Conflict between Palestine and Israel escalates

[tippy2k2]

Outright, shameless fucking lie.

So you haven't been saying that people should/should have vote(d) for Harris?

Granted, you haven't been saying Biden is/was powerless and innocent so you get credit for that one, though my critique was a general sense of VBNMW people, not specifically aimed at you

and you haven't been saying that Biden didn't escalate things because presidents have been dealing with Israel in this way since it was created?

and you haven't been saying that the only reason this has only now escalated like this is because Trump is in office (therefore if Harris was in office, it wouldn't be escalating in this particular manner)?

Because I've been reading these few pages and you seem very much on board that if Harris was in office currently, this wouldn't be happening right now. If I'm misrepresenting what you've been saying in this thread, feel free to correct me.

 

[Silvanus]

So you haven't been saying that people should/should have vote(d) for Harris?

That's not what that paragraph said. That paragraph was whole litany of other made-up horseshit I never said.

I'll take this shift as tacit admission that you can't back up the actual contents of that paragraph.

 

[tippy2k2]

That's not what that paragraph said. That paragraph was whole litany of other made-up horseshit I never said.

I'll take this shift as tacit admission that you can't back up the actual contents of that paragraph.

...

Like I said, two entirely different realities. Take whatever you want from the conversation because this is getting silly

 

[Silvanus]

...

Like I said, two entirely different realities. Take whatever you want from the conversation because this is getting silly

OK then, how about you substantiate it. Where's something I've said that indicates "a little genocide is fine", and "Biden is an innocent little babe", that he "did nothing wrong", that "the genocide only started Jan '25". That's what you accused me of. Where? Where are my direct posts saying those things?

Yes, it's getting silly-- it's getting outright stupid that this is all you have. Just endless, childish little made-up positions.

 

[tippy2k2]

EDIT: I removed my above post because frankly, we're talking about each other and I just want to get to the meat and potatoes of it all instead

How about a TLDR overview statement and just cut out all of the side fluff @Silvanus; do you believe that if Harris were president right now, this wouldn't be happening?

Because I 100% in my heart of hearts believe this exact scenario would still be happening whether Harris was in charge or Trump was in charge. I 100% believe that this has been Israel's plan this entire time and this is what they would have pushed for regardless of who would would currently be in power now. I 100% believe that Harris would be following the same exact playbook because she would have no desire to stand up to Israel any more than Biden had.

The only difference I believe between a hypothetical February 11th 2025 Israel/Palestine plan with Harris in charge and a current day February 11th 2025 plan with Trump in charge is that we wouldn't be hearing about it anymore since Harris is smart enough to shut the hell up once in a while where there isn't a silence in the world that Trump wouldn't rush in to fill with the sound of his talking.

 

[Seanchaidh]

OK then, how about you substantiate it. Where's something I've said that indicates "a little genocide is fine", and "Biden is an innocent little babe", that he "did nothing wrong", that "the genocide only started Jan '25". That's what you accused me of. Where? Where are my direct posts saying those things?

Yes, it's getting silly-- it's getting outright stupid that this is all you have. Just endless, childish little made-up positions.

The points you're making don't make much sense without some naive, foolish beliefs behind them. Reelect the administration that facilitated the devastation of Gaza for the sake of Gaza; that is a childish position by itself.

 

[Silvanus]

EDIT: I removed my above post because frankly, we're talking about each other and I just want to get to the meat and potatoes of it all instead

Fair enough. I've removed my reply too.

How about a TLDR overview statement and just cut out all of the side fluff @Silvanus; do you believe that if Harris were president right now, this wouldn't be happening?

The bombing and mass internal displacement, the razing of infrastructure, everything that was already happening under Biden would be happening under Harris.

I do not believe the US President would be launching an effort to remove the entirety of the population, over 2 million people.

Because I 100% in my heart of hearts believe this exact scenario would still be happening whether Harris was in charge or Trump was in charge. I 100% believe that this has been Israel's plan this entire time and this is what they would have pushed for regardless of who would would currently be in power now. I 100% believe that Harris would be following the same exact playbook because she would have no desire to stand up to Israel any more than Biden had.

The only difference I believe between a hypothetical February 11th 2025 Israel/Palestine plan with Harris in charge and a current day February 11th 2025 plan with Trump in charge is that we wouldn't be hearing about it anymore since Harris is smart enough to shut the hell up once in a while where there isn't a silence in the world that Trump wouldn't rush in to fill with the sound of his talking.

