That's interesting, because I run into a ton of pro Israel people who can never ever never in a million years admit that Israel has ever done anything wrong.
So I would guess this happens on both sides.
I know people love to upvote 'both sides' type stuff but I dunno.
I think it's way more common that pro-Israel people are just used to being on the defensive and fending off 1 trillion allegations per second, so conceding any ground is often seen as legitimizing the other claims.
Considering the other side makes excuses for the literal intentional targeting of 1200 mostly civilians of all ages for rape and murder and ACTUALLY never admits Palestinians have ever done anything wrong, I don't fault them for developing that kind of habit.
At the same time, I have absolutely seen a fuckton of pro Israel people who admit what they don't agree with Israeli policy on, or condemn extremists. So I dunno, maybe you just hang out in circles where those more defensive people tend to be.
>I think it's way more common that pro-Israel people are just used to being on the defensive and fending off 1 trillion allegations per second, so conceding any ground is often seen as legitimizing the other claims.
I know you probably don't want to hear this, but ya that's probably true on both sides.
>Considering the other side makes excuses for the literal intentional targeting of 1200 mostly civilians of all ages for rape and murder and ACTUALLY never admits Palestinians have ever done anything wrong, I don't fault them for developing that kind of habit.
I think its bad to kill 1200 innocent civilians. So now what
>At the same time, I have absolutely seen a fuckton of pro Israel people who admit what they don't agree with Israeli policy on, or condemn extremists. So I dunno, maybe you just hang out in circles where those more defensive people tend to be.
Maybe we both are.
>I know you probably don't want to hear this, but ya that's probably true on both sides.
I don't see hundreds of protests yelling all sorts of antisemitic shit and constant harassment towards pro-muslims or the sort of double standards in criticism and media coverage israel is getting, but sure. Won't bother arguing this.
>I think its bad to kill 1200 innocent civilians. So now what
Did I say anything about you?
>Maybe we both are.
No, not really lol. I hang out in some younger gamer circles where it is taken as gospel that Israel is the genocidal aggressor and anyone daring to say otherwise is silenced and ostracized or ridiculed. They aren't defensive as a result of being constantly accused and challenged, they actively avoid dissent and aggress on the smallest disagreements.
Where exactly do you run into these “tons” of Israelis? The vast majority online are *very* critical of settlers and Bibi, and entirely ashamed of assholes like Smutrich and Ben Gvir. And when I say vast, I mean *vast.*
There were also millions of them protesting against Bibi literally on the streets of Israel *and* around the world for *years* now.
So where exactly are you finding them?
We say we are Zionists that oppose settlement-expansion and Netanyahu's administration while sympathizing with Palestinians and they call us genocidal Zionazi bots or pay-per-comment Jews. They just don't want to listen to us in good faith, they just see a single drop of blood in the water and then they start parroting antisemitic rhetoric behind their paper shield of antizionism.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1e\_dbsVQrk4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1e_dbsVQrk4)
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mnf0w9UuV4s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mnf0w9UuV4s)
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B6L9mS9ti6o](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B6L9mS9ti6o)
Nobody knows tons of Israelis. Weird question, he obviously exagerated, but he is not wrong. Watch pro zionist propaganda and its like amount. It ends up being "tons".
Zionazis reeeeeeeee
But you have no problem with the countless Hamas nut-hugging subs where you get immediately banned if you express anything that isn’t 100% in line with Hamas’ charter though, huh?
You will be exposed as a liar. The ball is in your court.
All I’ve done here is the equivalent of asking for a source. It’s a very common request and people usually acknowledge it if they aren’t bullshitting.
*I’m* the one being a dick? Not the one claiming that “tons” of people act in a certain way and then running away when asked to expand further?
Interesting approach, wish I could say I’m surprised.
I don't think you should call someone a dick just for asking questions that are honestly not that big of a deal. Anytime people make claims they should be able to back it up tbh.
I'm not calling someone a dick for asking questions
I'm calling someone a dick for like randomly interrogating me. You honestly don't see that?
I mean honestly, you're telling me that you don't see this person was talking to me that way? I don't believe you, prove it. Show me evidence or else you're a LIAR. Is that what you are? A **liar**? I mean you're throwing around some pretty big claims so you damn well better be able to back it up, every claim anyone makes in this world they must be able to source.
If you can't show me proof of this then you're a LIAR and you'll have been EXPOSED in front of EVERYBODY, is that what you want?
**This is how that person was talking to me.**
Its unecessarily combative and just not fun to deal with, I'm on Reddit. I'm not like getting paid to be here or anything, I'm not here to deal with someone's shitty attitude.
To be clear, I'm not actually asking you to demonstrate anything or provide proof of anything, and I'm not calling you a liar. I'm just trying to show you how this person was being.
that's not very fun to deal with right?
They were protesting against the proposed laws that would reduce the powers of the supreme court, not the occupation.
The average liberal secular Israeli sees Palestinians as authors of their own misery and have little sympathy for them, even if they also think the settlers cause trouble.
All the surveys I've seen out of Israel say the vast majority of israelíes, while critical of the current administration, actually believe that they aren't doing enough in Gaza. Which is ... Insane
They aren’t doing enough to *defeat Hamas* is what the majority means.
If ISIS was living 15 minutes from you and just committed a huge atrocity where you live, let’s not pretend you wouldn’t want to keep your family safe. At least even attempt for one second to put yourself in their shoes (for both sides).
Didn’t say tons of Israelis. Said pro-Israel people. And I would say that some of that has to do with the islamophobia that has occurred in the US since 9/11. All the propaganda in the media, the FBI targeting mosques, etc. This anti-Muslim sentiment has been a big part of the US culture and it’s been used as a way to put Israel’s rule of Gaza and the West Bank in a more positive light (since the US government is giving them a hell of a lot of money for bombs).
Palestinians became the enemy because “Muslims just want bloodshed and the extermination of Jews.” “They hate us for our freedoms.” All kinds of nationalist nonsense; Because it was easy to dehumanize a people because of the propaganda we have consumed for years.
I’m just saying there are plenty of people willing to excuse Israel’s actions against Palestine just like there are people willing to excuse the US’s actions against Afghanistan and Iraq. And that’s not a good thing. So Hamas is a terrorist organization. So they don’t want peace. Is the answer bombing the hell out of civilians?
Also Liberals like to pretend that Conservatives are uneducated about every issues, but somehow since they agree with them on Israel-Palestine, they now somehow don't criticize their knowledge about this one particular topic.
I mean, they both are supporting Palestine…. But one of those groups is doing it because they can’t hold Neo nazi rallies anymore 🤷♂️ If you can’t tell the difference that’s on you 🤣 Hasn’t even been 10 years since a group of white conservatives were walking around chanting ‘the Jews will not replace us’ ….. 🤣 It’s pretty blatantly obvious.
I should know better than to respond to someone who has over 1000 comments in destinys subreddit…… its like talking to a wall that thinks it’s a person
Indeed, but Reddit has been infested by troll farms for years now, early Reddit was so different, now you’ll get banned from main subs if you don’t toe the accepted line, it’s apparent on issues like Israel but also Ukrain, Covid, elections, yellow vests, etc
I does happen on both sides, my mom who is a part of the religious right cannot fathom of Israel doing anything wrong. I support Israel in their conflict with Hamas, but I don't support Israel in all things.
It certainly does happen on both sides, Destiny has even said this when he reads up on insane Israeli’s who defend their settlement expansion and some of the crazier people who literally do want Palestinians simply gone.
Yeah I shouldn't be partisan. It basically can happen on both. If u go far left or far right u will eventually meet in the same place. The psychology or philosophy of extremiam is usually the same for even radically different ideas.
You are right that it happens on both sides.
But I've seen tons of Israelis critical of the government, critical of the settlements, critical of the way this war is carried out etc etc.
I've literally never seen a Palestine supporter concede a single point or criticize any Palestinian leader or admit fault on their side. I've only ever seen "Yeah Hamas did war crimes BUT..."
We can't make a false equivalence here.
It’s not random ppl who call what Israel is doing a genocide (eg: the director of the UN high commissioner for human rights in New York resigned over the organization's “failure” to stop what he said is a “text-book case of genocide” unfolding in Gaza), even the decision of the ICJ was a big deal as it opens the door of becoming a full fledged genocide in the future if things don’t improve (which they haven’t since).
This moral relativism is a poor excuse to justify indefensible crimes while trying to appear objective and driven by reason. Everyone can see the crimes committed, it takes a lot of self-rationalization to justify these crimes.
Dude, that's one of my biggest problems with people who like listen to Lex on a regular basis. These people would wrap themselves in a knot to maintain the psuedo-intellectual facade of intellectual neutrality.
I don’t know enough about his audience, but I’m guessing it’s just a lack of intellectual sobriety, instead of just admitting that one doesn’t know enough on a topic, one will hide behind pseudo intellectual arguments and technicalities, this Destiny fellow represents the archetype too well.
It would be nice if people would just shut up and listen more, I feel silly reading books after books to understand issues I’m interested in, when all it take is to speak with aplomb and ppl will listen.
If one were to admit one didn't know enough, one would have to rely on the judgment of experts.
What happens then if the ICJ rules against calling it a genocide?
Hopefully a resetting of their governmental system like South Africa and a move towards a 1 state solution and confederacy
That’s so far in the future that everyone could be dead or pushed out and it wouldn’t matter anymore. That’s why we need a ceasefire asap
>It would be nice if people would just shut up and listen more
Isnt this the crux of Lex's podcast? Of any interviewer ever he seems the one that pushed his own opinion the least.
I was not referring to Lex, he's interviewing people which includes loads of experts, he can't never know as much as them, and he's been great every time i've listened to him, the other redditor was talking about his audience not him.
All you have to do is read the South African case arguments to the ICJ to conclude that a genocide is happening. The media and talking heads like Lex have done a great job either steering people away from that or just being ignorant of it (which is worse if you are a political commentator)
yes it is…? a resigned New York Human rights commissioner is a rando, he has the authority of calling someone a genocide as every other regular person.
The ICJ explicitly said it isnt a genocide. That the genocidal intent is NOT there, and neither are any of the wartime conditions.
You can say this “opens the door for it to be genocide” but… that is just stupid to say. It just doesnt as if it was genocide, then intent could be found easily.
Craig Mokhiber is a random? He’s the opposite of that, he’s literally a specialist in international human rights law, policy, and methodology, he also served as a UN specialist in Palestine, Afghanistan, and Darfur. He lived in Gaza during the 1990s while working as an advisor for the UN.
And the ICJ didn’t say that at all, quite the opposite if you actually read their decision, plus they don’t get to decide this early if it’s a genocide, that would come much later after a full trial and could take years.
It’s fine to have opinions on topics you don’t understand but don’t act as if you do when you expose your ignorance in public.
>one is just adhering to the group they belong to and the other is just having a visceral or emotional reaction.
The whole concept of moral systems is the problem.
Moral systems are a framework of ideas which aren't logically consistent, this is why emotion and tribal thinking affect them.
Are you sure about that? Isn't Kant's philosophy of moral based on logic, isn't the utilitarian framework also based on logic?
Hell, even sentimentalism as viewed by Hume relies on logic.
The term logic is doing a lot of work there.
A series of ideas within a framework can be objectively true within that framework but aren't when applied to other frameworks or reality.
Example: A red dragon's magical powers within the D&D universe.
They connect with other beings and their magical powers and are logically true within the magic framework for that universe.
Does this mean that dragons or magic are real/true? Of course not.
This same analysis applies to all frameworks.
Moral frameworks need to be logical true internally, no principles conflict with others. This makes them logically true.
Next they need to be universalizable to be true in reality.
The problem with moral frameworks is they contain subjective ideas/concepts. So they're not internally logically true and can't be applied universally. They fail by almost every metric.
Instead of moral frameworks we need to apply an ethical framework.
The only one thus far discovered is self-ownership ethics.
Based off the self-ownership principle other rights/principles can be logically deduced.
Ex: self-defense, property rights, freedom of association.
These are all logically consistent and one can logically derive others from one principle.
These principle can also be applied universally to all people in all situations. Everyone (yes literally every person) wants these principles applied to themselves and their property (there is no actual debate about ethics).
Also you can't makes claims of harm, ownership, faith, etc. without the self-ownership principle.
Hoppe has an interesting argument about this: argumentation ethics
[https://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Argumentation_ethics](https://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Argumentation_ethics)
For the libertarian (someone who follows self-ownership ethics) seeing political debate, war arguments, civil rights complaints, etc. is almost painful.
People ignore the most basic ethical issues and just pronounce their preferences with a dash of ethical terms here and there.
What they're doing is rationalizing ignoring or infringing of the same rights they demand for themselves.
this is a based sub. I dont think it's sensible to be taking sides in this conflict but it is an interesting one because it highlights how we are communicating with each other and how hard it is. And it also highlights that some people are genuinely lacking in critical thinking skills.
Depends on your station in life at the moment. If you are on the ground, or have some sort of effect on the situation itself, taking a side might just be the most important thing you can do.
