Israel declares war on Hamas

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Manhattanboy

Interesting read on the Hamas attack in the Atlantic:

https://apple.news/ANW4d61SOT5WRa7kTOaRO9g

“What is Israel to make of an enemy that launches an attack like this, and does not have an immediate Step Two? The more details that come out about what happened this weekend, the more it seems that the simple answer could be correct. In that way Hamas’s operation resembles 9/11 even more than the sneak attack that began the 1973 Yom Kippur War. In the days after 9/11, Americans waited in fear for a Step Two that never came. It took years to realize that al-Qaeda didn’t have a sophisticated strategy at all, which is one reason its central terror networks have been obliterated.

Indeed, it is becoming clear that Hamas achieved what is sometimes called catastrophic success: a short-term victory so staggering that its leaders did not predict it and could not handle it even as it was happening, and whose massive long-term consequences are likely dire for Hamas.

Step One was to infiltrate Israel and commit crimes against humanity. Step Two—well, it’s not clear what Step Two is, and even Step One is looking half-baked. Terrorists gonna terrorize. On one hand, this would be, oddly, good news for Israel in the short term. An enemy incapable of discipline and coordinated strategic thought is a weaker enemy. On the other hand, an enemy without moral boundaries, who will kill unarmed old people, but not before commandeering their cellphones to stream their murder for their grandchildren, is not a promising partner in any kind of peace process.“

Oct 7 was a one-way suicide mission for the terrorists - the IDF has killed most of them. An Economist analysis of the attacks points out that losing around 1,000 of its most highly-trained and motivated members will hurt Hamas’ capabilities.

It’s a mistake to see these actions through the lens of rational, long-term political strategy. Hamas has a lot more in common with al-Qaeda and ISIS than with the PLO.

[Bigtime]

RCAF has two of their A310's operating rescue flights. One inbound to Athens right now from Tel Aviv and the second on the way to Tel Aviv.

[PsYcNeT]

Amazing bit from 2014 that has sadly aged exceptionally well.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1712245994606444847

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

Youi said this nonsense.



Which is demonstrably false. You can try and play semantic games (I admit to being anti-semantic - see what I did there?) about trying to declassify Canaanites as non-people and then dismiss the Babylonian empire as foreign invader even though they occupied the lands long before the Jews existed, which was your point. The Jews were first which was total bull####.

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

The other bull#### is this claim that Jews are not a religion, but instead a nation. To be a Jew you just have to embrace Judaism, which is what? Wait for it? A religion! You don't have to be born into a land, or have any particular blood, you just have to adopt the religion. Period. Full stop.

Sometimes I feel like the word "Jew" must mean something different in English. Because even Hitler understood that there's such thing as Jewish blood. There's also Judaism religion, which for has nothing to do with it, yet have the same word for its followers. There's no such thing as Mormon's blood.


https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Jew

1
: a person belonging to a continuation through descent or conversion of the ancient Jewish people
2
: one whose religion is Judaism
3
a
: a member of the tribe of Judah
b
: ISRAELITE
4
: a member of a nation existing in Palestine from the sixth century b.c. to the first century a.d.


Since I already addressed Canaanites (a group of tribes, Jews being one of them), let me address Babylon

The timeline below implies, that Babylon conquered Jerusalem and deported Jews, right? Which means that by the time Babylonians arrived at the gate of Jerusalem, Jews already existed and were living there. And had to be deported to Babylonia, which implies that Babylonia was in some different place (in modern day Iraq basically). Also mote no mentions of Arabs.

https://www.worldhistory.org/timeline/babylon/

597 BCE
Babylonian king Nebuchadnezar captures Jerusalem.
597 BCE - 587 BCE
Jews are deported to Babylonia.
587 BCE - 539 BCE
Jewish exile in Babylonia

[Johnny Makarov]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Oct 7 was a one-way suicide mission for the terrorists - the IDF has killed most of them. An Economist analysis of the attacks points out that losing around 1,000 of its most highly-trained and motivated members will hurt Hamas’ capabilities.

It’s a mistake to see these actions through the lens of rational, long-term political strategy. Hamas has a lot more in common with al-Qaeda and ISIS than with the PLO.

Are they stupid? why would they not retreat after the mass killings? What more could they have gained staying in Israel?

[_Q_]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

Because the article is a hack handwaving legitimate external criticism.

I just thought the first line was extremely funny. I posted a much better article from Haaretz (which is not a rag like The Sun) yesterday to crickets.

https://www.haaretz.com/opinion/2023...b-737c1b7a0000

Levy wrote an even more scathing article three days prior actually

https://www.haaretz.com/opinion/2023...b-14f6262a0000

If you don't want to pay for Haaretz (you should imo, at least for this month) some excerpts here:

https://twitter.com/user/status/1712167472592216477

Thanks for sharing these articles.

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by Johnny Makarov

Are they stupid? why would they not retreat after the mass killings? What more could they have gained staying in Israel?

