[eloff]

An opinion is a view point. And we're talking about whether the US ever did something because it was the right thing and not the best thing for the US. Stop redefining things.

About your Israel rant, I've said elsewhere, Israel was fully within its rights to fight back against Hamas. If drug cartels in Mexico started firing rockets into Texas, there would be a full scale invasion. There are two sides to this conflict and of the two Israel tries hard to avoid civilian casualties while Hamas tries hard to cause them. It's obvious to me which side has the moral high ground.

[vimacs2]

"If drug cartels in Mexico started firing rockets into Texas"

Imagine if the US were taking more and more territory from Mexico while illegally evicting and assaulting Mexicans to make room for US settlers. Let's say that they then made it impossible for Mexicans to leave or enter a narrow strip of land and denied them medical treatment and severely restricted food and water access. That and prior to the attack of the cartels, let's say 6 years ago, the US launched strikes against the Mexicans where a later report by the UN found that 80% of the dead were civilians.

Imagine then if that drug cartel itself was originally placed into power by the US to avoid the formation of rival organisations that the Mexicans could choose between.

[eloff]

I didn't say Hamas is unprovoked. I did acknowledge there are two sides to this conflict (there always is.) That's more than you've accomplished here so far.

Provoked or not, one side is trying to kill civilians and the other side is trying not to. The good guys seem pretty obvious to me. I worry about your moral compass, because you seem to be on the other side of that. Do you condone or support the terrorist attacks of Hamas?

[vimacs2]

The only reason you have for assuming that the IDF are trying not to kill civilians is their own word which is worthless to me and anybody outside of their alliance with the US.

They have lied repeatedly before about how their attacks did not hit non combatants only for later UN reports revealing that the majority of deaths were civilian. They even bombed offices for Al Ghazeera and AP News recently in Palestine, likely in retaliation for testy interviews and coverage. Am I supposed to believe that those were holding Hamas as well?

And you never said anything about Hamas's motivations in the first place. You just treated Israel's actions as being justified as a given so don't give me this bs about how you're somehow being fair in your coverage when you're transparently biased towards Israel.

And as for your question, while I do not condone any attacks on civilians or civilian infrastructure (which already makes my moral compass better than the IDF's), I absolutely support resistance by the Palestinians against their violent and illegal occupation and ethnic cleansing efforts by Israel. You don't get to cry about your right to self defence when you're the ones who they're trying to defend their homes against.

[eloff]

> The only reason you have for assuming that the IDF are trying not to kill civilians is their own word

No, actually I'm looking at their actions. Evacuating buildings first, checking them via drones, then firing warning shots, then bringing them down. Levelling a twelve story building with 0 casualties is a degree of care rarely seen in warfare.

Civilian casualties, of course, do happen and are not avoidable in war. That's the nature of it.

> so don't give me this bs about how you're somehow being fair in your coverage when you're transparently biased towards Israel

I'm being more fair than you are in your bias against Israel.

[vimacs2]

Yes, they showed a great "degree of care" in levelling a building that happened to contain the offices of media that were critical of the actions of the IDF on the basis of “Hamas military intelligence” with no evidence given. Btw, conflating giving the inhabitants of a building an hour's warning before a strike with evacuating is a stretch but even if I accepted that premise, is the IDF going to compensate the inhabitants of this building a single dime? Given their history, I would guess no.

However, outside of a building containing high profile media companies, many Israeli strikes are far from being as careful. You can waffle on and on about how heroically and nicely they fire air to ground missiles in cities from a safe distance but in the end the raw numbers don't lie. Compare how many Palestinian's have died since this conflict started compared to the Israeli's and it's plain that this isn't a "war", it's a massacre.

The actual attitude towards Palestinians by many Israelis including officials is positively blood thirsty and genocidal. I've seen enough interviews on the streets of Tel Aviv to be deeply concerned. The population have grown increasingly radicalised and right wing by decades of IDF propaganda and there seems to be little recognition of their common humanity with the Palestinians. They will not be satisfied until the entire Palestinian population are either purged or driven from Israel.

There is no possible way to reconcile the requirements of a egalitarian democratic society with a Jewish ethnostate. This is the reason why they push for a "Two State" solution even though it's a farce and Palestinian territory has been eroded away more and more with Settlements that are illegal by international law. They do not want to the Palestinians incorporated into their society because they want to maintain a Jewish majority. There is no way that desire can be achieved without ethnic cleansing in the long term and we are seeing more and more brazen actions towards that goal.

The solution is both obvious and incredibly hard: Get rid of the two states and make it a single democratic state with full civic and political rights given to all inhabitants. The hardline Zionists of course will never stand for it though so it's never happening without a radical revolution in Israeli society.

I am personally sick and tired of arguing with somebody who thinks I should treat an aspiring ethnostate with anything more than contempt so this will be my last post to you. Feel free to have the last word.

I will urge (probably uselessly) that maybe instead of listening to IDF and US propaganda, you look at news in countries that don't have financial and political interests tied up in multi-billion dollar arms deals and territorial acquisitions. I don't listen to RT for details on Ukraine after all. Good night!

[eloff]

There's not one bit of nuance in this. Not a single look at what the Palestinians are doing wrong or at the other side of the conflict.

It has been mostly a waste of time talking with you, as I predicted from your first comment, but it wasn't without entertainment value.

Your ideas about a one state solution are kind of interesting. Honestly, I'm not sure the Palestinians would even want that if it were on the table.

My prediction is similar to yours. The Palestinians will refuse to compromise (capitulate?) Sufficiently for the Israelis. They'll keep losing power and territory and leverage and the deal on offer will keep getting worse. Until they've all moved on or been assimilated.

Their best hope is make a bad deal now, because it's not going to get better for them. It's not fair, but it is the reality.