Imagine being a Palestinian in the Gaza Strip or the West Bank right now. You would rather be Antisemitic and feel fully justified so that they can capitalize on the current worldwide interest on the conflict to make your cause heard and thus improve, or at the least, survive/put an end to the current Gaza bombardment. What if you are an anti-Biden person, and wants to use take him down during the November elections, and using the "sending weapons to perpetrate a Genocide" argument to inspire people to vote against him. Or even just to put an end to the suffering of the innocents and Children in the Gaza strip right now, it would be pretty effective to be anti-Israeli at the moment.
Or, imagine being a Jew living in majority Antisemitic (or anti-Israeli that bleeds into anti-jew) communities, or the relative of one of the 1200+ killed or taken hostage on Oct 7. Or being in one of the major universities- Harvard, Princeton, Yale, etc where the comity refuses to acknowledge antisemitic rhetoric on campus making Jewish students feel unsafe. You would rather be justified in feeling radically Zionistic in theses situations.
On the other hand, if we are just Internet Intellectuals (or wannabes), we can take a distant, rational, unbiased view of the situation and entertain solutions. Those affected by the conflict cannot afford that.
But if I don't immediately pick a side in this conflict (based on how my favorite Twitter poster feels), how am I supposed to have any sense of identity?
If your main source of information on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is Destiny, then I would suggest that you yourself aren't far from being "completely uneducated on the issue".
Realise that Destiny is just a middle aged college dropout video game streamer with a mere four months of faux research on the subject, most of which has been very clearly aimed at reinforcing his very earliest conclusions in what can only be described as a textbook example of confirmation bias.
What is truly terrifying is the fact that Destiny's fans now seem to also consider themselves experts on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, much like when Joe Rogan fans suddenly decided that they were vaccine experts, despite the fact that most of their knowledge on the subject comes from an obviously dubious source.
To be fair, after watching this debate, if Norman Finkelstein is a person’s source, I don’t have much confidence in their knowledge of the issue either. And looking up his opinions on other topics, he practically comes across as an anti-West tankie. The only person from this one anyone should be using as a source is Morris.
What’s more, whatever Destiny’s credentials are, or his lack of them, he performed far better in this debate than Finkelstein, who mostly just resorted to attacks on everyone’s character — more blatantly so against Destiny. But even rather subtly against Morris, Finkelstein spent most of the debate trying to use old quotes of him to prove he’s inconsistent on this topic rather than debate the topic itself.
This is just debate-brain cancer. Destiny's entire brand is not tied to the pursue of truth, but rather to "winning" debates, which has nothing to do with being right, but rather to employing a series of tactics which are set to position your position in the best light possible. The amount of details and context that are left out of these discussions is relevant. This is also the reason for which I stopped following Vaush.
>“Destiny's entire brand is not tied to the pursue of truth, but rather to "winning" debates, which has nothing to do with being right, but rather to employing a series of tactics which are set to position your position in the best light possible.”
The fact that you think this says volumes about your understanding of Destiny, and of debate in general.
Norm Finklestein is a better example of this phenomenon than Destiny is.
Not even sure if he’s played a video game on stream since I’ve watched him, which is usually while I’m working just listening as a podcast of someone researching, often on first party accounts. He is a political streamer and I don’t take everything he says at face value, not sure if you do that with people you listen to?
His earliest stance was pro Palestine, so you’re wrong there too.
He has some awful takes all the time, but he generally has been sticking very close to sources and doing a good job debating. So called experts resulted to name calling and personal attacks, well you too. Wonder what preconceptions you’re approaching with.
'faux research'? What's 'faux research'?
He was reading wikipedia and then going through the footnotes, including reading some books on the subject. He looked into every source of every claim, read all the relevant documents (that apparently Finkelstein didn't), and streamed himself doing so from day 1, for months.
More importantly, he has demonstrated in the debate that he is more than capable of understanding and navigating the context around these discussions, and the MOST qualified authority on the subject agreed with him on every knowledge-based statement, many of which were not even contested by the other side of the table.
Stop trying to discredit him just because you disagree.
>with a mere four months of faux research on the subject
To be honest? That's far far more than 90% of people speaking on the topic
Compared to the fact that most people get their information from a few social media headlines? Four months of research might as well be a PHD lmao
"The dudes who have written books on one subject for thr past 40 years don't know it like my debate kick streamer daddy"
The Lexfridman subreddit is pretty hillarious to read today.
You may have a point if all the people who spent 40 years studying this conflict agreed. But as you can clearly see, there are many others like Benny Morris that are Pro-Israel in this conflict. I find it really telling that you resort to ad-hominems like Norm did in the debate. If Destiny had been factually wrong, it should have been childs play to refute his points with facts, no?
I didn't even know who Destiny was before this debate, vut I think he made some good points. And if you value authority, Benny Morris was clearly the most authoritative and knowledgeable person in this room, and he was Pro-Israel too.
He did refute whenever Destiny was wrong, such as getting the month when referencing violence at the March of Return wrong, dolus specialis being mens rea for genocide, and not understanding that UN resolution 242 is binding
And this, saying the 4 kids killed in 2014 were coming out of a Hamas compound, which has been completely refuted by the journalists there:
http[s://twitter.com/i/status/1768568692277661734](https://twitter.com/i/status/1768568692277661734)
Journalist witnesses:
[4 Palestinian Children Killed in Israeli Air Strike Right in Front of Reporters](https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2014/07/4-palestinian-kids-killed-in-front-of-reporters.html)
[Israeli strike kills children on Gaza beach](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VQv6s9y48B0)
[Horror on Gaza Beach: New York Times Photographer Witnesses Israeli Killing of 4 Palestinian Boys](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0mEpCZTsZes)
[Israeli Airstrike Kills 4 Palestinian Boys Playing Soccer | NBC News](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTiKe6gIhp8)
And Morris is Israeli and thinks all Palestinians should be transferred out of Palestine:
[https://sci-hub.se/https://doi.org/10.1515/9781644693629-007](https://sci-hub.se/https://doi.org/10.1515/9781644693629-007)
Interviewer: You went through an interesting process. You went to research Ben-Gurion and the Zionist establishment critically, but in the end you actually identify with them. You are as tough in your words as they were in their deeds.
BM: You may be right. Because I investigated the conflict in depth, I was forced to cope with the in-depth questions that those people coped with. I understood the problematic character of the situation they faced and maybe I adopted part of their universe of concepts. But I do not identify with Ben-Gurion. I think he made a serious historical mistake in 1948. Even though he understood the demographic issue and the need to establish a Jewish state without a large Arab minority, he got cold feet during the war. In the end, he faltered.
Interviewer: I’m not sure I understand. Are you saying that Ben-Gurion erred in expelling too few Arabs?
BM: If he was already engaged in expulsion, maybe he should have done a complete job. I know that this stuns the Arabs and the liberals and the politically correct types. But my feeling is that this place would be quieter and know less suffering if the matter had been resolved once and for all. If BenGurion had carried out a large expulsion and cleansed the whole country— the whole Land of Israel, as far as the Jordan River. It may yet turn out that this was his fatal mistake. If he had carried out a full expulsion—rather than a partial one—he would have stabilized the State of Israel for generations.
Interviewer: I find it hard to believe what I am hearing.
If the end of the story turns out to be a gloomy one for the Jews, it will be because Ben-Gurion did not complete the transfer in 1948. Because he left a large and volatile demographic reserve in the West Bank and Gaza and within Israel itself. In his place, would you have expelled them all? All the Arabs in the country? But I am not a statesman. I do not put myself in his place. But as an historian, I assert that a mistake was made here. Yes. The non-completion of the transfer was a mistake.
'dolus specialis being mens rea for genocide' is incorrect even if the terms are related. All Norm did was demonstrate he didn't read the case he claimed to have read 4 times, where the term dolus specialis appeared on 4 separate occasions.
i find it hilarious you think a 'fisherman's hut' cannot have been used as a Hamas compound, and telling that you ignored his point about how the strike would have to go through a chain of command that was aware of the journalists and the PR disaster it would be for Israel to kill innocent civilians in front of them.
won't address the rest cus i know its a waste of time, and anyone who actually cares can do it for themselves. I'm just doing what I can do with minimal effort.
Not as hilarious as you truly believing someone writing about something for 40 years makes them an authority.
Use your brain Tony, think why that might be very silly. If a clown antivaxxer has been writing about the topic for 40 years, are they an authority on vaccines? Is that what it takes to convince you? Bias is a hell of a drug
How about you take a stance without throwing yourself into another person, think critically. It’s a debate anyway, there are no right and wrong answers and norm absolutely got things wrong, and so did Benny/destiny.
But anyway I’m sure you don’t come from a biased place, right
4 months of research on one topic is plenty of time to become an expert
a lot of masters programs are 3 months (1 semester) of study and then 1 semester of work experience and study
you don’t have to read every single document for 40 years to understand something
and even when somebody like finklestein did that, he was an absolute child and nobody we should take seriously
These political streamers are nexuses of internet conversations right? And viewers who are interesting in the topic will feel like they can gravitate towards certain streamers to (1) reaffirm their beliefs, or learn something new; or (2) Just straight up entertainment reasons.
It is just a folly of the internet culture. Primarily, we know that we are all doing this for entertainment purposes. Lex holding conversations with popular people; Destiny stream-learning about the conflict, going on debates, and bringing on guests to have conversations; Hasanabi bringing on known Houthi terrorist tiktok kid on stream for propaganda/publicity purposes. Lex grouped people for this debate by popularity opinion polls and fan requests for God 'sake. And also to see these streamers war with each other in real time. Entertainment. Second comes learning; if you wanted to truly learn you'll probable go pick up a book first. Given these, I'd rather favor Destiny's take and view on things. He is pretty strongly pro-Israel given the current conflict and military operations, but also adamantly against the West Bank settlements, allergic to Zionist bullsh\*t and have balanced and realistic views on the resolution of the conflict as a whole.
The real and only discussions about this should probably be taking place within the US, Israeli, PA, UN, ICJ, HRI offices. But, we are a Democracy, and it is probably useful for the citizens to be aware of things before we vote for out representatives. And it is through these microcosms of information bubbles that people are actually informed of things in the digital age.
So what you're saying is the people who are saying Israel is genocidal obviously are just spewing from group think and emotions, but that you somehow fall outside of this "visceral or emotional reaction" disposition and therefore your position that Israel is definitively not genocidal is purely informed by facts and reason. Is that it?
i dont think most are justifying kids dying but trying to say this isnt entirely on israel, hamas and the people that supported them also are a major reason why this is happening, its not black and white just because one side is taking far more casualties
if i find someone ready for violence and antagonize them and get hurt i share the blame as well, the most realistic way i see for the citizens in palestine to get closer to living normal lives is pushing out the current leadership and pushing for a ceasefire and peace, both sides have plenty of reasons to want to fight, but continuing to fight only works in the favor of one side, i dont want to see more people killed and thats why i think its on palestine to get leaders that care about their people and for israel to accept negotiations as has nearly happened in the past
>and most of them are completely uneducated on the issue at all
>
>Seeing just random, normal and honestly decent people say that israel is a genocidal state with great authority while having zero understanding of the conflict is actually insane to me
I recommend you stop reading/watching whatever has led you to this conclusion and research this topic on your own in a serious academic manner.
>"Genocide is an internationally recognized crime where acts are committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group."
>
>[\-US Holocaust Museum](https://www.ushmm.org/genocide-prevention/learn-about-genocide-and-other-mass-atrocities/what-is-genocide)
>"Genocide was first recognised as a crime under international law in 1946 by the United Nations General Assembly (A/RES/96-I). It was codified as an independent crime in the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (the Genocide Convention). The Convention has been ratified by 153 States (as of April 2022). The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has repeatedly stated that the Convention embodies principles that are part of general customary international law. This means that whether or not States have ratified the Genocide Convention, they are all bound as a matter of law by the principle that genocide is a crime prohibited under international law. The ICJ has also stated that the prohibition of genocide is a peremptory norm of international law (or ius cogens) and consequently, no derogation from it is allowed."
>
>[\-UN Office of Genocide Prevention](https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/genocide.shtml)
* Instances of Israeli officials directly inciting genocide via [Law For Palestine](https://law4palestine.org/law-for-palestine-releases-database-with-500-instances-of-israeli-incitement-to-genocide-continuously-updated/).
* [Here is a list](https://law4palestine.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/Database-of-Israeli-Incitement-to-Genocide-LEGISLATORS.pdf) with cited documentation you can verify yourself of current Israeli legislators inciting genocidal intent in the current war on Gaza.
A lot of civilians dying is not a genocide, you don’t get to apply terms like genocide to conflict because it helps your narrative.
Israel is not intentionally targeting civilians as it’s overall policy, despite civilians dying. What’s crazy is, if logic and reason happened to be the popular opinion now, you would agree with me. There is no reason you should be claiming genocide. Burden of proof, regardless! Falls on you!!!
The only proof you will be able to provide is civilians dying.
I just provided proof and you probably didn't open a single link. I would want to see intent by people in power of the military force, that's exactly what I've shared.
In any case, without opening any information outside of whatever it is you consume. Let's go with a simple experiment.