There are three versions that more or less make sense (maybe there are more, but I didn't see them)

1. Hamas' goal was to stop Saudi-Israel peace deal at any cost, and they achieved, at least for now.

2. They want to ensure that region is unstable, because it means that certain cash flows, such as weapon purchases and aid are stable.

3. They didn't really think it through or particularly cared. The attack was a goal in itself.

[Johnny Makarov]

Originally Posted by Pointman

There are three versions that more or less make sense (maybe there are more, but I didn't see them)

1. Hamas' goal was to stop Saudi-Israel peace deal at any cost, and they achieved, at least for now.

2. They want to ensure that region is unstable, because it means that certain cash flows, such as weapon purchases and aid are stable.

3. They didn't really think it through or particularly cared. The attack was a goal in itself.

They already achieved the first 2 goals and could still have retreated. But it's great they died in all their glory by not doing so.....

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

Because the article is a hack handwaving legitimate external criticism.

I just thought the first line was extremely funny. I posted a much better article from Haaretz (which is not a rag like The Sun) yesterday to crickets.

https://www.haaretz.com/opinion/2023...b-737c1b7a0000

Levy wrote an even more scathing article three days prior actually

https://www.haaretz.com/opinion/2023...b-14f6262a0000

If you don't want to pay for Haaretz (you should imo, at least for this month) some excerpts here:

https://twitter.com/user/status/1712167472592216477

I didn't read full articles as I don't pay for Haaretz. From excerpts it seems like more of the same - some list of atrocities allegedly committed by Jews against Palestinians. For such a long and violent conflict it's obvious that both sides can produce long lists of such. It doesn't get us anywhere.

[FlameOn]

Originally Posted by Pointman

I didn't read full articles as I don't pay for Haaretz. From excerpts it seems like more of the same - some list of atrocities allegedly committed by Jews against Palestinians. For such a long and violent conflict it's obvious that both sides can produce long lists of such. It doesn't get us anywhere.

For when you need to bypass paywalls.
https://github.com/iamadamdev/bypass-paywalls-chrome

[PepsiFree]

More recent context around the current situation in terms of actions, reactions, and the direct baggage each side is carrying is certainly more relevant and gets us somewhere more effectively than arguing about Babylon for multiple pages.

[Beninho]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

Youi said this nonsense.



Which is demonstrably false. You can try and play semantic games (I admit to being anti-semantic - see what I did there?) about trying to declassify Canaanites as non-people and then dismiss the Babylonian empire as foreign invader even though they occupied the lands long before the Jews existed, which was your point. The Jews were first which was total bull####.

The other bull#### is this claim that Jews are not a religion, but instead a nation. To be a Jew you just have to embrace Judaism, which is what? Wait for it? A religion! You don't have to be born into a land, or have any particular blood, you just have to adopt the religion. Period. Full stop. No different than the Mormons, other than the Mormons get a whole planet when your name goes in their book in Salt Lake instead of pining for a crappy piece of real estate in the Middle East. So yes, being a Jew is associated with the religion and not a nation.

Need you be reminded that Judaism grew out of the polytheistic religions of the Canaanites and the Babylonians? Judaism was very minor religion and heretical in context of the times. Even to this day Judaism remains a very minor religion in the world but I digress.

It’s an ethno-religion. There is no point in trying to explain this to a legitimate idiot like yourself. You do not need to be religious to be a Jew. You also cannot just convert to the religion. It takes years for someone to convert but there is no point in trying to explain this to you.

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

More recent context around the current situation in terms of actions, reactions, and the direct baggage each side is carrying is certainly more relevant and gets us somewhere more effectively than arguing about Babylon for multiple pages.

That's actually correct, because while Jews are both a nation and indigenous in that, it is not relevant, and is only being brought up because it's being argued.

[FlamesAddiction]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1711808433794810070

[Doctorfever]

Most of what I have read about the conflict has been on this site, some really good discussions here.

The conflict itself doesn’t seem a whole lot different than the discussions about the conflict, in terms of who is right and who is wrong.

There are valid points on both sides, and if one side thinks they have gained the upper hand in the discussion, the other side goes back a few more years in time to justify their position.

I don’t know what to say, other than I can’t see how there is any way the conflict is resolved. Ever.

That is an extremely sad take, especially coming from an optimist.

[_Q_]

Originally Posted by Pointman

Sometimes I feel like the word "Jew" must mean something different in English. Because even Hitler understood that there's such thing as Jewish blood. There's also Judaism religion, which for has nothing to do with it, yet have the same word for its followers. There's no such thing as Mormon's blood.


https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Jew

1
: a person belonging to a continuation through descent or conversion of the ancient Jewish people
2
: one whose religion is Judaism
3
a
: a member of the tribe of Judah
b
: ISRAELITE
4
: a member of a nation existing in Palestine from the sixth century b.c. to the first century a.d.


