3 Cheers for our good ally Israel! Est. 1200 BC

Nobody seems to want the Palestinians--especially Egypt and Jordan. So where would they go if they are to move? A large portion of the quasi-state "Western Sahara" is uninhabited, and practically speaking is owned by nobody. Put some seawater to freshwater distilling plants there, funnel a bunch of UN $ there, and encourage their immigration.

typically, nothing ever goes wrong with this sort of scheme...
 
The other way would be to replicate what the Netherlands has done and "create" new land from the sea with large-scale civil engineering. Surely, there must be some shallow places in the waters off the Middle East?

Another option, build a pipeline, pump down the Dead Sea to dry land, and give them that. I think that's where Sodom and Gomorrah used to be. The "Cities of the Plain."

No need to worry. Like I wrote above: typically, nothing ever goes wrong with this sort of scheme...
 
Chop said:
Nobody seems to want the Palestinians--especially Egypt and Jordan. So where would they go if they are to move? A large portion of the quasi-state "Western Sahara" is uninhabited, and practically speaking is owned by nobody. Put some seawater to freshwater distilling plants there, funnel a bunch of UN $ there, and encourage their immigration.

typically, nothing ever goes wrong with this sort of scheme...
Click to expand...
And UN soldiers from smaller European countries, with orders not to shoot, can defend them and maintain the peace in their new land.
 
Mr. Deez said:
Serious question - if a population largely supports an act of terrorism, should they be called "innocent people?"

Click to expand...


Let's look at the other side of the question. I don't have poll numbers but assuming Israelis support the military action that the IDF is taking, if Israel's population largely supports their violent action (they have killed 10xs more people, are responsible for thousands if not millions of dollars of property destruction, and enforce theft of homesteads in the West Bank), should they be called "innocent people", either?

I prefer to use the Lockean viewpoint which is the basis for our culture and legal system, where speech and opinion don't make one guilty. The only speech that brings guilt is direct threats of violence. I am sure there are Palestinians guilty based on that standard. The problem is knowing which ones are guilty and which ones aren't. The same reasoning applies to Israelis as well.

Do direct verbal threats of death to either side deserve the death penalty? Do they deserve jail time or fine? Let's apply appropriate justice to the guilty. It will be really messy on both sides. That isn't a reason not to pursue it, but it would be much cleaner to pursue those who have actually committed violent acts for justice. That also gives a narrative to those in authority that can be used to convince the other side that they are acting in good faith, in order to calm the situation down and make possible a more lasting peace. This approach isn't guaranteed to work, but the path both sides are going down now will only escalate to more and more death and destruction. It will subsume more and more of both sides into guilt if not out right crime.
 
Mr. Deez said:
Serious question - if a population largely supports an act of terrorism, should they be called "innocent people?"

Click to expand...


When I look further at the poll, my take away isn't "let's consider them all guilty". Several interesting points to think about:
  • Gazans show a healthy plurality of people who disagree with the 10/7 attacks, up to 43%. Publicly disagreeing with Hamas put their lives and family's lives in peril.
  • The West Bank which isn't suffering the attacks has a way more positive opinion about the attack. This shows me it is easy to cheer on violence when you aren't involved in it. They don't have pressure to agree with Hamas so I believe those numbers more than those from Gaza. They also haven't had to live under Hamas control.
  • Further down in the data only 38% of Gazans want Hamas in charge. That should shape how you understand the first bullet point.
  • 85% of Palestinians haven't seen any footage of the 10/7 attack. That is probably due to censorship by Hamas and also Israel taking out their electrical grid. So many may know less about it than we do in the US. That shapes how they see 10/7. Fundamentally they see Israel as the enemy so I would expect general support for "fighting back". Link this thought back to my previous post. Israel needs to build a narrative that convinces Palestinians to trust them over Hamas or the PLO. That is the only way to fight an insurgent war and win.
 
Mr. Deez said:
And this is the breakdown. In your mind, what the IDF is doing isn't more morally defensible than what Hamas did.
Click to expand...

Why don't you consider the perspectives of both sides? To do that is to assume the right of one and the wrong of the other out of the gate. My initial statement is an appeal to critically look at the complete situation. Inherent in your quote above is to truncate the analysis from October 7, 2023 to December 14, 2023. If I did that I would have the same opinion as you and the majority of this board.

However, in order to come to an accurate conclusion many basic questions have to be asked up front. What is the appropriate starting point to begin analysis of the Israel/Palestine conflict? What is the moral/logical (i.e. natural law) principle that justifies the use of violence? What natural law principle defines the appropriate response to violence you have suffered? What courses of action have any chance at resolving the conflict once it has started? There are many more too.
 
Monahorns said:
Why don't you consider the perspectives of both sides?
Click to expand...

I actually do. I think the Palestinians have some legitimate complaints. My big issue is how they're behaving and what their expectations are.

