Obama says people need to acknowledge complexity of Israel-Palestinian conflict to move forward
cnn.com
Former President Barack Obama said a way forward for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is only possible if people acknowledge the “complexity” of the situation.
“If there’s any chance of us being able to act constructively to do something, it will require an admission of complexity and maintaining what on the surface may seem contradictory ideas that what Hamas did was horrific, and there’s no justification for it. And … that the occupation and what’s happening to Palestinians is unbearable,” Obama said in an interview on the podcast “Pod Save America.”
The former president’s comments come as the Israeli military focuses its offensive against Hamas in Gaza City and northern parts of the enclave.
Sadly, there is no way forward. The leaders of both sides want the complete elimination of the other.
So remove the leaders of both sides.
Unfortunately Hamas hasn't held a single election since they were elected in 2006, and Netanyahu is looking similarly autocratic. The recent escalation is only going to make both sides more antagonistic.
In other words, this shit ain't going away any time soon.
Why should hamas keep down their arms when they see what is happening in disarmed Westbank?
Unarmed protest is always an option. It's a harder option, but it is an option.
Hamas could keep their weapons, and target actual military targets in Gaza.
Israel already withdrew from Gaza in '06, but Hamas is happy to launch rockets at civilian targets in Israel.
Hamas could launch rockets at civilian targets in Israel from non-civilian locations in Gaza, instead of using schools and hospitals.
Hamas has consistently picked the most hostile options because Hamas doesn't just want a free Palestine, Hamas wants the destruction of Israel and rejects any territory existing as an Israeli state. Gaza isn't even fully isolated by Israel, but Egypt wants nothing to do with Hamas either.
I'm not even saying armed resistance is wrong, but what Hamas does is. And yes, Israel's government is also just as wrong, if not more so.
You must be new to the world then.
Why shouldn't Hamas continue armed resistance? Westbank is the living example of what happens when resistance dwindles. Israhell takes all. Simple.
Do you think an armed Westbank would fair any better?
Yes. If Arabs had helped they'd have their own state by now. But the monarchies helped suppress and kill Palestinian state hood because they are afraid of what the Levant Arab mindset represents. They are afraid of both islamist and secular Levant arab politics because they represent unity beyond borders.
Exactly. I've been recently thinking that maybe Israel and Palestine become a new country run by the world. It becomes a neutral globally enforced and patrolled market or exchange. Almost like a U.N. country, but somehow better because the U.N seems like a fucking joke. I'm not sure exactly what I mean here, but essentially, the world removes the two and force them to be one.
Even though it is complex, there are obvious crimes, let alone war crimes happening there. Looking at you IDF with your repeated bombing of civilians and the wounded.
I think you've just created a tinderbox of like...well...biblical proportions.
Umm... it's already burning.
Just saying.
The UN is a pull organization. It has to request forces & money for operations. No nation or nation collective in their right mind would want to shell out the billions required to basically occupy the region, even with Jerusalem.
Make it a global trade hub. All nations will have an interest. With global trade comes investment, and the next thing you know, this small patch of the earth is the most valuable piece on it.
So make a place a global trade hub in theory can be as simple as saying it is so and watching every country trade there, only in one's imagination.
So now the region is going to be made into a great Singapore for the Mediterranean using billions of dollars of tax money from nations including Egypt, Turkey, Greece, Cyprus, etc?
That's not a global trade hub. That's a globally subsidized tax haven. Whose long-term stability Congress from the whim of nations like the USA, China, Russia, the EU, Iran, Saudi Arabia, etc...
With that, it would be infinitely easier and more attractive for any nearby nation to create a special economic area to handle regional trade & take the jobs, and the best part? This would be funded by the respective nation itself.
The way you describe it is a tax haven. Make it not so.
This is almost an appealing idea in a parallel universe where religion doesn't exist, but unfortunately that's not the one we live in. This conflict is one that extends to nearly every avenue, but at it's core, it's a religious one. Unless we're ready as a global community to finally denounce religion and call the practice of it a silly and fruitless endeavor, which to be clear, we aren't, then we're never going to get anywhere pretending we can ignore the religious aspect of it. And that includes your utopian suggestion, which aside from all of its other very real problems would also likely enrage an enormous religious segment of the world who would see some of their holiest lands reduced to mere merchants dens. Even if you perhaps try to protect the religious sites, now you're effectively enforcing a concept of religious sanctity on the global community, which is no less likely to offend.
