Israel-Palestine megathread for the remainder of the weekend

alyaza [they/she]@beehaw.orgmod to World News@beehaw.org – 122 points –

the front page is now like half articles on this currently, so it's probably time for a megathread because none of us want to keep track of 12 threads on this subject and all the resulting comments. only major subsequent developments (for example, boots on the ground; pronunciations by governments; that sort of stuff) will get their own thread. otherwise please post stuff in here for the time being. any threads not meeting this criteria will be locked and removed. thank you in advance for your cooperation.

86

It's terrible that Israeli civilians were murdered.

It's wonderful that the world is stating such, and showing its support to prevent further murder of innocents.

It's terrible that Palestinian civilians were murdered.

It's terrible that the world is ignoring this, and turning a blind eye to further murder of innocents.

Exactly. If you look at the big picture, Israelis have killed WAY more Palestinians over the years, as well as apartheid and stealing Palestinian land.

I'm not taking sides, but the one sided coverage gross.

taking sides is fine and even right, but that needs to come with recognition and acceptance of that side's problems

The problem with this conflict in particular is that taking the side of Palestine has become synonymous with taking the side of Hamas, or with simply being antisemitic. It's essential if you want to express any support for Palestine that you also painstakingly lay out exactly what you support and what you don't, otherwise.... Well, the onion said it best.

it hasnt become synonymous, certain people want to make it seem like theyre synonymous

I don't think articulating a concern for any civilians on any side is taken poorly, and I don't think that the majority of the media has skewed any calls for humanitarian aid and adherance to international warfare rules as anti-semitism. In fact, the new york times has published both investigative and opinion pieces that are very sympathetic to Palestinian civilians, and calling out Israeli disproportionate response.

I think part of the problem in discussing the issue is that the events of today are inextricably woven into the events of the

  • 1948 founding of Israel by the UN at the end of the British mandate.
  • the invasion of the five armies and the 1949 armistice.
  • the six day war, and the loss of the Sinai peninsula.
  • the eventual recognition of borders by Egypt and Jordan.
  • the results of the shelling of Beirut after the Hezbollah attack in 2006.

But that is a lot of history, but the back and forth of tragedies, including disproportionate response is driven by these events.

When most people online seem to confuse the history of Gaza with that of the West Bank, or conflate Hamas and Hezbollah, it is no wonder that discussion breaks down.

Unfortunately I was in a debate elsewhere on the fediverse where the other person said there is no legitimate response to the Hamas attack for Israel because Israel's existence is the source of the problem.

That sounds like the Hezbollah general who yesterday called this a "war of existence" in that either Israel exists or the Arab alliance exists. So how do you reason with that position, and how many people objecting to Israel's use of force are really all that knowledgeable of the history?

I also think that people underestimate how you reason with allies. If Biden hadn't shown solidarity with Israel, then his visit today wouldn't have resulted in the opening of humanitarian aid. You influence allies by showing solidarity publicly, and having frank conversations on private.

Anyway, sorry for the long post. Have a great evening!

It doesn’t matter who killed more. That’s why this never ends. “My tragedy is worse than your tragedy” is never productive. It just serves as an (incorrect) argument for why it’s permissible for one group to keep committing atrocities while the other group has to suffer it and be the first to bury the hatchet. Then the script flips and everyone does it again from their respective positions. It never ends.

It's terrible that some civilians immigrated to Israel for the sole purpose of becoming settlers and pushing Palestinians out.

It's terrible that some civilians immigrated to Gaza for the sole purpose of having as big a family as possible to use their own children and grandchildren as human shields against Israeli settlers.

It's terrible that dual-citizenship people on both sides are asking "their" [other] countries to evacuate them, after having spent decades there on purpose.

It's terrible that Israel is willing to watch millions of civilians starve... that Egypt doesn't want to let refugees in... and Hamas doesn't want to let them out.

So far, I see nothing wonderful in all of this.

Can you substantiate that 2nd point? I haven't heard it anywhere before.

