[LAC-Tech]

I may offer myself as an example.

As a young man I was generally pro-Israeli, I can remember a teacher in high school telling us about how great Israel was the morning after 9/11, how they fought all those wars against Arabs who hated them (for no reason at all), Moshe Dayan's cool eyepatch, etc etc.

I'm 36 now, and things are different:

- I know who Netanyahu is, and what he's said.

- I know who AIPAC are, and what they've said.

- I know who the ADL are, and what they've said.

- I know how the British Mandate of Palestine ended

Younger generations will be finding a lot more of what I learned a lot more quickly.

[selestify]

As a younger person than you, I moved from being vaguely pro-Palestinian in the past to being staunchly pro-Israel now that I have learned more about:

- how Israel has repeatedly needed to fend off simultaneous attacks on its existence

- what the rules of war actually are, and what counts as a war crime or not, and how restrained Israel has been in this regards

- how Palestinians in the Gaza Strip are highly radicalized and even celebrated the 9/11 attacks on the very day of

I’m not claiming to be representative of people my age. I’m simply providing a counter example to you, to show that “learning the facts a lot more quickly” can lead one to different conclusions.

For me, I will unapologetically stand on what I perceive to be the side of civilization, against the forces of barbarism that we saw unleashed on 10/7. Others may perceive differently, or have different values. That’s fine, but it doesn’t make one perspective the obvious and objectively correct one.

[underdeserver]

Look at your list of arguments.

AIPAC, the ADL and 1948 Britain (?) are not Israeli. We agree with some of what they do. The Israeli public is VERY conflicted about Netanyahu. It's like saying that since Trump got elected, America is a racist misogynistic country.

I am Israeli. I want to live without fear of being gunned down in my house or at a rave at 6 AM like the 1200 people who died on October 7th. I want to live without fear of a rocket fired from Gaza exploding on my house.

Am I allowed that right? If I am, pray tell, how do we get from October 7th to there?

[ceejayoz]

You deserve all that.

I’m not sure creating a new generation of angry orphans in Gaza will get you there.

[underdeserver]

But that's the problem. What will?

It feels like everyone in the world is criticizing what the IDF does. Nobody seems to have an alternative. Hamas keeps repeating that they want no Jews between the river and the sea and they plan to commit October 7th-like atrocities again and again. What is the IDF and the Israeli government supposed to do?

[ceejayoz]

> But that's the problem. What will?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politician%27s_syllogism

I don't know what the solution is. People much smarter than me have tried to come up with one. What I can definitively say is large-scale civilian casualties in Gaza is unlikely to prevent another October 7th someday, and may well help cause another one.

Some problems are intractable. Christians in the area have been arguing since 1757 about who's allowed to move a ladder, without resolution, and no one even died over it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Status_Quo_(Jerusalem_and_Beth...

[underdeserver]

Civilian casualties in Gaza are a tragic, unfortunate side effect. It's terrible. But October 7th changed things. 1,200 dead, 240 kidnapped, more than 100,000 still displaced. "Some problems are intractable" is not good enough anymore, our lives are in danger.

So Israel acts, with the goal of destorying Hamas's military ability. If you forcibly take away the other side's guns they can't shoot you anymore. That's not a syllogism, it's simple logic.

This is a solution with a terrible cost, brought about by Hamas's continued active use of their citizenry as human shield. Hamas can end this today by disarming and surrendering. The Gazans would get a functioning state and a better life for their citizens.

Israel doesn't have this option - right now it is do or die.

If there is a way to neutralize the threat from Hamas without civilian casualties, I'm all ears. If not, I assert that any reasonable westerner would act exactly the same. Go ahead and prove me wrong.

[ceejayoz]

Oh, I don't doubt we'd do the same. We did it in Afghanistan.

IMO, that wound up a cautionary tale that proves my point.

Israel, like the US in Afghanistan, cannot achieve this goal via their current approach, no matter how much they wish it.

[HDThoreaun]

> "Some problems are intractable" is not good enough anymore

"some problems are intractable" isn't an argument here, it's a fact. You can't just say "this fact isn't good enough". The entire idea that an occupation of Gaza could possibly lead to a demilitarization of Gazans is incredibly naïve, Iran will never stop arming terrorists in Gaza. Occupying a hostile territory always leads to more terrorism, not less. There is no reason to believe that this occupation will make Israeli's safer, and many reasons to believe it will make them less safe. Obviously it sucks to be in this situation, but rejecting the reality of the situation doesn't help anyone.

[HDThoreaun]

Palestinians are not the only group with atrocities committed against them here. This situation is so sticky because both sides have legitimate grievances that allow them to make compelling moral arguments for their actions.