Conflict between Palestine and Israel escalates

[Gergar12]

Hezbollah allegedly asked Iran to attack Israel

Hezbollah asked Iran to attack Israel as the tensions between the organization and the latter country escalated in the past few days, Axios reported on Tuesday.According to one Western and two Israeli...

breakingthenews.net

The Iranians are one of the few players hated by both sides of Washington. Trump doesn't like them and was very close to striking Iran, Harris doesn't like them due to Harris having a pro-Israel husband and not wanting to be dragged for the Iran nuclear deal like Obama, and Clinton were. The millennials are slacking off at work, and the Gen Z youth are too busy being not numerous enough, at least the vocal ones are busy running their future careers with those idiotic marches when they should be voting for Harris.

Iran has no backers in the US. Of course, they want to de-escalate.

 

[Seanchaidh]

 

[tippy2k2]

I wish I believed in Hell because there are a LOT of people who should be going straight to the deepest parts of it with the child molesters and people who talk at the theater

 

[Gergar12]

Iran ready to resume nuclear negotiations immediately: Foreign minister

Foreign minister says Tehran will restart nuclear negotiations if other parties are willing.

www.aljazeera.com

US State Department:

https://www.wsj.com/world/middle-east/bidens-iran-envoy-wanted-a-nuclear-deal-it-may-have-cost-him-his-career-2b705879

 

[Seanchaidh]

The Zionist terror regime murdered a man because he insisted that peace would only come if they stop mass-murdering Palestinians.

 

[Seanchaidh]

 

[Agema]

I wish I believed in Hell because there are a LOT of people who should be going straight to the deepest parts of it with the child molesters and people who talk at the theater

The USA and Israel seem like the worst sort of toxic relationship, and the USA if anything looks more like the abused partner.

 

[Seanchaidh]

The USA and Israel seem like the worst sort of toxic relationship, and the USA if anything looks more like the abused partner.

It appears that way. But US politicians would rather it appear that way than be yet more clearly implicated in the Zionist terror regime's crimes. The material support never falters.

 

[Gergar12]

It's weird, all of my life I have watched, and read about war, and when a country follows my advice, like Israel vs. the Shia Crescent and Iran or the US vs. China, I feel empty and even pitiful. I have gone soft in a way. I see people unemployed in China due to US tariffs, and I understand the PLAN, and PLAAF are still as well-staffed, but I still feel pity. I feel pity for Gazans even if I have read polls on the Middle East being Islamist and seeking to conquer the world in the name of Islam, like communism and Gaza especially.

I would have made a bad realist in the State Department or Defense Department. I am not even from there (the Middle East), and it's against my interest for China to have full employment or a good housing sector yet I feel pity. I even feel sorry for Imran Khan, who was a good leader in an otherwise good country with social, and economic troubles but was against US interests.

It's annoying, but it's consistent. Netanyahu is the closest to my favorite anime character, Eren Yeager, but after seeing children getting their legs sawed off in Gaza, and Jamal Bowman's testimony about the West Bank being a textbook example of apartheid, I can't help but feel like there is a sense of injustice.

 

[Silvanus]

I feel pity for Gazans even if I have read polls on the Middle East being Islamist and seeking to conquer the world in the name of Islam

That's because 1) principled morality is not transactional; 2) no society is a monolith; 3) collective punishment is immoral dogshit; 4) death and torture are not appropriate responses to regressive social/ religious beliefs; and 5) regressive social/ religious beliefs proliferate in areas of poor development and poverty, and Gaza has had its development artificially suppressed.

It's annoying, but it's consistent. Netanyahu is the closest to my favorite anime character, Eren Yeager, but after seeing children getting their legs sawed off in Gaza, and Jamal Bowman's testimony about the West Bank being a textbook example of apartheid, I can't help but feel like there is a sense of injustice.

That's not weird. That's basic human compassion and recognition. What's weird is that your view on the matter should be affected at all by a comparison to anime.

 

[Satinavian]

It's weird, all of my life I have watched, and read about war, and when a country follows my advice, like Israel vs. the Shia Crescent and Iran or the US vs. China, I feel empty and even pitiful. I have gone soft in a way. I see people unemployed in China due to US tariffs, and I understand the PLAN, and PLAAF are still as well-staffed, but I still feel pity. I feel pity for Gazans even if I have read polls on the Middle East being Islamist and seeking to conquer the world in the name of Islam, like communism and Gaza especially.

I really don't get what you think the US is getting out of the support of Israel.