I think several higher-ups in Likud-- Netanyahu, Gallant, Katz and others, as well as quite a few of their hard-right predecessors-- have had a scenario in mind for complete displacement and takeover for a number of years. However, they've instead opted for a piecemeal approach, seizing parcels of land, illegal settlements and expansions, and haven't launched a serious one-and-done takeover and expulsion in those years.

I think there are several reasons for this. One is of course armed resistance. But also, they are wary of 1) causing Israeli citizens too much discomfort, lest they lose their power; and 2) pushing international opinion (primarily in the US) to the point where it turns against them. A piecemeal approach is much easier to spin or brush under the carpet.

Biden was endlessly indulgent towards Israel. In service of that gradual, attritional approach-- as quite a few Presidents have been before him. Main consideration there was money and the maintenance of a regional ally.

Then comes Trump. And I don't think Trump is vocalising any particular plan that Netanyahu's government has actually had in mind. Netanyahu had his "ideal scenario" of total takeover in mind, on the backburner for years in favour of the slow burn approach-- but Trump just walks in and proclaims that his gov will take it all over. So Netanyahu sees the opportunity to switch up the heat.

 

[Silvanus]

The points you're making don't make much sense without some naive, foolish beliefs behind them. Reelect the administration that facilitated the devastation of Gaza for the sake of Gaza; that is a childish position by itself.

I mean, I haven't even been talking about how anyone should or shouldn't have voted here. The post you responded to wasn't even about anything like that. Feel free to keep arguing against posts I might've made 4 months ago though.

 

[Seanchaidh]

The bombing and mass internal displacement, the razing of infrastructure, everything that was already happening under Biden would be happening under Harris.

I do not believe the US President would be launching an effort to remove the entirety of the population, over 2 million people.

"Mass internal displacement" is a way of saying that their homes and refugee camps and any other places to live are destroyed and they haven't chosen or been able to escape out of Gaza. The many actions which caused that mass internal displacement would also be the principal cause of any external displacement. That and the razing of infrastructure is (and was) creating the conditions under which the Zionist settler colony can remove the entirety of the indigenous population, announcement of intent or no. The only thing that appears to be standing in the way is the sheer resilience and tenacity of the Palestinian people, and the occasional bloody nose given to the Zionists by the Al-Qassam brigades or other resistance fighters.

 

[crimson5pheonix]

The bombing and mass internal displacement, the razing of infrastructure, everything that was already happening under Biden would be happening under Harris.

I do not believe the US President would be launching an effort to remove the entirety of the population, over 2 million people.

They literally did though. If Egypt had let him, Gaza would already be half empty today.

 

[Satinavian]

@ Silvanus It should be obvious it not worth engaging those two on the topic. There are only intereste in strawmanning your position to have something to argue against. Because otherwise they might have to engage with actual arguments.

 

[crimson5pheonix]

@ Silvanus It should be obvious it not worth engaging those two on the topic. There are only intereste in strawmanning your position to have something to argue against. Because otherwise they might have to engage with actual arguments.

Arguments like "by the math with your unsourced number, half the population of Gaza would be gone today"?

 

[Satinavian]

Arguments like "by the math with your unsourced number, half the population of Gaza would be gone today"?

If you anly debated that, instead of claiming Silwanus wanted the establishment of the evacuation corridor and in all caps and supersize, i would not have made the suggestion.

You two ascribing stances to Silvanus that explicitely contradicts what Silvanus wrote, is just the above mentioned strawmanning. It is tedious and aggravating and shows you don't want an honest discussion.

 

[crimson5pheonix]

If you anly debatet that, instead of claiming Silwanus wanted the establishment of the evacuation corridor and in all cpas and supersize, i would not have made the suggestion.

You two ascribing stances to Silvanus that explicitely contradicts what Silvanus wrote, is just the above mentioned strawmanning. It is tedious and aggravating and shows you don't want an honest discussion.

If this all comes down to Silvanus just having a math error, I will pull back what I said. But being so cocksure about something so plainly obviously wrong, I get ideas. He didn't lead with any of this math, neither has he yet sourced where that number came from.

 

[Seanchaidh]

@ Silvanus It should be obvious it not worth engaging those two on the topic.

yeah, he should think and reflect on the matter instead.

 

[Silvanus]

If this all comes down to Silvanus just having a math error, I will pull back what I said. But being so cocksure about something so plainly obviously wrong, I get ideas. He didn't lead with any of this math, neither has he yet sourced where that number came from.