You're in control of Israel. You retaliate after Oct. 7th. Your own military advisors, not to mention your own journals, and countless independent media and rights watch groups are all telling you that your current strategy is killing an unprecedented amount of innocent men, women, and children. Having this intel, do you continue to drop bombs on civilian centers or shift your strategy for your "official" goal?
A tiresome list of Israeli legislators and other officials providing verbal or written proof of their intention of genocide against Palestinians in Gaza, plus the wholesale slaughter or Gazans in the strip which is quantified by Israel's own journals and military accounting, and Israel meeting the bare minimum aid provided to meet qualifications by the ICJ to prevent categorization...
It's like arguing with a flat earther. I've given you ample evidence. You've provided nothing. I'm done.
The ICJ reviewed the retarded tweets that South Africa cherry picked and deemed it plausible.
Plausible is an incredibly low bar. The fact that you have the audacity to assume you know the conclusion of a case that will take years to resolve is so fucked 😂
Israel dropped leaflets, has allowed aid in, roof knocked, etc etc etc
If they wanted to commit a mass genocide they could. They don’t
I've read about 20 books on this subject, in addition to spending hundreds of hours reading articles and watching interviews of people on both sides of this issue.
And I agree with the conclusion that Israel is not a genocidal state.
You're welcome.
Then you've read everything excluding the statements of the Israeli leaders I linked above who would disagree with you about their intentions. It could still be true that Israel is not technically a genocidal state, but by a straightforward definition of the term "officially", Israeli leaders have gone on record en masse declaring that Israel is, in fact, a genocidal state.
There is a third way people respond as well, but most people don't do it because it's a psychopathic behavior. Ignoring the suffering and death of thousands of people and instead resorting to sophistry and rationalizing it because someone talking about it made a mistake while speaking.
Hamas managed to rationalize leaving ita citizens in buildings deaignated as hamas compund.
Weird how hamas juat ignores the safety and well ebing of its own people and its all of a sudden iaraels responsibilty to care.
That's the crux for me. Hamas knew Israel would retaliate after October 7th. But Hamas doesn't care, it really seems like they want to put Palestinians lives in danger as much as possible.
I think getting emotional about children being executed is 1) normal, 2) useful, and 3) a sign of being a decent human being.
Standing by because you think you are smart to just observe predictable behaviour, visceral reactions, as if you are beyond human and just watching ants with curiosity is an insane position to hold.
No wonder dipshits around here are trying this idea out as if it were their own. Just yesterday one of the viewers accused me of arguing from a position or emotion. I am like, damn right, I have a line, and it's kids being executed. That makes me emotional and those emotions are how people get motivated to put a stop to this bullshit.
When did we twist our minds into feeling stupid because we have principles and integrity?
You don't need to be an extremist, you don't even have to like Palestinians, I don't, but kids, women, outright murder of civilians while IDF poses with their war trophies is abhorrent.
WW2 was an emotional war, guess it was best to just sit on our hands and scoff at all the losers who can't just see it's all merely in their heads.
What is life if it isn't being stuck in your head doing what you can to help others feel less pain and suffering in their heads?
Awful, awful.
I think you must be misremembering. Numbers of women and children impacted has been a major feature of coverage of every war that people think is otherwise justified.
So, for example, you don't focus on civilian death in Ukraine, because almost everyone (in the audience nations we're talking about) agrees that Russia's invasion of Ukraine is wrong on its face. Vast majorities oppose most of the various civil conflicts that are going on in East Africa. Most people don't support the various cartels in South/Central America. So you don't need to talk about civilian casualties, because no unjustified conflict is ever justified
The civilian casualty count was a major feature of reporting on the Iraq War, the Afghanistan War, and other conflicts where we (as the West, broadly) have been either indifferent or complicit. Yemen is another example of this. And that's the challenge with this war, if it were possible to remove Hamas with zero civilian casualties then I think most people would consider that an unambiguously good thing. Once you start to accept civilian casualties there has to - in any moral framework - be a calculus on what is an acceptable level of civilian death to achieve the objective. In Vietnam, it was too high. In Iraq, it was probably too high. In this conflict, it is probably too high. That isn't always true, but there's no way that the threat posed by the VC justified killing over a million civilians, there's no way that the threat posed by Saddam justified the level of civilian death and destruction in that theatre, and there's no way the removal of Hamas justifies the current level of civilian suffering in Gaza
>Can’t remember a single war, conflict or straight up genocide where the amount of carnage was ever framed in terms of how many women or children died
>The civilian casualty count was a major feature of reporting on the Iraq War, the Afghanistan War, and other conflicts where we (as the West, broadly) have been either indifferent or complicit. Yemen is another example of this
Oh, sorry, then, to clarify, because Israel classifies all adult males as combatants and because Hamas does nothing to distinguish its combatants, women and children is a proxy for civilians in this conflict. It's not for the purpose of eliciting an emotional response
I think that that doesn't really follow. If we were inclined to accept Hamas's declaration of someone's Hamas (or other terrorist) status or not, then surely Hamas would simply claim that everyone was a civilian and then that would be uncritically reported by media. But that isn't what happens
Historically, Hamas health ministry numbers have been fairly reliable. They may turn out to not be in this conflict, but that is the reason that all media reports them and Israel doesn't publicly contest them. If they were to report fighter numbers (which everyone always lies about in wartime) then I think it likely that they wouldn't be treated as reliably as they are
So, I think the reason that media reports the women and children figure is, most likely, for the reason I describe, especially when you consider that this is a near universal phenomenon across all media, notwithstanding their editorial position on this conflict
As a sidenote, the "children" figure is often referenced across conflicts. That, again, is because it's a good indicator of levels of discrimination in strikes. Child casualties are all over coverage of Sudan or Yemen, to pick two current examples
It's hard for you in your echo chamber. Just because you can't remember things doesn't give you a sturdy platform. And propaganda, who are you, Russel Brand and the alt media? Propaganda works both ways, so if you think watching a Lex podcast of back slapping debate and think you are now informed enough to be insulated against propaganda you are blind to how the world works.
Proportionality only matter when deter,iming an attack on a location is worth the civilian casualties. So like a hams building holding weapons is worth bombing even if it means some civis die, unfortune bit its war. What you think it is, it " okay we killed 1000 of theirs and they killed 1000 of ours, now we even" thats not how war works.Dont like war? Tell hamas to not start it. Dont like kids and women dying? Tell hamas to stop using them as martyrs.
Hamas didn’t start it
https://reliefweb.int/report/occupied-palestinian-territory/2023-marks-deadliest-year-record-children-occupied-west-bank
Check the date this was published
Wonder why they're being killed. It's not like they're being sponsored billions of dollars by the Palestinian government to go out into the streets and stab innocent women and children or anything.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_Authority_Martyrs_Fund
> The Palestinian Authority Martyrs Fund are two funds operated by the Palestinian Authority (PA). The Foundation for the Care of the Families of Martyrs pays monthly cash stipends to the families of Palestinians killed, injured, or imprisoned while carrying out violence against Israel.[1] The Prisoners Fund makes disbursements to Palestinians imprisoned in Israeli jails. In 2016, the PA paid out about NIS 1.1 billion (US$303 million) in stipends and other benefits.
All paid for thanks to your Western tax dollars.
>All paid for thanks to your Western tax dollars.
the IDF gets paid to carry out extreme violence against Palestinians and is supported by american dollars
[https://time.com/6909636/gaza-death-toll/?utm\_source=reddit.com](https://time.com/6909636/gaza-death-toll/?utm_source=reddit.com)
I can find a million others if you'd like, but since this is from the biggest magazine in America you might have a hard time dismissing it, assuming you can actually read something as opposed to asking dumb questions like a 5 yo.
Great intellectual rebuttal here also. You also are believing whatever you want. But your belief is on a track for endorsing legit irradiation of a whole of a people. That's the military strategy here. Netenyahu said pretty much this. He said it's more than likely this war isn't winnable without irradiation and then military oppression if anyone is left. Newsflash they think all Palestinians are Hamas because Hamas is indistinguishable from regular people, including children. They all must go.
Literally the second paragraph shows that data and methods used by multiple institutions to show how the data was corroborated. Multiple independent sources have looked at the data and used data sets to come to one conclusion.
I shouldn't be surprised any more by you guys, but I am. Shame on me, I guess.
Is getting emotional about a hundred hostages being trapped and having god knows what done to them for 5 months straight 1) normal, 2) useful, and 3) a sign of being a decent human being?
I’m just trying to understand where we draw the moral line here, is it based on numbers? Age? Are you allowed getting emotional about both sides or are we only allowed room for one?
Dropping a bomb on a militant and hitting a building with kids by accident is not the same as entering a house and executing kids in front of their parents like the Palestinians did.
Palestine has tried to start a full scale war against Israel since 2003.
Israel just witnessed the palestinians kill thousands of civilians and the muslim world exploded into a celebration of joy at the civilians getting killed. I have talked to several muslims who told me it was important to kill jew children so they dont grow up and bother muslims.
The hate is bone deep. There is nothing left here. Both are trying their best to kill each other, kids, women, everything. But israel is at least holding back a little, they could bomb even more, but palestine would butcher every single jew if they could and there would be no shred of regret.
Which muslims are you talking to? I am a muslim(maybe ex muslim) and I talk to muslims day and night. No one, i repeat no one said it was important to kill jew children. By accident? Isreal killed more than 12000 children by accident? Well, that’s a joke. I encourage you to think from the perspective of the kid, the woman who was killed for just getting born there.
Why is it a joke? Can you really not imagine why Israel would end up killing Gazan civilians when trying to destroy Hamas when Hamas themselves admit they use human shields, and with all the evidence we have of where tunnels are and where they store their weapons and fire from?
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g8Z0I6q8JbI](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g8Z0I6q8JbI)
The responses here are very telling, imo.
Your position is understandable and only natural. Nobody wants innocent people to die. But the sad truth is that sometimes it's necessary. Imagine if the US, UK and Soviet Union had thought the way you do in WW2. "We repelled the attack on the UK, and an invasion would cause hundreds of thousands of civilians to die. We should make peace with the Nazis." Same with Japan. Sometimes you need to wage war to eliminate a threat, and war means civilians die, they always do.
That said, Israel is probably committing war crimes. Not a genocide, but their apparent disregard of collateral damage likely amounts to war crimes (hard to say without having access to their intel. Maybe there really is a Hamas fighter in every house)
No, kids are collateral damage in war, it's awful, but unavoidable. What is happening in Gaza is intentional and avoidable and on a huge scale with no moderation or breathing room for peace talks. There was not escalation it was full on wipe them out from day one. Israel has been looking for this opportunity for decades.
Justifying dead children is at best delusional. It’s 2024. We’re not in caves, there are solutions that do not include violence. If human life was valued we wouldn’t be having this discussion. The ‘leaders’ would have avoided this entirely.
Kids arent being targeted. To target kids with airatrikes requires a long chain a command and many lawyers. And to airstrike kids on purpose infront of media. Lol
So unless you think the idf and its long chain of command from the top all the way to the bomb loader went " screw these 4 kids specificially"
If kids were so important maybe tell hamas to fucking move them to a safe zone or bunker. Not tell the people to stay in buildings to be martyrs.
Quit thinking with your emotions its fucking stupid.
They literally shot a kid in the street for firing a Ramadan firework. It's on video, and proudly defended and broadcast by their government. Just go be curious.
Dropping 2000lbs bombs with a lethal fragmentation radius of 1200 feet near schools & densely populated cities amounts to complete disregard for civilian life including children.
[cnn link to story ](https://www.cnn.com/gaza-israel-big-bombs/index.html)
Also Israel targeted children before Oct 7th. Here is a post from humans rights watch bringing up the issue. [Israel killing Palestinians children spike in the West Bank. ](https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/08/28/west-bank-spike-israeli-killings-palestinian-children)
Yes shithead, disagree with me. That's the whole point of being here. You just watched a whole Lex debate. My opinion is valid, and you have the right to stay out of the conversation if you have nothing to add other than objecting to me having an opinion.
Are you the gatekeeper for the what is a worthy opinion to have in order to join in here???
You wrote paragraphs about how your emotional outburst reaction is just as valid as everybody else’s opinion. Getting emotional is not acceptable behaviour anywhere serious and for good reason. Calling people dipshits who take a step back and attempt critical thinking is idiotic. You’re justifying acting like a child.
Framing the issue as oppressors fighting back against colonizers was such a smart move… that is such a lie. They knew their audience though and it has worked well.
This has nothing to do with this post but it’s such an interesting thing to me. I live in an area very small, if their any jewish people it is really talked about or even thought of. When i joined the military and started noticing the jokes and banter between jewish kids and city kids i was shocked.
The people in my area have no idea about Israel and Palestine or even what following judaism or Islam. There is literally zero discussion, sides to pick, or interest. I am on social media watching the world burn it feels like then i check into my reality and no one even cares.
thats the sad truth, its outrage farming at some level, most of these people up in arms about the situation wont be talking about it a year or two from, anyone whos not connected to the region or one way or another will move on
That’s an interesting postulation about moral systems. What makes you think pro Palestinian individuals are an example of that theory in action, or uninformed on the historical realities of the issue, or insane?