Source: Spanish TV.

There has been some uproar this week because there are over 10,000 Spanish citizens in Israel and Gaza, but the government only decided to fleet 2 military planes to evacuate 500 of them. Turns out, they were only evacuating the "tourists and people on business trips"... meaning the rest are not; they're people who decided to immigrate there. Following that, different reporters got hold of people "left behind", both in Israel and Gaza.

One of those people, was a lady who immigrated to Gaza 40 years ago, "to settle right next to the Israeli border", and now kept repeating how the Spanish consulate is ignoring her request for evacuating her 19-people family, with many children among them.

It's estimated that 50% of the population of Gaza are underage, meaning they're people born in the last 18 years, into a conflict that's been going for 70 years, from way before this lady decided to immigrate there 40 years ago and contribute to the population growth.

Source: Internet (various)

Some statistics about this:

Both sides are engaged in a long term (100+ years) strategy of trying to out-number each other, with sympathizers of each side migrating there to increase the numbers for the conflict. Since immigration into Gaza and Palestine is more restricted than into Israel, the former have been trying to churn out as many "new residents" (aka kids) as quickly as possible... who are now being used by Hamas as a humanitarian crisis bargaining chip.

Notice how even with a steady emigration of about half the population of Palestine every year, the total population keeps growing, along with a steady immigration rate of around 200K/year:

You do realize that poorer regions have much higher fertility because of much higher child mortality rates and much lower average lifespans, right? Fertility is inversely proportional with wealth and access to healthcare.

This isn't unique to Gaza. It's true in Africa, India, and pre-communist China.

Notice how the sharpest decline in Palestine's demographic pyramid appears between 14 and 34 years old, or about when people realize what's going on and decide to GTFO, and how that fits the constantly increasing emigration, while the increasing population —despite higher child mortality, lower lifespans, and extreme emigration— fits the profile of adapting fertility to and ideological parity with Israel's immigration rates.

Since you mentioned India:

Notice the low child mortality with an actual increase towards the age of 22. We could discuss the large younger male surplus, though.

I'd recommend you take a look at the demographic pyramids of countries in Africa. Mortality is steepest in the 14-34 range because that's when most people die.

That's nonsense. Feel free to investigate the demographics of the World, Africa, Niger, Ukraine, China, or the US, to get a feel for "infant mortality" or "when most people die".

https://www.populationpyramid.net/

Have you ever looked at the tool you sent?

Please, do put in Niger and find out (FWIW, your tool is very low granularity and I know there are visualizers that show it at a more fine scale).

‘The Onion’ Stands With Israel Because It Seems Like You Get In Less Trouble For That - The Onion posts absolutely fire satire (safire?) once again

Omar and Tlaib Are Condemned in the US for Saying What Prominent Israelis Are Saying^(^^direct^^)^

About 1/3rd through the article, they start highlighting some of the progressive conversations that have been being had in Israel, comparing them to the remarks AOC, Bernie Sanders, Ilhan Omar, Cori Bush, Rashida Tlaib, and others have been criticized as "disgraceful" for.

Some important ones IMO:

Daniel Levy, a former Israeli peace negotiator and top adviser to former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak, who told the BBC, “If anyone told me that what the militants did on the weekend was a legitimate response to years and years of occupation. I would say: ‘No, you’re wrong-headed. You’ve lost sight of humanity and reality.’ And if anyone tells me that what Israel is doing in Gaza today is a legitimate response to what happened on the weekend, it’s exactly the same.”

Israeli human rights lawyer Michael Sfard, an expert on the rules of war, observed Wednesday that “Hamas committed abominable war crimes for which there can be no forgiveness. But the laws of war weren’t meant only for situations in which our blood is cool, or when there is no justified anger or understandable desire for revenge.” The lawyer explained:

It’s not easy for Israelis to think about Gazans’ rights in a week when Hamas committed crimes that are still impossible to digest and our whole society is mourning and crying. But Gaza’s catastrophe won’t wait for the end of our seven-day shivah.