Your idea is well-intended and nice to think about, but unfortunately unrealistic for many reasons, starting on the ground floor with problem of religion.
Yes, that's why we don't stop trying. I might not make a difference, but maybe the next generation or the next after that. The point is I'm not going to stop trying. There is no answer that everyone is going to like, but there is an answer that will help everyone. I mean Israel IS man made.
Exactly, change the leader or change the leader
It's a never-ending organic entity. You have to keep at it The problem with the insanity analogy is that it takes a billion times to do something sometimes before even beginning to see the start of a change.
Take away their toys and put them in time oot.
Ah. Yes. That's the easy way to do it.
Lol not true. Palestine disarmed in the Westbank and got nothing except brutal apartheid and evictions as a result.
And we can stop giving them money unless they start playing nice.
It's not the government who is settling the West Bank. Yes, it is their policy, but it's regular Israeli citizens who are killing Palestinians, burning their homes down or taking their homes from them and driving them away.
I mean, the government is incentivizing it and enabling it.
Settlers wouldn't settle the West Bank if the Israeli military wasn't protecting them. The government is absolutely the problem.
Go try and take someone's home by force. It won't go well. But it will go a lot better when it's sanctioned by an overwhelming military force.
And in turn, Western governments are enabling the Israeli government. If the West sanctioned Israel as hard as they sanctioned Iran or Russia, they'd probably think twice about annexing the West Bank. But instead of sanctions they get weapons.
enact a european style democratic state with no official religious affiliation. problem solved. jews and muslims don't actually hate each other. they live side by side all the time.
He also said:
which is something I totally agree on. There is no "good or bad" team in the Middle East...all parties are involved in this conflict and it's cause!
Hey, don't forget those of us who made this mess and walked away, and every country on Earth that continues to keep the whole Middle East area relevant through our continued oil addiction.
The early 20th century British Empire?
Israel, let alone Gaza, don't exactly produce a lot of oil, and I certainly don't know that they sell it.
This whole conflict in Israel is more about land, and the West supports Israel bEcAuSe DeMoCrAcY in an otherwise unfriendly region. The region as a whole might be messy "because oil," but that's rather tangential to this conflict.
Israel is adjacent to an incredibly strategic shipping location - the Suez Canal. The Suez Canal links the Mediterranean to the Indian Ocean without having to go around Africa or around Siberia.
Israel isn't strategically important because it has big oil reserves. It's strategically important because it's near a lot of important things. Oil and shipping play a bigger role than you'd think.
You mean the canal that is entirely within Egypt? That argument seems like a stretch to me, and clearly wasn't the argument the above was trying to make either.
They're a democracy and have historically been opposed to many counties the West was already opposed to. Their strategic importance is military, not oil.
Israel, the UK and France invaded Egypt in 1956 after Egypt expropriated the Suez Canal from its French & British owners. Then they fought a war in 1967 to keep it open. The conveyance of European trade through the Suez Canal is a major part of Israel's geopolitical importance.
Great point.
“You take my water, burn my olive trees, destroy my house, take my job, steal my land, imprison my father, kill my mother, bombard my country, starve us all, humiliate us all, but I am to blame: I shot a rocket back.”
Of course. Those kids in refugee camps, hospitals and ambulances have their hands soaked in blood.
Could we have this guy back, please?
Nah, he might seem reasonable here but his foreign policy scatterbrain pattern is part of why Ukraine is in such dire straights now. Man hesitated to stand up to Russia when they went into crimea, the point when they could have been stopped, and where Ukraine could have been swept into the EU orbit with far less bloodshed.
Obama standing up to Russia during the Crimea invasion would make for some interesting alt-history.
With Russia under stronger sanctions earlier, perhaps they would have less opportunity to feed and fund the alt-right to the same extent as it has been.
Please, they've been stirring shit up on a shoestring budget for decades. It's almost impressive what they've been managing to do.
They should run a frugal youtube channel and teach the CIA how its done.
High school never ends [for now]. Remember that, people.
And when you distill complex conduct into easy bites about said high schoolers, the other high schoolers of the world will take high schooler level actions.
Perhaps we need a more educated world to move forward...
We certainly are catering to the least intelligent among us in almost every respect. Oddly enough I was thinking about this earlier tonight.