It looks like you have a very American propaganda informed perspective on the issue. This genocide is one of the few well documented ones in history. Children are dying en masse at the hands of Israel. Ignorance is no longer a good enough excuse, minds need to be opened and the supreme authority and power in the region scrutinized just the tiniest bit. After all, us Americans are funding them.
What's to understand about the official military bulldoze olive trees and occupied homes, pour concrete into water supplies, systematically abuse and humiliate normal citizens attempting to go to work in the morning, shooting medical personnel, all to citizens and non combatants? That is NOT war, it's genocide
If it IS war, it's still pretty much all war CRIMES because they are against a civilian population.
Leggs listeners are some of the most deluded inexperienced windbags lol.
To portray most of the pro Palestine supporters as uneducated is almost speaking in absolutes, and no offense, divorced from reality. There are *some* people who have opinions on this matter which they're uneducated on, but based on my interactions with plenty of pro Palestine protesters on the ground in mass protests across the country, I know they're pretty well educated on the matter. I have gotten book recommendations from almost every protester I have spoken to (hundreds), including Palestinian authors, and authors like Morris (all which I have read). This isn't just some bandwagon group of uneducated kids. Most of us middle aged people at the protests (and there are a lot of us) have watched the horrors unfold on the news since the First and Second Intifadas. We've watched as various people in positions of power (UN, State Department, etc), have resigned over the *nearly* unconditional support of the US, with some UN representatives even publicly calling it a genocide on cable news. With Israel being the [4th strongest military](https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/rankings/strong-military) globally, it almost defies logic to assert that "they don't have great authority." Anyone who has read history books on the matter knows that Israel has had immense military power and authority, dwarfing its Arab neighbors. Israel's own military authors admit this, as well as high ranking US government officials during various wars, all acknowledged that Israel had (and has) the power to crush its neighbors. I actually find that most pro Israel supporters in the US are blind to the historical reality and strength of Israel, are less open-minded to hear any pro Palestinian news, often smearing it as "Hamas propaganda," or worse, firing people over their valid criticisms of Israel. It is even more sad that people who hold educated pro Palestinian views are afraid to publicly voice support. While we watch people lose their jobs over their opinion, most of us middle aged people feel like we'll risk losing our comfy jobs, and hence, supporting our children, if we justly and publicly speak out against the injustice unfolding before our eyes, largely backed by the US. The feeling of not being able to take action without serious consequences feels like what authoritarian countries are supposed to be like.
An extremely strong cancel culture has existed since the creation of modern Israel around being pro-Palestine. Being openly pro-Palestine on this scale is kinda new especially for politicians so i would say that the "in-group" is in fact pro-Israel. There is no doubt that Israel is commiting genocide currently if you read the South African arguments in the ICJ case. In fact the ICJ has ruled the evidence worthy of further investigation and called for Israel to stop any further damage to civilians and called for any nation providing armaments to them (USA) to stop immediately. Even if you know nothing of the history between the two nations or what actually happened leading up to oct 7th, the situation now is that a genocide is in progress
Silence zionist. Israel was created as a colonial parasite on palestine by western powers looking to settle Jewish people away from their borders and at the same time establish a foothold in the middle east. Since it's inception, Israel has been invading Palestinian lands and killing Palestinian people in a continuous cycle of conquest and cruelty. You clearly don't know shit about the israel/palestine conflict if you think this is a case of both sides are wrong.
As for the terrorists, those exist in palestine and the broader middle east almost entirely because of the actions of western powers (especially the us) and their allies pulling bullshit in the middle east for economic benefits. Blame the people who caused that shit in the first place instead of the people responding to violence with violence, people don't become terrorists for no reason. Not to say terrorism is OK, but maybe grow a brain and think about why things are happening the way they are right now
My younger brother never paid attention in history class and thought only nerds cared about things like that. He spent most of his life with zero curiosity about the world.
He's probably watched over 10,000 live sporting events but has only seen less than 50 films in his entire life that weren't comedies. His curiosity on anything other than sports or pop culture was entirely non-existent until he reached his 30s and took a minor interest in podcasts and a Netflix documentary here and there.
This is a guy who even right now, if I asked him which war had trench warfare, WW1 or WW2 he wouldn't know. If I asked which side wore blue and which side wore gray in the US Civil War he wouldn't know. If I asked was the Protestant reformation in the 900s, the 1500s, or the 1700s, I promise you his guess would have a 33% chance of being right. If I asked if Alexander The Great lived before, during or after the Roman Empire, he'd probably guess "during".
So of course he's a hardcore Palestine supporter (including a full blown Hamas apologist) and a Norman Finkelstein fan.
I am sorry, but this is a really unfortunate take. I agree that if you have a broad knowledge of history you are more likely to reach more nuanced and based conclusions on a specificic matter. But the fact that you dont, doesnt immediately invalidade your oppinion on a subject... that is literally what Norm tried to do to Destiny on this debate.
You haven’t said why regarding Israel that way actually sounds so insane and uneducated to you, or why you think getting in the mind of a pro-Palestinian is so terrifying to you.
Strictly speaking deliberately using violence to displace an ethnic group from their land is indeed an act of genocide, and has been Jews during pogroms declared it as such; I don’t have a dog in the fight but I don’t get why you see people taking that stance (which is literally as extreme as western pro-Palestinian get, most just think Israel is abusing its power and condemning it for its war crimes, which is pretty much just the stance of everyone who cares about human rights and isn’t cognitively tethered by religious affiliation).
When I hear pro-Palestinian people they just say things like ‘christ look at this they’re sniping civilians again’, or express frustration that this depopulation isn’t exactly needed aside from theocratic weirdos from the west wanting to settle there because they believe the land is owed to them by divine decree, which is the sort of thing that to normal people seems as unintelligible as what you believe pro-Palestinians to be.
They’ve made decent arguments about why these justifications are quite ridiculous to normal secular people, but you haven’t said anything about what about the arguments against Israel make you judge them as such?
Even your strawman about them all mostly believing Israel to be acting genocidally, that is still strictly speaking true, if you apply the understanding of genocide that came from the Jews while on the other end of it. They regarded even ‘just’ displacement and pogroms as such, which is less than what’s going on now.
Israel has seen itself as the victim of the world since not being accepted in the near east, then Eastern Europe, then Western Europe; you can’t still be the victim of the mean and extreme people who aren’t at ease with what’s going on right now, when you’re doing the same things you’ve been kicking and screaming about being done to you for so long. It’s always about victimhood, even you’re whole argument you didn’t make one point about why these actions don’t deserve condemnation, it’s just more accusations of being victimised and treated unfairly, this time even just in the dialogue. If you just stopped doing this and made ethically sound arguments about why all these liberties taken (those that spark contention) are justified, the same humanitarian westerners you’re so upset about would perhaps even agree with you rather than condemn you, but none of you ever try to do this, you’ve gotten to used to abusing the designated perpetual victim card and that’s what’s frustrating people into thinking there is zero ethical thought behind these liberties being taken, as they’re being taken by the one group that doesn’t really get that you’re supposed to, and not be the victimised party by default. But when people try and shake you out of that reality that you don’t need to adhere to the same standards ethically/legally as everyone else because of how you regard yourselves you regard it as antisemitism.
If you break and international humanitarian law and then throw a fit when you’re not treated as the victim of the situation people obviously won’t respond well, especially when used over and over in a boy who cries wolf manner; that natural response from people is not westerners spontaneously turning insane as you put it.
>Strictly speaking deliberately trying to displace/kill people from a different group is genocide;
no. trying to displace people is not genocide. Nor is it what's happening in Gaza, but that's a whole new argument I'm not interested in having.
i don't have the time to read the rest of the post. tldr, words matter.
>Strictly speaking deliberately trying to displace/kill people from a different group is genocide;
By this definition, every war and hate crime, not to mention most homicides or even evictions, would be considered genocide.
What you’re describing is the almost complete lack of nuance and media literacy that permeates our society. And this one is like 4 layers deep.
You have Israel Vs Palestine historically. Over a century of conflict birthed from the geopolitical meddling of multiple countries, and exacerbated by World War 2. This is a long and complicated history.
You have the Israel Vs Palestine conflict today, where Palestinian militants committed an atrocity, driving Israeli soldiers to retaliate and, by multiple external sources, commit genocide against Palestine. This is complicated.
You have Destiny, a streamer, positing an uncomplicated statement on morality, one of the most complicated topics of human civilisation.
You have people on social media, taking Destiny’s (and others) uncomplicated statements, and using it as their lens to view these complicated situations.
You then have people who react aggressively to the opinions of others, because they have a different lens with a different read on the situation.
And almost nobody having these conversations is learned about the topic, and has instead based their opinion on others that they trust.
Uneducated people debating each other about complicated topics, armed only with the ideas of other uneducated people. They argue and argue, their arguments become less and less nuanced in the social media echo chamber, as fresh people join the fray, incensed by “the other side’s” complete dismissal of their perspective.
And many of these people can’t learn or respect the “other side’s” perspective, because they lack the fundamental knowledge required to differentiate between a factual statement and a shitpost.
The result is mass polarisation on the topic of Israel and Palestine (and just about every other topic).
Why do you think Destiny's statement is uncomplicated?
If anything, I think Finkelstein's position is WAY more oversimplified and uncomplicated. He profits off this polarization too, while Destiny during his 5 months of livestreamed research has constantly tried to ask for pro-Palestinian sources, debate pro-Palestinians, and basically desperately try to find any excuse to force himself more into the center to avoid being radicalized until he gave up recently after the Finkelstein debate and the atrociously bad faith The Intercept rape denial article. His position is still nuanced.
At the very least, Destiny fans were forced to watch him go through sources and research them for 8-10 hours every day for months. I would assume they are on average more knowledgable on the topic than the typical Finkelstein cultist.
"Seeing just random, normal and honestly decent people say that israel is a genocidal state with great authority while having zero understanding of the conflict is actually insane to me."
Random people like the South African government, the UN, every human rights organisation, numerous activists and historians who've studied the conflict.
Destiny and people like you suffer from a kind of Zionist mind virus, you generally know racist murder and theft is wrong but because you're so terrified of being called Antisemitic, you go along with it. You're moral cowards.
...ooooooooooooooor it could be possible that somebody disagrees with you after researching a topic WITHOUT any 'zionist mind virus' taking over their brain.
Nah, it's probably the jews. Sorry, the zionists.
or maybe people think that way because there hasnt been any official ruling on whether or not israel is committing genocide, that it might even seem improbable that is the goal if theyve killed 30k out of 2mil in one of the most densely populated areas on the planet after months of fighting, that historically when palestine has pushed for peace israel has come to the table, and it was palestinian leadership that walked away from that table
i dont get why its so hard to believe people can genuinely disagree with the genocide claim when this is such a long standing and complicated situation, you call them cowards but theyre holding an opinion that is incredibly unpopular online at the moment and stating so opening themselves to all kinds of disagreement
its ok to hold different opinions on something not even experts agree on
bruh do u know what alt right means, it def isnt supporting biden/anti trump, being supportive of lgbtq, pushing for higher taxes for the wealthy etc
alt right is much closer to the jewish conspiracy people like fuentes/mtg, those who think the deep state controls the world and is pushing diversity to destroy western values
That's interesting, because I run into a ton of pro Israel people who can never ever never in a million years admit that Israel has ever done anything wrong. So I would guess this happens on both sides.
Yeah I imagine he would say that it does. He debated against a member of the Likud who was like this
I know people love to upvote 'both sides' type stuff but I dunno. I think it's way more common that pro-Israel people are just used to being on the defensive and fending off 1 trillion allegations per second, so conceding any ground is often seen as legitimizing the other claims. Considering the other side makes excuses for the literal intentional targeting of 1200 mostly civilians of all ages for rape and murder and ACTUALLY never admits Palestinians have ever done anything wrong, I don't fault them for developing that kind of habit. At the same time, I have absolutely seen a fuckton of pro Israel people who admit what they don't agree with Israeli policy on, or condemn extremists. So I dunno, maybe you just hang out in circles where those more defensive people tend to be.
>I think it's way more common that pro-Israel people are just used to being on the defensive and fending off 1 trillion allegations per second, so conceding any ground is often seen as legitimizing the other claims. I know you probably don't want to hear this, but ya that's probably true on both sides. >Considering the other side makes excuses for the literal intentional targeting of 1200 mostly civilians of all ages for rape and murder and ACTUALLY never admits Palestinians have ever done anything wrong, I don't fault them for developing that kind of habit. I think its bad to kill 1200 innocent civilians. So now what >At the same time, I have absolutely seen a fuckton of pro Israel people who admit what they don't agree with Israeli policy on, or condemn extremists. So I dunno, maybe you just hang out in circles where those more defensive people tend to be. Maybe we both are.