Consequently, this needs to be said: Israel has held millions of people under a brutal blockade for more than 15 years with the support of the entire Western world. That is inhumane and inconceivable, and every solution to this bloody conflict ultimately includes respecting the rights of all people, both in Gaza and Sderot, to live with security and human dignity. And that begins with respecting the most basic rules as set down in the international laws of war, which are designed to reduce the harm to civilians.

It's easy to get stuck in a North American bubble of media, but it's also important to note what's being said locally by people who have eyes on the ground and have been watching this stuff grow first hand for 75 years since the occupation of Israel.

It's very telling that the media began insinuating (or labeling outright) Representatives Omar and Tlaib as being antisemitic for criticizing Israel's response, but when Sanders says the same thing, and even more, they don't.

If it's not antisemitic for a Jewish person to say, it's not antisemitic for someone else to. No one is immune from criticism that would otherwise be valid, simply because of who is giving it.

fyi: if you'd like a vetted cause to donate to, people are fundraising for Palestine Children's Relief Fund which is one of the best charities i'm aware of that does relief work in Gaza and puts basically all of the money given to them toward actual work and not salaries or overhead.

do you have one for EU folks? want to donate, but donating to an actual trustworthy org is hard enough when there isnt this much misinformation

I think Medecines Sans Frontiers is good?

Journalist Rips Palestinian ‘Terrorism’ Narrative to Shreds

Israel has been calling Palestinian fighters “terrorists” to justify its slaughter of Gaza.

Breakthrough News journalist, Eugene Puryear, rips this narrative apart, explaining the long history of oppressed and colonized people being demonized and called terrorists and savage to justify the continued occupation of those people. No different than the Native resistance to American colonization, slave rebellions in the Americas, the Haitian Revolution, Palestinians are resisting Israeli colonialism, not out of bloodlust as the media has portrayed it, but because of decades of land thefts, massacres, second-class citizenship and the denial of the right to return that has persisted for decades.

This seems to be missing the meaning of the word "terrorist", as in anyone espousing the ideology of instilling fear as a weapon.

as in anyone espousing the ideology of instilling fear as a weapon.

I wish that was what the word "terrorist" means.

It has always meant anyone using asymmetric tactics to oppose states or capitalism, both violent and non-violent. If it simply meant using fear as a weapon, then every state that has prisons and police would be terrorist.

The standard usage of the word is so hypocritical that it has become an authoritarian allegiance-signifying pejorative without any deeper meaning.

If it simply meant using fear as a weapon, then every state that has prisons and police would be terrorist.

Well... you said it 🙈

The Oxford definition adds "unlawful" as an extra requirement, but I'd readily call Iran's morality police "terrorist", despite being lawful and state sponsored.

I agree Iran uses fear to control its citizens, but that's a pretty facile statement in an English speaking community. How do you feel about Anastasija Kukhta or Mikhail Lazakovich, both convicted of terrorism?

Russia and Belarus also use fear to control their citizens. Setting a place on fire to make the state fear you, definitely can be called terrorism. Asking for sanctions against a state... hm, kind of? Technically, many of the sanctions against Russia are also intended to instill fear, including amongst civilians so they stop supporting their state. Making the EU fear whether it will have enough fuel for the winter, is another case.

There's a lot of terrorising going around these days.

The word is useless for describing violent acts in a meaningful way. It can mean making children traumatized with bombs, or making HOA members afraid their property value will decrease with graffiti, vastly different actions and outcomes.

Tellingly, none of the people who tried to overthrow the government and caused hundreds of senators and congresspeople to retreat in fear have been charged with terrorism.

Meanwhile, people who take videos of animal abuse on farms are terrorists. Eric King is housed at the infamous prison for terrorists ADX Florence, and is referred to the counterterrorism unit for passing out Union cards.

No one who wants to be taken seriously should use the word "terrorist" in a descriptive context. It is not a meaningful word, it's a noise people make when the word they actually mean is socially inappropriate or politically inopportune.