I went to use the bathroom at a restaurant and they had some framed newspapers hanging up in there that were run by the local newspaper in 1918. The whole front page was news about WWI but it looked very different from war coverage in newspapers today. Each article was very detailed and covered distinct parts of the conflict during that week. There were sections on American, Canadian, and English troops detailing whether they had advanced or retreated, how much fighting they had to do, and references to commanding officers, obscure geographic landmarks, and lines from speeches made by foreign leaders. It was clear from the way they were written that the author expected his audience to be familiar with all of this to the point that he could mention them in passing without offering any explanation as to how they were related or what significance they held.
This is in stark contrast to current reporting on the Palestinian conflict and to a lesser degree the war in Ukraine. Journalists rarely mention details in such a way and when they do they offer much more context, assuming the reader is unfamiliar with much of what is being discussed. Of course, they're not wrong in that assessment but I do wonder how much of that has to do with the public being slowly conditioned to expect simplicity in reporting. These articles often read more like a political interpretation than a description of events. Nuance and the expectation of sustained interest in the subject seems almost entirely absent.
During my relatively long life I've witnessed journalism morph from giving information to forming opinion. Sometimes they do it openly, sometimes they try to pass it as the context you mention.
I believe context is necessary now because of how fragmented people's attention is. We used to have 5 tv channels and two main newspapers and that was it. It was easier to keep the focus and remember the context back then.
Or, rather, we were all inside the same information bubble. Now everyone is in their own bubble, and there's no more common understanding of reality.
This conflict makes it super clear, because of its complexity and long history, that people don't have the time or bandwidth to understand the whole thing and end up repeating what they hear inside their bubble.
For example: your opinion is largely influenced by your location and your own history, much more than by the facts of the conflict. I come from Argentina, where most people support Israel, and I live in Ireland, where most people support the Palestinians. There's understandable reasons for that. Argentina suffered two Islamic terrorist attacks against local Jewish institutions, while Irish people identify with Palestinians because of the British oppression.
I personally live in my own bubble of course, we all do. I know my opinion is heavily influenced by my own history.
As a consequence I end up getting involved in online discussions where I argue for nuance and against simplification, but that just puts me on the "wrong side" of both "sides". So for my own mental health I've been trying to stop participating. I only wanted to chime in here because your comment seemed to capture some of what I think.
I know exactly what you mean about being on the wrong side of both sides. In the US our two political parties are so ingrained in culture that people feel like they can't disagree on any subject without being cast out. I've always thought the idea that you would fall perfectly into one of two categories was asinine. That's led to me taking positions on many subjects that aren't extreme enough for the purists on either side. It's incredibly annoying because you can tell that for many of them the things they're saying aren't deeply held beliefs and yet they're defended as if they are. Really though, they're simply the dominant narrative in that person's bubble.
I just posted a video about this in the Breadtube community if you’re interested. It’s about being able to disagree without disrespecting.
Please share.
Sure.
Loved the video. Is that you?
I posted it. I am not Van Jones. He seems like a good guy though.
Yep, I wish everyone thought like that.
Me too. It’s difficult though. The system is set up to make us compete with each other, splintering solidarity. I have to constantly remind myself that others aren’t enemies, but potential allies.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
Sure
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.
Please participate. Your perspective is important. You’re referencing consensus reality and it is indeed disintegrating.
I’m here for comments like yours. Thanks.
Thanks! I'm glad you found it interesting. It's sometimes hard to know if other people enjoy what I write or if I'm just rambling into the void for no reason.
A more educated world, or a less educated one. If there is nobody around to teach the tradition of violence in the region, nobody would have any interest in perpetuating it.
Education isn't the problem. It's self control. People think they prioritize rational decisions but if that were true, cigarettes would be long gone and global warming would be solved. We prioritize feelings which is why GOP loves to fear monger and push religion. Nothing scarier than a eternal suffering, especially since eternity lasts a long time.
In this case, we have two countries that have held a religious divide for decades based on who believes they're actually worshipping the correct people so they don't get sent to eternal suffering. Except, they're willing to kill for their religious text because they feel so deeply that theirs is superior.
How can we as outsiders possibly take the right actions when the irrational people are willing to commit genocide over their feelings brains?
I would argue education is important, because this isn't actually really a religious conflict, and perpetuating that belief causes harm - namely that this is some intractable millennia old conflict rooted in fundamental beliefs and not one only a hundred years old largely just about lines on a map.