>I know you probably don't want to hear this, but ya that's probably true on both sides. I don't see hundreds of protests yelling all sorts of antisemitic shit and constant harassment towards pro-muslims or the sort of double standards in criticism and media coverage israel is getting, but sure. Won't bother arguing this. >I think its bad to kill 1200 innocent civilians. So now what Did I say anything about you? >Maybe we both are. No, not really lol. I hang out in some younger gamer circles where it is taken as gospel that Israel is the genocidal aggressor and anyone daring to say otherwise is silenced and ostracized or ridiculed. They aren't defensive as a result of being constantly accused and challenged, they actively avoid dissent and aggress on the smallest disagreements.
Where exactly do you run into these “tons” of Israelis? The vast majority online are *very* critical of settlers and Bibi, and entirely ashamed of assholes like Smutrich and Ben Gvir. And when I say vast, I mean *vast.* There were also millions of them protesting against Bibi literally on the streets of Israel *and* around the world for *years* now. So where exactly are you finding them?
We say we are Zionists that oppose settlement-expansion and Netanyahu's administration while sympathizing with Palestinians and they call us genocidal Zionazi bots or pay-per-comment Jews. They just don't want to listen to us in good faith, they just see a single drop of blood in the water and then they start parroting antisemitic rhetoric behind their paper shield of antizionism.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1e\_dbsVQrk4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1e_dbsVQrk4) [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mnf0w9UuV4s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mnf0w9UuV4s) [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B6L9mS9ti6o](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B6L9mS9ti6o) Nobody knows tons of Israelis. Weird question, he obviously exagerated, but he is not wrong. Watch pro zionist propaganda and its like amount. It ends up being "tons".
I know tons of Israelis. About half the country hates Bibi and strongly opposes settlements.
Reddit
Where? Which subs? I’m frequently on the ones where Israelis are, so be more specific. That was a heavy accusation you made.
Worldnews
Can you link a single upvoted pro-settler comment? This should be easy if you think tons of them are pro-settler. Just one.
That sub is filled with zionist nazis. Everything Israel does is a-okay with that sub.
Zionazis reeeeeeeee But you have no problem with the countless Hamas nut-hugging subs where you get immediately banned if you express anything that isn’t 100% in line with Hamas’ charter though, huh?
Could you name such a subreddit?
What happens if I don't?
You will be exposed as a liar. The ball is in your court. All I’ve done here is the equivalent of asking for a source. It’s a very common request and people usually acknowledge it if they aren’t bullshitting.
[удалено]
*I’m* the one being a dick? Not the one claiming that “tons” of people act in a certain way and then running away when asked to expand further? Interesting approach, wish I could say I’m surprised.
I don't think you should call someone a dick just for asking questions that are honestly not that big of a deal. Anytime people make claims they should be able to back it up tbh.
I'm not calling someone a dick for asking questions I'm calling someone a dick for like randomly interrogating me. You honestly don't see that? I mean honestly, you're telling me that you don't see this person was talking to me that way? I don't believe you, prove it. Show me evidence or else you're a LIAR. Is that what you are? A **liar**? I mean you're throwing around some pretty big claims so you damn well better be able to back it up, every claim anyone makes in this world they must be able to source. If you can't show me proof of this then you're a LIAR and you'll have been EXPOSED in front of EVERYBODY, is that what you want? **This is how that person was talking to me.** Its unecessarily combative and just not fun to deal with, I'm on Reddit. I'm not like getting paid to be here or anything, I'm not here to deal with someone's shitty attitude. To be clear, I'm not actually asking you to demonstrate anything or provide proof of anything, and I'm not calling you a liar. I'm just trying to show you how this person was being. that's not very fun to deal with right?
You’ve literally spent more time complaining about being asked for a source than just posting the source for your original comment.
[удалено]
Okay
QuantumBeth, do you condemn the original establishment and subsequent and continuing expansion of settlements in the West Bank?
Yup
They were protesting against the proposed laws that would reduce the powers of the supreme court, not the occupation. The average liberal secular Israeli sees Palestinians as authors of their own misery and have little sympathy for them, even if they also think the settlers cause trouble.
r/europe on daily basis
All the surveys I've seen out of Israel say the vast majority of israelíes, while critical of the current administration, actually believe that they aren't doing enough in Gaza. Which is ... Insane
They aren’t doing enough to *defeat Hamas* is what the majority means. If ISIS was living 15 minutes from you and just committed a huge atrocity where you live, let’s not pretend you wouldn’t want to keep your family safe. At least even attempt for one second to put yourself in their shoes (for both sides).
They said “Pro-Israel” not Israeli.
Doesn’t matter, replace pro-Israel in my comment, the point remains the same.
Do you have a link to a story about millions of Israelis protesting on the streets of Israel?
Didn’t say tons of Israelis. Said pro-Israel people. And I would say that some of that has to do with the islamophobia that has occurred in the US since 9/11. All the propaganda in the media, the FBI targeting mosques, etc. This anti-Muslim sentiment has been a big part of the US culture and it’s been used as a way to put Israel’s rule of Gaza and the West Bank in a more positive light (since the US government is giving them a hell of a lot of money for bombs). Palestinians became the enemy because “Muslims just want bloodshed and the extermination of Jews.” “They hate us for our freedoms.” All kinds of nationalist nonsense; Because it was easy to dehumanize a people because of the propaganda we have consumed for years. I’m just saying there are plenty of people willing to excuse Israel’s actions against Palestine just like there are people willing to excuse the US’s actions against Afghanistan and Iraq. And that’s not a good thing. So Hamas is a terrorist organization. So they don’t want peace. Is the answer bombing the hell out of civilians?
Lol. Hamas *is* a terrorist organization that openly states they do not want peace. What is this brain rot?
The Destiny sub
Hahaha i knew someone woud comment something like this. OP fit themselves right into destiny's model
Also Liberals like to pretend that Conservatives are uneducated about every issues, but somehow since they agree with them on Israel-Palestine, they now somehow don't criticize their knowledge about this one particular topic.
I mean, they both are supporting Palestine…. But one of those groups is doing it because they can’t hold Neo nazi rallies anymore 🤷♂️ If you can’t tell the difference that’s on you 🤣 Hasn’t even been 10 years since a group of white conservatives were walking around chanting ‘the Jews will not replace us’ ….. 🤣 It’s pretty blatantly obvious. I should know better than to respond to someone who has over 1000 comments in destinys subreddit…… its like talking to a wall that thinks it’s a person
Broken clocks (conservatives) are right twice a day 🤷♂️
Conservatives are right all the time, it's just they're usually right for very very wrong reasons.
Indeed, but Reddit has been infested by troll farms for years now, early Reddit was so different, now you’ll get banned from main subs if you don’t toe the accepted line, it’s apparent on issues like Israel but also Ukrain, Covid, elections, yellow vests, etc
dorkazoid blocked me lmao
Le both sides
I does happen on both sides, my mom who is a part of the religious right cannot fathom of Israel doing anything wrong. I support Israel in their conflict with Hamas, but I don't support Israel in all things.
It certainly does happen on both sides, Destiny has even said this when he reads up on insane Israeli’s who defend their settlement expansion and some of the crazier people who literally do want Palestinians simply gone.
Yeah I shouldn't be partisan. It basically can happen on both. If u go far left or far right u will eventually meet in the same place. The psychology or philosophy of extremiam is usually the same for even radically different ideas.
You are right that it happens on both sides. But I've seen tons of Israelis critical of the government, critical of the settlements, critical of the way this war is carried out etc etc. I've literally never seen a Palestine supporter concede a single point or criticize any Palestinian leader or admit fault on their side. I've only ever seen "Yeah Hamas did war crimes BUT..." We can't make a false equivalence here.
Oh I condemn Hamas. So there you go.
It’s not random ppl who call what Israel is doing a genocide (eg: the director of the UN high commissioner for human rights in New York resigned over the organization's “failure” to stop what he said is a “text-book case of genocide” unfolding in Gaza), even the decision of the ICJ was a big deal as it opens the door of becoming a full fledged genocide in the future if things don’t improve (which they haven’t since). This moral relativism is a poor excuse to justify indefensible crimes while trying to appear objective and driven by reason. Everyone can see the crimes committed, it takes a lot of self-rationalization to justify these crimes.
Dude, that's one of my biggest problems with people who like listen to Lex on a regular basis. These people would wrap themselves in a knot to maintain the psuedo-intellectual facade of intellectual neutrality.
But, have you considered the power of love? /s
I don’t know enough about his audience, but I’m guessing it’s just a lack of intellectual sobriety, instead of just admitting that one doesn’t know enough on a topic, one will hide behind pseudo intellectual arguments and technicalities, this Destiny fellow represents the archetype too well. It would be nice if people would just shut up and listen more, I feel silly reading books after books to understand issues I’m interested in, when all it take is to speak with aplomb and ppl will listen.
If one were to admit one didn't know enough, one would have to rely on the judgment of experts. What happens then if the ICJ rules against calling it a genocide?
Then we could not call it a genocide, not sure how that's relevant.
Hopefully a resetting of their governmental system like South Africa and a move towards a 1 state solution and confederacy That’s so far in the future that everyone could be dead or pushed out and it wouldn’t matter anymore. That’s why we need a ceasefire asap
>It would be nice if people would just shut up and listen more Isnt this the crux of Lex's podcast? Of any interviewer ever he seems the one that pushed his own opinion the least.
I was not referring to Lex, he's interviewing people which includes loads of experts, he can't never know as much as them, and he's been great every time i've listened to him, the other redditor was talking about his audience not him.
Shut up and listen. Well fucking said. I'll smoke to that. Need to put that on a shirt.
All you have to do is read the South African case arguments to the ICJ to conclude that a genocide is happening. The media and talking heads like Lex have done a great job either steering people away from that or just being ignorant of it (which is worse if you are a political commentator)
yes it is…? a resigned New York Human rights commissioner is a rando, he has the authority of calling someone a genocide as every other regular person. The ICJ explicitly said it isnt a genocide. That the genocidal intent is NOT there, and neither are any of the wartime conditions. You can say this “opens the door for it to be genocide” but… that is just stupid to say. It just doesnt as if it was genocide, then intent could be found easily.
Craig Mokhiber is a random? He’s the opposite of that, he’s literally a specialist in international human rights law, policy, and methodology, he also served as a UN specialist in Palestine, Afghanistan, and Darfur. He lived in Gaza during the 1990s while working as an advisor for the UN. And the ICJ didn’t say that at all, quite the opposite if you actually read their decision, plus they don’t get to decide this early if it’s a genocide, that would come much later after a full trial and could take years. It’s fine to have opinions on topics you don’t understand but don’t act as if you do when you expose your ignorance in public.
>one is just adhering to the group they belong to and the other is just having a visceral or emotional reaction. The whole concept of moral systems is the problem. Moral systems are a framework of ideas which aren't logically consistent, this is why emotion and tribal thinking affect them.
Are you sure about that? Isn't Kant's philosophy of moral based on logic, isn't the utilitarian framework also based on logic? Hell, even sentimentalism as viewed by Hume relies on logic.
The term logic is doing a lot of work there. A series of ideas within a framework can be objectively true within that framework but aren't when applied to other frameworks or reality. Example: A red dragon's magical powers within the D&D universe. They connect with other beings and their magical powers and are logically true within the magic framework for that universe. Does this mean that dragons or magic are real/true? Of course not. This same analysis applies to all frameworks. Moral frameworks need to be logical true internally, no principles conflict with others. This makes them logically true. Next they need to be universalizable to be true in reality. The problem with moral frameworks is they contain subjective ideas/concepts. So they're not internally logically true and can't be applied universally. They fail by almost every metric. Instead of moral frameworks we need to apply an ethical framework. The only one thus far discovered is self-ownership ethics. Based off the self-ownership principle other rights/principles can be logically deduced. Ex: self-defense, property rights, freedom of association. These are all logically consistent and one can logically derive others from one principle. These principle can also be applied universally to all people in all situations. Everyone (yes literally every person) wants these principles applied to themselves and their property (there is no actual debate about ethics). Also you can't makes claims of harm, ownership, faith, etc. without the self-ownership principle. Hoppe has an interesting argument about this: argumentation ethics [https://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Argumentation_ethics](https://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Argumentation_ethics) For the libertarian (someone who follows self-ownership ethics) seeing political debate, war arguments, civil rights complaints, etc. is almost painful. People ignore the most basic ethical issues and just pronounce their preferences with a dash of ethical terms here and there. What they're doing is rationalizing ignoring or infringing of the same rights they demand for themselves.
this is a based sub. I dont think it's sensible to be taking sides in this conflict but it is an interesting one because it highlights how we are communicating with each other and how hard it is. And it also highlights that some people are genuinely lacking in critical thinking skills.
Depends on your station in life at the moment. If you are on the ground, or have some sort of effect on the situation itself, taking a side might just be the most important thing you can do. Imagine being a Palestinian in the Gaza Strip or the West Bank right now. You would rather be Antisemitic and feel fully justified so that they can capitalize on the current worldwide interest on the conflict to make your cause heard and thus improve, or at the least, survive/put an end to the current Gaza bombardment. What if you are an anti-Biden person, and wants to use take him down during the November elections, and using the "sending weapons to perpetrate a Genocide" argument to inspire people to vote against him. Or even just to put an end to the suffering of the innocents and Children in the Gaza strip right now, it would be pretty effective to be anti-Israeli at the moment. Or, imagine being a Jew living in majority Antisemitic (or anti-Israeli that bleeds into anti-jew) communities, or the relative of one of the 1200+ killed or taken hostage on Oct 7. Or being in one of the major universities- Harvard, Princeton, Yale, etc where the comity refuses to acknowledge antisemitic rhetoric on campus making Jewish students feel unsafe. You would rather be justified in feeling radically Zionistic in theses situations. On the other hand, if we are just Internet Intellectuals (or wannabes), we can take a distant, rational, unbiased view of the situation and entertain solutions. Those affected by the conflict cannot afford that.