The word is useless for describing violent acts in a meaningful way

Agree.

It is not a meaningful word

Disagree.

"Terrorism" has a clear meaning, and observing when people use it, or avoid using it, is even more meaningful, as proven by those examples.

PS: I've been called a "no freeloading terrorist", a "TV remote terrorist", and a "cleaning terrorist". It may not tell you much about what I did, but it should convey enough meaning about what they were thinking.

It seems the person who called you a terrorist did not want to be taken seriously :)

Israel Is ‘Very Sorry’ For Attack That Killed Journalist Issam Abdallah

The Israeli army has expressed that they are “very sorry” for the death of Lebanese Reuters journalist Issam Abdallah, who was killed in an Israeli shelling at the Lebanon border.

Despite the IDF’s expression of regret, the vehicle Abdallah was in was clearly marked as a media car. The incident occurred while Abdallah and other journalists were covering ongoing clashes at the border.

Lebanon’s caretaker Prime Minister Najib Mikati condemned Israel’s actions, and UN Secretary-General António Guterres expressed condolences, emphasizing the need for journalists to be protected.

CBC | As Israel expands Gaza offensive, it has lonely critics in Washington^(^^direct^^)^

As Israel expands its military offensive in Gaza, some Democrats in the US are expressing growing criticism of Israeli actions. Younger progressive Democrats have been more vocal in calling for civilian protections and a ceasefire. However, support for Israel remains strong among both Democratic and Republican leadership as well as the general public. While progressive critics want to see Palestinian lives prioritized, Israel sees no viable negotiating partner with Hamas controlling Gaza. The article discusses the long history of US support for Israel since its founding and changing views over time. Some analysts believe criticism from the left lacks real political power but could influence younger voters. Ultimately both sides express pessimism about prospects for peace given the deep tensions and lack of trust between Israelis and Palestinians.

It's evidenced in the vote in the last U.S. Congress to top up American funding for Israel's missile-defence system: a lopsided result of 420 to 9.

I checked who voted which way, and the following were Nay votes:

  • Cori Bush (D)
  • André Carson (D)
  • Jesús G. "Chuy" García (D)
  • Raúl M. Grijalva (D)
  • Thomas Massie (R)
  • Marie Newman (D)
  • Ilhan Omar (D)
  • Ayanna Pressley (D)
  • Rashida Tlaib (D)

Present:

  • Henry C. "Hank" Johnson, Jr. (D)
  • Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D)

No Vote:

  • Debbie Lesko (R)

Hamas appears to have set up roadblocks to prevent Gaza residents from evacuating south

The IDF said that just like they said there were a bunch of decapitated babies before they walked that lie back

What other purpose do you think the trucks barring the route south could serve?

IDF reliability in reporting is at an all-time low.

Seattle Rabbi David Basior Eulogizes Former Congregant Killed by Hamas, Says Occupation Must End

As more details emerge about the shocking Hamas attack on Saturday, we speak with Rabbi David Basior of Kadima Reconstructionist Community, a progressive Jewish group in Seattle focused on social justice. Basior’s former congregant Hayim Katsman was among those killed in Israel by Hamas militants who stormed Kibbutz Holit. The 32-year-old was a gardener, mechanic and peace activist who worked with anti-occupation groups. During the attack, he shielded a woman from bullets with his own body, saving her life at the cost of his own. Katsman’s family have said that he would not have wanted his death to fuel retribution against Palestinians. “Life is the utmost. It is the most core teaching that I have received from my tradition, from my ancestors,” says Basior, who evokes the phrase “never again,” used in remembrance of the Holocaust and other genocides, and says that precept means the violence against Palestinians “must be spoken out against.”

Egypt refuses foreigners passage from Gaza except as part of aid agreement

Ahram Online , Saturday 14 Oct 2023

Egyptian authorities have refused the passage of foreign residents of Gaza through the Rafah crossing, except as part of a foreign aid delivery agreement, Al-Qahera News TV reported, citing informed sources.