2,000 years ago the region was largely inhabited by Jews, under the Roman Empire, and known as Judaea. With the split of the Roman Empire by around 300AD, the region became known as Palaestine under the Byzantine Empire, and obviously started seeing a lot of Christian activity. By the 800s, the region was conquered by Islamic caliphates, and by the 1500s was part of the Ottoman Empire. For nearly 400 years Jews, Muslims, and Christians all got along perfectly fine in Palestine under the Ottomans.
But with WW1, Britain was fighting the Ottomans. Britain promised the region to the people who by that point came to see themselves as "Palestinians" (largely Muslim but with a sizable Christian minority), as well as to Jewish diaspora if they'd help fight the Ottomans. They did, the Ottoman Empire collapsed, and Britain created the state of Mandatory Palestine, but decided to just keep it and rule it themselves. This was an unpopular move, but to make sure they didn't have to fight everyone, manufactured Jewish vs Palestinian antagonism so they'd just fight each other instead of British colonial rule. This unfortunately worked.
After WW2, Britain decided it didn't want all its colonies anymore, especially the mess it created in Palestine, so just left and told the brand new UN to fix it. The UN drew some borders, which the newly created modern nation of Israel was fine with. The people who would inhabit the newly created modern nation of Palestine were not fine with it, nor were the other neighboring nations, so there was a war in '48 and it's basically gone down hill from there.
I'm not a historian and that's a very, very, very superficial explanation of one of the longest inhabited regions in the planet, but it's just worth noting this conflict is not really religious in nature. It's two peoples, of various religions (or no religion at all, since there are secular Jews), who are fighting over land and recognition as a sovereign state due to a manufactured nationalism and border dispute barely more than 100 years old.
Your "very superficial explanation" is already orders of magnitude deeper than most people's understanding of the conflict.
It only took me a day to learn just that, so why more people don't bother to understand the conflict more before commenting is shameful, especially because it's nothing really new.
But it also doesn't really matter because the people who do know more and are in a position to create (inter)national policy haven't seemed to be able to find a solution, so I doubt armchair internet historians will either. 🫤
Yes, in spite of all the efforts decade after decade there has been no solution. Sometimes it was close (like when Arafat and Rabin shook hands) but any progress was always destroyed by the extremists on one side or the other, or by outside interests.
I don't think there's a solution. External pressure will hopefully stop this escalade, but the conflict will persist.
maybe I just need coffee but this seems completely incoherent to me
Or did your education stop at middle school?
Reddit probably rotted my brain, but I'm struggling to determine how this is anything but "everyone sucks here." On this matter, I don't think anyone has been truly in the right in a century. Can anyone provide a convincing argument otherwise?
I think he's trying to get around the black and white viewpoints, and bring up the idea that Israel is committing war crimes here, which is outside the Overton window on the subject currently in US politics.
Exactly. One does not do politics and convince their opposition if they don't use conciliating language.
Nah, you can go through the comments here and find people taking the easy, position here too. "Bombing kids is bad, so Israel is bad, so Palestine must be good, therefore I support Palestine." No nuance, no attempts to look at a more complex situation or consider anything other than the most basic information.
Both sides suck, both sides will happily commit war crimes, and civilians on both sides are getting hurt. One side is getting more hurt than the other, but that's just a difference in capability, not belief.
It's the official policy of many of the most powerful nations of the world that only Palestine sucks here and that Israel can do no wrong and must be supported unconditionally. An "everyone sucks here" position would be much closer to the truth.
Palestinians and Israelis are overall fine, except when you have to listen to them talk about each other, it's their governments that are so fucked.
This entire conflict is a story of overstepping state entities victimizing innocent civilians on both sides of this war nobody but them and their cronies wanted.
As much as we all hate comments like this...
"This."
(Well said. Short, to the point, and the best summary I've seen in a while.)
The victims. They are in the right. But they have no voice. Ironically though, as toxic as social media is, governments can't get by with the same shit that they did 50 years ago (Sauce: US in Central America).
That's basically the rational take here. Israel was attacked and is defending itself, but going far and beyond self defense using the extermination of terrorists as an excuse to commit genocide. Palestinian civilians are caught up in the crossfire and are innocent of any wrongdoing, but the Palestinian government knowingly harbors Hamas within their borders and refuses to cooperate with Israel at every opportunity to create a two state system. Finally, there's Hamas, who are bad guys full stop with no redeeming qualities.