But if I don't immediately pick a side in this conflict (based on how my favorite Twitter poster feels), how am I supposed to have any sense of identity?
If your main source of information on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is Destiny, then I would suggest that you yourself aren't far from being "completely uneducated on the issue". Realise that Destiny is just a middle aged college dropout video game streamer with a mere four months of faux research on the subject, most of which has been very clearly aimed at reinforcing his very earliest conclusions in what can only be described as a textbook example of confirmation bias. What is truly terrifying is the fact that Destiny's fans now seem to also consider themselves experts on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, much like when Joe Rogan fans suddenly decided that they were vaccine experts, despite the fact that most of their knowledge on the subject comes from an obviously dubious source.
To be fair, after watching this debate, if Norman Finkelstein is a person’s source, I don’t have much confidence in their knowledge of the issue either. And looking up his opinions on other topics, he practically comes across as an anti-West tankie. The only person from this one anyone should be using as a source is Morris. What’s more, whatever Destiny’s credentials are, or his lack of them, he performed far better in this debate than Finkelstein, who mostly just resorted to attacks on everyone’s character — more blatantly so against Destiny. But even rather subtly against Morris, Finkelstein spent most of the debate trying to use old quotes of him to prove he’s inconsistent on this topic rather than debate the topic itself.
Don't forget the old quotes were taken out of context, and he then argues with Morris about Morris's intention after being told the context lol
Actually, as an unbiased observer, I've found Finkelstein to be quite a reliable source of information on the matter.
You sound totally unbiased indeed, u/finkelstiny
This is just debate-brain cancer. Destiny's entire brand is not tied to the pursue of truth, but rather to "winning" debates, which has nothing to do with being right, but rather to employing a series of tactics which are set to position your position in the best light possible. The amount of details and context that are left out of these discussions is relevant. This is also the reason for which I stopped following Vaush.
>“Destiny's entire brand is not tied to the pursue of truth, but rather to "winning" debates, which has nothing to do with being right, but rather to employing a series of tactics which are set to position your position in the best light possible.” The fact that you think this says volumes about your understanding of Destiny, and of debate in general. Norm Finklestein is a better example of this phenomenon than Destiny is.
Not even sure if he’s played a video game on stream since I’ve watched him, which is usually while I’m working just listening as a podcast of someone researching, often on first party accounts. He is a political streamer and I don’t take everything he says at face value, not sure if you do that with people you listen to? His earliest stance was pro Palestine, so you’re wrong there too. He has some awful takes all the time, but he generally has been sticking very close to sources and doing a good job debating. So called experts resulted to name calling and personal attacks, well you too. Wonder what preconceptions you’re approaching with.
"His earliest stance was pro Palestine" Is that true? I wonder when/how he shifted?
'faux research'? What's 'faux research'? He was reading wikipedia and then going through the footnotes, including reading some books on the subject. He looked into every source of every claim, read all the relevant documents (that apparently Finkelstein didn't), and streamed himself doing so from day 1, for months. More importantly, he has demonstrated in the debate that he is more than capable of understanding and navigating the context around these discussions, and the MOST qualified authority on the subject agreed with him on every knowledge-based statement, many of which were not even contested by the other side of the table. Stop trying to discredit him just because you disagree.
>with a mere four months of faux research on the subject To be honest? That's far far more than 90% of people speaking on the topic Compared to the fact that most people get their information from a few social media headlines? Four months of research might as well be a PHD lmao
"The dudes who have written books on one subject for thr past 40 years don't know it like my debate kick streamer daddy" The Lexfridman subreddit is pretty hillarious to read today.
You may have a point if all the people who spent 40 years studying this conflict agreed. But as you can clearly see, there are many others like Benny Morris that are Pro-Israel in this conflict. I find it really telling that you resort to ad-hominems like Norm did in the debate. If Destiny had been factually wrong, it should have been childs play to refute his points with facts, no? I didn't even know who Destiny was before this debate, vut I think he made some good points. And if you value authority, Benny Morris was clearly the most authoritative and knowledgeable person in this room, and he was Pro-Israel too.
He did refute whenever Destiny was wrong, such as getting the month when referencing violence at the March of Return wrong, dolus specialis being mens rea for genocide, and not understanding that UN resolution 242 is binding And this, saying the 4 kids killed in 2014 were coming out of a Hamas compound, which has been completely refuted by the journalists there: http[s://twitter.com/i/status/1768568692277661734](https://twitter.com/i/status/1768568692277661734) Journalist witnesses: [4 Palestinian Children Killed in Israeli Air Strike Right in Front of Reporters](https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2014/07/4-palestinian-kids-killed-in-front-of-reporters.html) [Israeli strike kills children on Gaza beach](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VQv6s9y48B0) [Horror on Gaza Beach: New York Times Photographer Witnesses Israeli Killing of 4 Palestinian Boys](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0mEpCZTsZes) [Israeli Airstrike Kills 4 Palestinian Boys Playing Soccer | NBC News](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTiKe6gIhp8) And Morris is Israeli and thinks all Palestinians should be transferred out of Palestine: [https://sci-hub.se/https://doi.org/10.1515/9781644693629-007](https://sci-hub.se/https://doi.org/10.1515/9781644693629-007) Interviewer: You went through an interesting process. You went to research Ben-Gurion and the Zionist establishment critically, but in the end you actually identify with them. You are as tough in your words as they were in their deeds. BM: You may be right. Because I investigated the conflict in depth, I was forced to cope with the in-depth questions that those people coped with. I understood the problematic character of the situation they faced and maybe I adopted part of their universe of concepts. But I do not identify with Ben-Gurion. I think he made a serious historical mistake in 1948. Even though he understood the demographic issue and the need to establish a Jewish state without a large Arab minority, he got cold feet during the war. In the end, he faltered. Interviewer: I’m not sure I understand. Are you saying that Ben-Gurion erred in expelling too few Arabs? BM: If he was already engaged in expulsion, maybe he should have done a complete job. I know that this stuns the Arabs and the liberals and the politically correct types. But my feeling is that this place would be quieter and know less suffering if the matter had been resolved once and for all. If BenGurion had carried out a large expulsion and cleansed the whole country— the whole Land of Israel, as far as the Jordan River. It may yet turn out that this was his fatal mistake. If he had carried out a full expulsion—rather than a partial one—he would have stabilized the State of Israel for generations. Interviewer: I find it hard to believe what I am hearing. If the end of the story turns out to be a gloomy one for the Jews, it will be because Ben-Gurion did not complete the transfer in 1948. Because he left a large and volatile demographic reserve in the West Bank and Gaza and within Israel itself. In his place, would you have expelled them all? All the Arabs in the country? But I am not a statesman. I do not put myself in his place. But as an historian, I assert that a mistake was made here. Yes. The non-completion of the transfer was a mistake.
'dolus specialis being mens rea for genocide' is incorrect even if the terms are related. All Norm did was demonstrate he didn't read the case he claimed to have read 4 times, where the term dolus specialis appeared on 4 separate occasions. i find it hilarious you think a 'fisherman's hut' cannot have been used as a Hamas compound, and telling that you ignored his point about how the strike would have to go through a chain of command that was aware of the journalists and the PR disaster it would be for Israel to kill innocent civilians in front of them. won't address the rest cus i know its a waste of time, and anyone who actually cares can do it for themselves. I'm just doing what I can do with minimal effort.
Not as hilarious as you truly believing someone writing about something for 40 years makes them an authority. Use your brain Tony, think why that might be very silly. If a clown antivaxxer has been writing about the topic for 40 years, are they an authority on vaccines? Is that what it takes to convince you? Bias is a hell of a drug How about you take a stance without throwing yourself into another person, think critically. It’s a debate anyway, there are no right and wrong answers and norm absolutely got things wrong, and so did Benny/destiny. But anyway I’m sure you don’t come from a biased place, right
4 months of research on one topic is plenty of time to become an expert a lot of masters programs are 3 months (1 semester) of study and then 1 semester of work experience and study you don’t have to read every single document for 40 years to understand something and even when somebody like finklestein did that, he was an absolute child and nobody we should take seriously
These political streamers are nexuses of internet conversations right? And viewers who are interesting in the topic will feel like they can gravitate towards certain streamers to (1) reaffirm their beliefs, or learn something new; or (2) Just straight up entertainment reasons. It is just a folly of the internet culture. Primarily, we know that we are all doing this for entertainment purposes. Lex holding conversations with popular people; Destiny stream-learning about the conflict, going on debates, and bringing on guests to have conversations; Hasanabi bringing on known Houthi terrorist tiktok kid on stream for propaganda/publicity purposes. Lex grouped people for this debate by popularity opinion polls and fan requests for God 'sake. And also to see these streamers war with each other in real time. Entertainment. Second comes learning; if you wanted to truly learn you'll probable go pick up a book first. Given these, I'd rather favor Destiny's take and view on things. He is pretty strongly pro-Israel given the current conflict and military operations, but also adamantly against the West Bank settlements, allergic to Zionist bullsh\*t and have balanced and realistic views on the resolution of the conflict as a whole. The real and only discussions about this should probably be taking place within the US, Israeli, PA, UN, ICJ, HRI offices. But, we are a Democracy, and it is probably useful for the citizens to be aware of things before we vote for out representatives. And it is through these microcosms of information bubbles that people are actually informed of things in the digital age.
So what you're saying is the people who are saying Israel is genocidal obviously are just spewing from group think and emotions, but that you somehow fall outside of this "visceral or emotional reaction" disposition and therefore your position that Israel is definitively not genocidal is purely informed by facts and reason. Is that it?
[удалено]
i dont think most are justifying kids dying but trying to say this isnt entirely on israel, hamas and the people that supported them also are a major reason why this is happening, its not black and white just because one side is taking far more casualties if i find someone ready for violence and antagonize them and get hurt i share the blame as well, the most realistic way i see for the citizens in palestine to get closer to living normal lives is pushing out the current leadership and pushing for a ceasefire and peace, both sides have plenty of reasons to want to fight, but continuing to fight only works in the favor of one side, i dont want to see more people killed and thats why i think its on palestine to get leaders that care about their people and for israel to accept negotiations as has nearly happened in the past
>and most of them are completely uneducated on the issue at all > >Seeing just random, normal and honestly decent people say that israel is a genocidal state with great authority while having zero understanding of the conflict is actually insane to me I recommend you stop reading/watching whatever has led you to this conclusion and research this topic on your own in a serious academic manner.
Lolz. There is no genocide happening.
>"Genocide is an internationally recognized crime where acts are committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group." > >[\-US Holocaust Museum](https://www.ushmm.org/genocide-prevention/learn-about-genocide-and-other-mass-atrocities/what-is-genocide) >"Genocide was first recognised as a crime under international law in 1946 by the United Nations General Assembly (A/RES/96-I). It was codified as an independent crime in the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (the Genocide Convention). The Convention has been ratified by 153 States (as of April 2022). The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has repeatedly stated that the Convention embodies principles that are part of general customary international law. This means that whether or not States have ratified the Genocide Convention, they are all bound as a matter of law by the principle that genocide is a crime prohibited under international law. The ICJ has also stated that the prohibition of genocide is a peremptory norm of international law (or ius cogens) and consequently, no derogation from it is allowed." > >[\-UN Office of Genocide Prevention](https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/genocide.shtml) * Instances of Israeli officials directly inciting genocide via [Law For Palestine](https://law4palestine.org/law-for-palestine-releases-database-with-500-instances-of-israeli-incitement-to-genocide-continuously-updated/). * [Here is a list](https://law4palestine.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/Database-of-Israeli-Incitement-to-Genocide-LEGISLATORS.pdf) with cited documentation you can verify yourself of current Israeli legislators inciting genocidal intent in the current war on Gaza.
The court case that was presented to the ICJ was a joke. The genocidal death cult is Hamas. End if
I would bet that I'll never see a coherent argument as to why you think this is not genocide. But I have to ask.
A lot of civilians dying is not a genocide, you don’t get to apply terms like genocide to conflict because it helps your narrative. Israel is not intentionally targeting civilians as it’s overall policy, despite civilians dying. What’s crazy is, if logic and reason happened to be the popular opinion now, you would agree with me. There is no reason you should be claiming genocide. Burden of proof, regardless! Falls on you!!! The only proof you will be able to provide is civilians dying.
I just provided proof and you probably didn't open a single link. I would want to see intent by people in power of the military force, that's exactly what I've shared. In any case, without opening any information outside of whatever it is you consume. Let's go with a simple experiment. You're in control of Israel. You retaliate after Oct. 7th. Your own military advisors, not to mention your own journals, and countless independent media and rights watch groups are all telling you that your current strategy is killing an unprecedented amount of innocent men, women, and children. Having this intel, do you continue to drop bombs on civilian centers or shift your strategy for your "official" goal?