Monahorns said:
Inherent in your quote above is to truncate the analysis from October 7, 2023 to December 14, 2023.
Click to expand...

Not at all. I didn't start in 2023. It didn't even start in 1948. It goes back to at least the Rashidun Caliphate, and in a way, it goes back further than that.
 
Mr. Deez said:
And this is the breakdown. In your mind, what the IDF is doing isn't more morally defensible than what Hamas did.
Click to expand...

Another point. This isn't a logical, fair, or honest conclusion based on my response. I wasn't commenting on the morality of the acts of either side. I was trying to get people to think through the issue of whether or not all Palestinians are guilty or not.

I would say ask according to natural law what is a moral use of versus an immoral use of force. Some of that does go back to understanding the situation as a whole. Some of the answer is based on the act itself. For example, purposefully killing civilians is worse than indiscriminately killing civilians. Targeting a military base is better than targeting a house.
 
Mr. Deez said:
I actually do. I think the Palestinians have some legitimate complaints. My big issue is how they're behaving and what their expectations are.
Click to expand...

Ok. I agree with that. That wasn't communicated by your comment about the poll.

Mr. Deez said:
Not at all. I didn't start in 2023. It didn't even start in 1948. It goes back to at least the Rashidun Caliphate, and in a way, it goes back further than that.
Click to expand...

I agree with that too. Not sure how going back that far makes you excuse Israel and hold Palestine guilty. I would think it would lead you to believe the situation is much more complicated with blame on both sides.
 
This is true but surprising and contradicts SloJo
"They moved into southern Gaza on the ground in a way that was much smaller than they planned to do,” he told reporters. “We think that was an output of some of the advice and counsel we provided them about urban warfare.
they have published online maps of places where people can go or not go. That's basically telegraphing your punches! There's very few modern militaries in the world that would do that! I don't know that we would do that!" replied Kirby.




White House spokesperson: Israel is protecting civilians in ways even we wouldn't
 
78962527-12864409-More_than_70_surrendering_Hamas_operatives_emerged_from_a_Gaza_h-a-64_1702569049349.jpg

More Hamas surrendering -- marching with their weapons held up high.
 
78962525-12864409-Israel_s_military_said_it_was_operating_in_the_area_of_the_Kamal-a-65_1702569049350.jpg

Weapons found inside the Kamal Adwan Hospital.

Fortunately for all, the Hamas garrison at that location surrendered instead of fighting to the bitter end.
 
Horn6721 said:
This is true but surprising and contradicts SloJo
"They moved into southern Gaza on the ground in a way that was much smaller than they planned to do,” he told reporters. “We think that was an output of some of the advice and counsel we provided them about urban warfare.
they have published online maps of places where people can go or not go. That's basically telegraphing your punches! There's very few modern militaries in the world that would do that! I don't know that we would do that!" replied Kirby.




White House spokesperson: Israel is protecting civilians in ways even we wouldn't
Click to expand...

Except for the ~10,000 civilians they have killed. With protection like that who needs criminals.
 
Chop said:
78962527-12864409-More_than_70_surrendering_Hamas_operatives_emerged_from_a_Gaza_h-a-64_1702569049349.jpg

More Hamas surrendering -- marching with their weapons held up high.
Click to expand...

I don't know what anyone else would do but I wouldn't let terrorists walk out of a building with guns in their hands. First, thing they do is put the weapons on the ground. Then we march them out under very careful supervision and I definitely wouldn't let them carry out all the weapons and dump them outside. They are going straight to jail or some other detention area. These pictures are very strange to say the least.
 
I like how in this one the IDF is standing next to terrorists while they look at the guns they just brought out. Just 4 terrorists chillin' outside with their captors who most likely aren't even watching them and with guns down. Very strange.

78965411-12864409-Some_without_shirts_are_then_shown_coming_forward_and_placing_ob-a-68_1702569049353.jpg
 
Chop said:
Reports suggested that around 5,000 Hamas fighters had been killed out of the 30,000-strong terrorist group’s armed wing.

Israel claims Hamas fighters are surrendering in northern Gaza
Click to expand...

Yeah, the pictures in that links article were explained incorrectly. Those aren't Hamas fighters surrendering. Those are men in the area which were "arrested" or detained for investigation. Some may have been Hamas. MAYBE. But Israel didn't know what they were at the time.

Based on the discussions I have listened to around kill numbers the 5000 hasn't been identified as Hamas fighters. It is roughly the amount of adult males who have been killed. Different reports give different numbers but the last one I heard that was somewhat confirmed was 17,000. About 40% were women, 30% were children, and 30% were men. That doesn't count the 100s or 1000s that will never be dug out of the rubble. But the 5000 number hasn't been confirmed as Hamas.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict HORNS-AGGIES *
Sat, Nov 30 • 6:30 PM on ABC

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top