Not surprising, Egypt cannot handle 2 million refugees and once the Palestinians leave, there's no way Israel is letting them back.

Noura Erakat: Western Leaders & Media Are Justifying Israel’s “Genocidal Campaign” Against Palestinians

The unfolding crisis in Gaza, where relentless Israeli bombardment has killed more than 1,500 people since Saturday, is “a humanitarian catastrophe,” says Palestinian American human rights attorney Noura Erakat. She says Western leaders and the mainstream media have relied on racist, Islamophobic tropes to build a false consensus “that war is inevitable and that whatever consequences come out is the fault of Hamas, thereby further blaming the victims for their own killing and massacres.” Erakat also decries the Israeli order that 1.1 million residents in Gaza relocate under threat of a ground invasion. “What we are seeing is a genocidal campaign. You cannot forcibly transfer 1.1 million Palestinians in a 225-square-mile enclosed area. There is nowhere for them to go,” says Erakat, an associate professor at Rutgers University and author of Justice for Some: Law and the Question of Palestine.

Video of a Hamas rocket launch and subsequent IDF strike

Many videos out of the Gaza strip have the constant hum of surveillance drones in the background, it's interesting to see the drone's perspective for a change.

it’s interesting to see the drone’s perspective for a change.

The Russia/Ukraine conflict has really shown the drone's place on the battlefield. It's awesome; and terrifying.

Maps and Misinformation

Sorry, not news or updates, but also not worth creating a thread.

I've been seeing lots of maps on Lemmy (mostly in French-speaking communities communities). A number of them look like this:

::: spoiler standard conflict maps

:::

And then I've seen others that look like this (usually labelled as "fact" or "reality"):

::: spoiler alternative versions

:::

With the exception of an amazing 3-day event that took place in my school (we had some history professors/researchers come in over 3 days and present us arguments from both sides, then moderate a debate...) I received no education about this, and even if I had it would have been about 20 years ago or more.

I suspect we have all seen a version of this map before. I can read the Wikipedia, and watch the documentaries, but where should I look to be able to come to a decision on my own regarding these maps? Meaning, is one of them more factual than the other?

All those maps seem to show the same things, in slightly different ways. Basically, "statistics massaging" done with maps.

The "Fact" one seems to have the most information, as in:

  • Since 1917, the British had control ver the "Mandate of Palestine", which was neither Israel nor Palestine.
  • Both Jews and Arabs started buying land and settling there, hoping to become the majority population in case a referendum was held when the British retired.
  • Since 1941, the Jewish ideated a plan on how to win a possible referendum by getting One Million of their own in there, presenting it in 1944 as a solution for Holocause refugees, but then realizing that it wouldn't be enough, that they'd still be missing people and they'd need "Arab refugees", as in Jews fleeing persecution from Arab countries.
  • In 1947, after WWII, the UN proposed a plan to split the land, which the Arab countries rejected.
  • In 1948 the British planned to GTFO... and just the day before, Israel was formed and declared that the whole land would be theirs.
  • The moment the British left, all the Arab countries attacked Israel which they saw as illegitimate... and with the idea of genociding everyone.
  • However, Israel won that war, and let any Arabs choose whether to stay or GTFO. About 150,000 decided to accept Israeli citizenship, about 700,000 got pushed into Jordan/Palestine.
  • As predicted, a lot of Jews fled Arab countries fearing persecution, which propped up the numbers of Israeli citizens, and further increased the hatred in Arab countries.
  • In 1967, Israel got attacked again, and won again, letting it lay claim to the area previously known as Jordan/Palestine.
  • But people in that area, were mostly Arabs, which didn't sit well with Israel, who started a colonization process, mainly to cut off the "Palestine enclave" from Jordan... and to intersperse some Jewish population inside, lest the area decoded to hold a referendum and the Arab side win.
  • People in the Gaza area were Arab/Palestinian, and it has open access to the sea, so instead Israel tried to contain those people by walling them off, and telling Egypt to take them... which Egypt doesn't really want to (we're in the middle of a worldwide migration crysis, nobody wants millions of immigrants).
  • In 1995, after a lot dirty tactics from bother sides, a Palestinian governance was established... but by then the ex-Jordan area was already decimated by Israeli colonists.