It obviously makes it harder to come to an agreement with Iran and it also makes it harder to get what you want from the Saudis, Turkey, Egypt ... even Malaysia. It is also extremely costly and always comes with the risk to be dragged into more wars. And for what ? Has Israel ever done anything for the US ? Could Israel even do anything of note for the US ?

So why do you argue that the continued support is good from a "realist" standpoint ? I mean, there is a reason why the US-Israel relationship is called abusive above with the US painted as the abused party.

 

[Silvanus]

It obviously makes it harder to come to an agreement with Iran and it also makes it harder to get what you want from the Saudis, Turkey, Egypt ... even Malaysia.

Turkey and Egypt, yep. Saudi Arabia, less so-- they have very little care or concern for Shi'ite governments or militias, and can even benefit from regional damage to Iran (through weakening of Iran-aligned groups like Hezbollah or the Houthis).

And for what ? Has Israel ever done anything for the US ? Could Israel even do anything of note for the US ?

Of course, Israel's military provides inordinate sums of money for American arms manufacturers and "defence" contractors. But what's good for those parasitic fuckwits is not necessarily good for America, even from a geopolitical standpoint.

I'd say "realists" would argue the benefit comes from regionally weakening Iran. But then, political "realism" often becomes a thin veil for moronic cruelty and chauvinism.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Of course, Israel's military provides inordinate sums of money for American arms manufacturers and "defence" contractors. But what's good for those parasitic fuckwits is not necessarily good for America, even from a geopolitical standpoint.

As I understand it, a lot of that money comes from the US anyway, in the form of foreign aid with strings attached. So they could contract them to supply stuff to Ukraine just as well.

 

[Seanchaidh]

I'd say "realists" would argue the benefit comes from regionally weakening Iran. But then, political "realism" often becomes a thin veil for moronic cruelty and chauvinism.

John J. Mearsheimer, a very public realist, has argued since 2006 (when he co-wrote a book about it) that the influence of the Israel lobby steers US foreign policy in directions that are in the national interest of neither the United States nor even really of Israel. His view of realism tends to be a good description of how states tend to act in relation to other states, though I think he misses some things for lacking a class analysis; he readily concedes that his model does not fit all situations and thinks trying to make it do so would be a mistake of overcomplication-- which, if I studied him more extensively, might mean that he actually doesn't miss those things that I think he misses. But I suspect he prefers to be more or less silent on the matter of class.

 

[Silvanus]

John J. Mearsheimer, a very public realist, has argued since 2006 (when he co-wrote a book about it) that the influence of the Israel lobby steers US foreign policy in directions that are in the national interest of neither the United States nor even really of Israel. His view of realism tends to be a good description of how states tend to act in relation to other states, though I think he misses some things for lacking a class analysis; he readily concedes that his model does not fit all situations and thinks trying to make it do so would be a mistake of overcomplication-- which, if I studied him more extensively, might mean that he actually doesn't miss those things that I think he misses. But I suspect he prefers to be more or less silent on the matter of class.

There are a few instances in which political realism (or "neorealism", because old ideas love to appear new with a quick change of clothes) corresponds to keeping the US's nose out of other countries' business. But that tends to be the exception rather than the rule. Realists tend to endorse hegemony and sphere-of-influence domination (usually American), and treat the self-determination of all but the biggest as an irrelevance. In that regard Mearsheimer is no different, though on certain specific questions he's taken a more moral approach.

Political realism seems to me to be might-makes-right with better PR for a superficially post-colonial age.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Political realism seems to me to be might-makes-right with better PR for a superficially post-colonial age.

I thought it was explicitly might makes right, with no effort to appear otherwise, though hardly studied it in any detail.

 

[Avnger]

John J. Mearsheimer, a very public realist, has argued since 2006 (when he co-wrote a book about it) that the influence of the Israel lobby steers US foreign policy in directions that are in the national interest of neither the United States nor even really of Israel. His view of realism tends to be a good description of how states tend to act in relation to other states, though I think he misses some things for lacking a class analysis; he readily concedes that his model does not fit all situations and thinks trying to make it do so would be a mistake of overcomplication-- which, if I studied him more extensively, might mean that he actually doesn't miss those things that I think he misses. But I suspect he prefers to be more or less silent on the matter of class.

John J. Mearsheimer... Where have I heard that name before? Oh, right. It's from laughable statements like these:

According to the prevailing wisdom in the West, the Ukraine Crisis can be blamed almost entirely on Russian aggression. Russian president Vladimir Putin, the argument goes, annexed Crimea out of a longstanding desire to resuscitate the Soviet Empire, and he may eventually go after the rest of Ukraine as well as other countries in Eastern Europe. [...] But this account is wrong.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine

It’s difficult to tell, looking at the maps of the ongoing conflict, exactly what he’s up to. It seems quite clear to me that he is going to take the Donbass and that the Donbass is going to be either two independent states or one big independent state, but beyond that it’s not clear what he’s going to do. I mean, it does seem apparent that he’s not touching western Ukraine.