So, Obama's take is pretty solid. Nobody has their hands clean in all of this and everybody sucks, but there are still ways to stop the bloodshed, but those solutions are complicated. Especially when nobody really wants to come to the negotiation table right now. Israeli citizens right now remind me of American citizens in the wake of 9/11 - bloodthirsty and hungry for vengeance at any cost. So long as they remain furious, Netanyahu has a clear political motivation to continue the attacks.
This did not start this past October. Israel has been treating Gaza as an open air prison for over a decade. And before that there's all the settler bullshit and decades of war crimes justified by dehumanizing Palestinians.
Of course the Palestinians haven't been peaceful. Neither side has been peaceful since the 1940's.
The government of Gaza is Hamas, elected in 2007.
Israeli civilians have also been caught in the crossfire. You know from the terrorist attack they committed 3 weeks ago that killed 1,400 and then the 200 innocent people they kidnapped and imprisoned as hostages somewhere in Gaza, which is what this is all about?
If Hamas freed the hostages, Israel would have a much harder time conducting this war in the way they are, but you can’t literally kidnap someone’s citizens and expect anything less.
What about Netanyahus relationship with the PLO before Hamas. He's been playing both sides using the fear of Palestinian militants as a political football, just trying to stay elected and ignoring the views of the average secular Israeli.
Israel is being led by a group of religious extremists.
It's complicated, and both sides have committed unbelievable atrocities, but Israeli leadership have overplayed their card. Their crimes over the last few weeks will echo for decades to come.
My guess it will have the opposite effect than they intended, Israel will lose out in the long term.
Netanyahu also stoked the anti-Oslo crazies to the point that Rabin was assassinated. He's more responsible for the current state of the conflict than anyone, period.
Time will tell.
You’re right that both sides have been awful.
While Israel may be led by a group of religious extremists, so is Palestine and Gaza specifically by extremist terrorists.
This round of tit for tat will echo like all the previous rounds over the last 70 years.
Until Hamas frees the hostages, it’s virtually impossible to overplay the hand.
This will just be another footnote of ugly killing on both sides in a long history of ugly killings.
I'm not so sure. The current geopolitical outlook leaves Israel in a tough spot. With the failure of globalisation and the declining importance of the Middle Eastern hydrocarbons, there is actually a breaking point.
I don't necessarily think that breaking point would be reached, but if the current government does not restrain themselves and play their card correctly, it will count against them going forward.
Despite what Americans think, their previous actions have counted against them, too.
I'm the modern information age. The old tactics of statecraft and economic dominance fall apart. The opposing axis wanted Israel to respond like this. It's a huge mistake for them to continue with this approach.
It's a multipolar world these days.
Which are the poles you see in this multipolar world than were different from the poles over the last 50 years?
Suppose when you take the foreign policy of globalisation out of the equation, the geopolitical arena looks a lot different.
It's hard to know how the relationships will develop. Israel geographical location has become at least 50% less important.
When you consider the possible impact of climate change and demographics over the next decade, coupled with the increasingly fragile financial outlook.
It's not unfathomable that Israel ends up in an extremely exposed position without significant support from the West.
China and Russia are bound together by mutual interest in hydrocarbons, and Irans leaders would attempt to capitalise on every opportunity.
In a destabilised world, everyone will try to sieze the opportunity. It's going to get very busy, Netanyahu is assuming a lot when he thinks that Israel is going to stay relevant in the long term.
Just wanted to add that it's going to be multifaceted threats along with the multipolar geopolitical outlook. In situations like that, things get very simple. Things start to boil down to very simple decisions.
This doesn’t seem particularly internally consistent.
If the ME doesn’t matter because hydrocarbons don’t matter, why are Russia and China bound by them? Isn’t Russia in even deeper trouble since most of their hard currency is from exporting hydrocarbons?
When is the world being more destabilized than today and by who? Is the world stable right now?
Who is the financial outlook fragile for?
What are the impacts of climate change and demographics over the next decade?
How does this disproportionately work to the detriment of Israel?
I’m not even saying you’re wrong, but there’s a lot missing connecting this to the point you’re trying to make I think.
I always find it hard to explain the leaps in logic so bear with me.
