality is? Reality is the things that happen.

14 hours ago, Odine said:

You keep banging on about a possible Hezbollah invasion.. and I keep saying the only person who wants war with Hezbollah is Netanyahu. Hezbollah does not want war with Israel and nor does Iran.

I think if that was really the case Nasrallah and Khamenei would stop attacking Israel. For all the talk about Netanyahu wanting war with Iran to stay in power it seems like this might not actually be the case. Gantz and Eisenkot pushed for immediate retaliation before the attack from Iran had even properly happened — shades of 2000AD! — and Netanyahu said no. Netanyahu knows that the Israeli public punishes prime ministers electorally when wars are on their watch. He’ll go with what assures his political survival, sure, but I suspect President Biden’s statement that the US won’t participate in any Israeli counterattack actually did that. No way to know for sure — I always think of Don Draper’s reply to Roger Sterling in the Cuban Missile Crisis episode of Mad Men (‘07-’15) : “Kennedy’s daring them to bomb us. Right when I got a second chance.” “We don’t know what’s really going on. You know that.” — but that’s my take.

14 hours ago, Odine said:

Why? 

Because right now, there is a clean narrative of Israel disproportionately attacking Gaza, expanding it's borders, and committing genocidal war crimes. The US and the UK are beginning to distance themselves from Israel. The rest of the world is alresdy united in disgust with Israel. But as soon as either Hezbollah or Iran get involved it muddies that narrative and the conversation is no longer about Israel and it's war crimes and atrocities, it becomes murkier and about what should be done with Hezbollah and Iran. Then Netanyahu can solidify his hold on to power as a wartime PM. Hezbollah and Iran know this, and understand it's in their best interest NOT to engage with Israel. Meanwhile Israel is trying to provoke both Hezbollah and Iran into an open conflict, as we have just seen yesterday. With Iran launching a counter strike of some 300 missiles as a direct proportional response to Israeli actions taken against Iran.

Yesterday? It’s Tuesday. What are you talking about?

14 hours ago, Odine said:

As for my weaksauce sources. I gave a screen grab of a mainstream news feed simply to highlight that Israel is frequently provoking and engaging with Hezbollah. To highlight my statement that any action from Hezbollah will be a direct proportional response to Israeli actions. And Scott Ritter, who I've mentioned but not directly linked, has dozens or more videos disseminating whats been happening since the begining of the conflict, and is probably one of the most informed and knowledgeable publicly speaking experts on the matters of war and geopolitical conflict. So not sure what is weaksauce about referencing his arguements. If anything is weaksauce it's my ability to retain everything that I've read or listened to, and parce it into a legible post without using too many minutes of my day.

I’m glad you like the guy from Three’s Company (‘76’-84) and, yes, it is difficult to do that!

14 hours ago, Odine said:

Finally I am interested in what you think, it's why I asked what you think should be done in the first place. Because at the moment it seems like you wish nothing more than for the US to continue to supply arms, and for Israel to continue doing what it's doing. Which is tantamount to appeasement of a genocidal regime.

Oh, I got the impression you didn’t care. My mistake!

I don’t usually look at real things in reality and think about ideal solutions. What should happen? That’s just asking to be disappointed. Reality isn’t some piece of sci-fi fantasy make’em’up offered to me for my entertainment. When it comes to the real world I just try and see what’s happening and, from time to time, I wonder about what will happen.

I mean, I’m human. Sometimes I do wish for better, sure. But that’s an impulse I try my best to tamp down. If you put me on the spot, though, my answer is pretty simple : Hamas should return the captives. Israel should end the war. The peace process should restart.

14 hours ago, Odine said:

If you're one of the "Free Palestine from Hamas" folks then just say so and I'll stop wasting my time engaging.

If you feel like you’re wasting your time, well, I don’t know how to assuage your feelings on that score. I do think Hamas is pretty bad for the Palestinians! I think there’s some pretty strong evidence now that this is the case! I don’t agree with Sinwar’s statement that he was willing for the entire population of the Gaza Strip, down to the very last infant, to be killed so long as the dream of Hamas survives. I think that’d be bad if that happened!

But if you do disengage and I ever wonder to myself, “Self! What would Ondine think about what’s going on the Middle East?” I’ll just watch John Ritter’s television show and get the real deal straight from the source.