Russian annexation of Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk and Zaporizhzhia oblasts - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Gergar12]

That's because 1) principled morality is not transactional; 2) no society is a monolith; 3) collective punishment is immoral dogshit; 4) death and torture are not appropriate responses to regressive social/ religious beliefs; and 5) regressive social/ religious beliefs proliferate in areas of poor development and poverty, and Gaza has had its development artificially suppressed.



That's not weird. That's basic human compassion and recognition. What's weird is that your view on the matter should be affected at all by a comparison to anime.

Because Eren Yeager is the textbook definition of a realist who only cares about his in-group/interests, yes, I like the Sith Lord Valkorion for the old republic, but he was blinded by his hatred; he cared too much about it. A better example is Eren Yeager, who got his goals accomplished; he saved his friends over 80% of the fictional world's population and even his nation, he is the best definition of fictional ruthlessness.

Turkey and Egypt, yep. Saudi Arabia, less so-- they have very little care or concern for Shi'ite governments or militias, and can even benefit from regional damage to Iran (through weakening of Iran-aligned groups like Hezbollah or the Houthis).



Of course, Israel's military provides inordinate sums of money for American arms manufacturers and "defence" contractors. But what's good for those parasitic fuckwits is not necessarily good for America, even from a geopolitical standpoint.

I'd say "realists" would argue the benefit comes from regionally weakening Iran. But then, political "realism" often becomes a thin veil for moronic cruelty and chauvinism.

Iran is a former empire, and a possible future one, weakening them and containing them should be an American goal based on history, just like weakening Russia, China, Pakistan, and even North Korea.

There are a few instances in which political realism (or "neorealism", because old ideas love to appear new with a quick change of clothes) corresponds to keeping the US's nose out of other countries' business. But that tends to be the exception rather than the rule. Realists tend to endorse hegemony and sphere-of-influence domination (usually American), and treat the self-determination of all but the biggest as an irrelevance. In that regard Mearsheimer is no different, though on certain specific questions he's taken a more moral approach.

Political realism seems to me to be might-makes-right with better PR for a superficially post-colonial age.

There are Russian, Chinese, Pakistani, Polish, French, Turkish, Iranian, and Indian realists in power too.

I really don't get what you think the US is getting out of the support of Israel.

It obviously makes it harder to come to an agreement with Iran and it also makes it harder to get what you want from the Saudis, Turkey, Egypt ... even Malaysia. It is also extremely costly and always comes with the risk to be dragged into more wars. And for what ? Has Israel ever done anything for the US ? Could Israel even do anything of note for the US ?

So why do you argue that the continued support is good from a "realist" standpoint ? I mean, there is a reason why the US-Israel relationship is called abusive above with the US painted as the abused party.

Saudi Arabia is a gas station and soon to be a glorified tourist hub. Turkey is based; due to the number of wars they have fought, they have lost too many, and their economy is run by a madman. Egpyt lacks enough people and will face water issues and keeps building new cities vs getting more water from the Mediterranean. The Malaysians are idiots who looked at Singapore and said no thanks. Yes, they are rich now somewhat, but which dumbass country looks at the land with a chokepoint and says no thanks to the idiots in Malaysia. Too many Chinese are likely their excuse since we are all flaming communism for some reason.

 

[Gergar12]

John J. Mearsheimer... Where have I heard that name before? Oh, right. It's from laughable statements like these:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine

Russian annexation of Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk and Zaporizhzhia oblasts - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

There are rumors in my IR department where I went to school that he was paid by Russia.

 

[Silvanus]

Because Eren Yeager is the textbook definition of a realist who only cares about his in-group/interests, yes, I like the Sith Lord Valkorion for the old republic, but he was blinded by his hatred; he cared too much about it. A better example is Eren Yeager, who got his goals accomplished; he saved his friends over 80% of the fictional world's population and even his nation, he is the best definition of fictional ruthlessness.

You've missed the point. Build your positions on moral/political philosophies and the facts, not on trite comparisons with pop culture.

There are Russian, Chinese, Pakistani, Polish, French, Turkish, Iranian, and Indian realists in power too.

Sort of-- many of those governments are partially following political-realist approaches, but partially they're also following simple pragmatic or idealistic ones.

The pointlessly aggressive political-"realist" streak among all these countries (along with the US) is a major reason the world is in such a mire of suffering and conflict, though.