Since I already addressed Canaanites (a group of tribes, Jews being one of them), let me address Babylon

The timeline below implies, that Babylon conquered Jerusalem and deported Jews, right? Which means that by the time Babylonians arrived at the gate of Jerusalem, Jews already existed and were living there. Also mote no mentions of Arabs

https://www.worldhistory.org/timeline/babylon/

597 BCE
Babylonian king Nebuchadnezar captures Jerusalem.
597 BCE - 587 BCE
Jews are deported to Babylonia.
587 BCE - 539 BCE
Jewish exile in Babylonia

I think that you're quoting Hilter of all people shows how ridiculous it is that there is a pure blooded Jewish race that needs to return to the Middle East. Expelling the jews from Europe because they were seen as "other" was a big part of Nazi ideology.

I really didn't want to bring it up, because I know it touches a nerve for jews, so I'll leave it at that.

All the stuff you bring up about where the jews came from, where palestinians came from is really all irrelevant. Honestly.

Nations don't belong to one ethnicity anymore. They belong to the people living there, regardless of their ethnicity. Spain doesn't belong to all spanish speaking people, worldwide. A Mexican isn't entitled to remove a moroccan citizen of Spain from Madrid because they have some Devine right to do so. A Quebecois isn't entitled to "return" to Lyon and throw an Algerian into a ghetto. If those individuals have a strong connection with the land of their ancestors, then they can apply for immigration and move there like everyone else.

There is nothing special about Jews that entitles them a right to remove people from their homes. Mohammed in Hebron belongs in Hebron.

[Beninho]

Originally Posted by _Q_

I think that you're quoting Hilter of all people shows how ridiculous it is that there is a pure blooded Jewish race that needs to return to the Middle East. Expelling the jews from Europe because they were seen as "other" was a big part of Nazi ideology.

I really didn't want to bring it up, because I know it touches a nerve for jews, so I'll leave it at that.

All the stuff you bring up about where the jews came from, where palestinians came from is really all irrelevant. Honestly.

Nations don't belong to one ethnicity anymore. They belong to the people living there, regardless of their ethnicity. Spain doesn't belong to all spanish speaking people, worldwide. A Mexican isn't entitled to remove a moroccan citizen of Spain from Madrid because they have some Devine right to do so. A Quebecois isn't entitled to "return" to Lyon and throw an Algerian into a ghetto. If those individuals have a strong connection with the land of their ancestors, then they can apply for immigration and move there like everyone else.

There is nothing special about Jews that entitles them a right to remove people from their homes. Mohammed in Hebron belongs in Hebron.

Nm, no point in arguing with you. We know you don’t believe Jews should be allowed a state. No point in talking to you

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by _Q_

I think that you're quoting Hilter of all people shows how ridiculous it is that there is a pure blooded Jewish race that needs to return to the Middle East. Expelling the jews from Europe because they were seen as "other" was a big part of Nazi ideology.

I really didn't want to bring it up, because I know it touches a nerve for jews, so I'll leave it at that.

All the stuff you bring up about where the jews came from, where palestinians came from is really all irrelevant. Honestly.

Nations don't belong to one ethnicity anymore. They belong to the people living there, regardless of their ethnicity. Spain doesn't belong to all spanish speaking people, worldwide. A Mexican isn't entitled to remove a moroccan citizen of Spain from Madrid because they have some Devine right to do so. A Quebecois isn't entitled to "return" to Lyon and throw an Algerian into a ghetto. If those individuals have a strong connection with the land of their ancestors, then they can apply for immigration and move there like everyone else.

There is nothing special about Jews that entitles them a right to remove people from their homes. Mohammed in Hebron belongs in Hebron.

What you said is generally correct. Except that Jews are not removing anyone from their homes. You could argue that they did 80 years ago. But now they have an established state, with 20% of it's population being Arabic, who are living in their homes. Now it's Palestinians, more precisely, their breakaway enclave of Gaza, is trying to remove Jews from there homes and destroy the state altogether. And they have no right for it. They will also be better off letting it go.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Johnny Makarov

Are they stupid? why would they not retreat after the mass killings? What more could they have gained staying in Israel?

They could kill more Israelis if they stayed. So they did.

These (Hamas) are religious fanatics we’re talking about. They shout “God is great” as they kill. No doubt they believe the paradise of martyrs awaits them.

And the updated number is more than 1,500 terrorist infiltrators killed when the area was retaken.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

The other bull#### is this claim that Jews are not a religion, but instead a nation. To be a Jew you just have to embrace Judaism, which is what? Wait for it? A religion! You don't have to be born into a land, or have any particular blood, you just have to adopt the religion. Period. Full stop.

When irreligious, atheist, and non-practicing Jews were rounded up in pogroms and sent to death camps along with all the rest, Jews learned the hard lesson that to the wider world their identity wasn’t just a religion.