-You just have to view everything that's happening right now in the world with the understanding that a post hydrocarbon energy economy has ramifications for western economies financial systems while also on the opposite end of the spectrum, affecting developing nations ability to catch up.
The strength of the American dollar genuinely has been bolstered in the fact that it was the main currency used in the trade of hydrocarbons, this is no longer the case.
If China intends to continue its current military ambitions their demand for hydrocarbons is going to persist, as America retracts from the policy of globalisation a vacuum is being created which the Chinese would be more than happy to take advance of. Developing economies/regimes etc. won't stymie themselves, they will continue to use them.
There is an obvious split in world geopolitics because of this post hydrocarbon/globalisation shift. unwrapping the ramifications of the effects of climate change and the switch to renewables coupled with energy independence it's pretty complex, but it's not unreasonable to expect destabilisation as we enter a new phase.
https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RRA800/RRA853-1/RAND_RRA853-1.pdf
Outlook is not looking good for everyone's financial systems IMO, core economics and demographics are the best indicators of where the card lie at this time (US is always #1 in this regard). People look at inflation right now and analyse the Fed's actions without taking into account that this is Cold War economics. Increase the amount of money you increase the amount of productivity, you stay ahead. There is undoubtedly restructuring ahead.
Well let's talk demographics from a military perspective, A lot of the analysis of the Chinese military has been taken into account the fact that their demographics say they will have the most amount of eligible military personnel in the next decade, beyond that their numbers will be decreasing.
But then the question arises, are demographics going to matter in military situations in the future. Do you even need humans fight. Could it just become a AI powered military machine building contest?.
In a world with this much restructuring and destabilisation proxy wars are the preferred means of interacting, If I were to draw a line between these two opposing groups on the map, just like Ukraine, Israel would be right on it. As this plays out over the coming decade Israel is going to be continually tested in many different ways, when you look at the long term possibilities of how this is going to develop things are not as clear cut.
Netanyahu is not just battling Hamas he's antagonising everyone on the other side of that line right now, essentially drawing a target on the country for eternity.
As public opinion in support of Israel decreases in the west the chances of an American boot on the ground in Israel decreases. What if the Chinese move on Taiwan, American resources focus elsewhere. American politics presents a majority which oppose the spending. Climate change and AI are certainly going to impact the political status quo in the coming year. Even presuming military dominance is in the balance. American foreign policy is obviously different in recent years, focusing on insular tactics.
I digress, Israeli leadership are all for playing their cards wrong.They are acting exactly like their enemies wanted them to, the would have been better just to pay them off.
Nothing justifies war crimes.
But people justify Hamas attacks all the time by claiming they just defend themselves.
Did you really just just conflate every Hamas operation as a war crime?
That's... Impressive.
Here is a 2 minute video about being able to hold the idea that Hamas and Israel are both in the wrong and civilians are getting hurt on both sides as a result.
https://youtu.be/L0Zb9iUi0JM
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://piped.video/L0Zb9iUi0JM
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.
It's not true that civilians are getting hurt in Gaza because of Hamas. They were already being killed off before the attacks.
"It's complicated" is a constantly used rhetorical strategy by those in power to put off moral judgement.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RxC5HhKQ5ks 80 second video. This situation isn't complicated at all.
Michael Brooks is missed. Great name btw.
I truly do think that Islamophobia and the United States having a lot of historical and economic ties to Israel are why we've allowed this to go on unchecked for decades.
Public opinion is definitely shifting in favor of Palestine though.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://www.piped.video/watch?v=RxC5HhKQ5ks
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.
I think that's basically what he's saying with more words. You're not wrong in this case, but the "everybody sucks here" line is most often used by people who don't actually know the details of what they're talking about, but need to have an opinion on the record. (Other recent example being the Ukraine war situation)
In my opinion, this whole situation is too drunk guys who got in a fight over something stupid. Palestine got knocked out early, and so Israel is being vilified simply for being the one still standing, but now Palestine has got up and kidney punched Israel while it was turned away, and people are rooting for the underdog since they got back up. The problem with this, and the reason that Obama is speaking the way that he is, is because people seem to be forgetting all of the other horrible things that Hamas has done too, because they're currently the crowd favorite.
So yes, everybody sucks here, and I think people are having a hard time coming to terms with the fact that, sometimes in a fight, there isn't actually a 100% good guy. It's just too drunk guys getting in a fight over something stupid.