I didn't lead with it because it wasn't important to the overall point. The number was cited here.

The small scope of the request and the lack of effort to accomplish it are indications that it wasn't very central to their plan. Not to mention that this plan was dead for a year. Had they pinned a plan for complete population drain on evac, this is simply not how they'd have approached it. There would be scale, there would be pursuance.

 

[crimson5pheonix]

I didn't lead with it because it wasn't important to the overall point. The number was cited here.

The small scope of the request and the lack of effort to accomplish it are indications that it wasn't very central to their plan. Not to mention that this plan was dead for a year. Had they pinned a plan for complete population drain on evac, this is simply not how they'd have approached it. There would be scale, there would be pursuance.

You keep saying small. Had that corridor opened up by November, Gaza would be half gone. Had Kamala won, Gaza would be drained entirely before the next election. What determines the size isn't just the number of people moving per day, it's how long Israel would be allowed to use the corridor. And for everything we saw there would effectively be no limit coming from the US. Neither can we expect Israel itself to have stopped. In that light, even a 3 year timespan to depopulate Gaza is absolutely not small in scope, that's something that could very reasonably have happened.

 

[Silvanus]

You keep saying small. Had that corridor opened up by November, Gaza would be half gone. Had Kamala won, Gaza would be drained entirely before the next election. What determines the size isn't just the number of people moving per day, it's how long Israel would be allowed to use the corridor. And for everything we saw there would effectively be no limit coming from the US. Neither can we expect Israel itself to have stopped. In that light, even a 3 year timespan to depopulate Gaza is absolutely not small in scope, that's something that could very reasonably have happened.

It is technically numerically possible to accomplish it, over an extremely long timescale, with that route. That's not the core of what I'm saying: the core is that these aspects make no sense if we presume that to be the intent.

Say someone with piles of power tools attempts to cut a 10-sq-cm hole into a wall, then gives up when it gets a bit tricky. It would be technically possible for that hole to then get widened and widened and widened over the course of many months to end up with the whole wall down. But if he wanted the wall down, why the hell would that be the approach? And if he was so intent on getting it down, how come he's immediately given up and left it for a year without further effort? It's a more rational conclusion that he wanted that hole for another purpose, and it ended up just not being terribly important to him.

Then someone else walks in and declares he'll use a sledgehammer to take down the entire wall. I'm saying the two men probably had different plans for that wall. Both plans would be shit for its structural integrity and shouldn't be pursued.

 

[crimson5pheonix]

It is technically numerically possible to accomplish it, over an extremely long timescale,

What I'm arguing is that 3 years isn't extremely long. That's a shorter timeframe than the Russia-Ukraine war so far, for example. And that's 3 years with some generous assumptions, like that there's no other attrition to the Palestinians in that time. We don't know what Trump's plan is (Trump probably doesn't know what Trump's plan is), but considering Biden's plan could have been completely accomplished a couple years into his hypothetical 2nd term, or Kamala's first term, I'm not comfortable calling it "small" or "slow" or anything like that. It could be accomplished before any political will to throw out genociders could be put to use. It could have taken 5 years and still be a safe bet from Israel's perspective that they could have drained Gaza entirely.

 

[Silvanus]

What I'm arguing is that 3 years isn't extremely long. That's a shorter timeframe than the Russia-Ukraine war so far, for example. And that's 3 years with some generous assumptions, like that there's no other attrition to the Palestinians in that time. We don't know what Trump's plan is (Trump probably doesn't know what Trump's plan is), but considering Biden's plan could have been completely accomplished a couple years into his hypothetical 2nd term, or Kamala's first term, I'm not comfortable calling it "small" or "slow" or anything like that. It could be accomplished before any political will to throw out genociders could be put to use. It could have taken 5 years and still be a safe bet from Israel's perspective that they could have drained Gaza entirely.

Sure, but everyone knows the Russia-Ukraine war has dragged on far longer than its instigators planned; it was supposed to last weeks. And anyone with experience of logistics knows it wouldn't be 3 years-- it would drag into a decade-long mire with such a bottleneck. If the US had actively planned for that the infrastructure would have been massive.

I feel like behind this contention is the feeling that I'm somehow excusing what Biden's administration did. I'm categorically not. He's the scum of the earth, but his god is money, whereas Trump's god is spectacle and admiration (as well as money). Money is served by selling weapons. It isn't served by spending billions on a doomed takeover and getting the US mired in another costly occupation.