Misinformation:

  • The "disappearing Palestine" map, starts by claiming all the territory was Palestine, which is false, it was a "Mandatory Palestine" under British control. If you compare it with the first "Fact" map, you'll notice it claims all the white area as Arab owned, which is false.
  • The UN plan seems to be correct on all the maps, little to manipulate there since it failed anyway.
  • The 1948/1949 maps match what Israel claimed after preemptively declaring itself as a state, getting attacked, and winning.
  • The 1967 maps also show how Israel got control over the whole area, and progressively has been eating away at any possible Arab/Palestinian claim.
  • The 1995 and "NOW" maps show why Israel conceded a Palestinian governance: mainly over territories where people identifying as Palestinians are no longer a majority.

Personally, I'd say the "Fact" one along the AlJazeera one, paint the most complete picture.

For sources, check Wikipedia for:

The USA are deploying a second CSG to the eastern Mediterranean

I have directed the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower Carrier Strike Group (CSG) to begin moving to the Eastern Mediterranean. As part of our effort to deter hostile actions against Israel or any efforts toward widening this war following Hamas's attack on Israel, the Strike Group includes the guided-missile cruiser USS Philippine Sea (CG 58), guided-missile destroyers USS Gravely (DDG 107) and USS Mason (DDG 87), and Carrier Air Wing 3, with nine aircraft squadrons, and embarked headquarters staffs.

There was a lemmy post that showed beautiful pictures of Israel and Hamas before the attacks and I can't seem to find that post.

Why couldn't Biden have said about the hospital bombing in Gaza, despite the (supposed) evidence to the contrary, something like "this is a terrible tragedy for the Palestinian people," (which he may in fact have said), but much more importantly, "it's not clear who is responsible for this terrible attack," even if there was 100% incontrovertible evidence that Islamic Jihad did this (which they may or may not have, I honestly don't know). Everyone in the Arab world thinks, rightly, that the US will back Israel no matter what, and that we're not a fair dealer in any of this. No one in the Arab world believes that IJ did this, they all believe Israel is responsible, and why shouldn't they? What reason do they have to trust the US and Israel? This is where some diplomatic fudging could have really helped the situation. But Biden didn't end up meeting with a single Arab leader because of this. At a certain point you have to throw the other side a bone if there is any hope of them ever trusting you. I confess that despite some things I definitely don't like, I have been pleasantly surprised at how good the Biden presidency has been overall. But his trip to Israel may have made things a lot worse. No negotiations mean that no hostages will be released, no ceasefire can be implemented, no progress can be made.

A couple of points you might find interesting:

  • Biden was supposed to meet Jordan's King Abdullah, Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas. Abbas cancelled his presence following the hospital bombing, then Biden discussed with King Abdullah and they agreed to call it off.
  • Biden was not complacent with Israel in his address at Tel Aviv. He urged Israel not to give in to rage, drawing a parallel with USA’s mistakes following 9/11.
  • During his trip, Biden finally managed to convince Israel to let humanitarian aid into Gaza.

I might be overly optimistic, but I feel that countries (including the US) supporting Israel are in the process of diplomatically clarifying that their support is not really unconditional and that peace is the only acceptable objective. In that sense I don’t think his trip was all bad.

To add on to your point, you publicly support allies while having private conversations counseling them on prudent courses of action. They don't listen to you if you call them out publicly, which is usually a sign that privately articulated red lines have been crossed. I'm sure Biden is pressing them privately to have a more measured response, and is likely to have more traction than if he was publicly trashing them.

Just like you don't use all available sanctions out of the gate with an adversarial state, to leave room to negotiate and leave some channels open. Diplomacy is more nuanced than "saying it like it is" all the time.

I'm glad there's something to be optimistic about 🥲