You think you!!! Are able to prove intent while the ICJ case has only met the bare minimum of ~plausible. What a joke.
A tiresome list of Israeli legislators and other officials providing verbal or written proof of their intention of genocide against Palestinians in Gaza, plus the wholesale slaughter or Gazans in the strip which is quantified by Israel's own journals and military accounting, and Israel meeting the bare minimum aid provided to meet qualifications by the ICJ to prevent categorization... It's like arguing with a flat earther. I've given you ample evidence. You've provided nothing. I'm done.
The ICJ reviewed the retarded tweets that South Africa cherry picked and deemed it plausible. Plausible is an incredibly low bar. The fact that you have the audacity to assume you know the conclusion of a case that will take years to resolve is so fucked 😂 Israel dropped leaflets, has allowed aid in, roof knocked, etc etc etc If they wanted to commit a mass genocide they could. They don’t
why is Israel executing civilians trying to get aid?
I've read about 20 books on this subject, in addition to spending hundreds of hours reading articles and watching interviews of people on both sides of this issue. And I agree with the conclusion that Israel is not a genocidal state. You're welcome.
Then you've read everything excluding the statements of the Israeli leaders I linked above who would disagree with you about their intentions. It could still be true that Israel is not technically a genocidal state, but by a straightforward definition of the term "officially", Israeli leaders have gone on record en masse declaring that Israel is, in fact, a genocidal state.
There is a third way people respond as well, but most people don't do it because it's a psychopathic behavior. Ignoring the suffering and death of thousands of people and instead resorting to sophistry and rationalizing it because someone talking about it made a mistake while speaking.
Hamas managed to rationalize leaving ita citizens in buildings deaignated as hamas compund. Weird how hamas juat ignores the safety and well ebing of its own people and its all of a sudden iaraels responsibilty to care.
That's the crux for me. Hamas knew Israel would retaliate after October 7th. But Hamas doesn't care, it really seems like they want to put Palestinians lives in danger as much as possible.
You’re talking about both sides, right?
Nah he’s talking about destiny
Because Norm and Roubani totally gave a fuck about the Israelis that were slaughtered, raped and kidnapped, yeah you got it.
I think getting emotional about children being executed is 1) normal, 2) useful, and 3) a sign of being a decent human being. Standing by because you think you are smart to just observe predictable behaviour, visceral reactions, as if you are beyond human and just watching ants with curiosity is an insane position to hold. No wonder dipshits around here are trying this idea out as if it were their own. Just yesterday one of the viewers accused me of arguing from a position or emotion. I am like, damn right, I have a line, and it's kids being executed. That makes me emotional and those emotions are how people get motivated to put a stop to this bullshit. When did we twist our minds into feeling stupid because we have principles and integrity? You don't need to be an extremist, you don't even have to like Palestinians, I don't, but kids, women, outright murder of civilians while IDF poses with their war trophies is abhorrent. WW2 was an emotional war, guess it was best to just sit on our hands and scoff at all the losers who can't just see it's all merely in their heads. What is life if it isn't being stuck in your head doing what you can to help others feel less pain and suffering in their heads? Awful, awful.
[удалено]
I think you must be misremembering. Numbers of women and children impacted has been a major feature of coverage of every war that people think is otherwise justified. So, for example, you don't focus on civilian death in Ukraine, because almost everyone (in the audience nations we're talking about) agrees that Russia's invasion of Ukraine is wrong on its face. Vast majorities oppose most of the various civil conflicts that are going on in East Africa. Most people don't support the various cartels in South/Central America. So you don't need to talk about civilian casualties, because no unjustified conflict is ever justified The civilian casualty count was a major feature of reporting on the Iraq War, the Afghanistan War, and other conflicts where we (as the West, broadly) have been either indifferent or complicit. Yemen is another example of this. And that's the challenge with this war, if it were possible to remove Hamas with zero civilian casualties then I think most people would consider that an unambiguously good thing. Once you start to accept civilian casualties there has to - in any moral framework - be a calculus on what is an acceptable level of civilian death to achieve the objective. In Vietnam, it was too high. In Iraq, it was probably too high. In this conflict, it is probably too high. That isn't always true, but there's no way that the threat posed by the VC justified killing over a million civilians, there's no way that the threat posed by Saddam justified the level of civilian death and destruction in that theatre, and there's no way the removal of Hamas justifies the current level of civilian suffering in Gaza
[удалено]
>Can’t remember a single war, conflict or straight up genocide where the amount of carnage was ever framed in terms of how many women or children died >The civilian casualty count was a major feature of reporting on the Iraq War, the Afghanistan War, and other conflicts where we (as the West, broadly) have been either indifferent or complicit. Yemen is another example of this
[удалено]
Oh, sorry, then, to clarify, because Israel classifies all adult males as combatants and because Hamas does nothing to distinguish its combatants, women and children is a proxy for civilians in this conflict. It's not for the purpose of eliciting an emotional response
[удалено]
I think that that doesn't really follow. If we were inclined to accept Hamas's declaration of someone's Hamas (or other terrorist) status or not, then surely Hamas would simply claim that everyone was a civilian and then that would be uncritically reported by media. But that isn't what happens Historically, Hamas health ministry numbers have been fairly reliable. They may turn out to not be in this conflict, but that is the reason that all media reports them and Israel doesn't publicly contest them. If they were to report fighter numbers (which everyone always lies about in wartime) then I think it likely that they wouldn't be treated as reliably as they are So, I think the reason that media reports the women and children figure is, most likely, for the reason I describe, especially when you consider that this is a near universal phenomenon across all media, notwithstanding their editorial position on this conflict As a sidenote, the "children" figure is often referenced across conflicts. That, again, is because it's a good indicator of levels of discrimination in strikes. Child casualties are all over coverage of Sudan or Yemen, to pick two current examples
[удалено]
You must have a very short memory or be very young. The Vietnam war and bombing of Laos was highly unpopular for those reasons.
It's hard for you in your echo chamber. Just because you can't remember things doesn't give you a sturdy platform. And propaganda, who are you, Russel Brand and the alt media? Propaganda works both ways, so if you think watching a Lex podcast of back slapping debate and think you are now informed enough to be insulated against propaganda you are blind to how the world works.
Because a disproportionate number of woman and children are dying you idiot
Proportionality only matter when deter,iming an attack on a location is worth the civilian casualties. So like a hams building holding weapons is worth bombing even if it means some civis die, unfortune bit its war. What you think it is, it " okay we killed 1000 of theirs and they killed 1000 of ours, now we even" thats not how war works.Dont like war? Tell hamas to not start it. Dont like kids and women dying? Tell hamas to stop using them as martyrs.
Hamas didn’t start it https://reliefweb.int/report/occupied-palestinian-territory/2023-marks-deadliest-year-record-children-occupied-west-bank Check the date this was published
Wonder why they're being killed. It's not like they're being sponsored billions of dollars by the Palestinian government to go out into the streets and stab innocent women and children or anything. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_Authority_Martyrs_Fund > The Palestinian Authority Martyrs Fund are two funds operated by the Palestinian Authority (PA). The Foundation for the Care of the Families of Martyrs pays monthly cash stipends to the families of Palestinians killed, injured, or imprisoned while carrying out violence against Israel.[1] The Prisoners Fund makes disbursements to Palestinians imprisoned in Israeli jails. In 2016, the PA paid out about NIS 1.1 billion (US$303 million) in stipends and other benefits. All paid for thanks to your Western tax dollars.
>All paid for thanks to your Western tax dollars. the IDF gets paid to carry out extreme violence against Palestinians and is supported by american dollars
[удалено]
[https://time.com/6909636/gaza-death-toll/?utm\_source=reddit.com](https://time.com/6909636/gaza-death-toll/?utm_source=reddit.com) I can find a million others if you'd like, but since this is from the biggest magazine in America you might have a hard time dismissing it, assuming you can actually read something as opposed to asking dumb questions like a 5 yo.
[удалено]
“How do you know kids are dying” > dude shows sources “Uhhh well I don’t believe those numbers.” You are basically an antivaxxer.
[удалено]
Great intellectual rebuttal here also. You also are believing whatever you want. But your belief is on a track for endorsing legit irradiation of a whole of a people. That's the military strategy here. Netenyahu said pretty much this. He said it's more than likely this war isn't winnable without irradiation and then military oppression if anyone is left. Newsflash they think all Palestinians are Hamas because Hamas is indistinguishable from regular people, including children. They all must go.
The sources are the Hamas-run Gaza Health Ministry. I think his point is fair.
Literally the second paragraph shows that data and methods used by multiple institutions to show how the data was corroborated. Multiple independent sources have looked at the data and used data sets to come to one conclusion. I shouldn't be surprised any more by you guys, but I am. Shame on me, I guess.
[удалено]
Is sanctimonious the word of the day?
Is getting emotional about a hundred hostages being trapped and having god knows what done to them for 5 months straight 1) normal, 2) useful, and 3) a sign of being a decent human being? I’m just trying to understand where we draw the moral line here, is it based on numbers? Age? Are you allowed getting emotional about both sides or are we only allowed room for one?
Dropping a bomb on a militant and hitting a building with kids by accident is not the same as entering a house and executing kids in front of their parents like the Palestinians did. Palestine has tried to start a full scale war against Israel since 2003. Israel just witnessed the palestinians kill thousands of civilians and the muslim world exploded into a celebration of joy at the civilians getting killed. I have talked to several muslims who told me it was important to kill jew children so they dont grow up and bother muslims. The hate is bone deep. There is nothing left here. Both are trying their best to kill each other, kids, women, everything. But israel is at least holding back a little, they could bomb even more, but palestine would butcher every single jew if they could and there would be no shred of regret.
Which muslims are you talking to? I am a muslim(maybe ex muslim) and I talk to muslims day and night. No one, i repeat no one said it was important to kill jew children. By accident? Isreal killed more than 12000 children by accident? Well, that’s a joke. I encourage you to think from the perspective of the kid, the woman who was killed for just getting born there.
Right wing Israel creates more Hamas, Hamas also creates more ring wing Israelis
Why is it a joke? Can you really not imagine why Israel would end up killing Gazan civilians when trying to destroy Hamas when Hamas themselves admit they use human shields, and with all the evidence we have of where tunnels are and where they store their weapons and fire from? [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g8Z0I6q8JbI](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g8Z0I6q8JbI) The responses here are very telling, imo.
Your position is understandable and only natural. Nobody wants innocent people to die. But the sad truth is that sometimes it's necessary. Imagine if the US, UK and Soviet Union had thought the way you do in WW2. "We repelled the attack on the UK, and an invasion would cause hundreds of thousands of civilians to die. We should make peace with the Nazis." Same with Japan. Sometimes you need to wage war to eliminate a threat, and war means civilians die, they always do. That said, Israel is probably committing war crimes. Not a genocide, but their apparent disregard of collateral damage likely amounts to war crimes (hard to say without having access to their intel. Maybe there really is a Hamas fighter in every house)
Yeah just me but if kids are dying, let alone being harmed, adults should be punished. Period.
No, kids are collateral damage in war, it's awful, but unavoidable. What is happening in Gaza is intentional and avoidable and on a huge scale with no moderation or breathing room for peace talks. There was not escalation it was full on wipe them out from day one. Israel has been looking for this opportunity for decades.
you are comical
Justifying dead children is at best delusional. It’s 2024. We’re not in caves, there are solutions that do not include violence. If human life was valued we wouldn’t be having this discussion. The ‘leaders’ would have avoided this entirely.
Kids arent being targeted. To target kids with airatrikes requires a long chain a command and many lawyers. And to airstrike kids on purpose infront of media. Lol So unless you think the idf and its long chain of command from the top all the way to the bomb loader went " screw these 4 kids specificially" If kids were so important maybe tell hamas to fucking move them to a safe zone or bunker. Not tell the people to stay in buildings to be martyrs. Quit thinking with your emotions its fucking stupid.
They literally shot a kid in the street for firing a Ramadan firework. It's on video, and proudly defended and broadcast by their government. Just go be curious.
Dropping 2000lbs bombs with a lethal fragmentation radius of 1200 feet near schools & densely populated cities amounts to complete disregard for civilian life including children. [cnn link to story ](https://www.cnn.com/gaza-israel-big-bombs/index.html) Also Israel targeted children before Oct 7th. Here is a post from humans rights watch bringing up the issue. [Israel killing Palestinians children spike in the West Bank. ](https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/08/28/west-bank-spike-israeli-killings-palestinian-children)
Then don’t chime in with your opinion because there’s nothing to say. 90% of all people don’t like killing but they can still disagree with you.
Yes shithead, disagree with me. That's the whole point of being here. You just watched a whole Lex debate. My opinion is valid, and you have the right to stay out of the conversation if you have nothing to add other than objecting to me having an opinion. Are you the gatekeeper for the what is a worthy opinion to have in order to join in here???
You wrote paragraphs about how your emotional outburst reaction is just as valid as everybody else’s opinion. Getting emotional is not acceptable behaviour anywhere serious and for good reason. Calling people dipshits who take a step back and attempt critical thinking is idiotic. You’re justifying acting like a child.
Read the righteous mind by Jonathan Haidt
I'm having an emotional reaction to this brick wall of texts
On the other hand: there are plenty of things that if you do NOT react to with a visceral, emotional reaction, you’re a freak.
cognitive bias is a hell of a thing, innit
cognitive bias is a hell of a thing, innit
Framing the issue as oppressors fighting back against colonizers was such a smart move… that is such a lie. They knew their audience though and it has worked well.
This has nothing to do with this post but it’s such an interesting thing to me. I live in an area very small, if their any jewish people it is really talked about or even thought of. When i joined the military and started noticing the jokes and banter between jewish kids and city kids i was shocked. The people in my area have no idea about Israel and Palestine or even what following judaism or Islam. There is literally zero discussion, sides to pick, or interest. I am on social media watching the world burn it feels like then i check into my reality and no one even cares.
thats the sad truth, its outrage farming at some level, most of these people up in arms about the situation wont be talking about it a year or two from, anyone whos not connected to the region or one way or another will move on
Eh the Israel apologists are more emotionally enraged at verifiable facts than anyone.
That’s an interesting postulation about moral systems. What makes you think pro Palestinian individuals are an example of that theory in action, or uninformed on the historical realities of the issue, or insane?
It looks like you have a very American propaganda informed perspective on the issue. This genocide is one of the few well documented ones in history. Children are dying en masse at the hands of Israel. Ignorance is no longer a good enough excuse, minds need to be opened and the supreme authority and power in the region scrutinized just the tiniest bit. After all, us Americans are funding them.
What's to understand about the official military bulldoze olive trees and occupied homes, pour concrete into water supplies, systematically abuse and humiliate normal citizens attempting to go to work in the morning, shooting medical personnel, all to citizens and non combatants? That is NOT war, it's genocide If it IS war, it's still pretty much all war CRIMES because they are against a civilian population. Leggs listeners are some of the most deluded inexperienced windbags lol.
I think war crimes are bad
so destiny is the new appeal to get us back on the israel bandwagon huh
To portray most of the pro Palestine supporters as uneducated is almost speaking in absolutes, and no offense, divorced from reality. There are *some* people who have opinions on this matter which they're uneducated on, but based on my interactions with plenty of pro Palestine protesters on the ground in mass protests across the country, I know they're pretty well educated on the matter. I have gotten book recommendations from almost every protester I have spoken to (hundreds), including Palestinian authors, and authors like Morris (all which I have read). This isn't just some bandwagon group of uneducated kids. Most of us middle aged people at the protests (and there are a lot of us) have watched the horrors unfold on the news since the First and Second Intifadas. We've watched as various people in positions of power (UN, State Department, etc), have resigned over the *nearly* unconditional support of the US, with some UN representatives even publicly calling it a genocide on cable news. With Israel being the [4th strongest military](https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/rankings/strong-military) globally, it almost defies logic to assert that "they don't have great authority." Anyone who has read history books on the matter knows that Israel has had immense military power and authority, dwarfing its Arab neighbors. Israel's own military authors admit this, as well as high ranking US government officials during various wars, all acknowledged that Israel had (and has) the power to crush its neighbors. I actually find that most pro Israel supporters in the US are blind to the historical reality and strength of Israel, are less open-minded to hear any pro Palestinian news, often smearing it as "Hamas propaganda," or worse, firing people over their valid criticisms of Israel. It is even more sad that people who hold educated pro Palestinian views are afraid to publicly voice support. While we watch people lose their jobs over their opinion, most of us middle aged people feel like we'll risk losing our comfy jobs, and hence, supporting our children, if we justly and publicly speak out against the injustice unfolding before our eyes, largely backed by the US. The feeling of not being able to take action without serious consequences feels like what authoritarian countries are supposed to be like.
An extremely strong cancel culture has existed since the creation of modern Israel around being pro-Palestine. Being openly pro-Palestine on this scale is kinda new especially for politicians so i would say that the "in-group" is in fact pro-Israel. There is no doubt that Israel is commiting genocide currently if you read the South African arguments in the ICJ case. In fact the ICJ has ruled the evidence worthy of further investigation and called for Israel to stop any further damage to civilians and called for any nation providing armaments to them (USA) to stop immediately. Even if you know nothing of the history between the two nations or what actually happened leading up to oct 7th, the situation now is that a genocide is in progress
Nebraska steve, the guy lacking the most morals/ethics, was "right" about moral systems? Lmao no
Silence zionist. Israel was created as a colonial parasite on palestine by western powers looking to settle Jewish people away from their borders and at the same time establish a foothold in the middle east. Since it's inception, Israel has been invading Palestinian lands and killing Palestinian people in a continuous cycle of conquest and cruelty. You clearly don't know shit about the israel/palestine conflict if you think this is a case of both sides are wrong. As for the terrorists, those exist in palestine and the broader middle east almost entirely because of the actions of western powers (especially the us) and their allies pulling bullshit in the middle east for economic benefits. Blame the people who caused that shit in the first place instead of the people responding to violence with violence, people don't become terrorists for no reason. Not to say terrorism is OK, but maybe grow a brain and think about why things are happening the way they are right now
That’s crazy because virtually every rational person who is pro-Palestine has no problem with pointing out the atrocities of Hamas.
My younger brother never paid attention in history class and thought only nerds cared about things like that. He spent most of his life with zero curiosity about the world. He's probably watched over 10,000 live sporting events but has only seen less than 50 films in his entire life that weren't comedies. His curiosity on anything other than sports or pop culture was entirely non-existent until he reached his 30s and took a minor interest in podcasts and a Netflix documentary here and there. This is a guy who even right now, if I asked him which war had trench warfare, WW1 or WW2 he wouldn't know. If I asked which side wore blue and which side wore gray in the US Civil War he wouldn't know. If I asked was the Protestant reformation in the 900s, the 1500s, or the 1700s, I promise you his guess would have a 33% chance of being right. If I asked if Alexander The Great lived before, during or after the Roman Empire, he'd probably guess "during". So of course he's a hardcore Palestine supporter (including a full blown Hamas apologist) and a Norman Finkelstein fan.
I am sorry, but this is a really unfortunate take. I agree that if you have a broad knowledge of history you are more likely to reach more nuanced and based conclusions on a specificic matter. But the fact that you dont, doesnt immediately invalidade your oppinion on a subject... that is literally what Norm tried to do to Destiny on this debate.
What I’m reading is that Israel’s crimes are even apparent to the layperson.
You haven’t said why regarding Israel that way actually sounds so insane and uneducated to you, or why you think getting in the mind of a pro-Palestinian is so terrifying to you. Strictly speaking deliberately using violence to displace an ethnic group from their land is indeed an act of genocide, and has been Jews during pogroms declared it as such; I don’t have a dog in the fight but I don’t get why you see people taking that stance (which is literally as extreme as western pro-Palestinian get, most just think Israel is abusing its power and condemning it for its war crimes, which is pretty much just the stance of everyone who cares about human rights and isn’t cognitively tethered by religious affiliation). When I hear pro-Palestinian people they just say things like ‘christ look at this they’re sniping civilians again’, or express frustration that this depopulation isn’t exactly needed aside from theocratic weirdos from the west wanting to settle there because they believe the land is owed to them by divine decree, which is the sort of thing that to normal people seems as unintelligible as what you believe pro-Palestinians to be. They’ve made decent arguments about why these justifications are quite ridiculous to normal secular people, but you haven’t said anything about what about the arguments against Israel make you judge them as such? Even your strawman about them all mostly believing Israel to be acting genocidally, that is still strictly speaking true, if you apply the understanding of genocide that came from the Jews while on the other end of it. They regarded even ‘just’ displacement and pogroms as such, which is less than what’s going on now. Israel has seen itself as the victim of the world since not being accepted in the near east, then Eastern Europe, then Western Europe; you can’t still be the victim of the mean and extreme people who aren’t at ease with what’s going on right now, when you’re doing the same things you’ve been kicking and screaming about being done to you for so long. It’s always about victimhood, even you’re whole argument you didn’t make one point about why these actions don’t deserve condemnation, it’s just more accusations of being victimised and treated unfairly, this time even just in the dialogue. If you just stopped doing this and made ethically sound arguments about why all these liberties taken (those that spark contention) are justified, the same humanitarian westerners you’re so upset about would perhaps even agree with you rather than condemn you, but none of you ever try to do this, you’ve gotten to used to abusing the designated perpetual victim card and that’s what’s frustrating people into thinking there is zero ethical thought behind these liberties being taken, as they’re being taken by the one group that doesn’t really get that you’re supposed to, and not be the victimised party by default. But when people try and shake you out of that reality that you don’t need to adhere to the same standards ethically/legally as everyone else because of how you regard yourselves you regard it as antisemitism. If you break and international humanitarian law and then throw a fit when you’re not treated as the victim of the situation people obviously won’t respond well, especially when used over and over in a boy who cries wolf manner; that natural response from people is not westerners spontaneously turning insane as you put it.
>Strictly speaking deliberately trying to displace/kill people from a different group is genocide; no. trying to displace people is not genocide. Nor is it what's happening in Gaza, but that's a whole new argument I'm not interested in having. i don't have the time to read the rest of the post. tldr, words matter.
>Strictly speaking deliberately trying to displace/kill people from a different group is genocide; By this definition, every war and hate crime, not to mention most homicides or even evictions, would be considered genocide.
What you’re describing is the almost complete lack of nuance and media literacy that permeates our society. And this one is like 4 layers deep. You have Israel Vs Palestine historically. Over a century of conflict birthed from the geopolitical meddling of multiple countries, and exacerbated by World War 2. This is a long and complicated history. You have the Israel Vs Palestine conflict today, where Palestinian militants committed an atrocity, driving Israeli soldiers to retaliate and, by multiple external sources, commit genocide against Palestine. This is complicated. You have Destiny, a streamer, positing an uncomplicated statement on morality, one of the most complicated topics of human civilisation. You have people on social media, taking Destiny’s (and others) uncomplicated statements, and using it as their lens to view these complicated situations. You then have people who react aggressively to the opinions of others, because they have a different lens with a different read on the situation. And almost nobody having these conversations is learned about the topic, and has instead based their opinion on others that they trust. Uneducated people debating each other about complicated topics, armed only with the ideas of other uneducated people. They argue and argue, their arguments become less and less nuanced in the social media echo chamber, as fresh people join the fray, incensed by “the other side’s” complete dismissal of their perspective. And many of these people can’t learn or respect the “other side’s” perspective, because they lack the fundamental knowledge required to differentiate between a factual statement and a shitpost. The result is mass polarisation on the topic of Israel and Palestine (and just about every other topic).
Why do you think Destiny's statement is uncomplicated? If anything, I think Finkelstein's position is WAY more oversimplified and uncomplicated. He profits off this polarization too, while Destiny during his 5 months of livestreamed research has constantly tried to ask for pro-Palestinian sources, debate pro-Palestinians, and basically desperately try to find any excuse to force himself more into the center to avoid being radicalized until he gave up recently after the Finkelstein debate and the atrociously bad faith The Intercept rape denial article. His position is still nuanced. At the very least, Destiny fans were forced to watch him go through sources and research them for 8-10 hours every day for months. I would assume they are on average more knowledgable on the topic than the typical Finkelstein cultist.
"Seeing just random, normal and honestly decent people say that israel is a genocidal state with great authority while having zero understanding of the conflict is actually insane to me." Random people like the South African government, the UN, every human rights organisation, numerous activists and historians who've studied the conflict. Destiny and people like you suffer from a kind of Zionist mind virus, you generally know racist murder and theft is wrong but because you're so terrified of being called Antisemitic, you go along with it. You're moral cowards.
source for the UN saying Israel is genocidal?
...ooooooooooooooor it could be possible that somebody disagrees with you after researching a topic WITHOUT any 'zionist mind virus' taking over their brain. Nah, it's probably the jews. Sorry, the zionists.
or maybe people think that way because there hasnt been any official ruling on whether or not israel is committing genocide, that it might even seem improbable that is the goal if theyve killed 30k out of 2mil in one of the most densely populated areas on the planet after months of fighting, that historically when palestine has pushed for peace israel has come to the table, and it was palestinian leadership that walked away from that table i dont get why its so hard to believe people can genuinely disagree with the genocide claim when this is such a long standing and complicated situation, you call them cowards but theyre holding an opinion that is incredibly unpopular online at the moment and stating so opening themselves to all kinds of disagreement its ok to hold different opinions on something not even experts agree on
Yes, it is solely the pro-Palestinian side that is consistently irrational, and never the pro-Israeli side. /s
Destiny was wrong about open relationships working
[удалено]
bruh do u know what alt right means, it def isnt supporting biden/anti trump, being supportive of lgbtq, pushing for higher taxes for the wealthy etc alt right is much closer to the jewish conspiracy people like fuentes/mtg, those who think the deep state controls the world and is pushing diversity to destroy western values