Agree or disagree with other people's opinions, so be it. But this comment is such a unearned hand waving away of other people's thoughtful comments/opinions made on the subject, and it's not a true representation of what's going on.
See, reading your comment makes me think that you didn't actually read the rest of mine, because that's not what I said. I'm not talking about the people here... Mostly.
I did.
Well then I'm not sure where to go from here, because you're implying that I said things which I didn't.
What I quoted, which is what you did say, is very explicit...
There's truly no reason for us to continue to go back and forth on this endlessly, that text is very specific and straightforward.
Your analogy assumes some sort of equivalency between the two drunk men, but in reality there's a huge discrepancy of power between Israel and Palestine, one so vast that your analogy comes off as reductive. It's not just "two drunk guys in a fight", it's more like a drunk guy and a child, which the drunk guy has been picking fights with since the child was born, and all of the drunk guy's friends keep helping him beat this child up.
There's a power discrepancy now, but there wasn't always.
By this analogy, Palestine is a drunk 17 year old, who along with a bunch of 20-something friends jumped one another kid when he just turned 18. Except the 18 year old won the fight and the older pals of the original drunk kid have backed off. Beaten to shit, the 17 year old keeps trying to swing at the 18 year old, who continues just kicking him while he's down and everyone is looking on in horror but unwilling to jump back in the fight.
The fact they went 1 v 8 probably contributes a lot to Israel's absolute unwillingness to not put themselves in a position where they are less powerful.
I see where your coming from, and I suppose I should clarify: in this case, the reason that I invoke the simile, is that the original reason for ALL this drama, is religion. There is more than enough physical space for them both to live in the region happily, but because this is the Land of Israel that we're talking about, they both claim exclusive right to it, and only one can have it.
Events since this original issue obviously can't go overlooked, but it all stems from this unreasonable unwillingness to share plenty.
It's a tale as old as time. Just like the Hatfields and McCoys. They've hated each other for so long neither side remembers what started it and both sides have a list of grievances longer than they can keep track of and the score can never be settled. It's to the point where there is no right side; both are wrong. You can make arguments that one side is more wrong than the other, but I'm not in favor of a "let the least wrong win" approach. Both sides are objectively wrong and both sides must stop.
This is simply not true. Palestinians were copacetic before the British mandate, the Balfour declaration, the declaration of the state of Israel and the Nakba.
Just come to your own conclusion
Thanks. People want to pretend this started a month ago and not understand the history.
Because the truth is that Israel is WAY worse than Palestine. They're openly calling for genocide. Resistance to oppression is good, actually, and so basically whatever Palestine does while still being oppressed is morally fine, while Israel continuing to oppress them is not. Anything anybody says criticizing palestine's reaction to oppression is whataboutism, because they're literally the victims of genocide.
Hamas is openly calling for genocide too, and they've been doing it longer than Israel.
Also, funny story, Israel is also literally the victims of genocide, (the Holocaust?), which is why their motto is "never again".
There is no "way worse", just ignorant keyboard warriors, and a shitty situation made worse by shitty people.
Do you think the Holocaust means that the descendents of it's victims can't be genociders themselves? It altyally makes more sense, when you consider the cycle of abuse. Israel has been genociding Palestine for longer than Hamas has even existed, so no, that's false.
Israel is way worse than Palestine, and you are the ignorant one if you disagree based entirely on the US/Israeli propaganda you've seen. You should research this yourself if you don't believe me. Would you rather be right, or correct?
Israel are the beneficiaries of the Holocaust.
Literally, the major bump in population they experienced as a result of WWII was Jews who were able to go through a Nazi/Israel visa program to transfer them and their money. Like Hitler was planning to send them to Madagascar after he seized France, and then Israel reached out to him and negotiated a deal for him to send them settlers.
This agreement was seen as such a "success" the Roma (who unfortunately had a bit of a fascist sympathizing streak at the time) wanted to strike a similar agreement with Mussolini when he invaded Egypt to get their own "Israel" along the Red Sea coast.
The actual place most of the post war victims went to was to America where Jews had found success developing community safety via integration with surrounding communities.
If the entire holy land was nuked and radioactive, people would still try to occupy the wasteland so they could get back in first. Don't think there is a solution
Honestly, this is nonsense.
They aren't fighting over Jerusalem or Bethlehem or Jericho. This is a war over grazing lands and a beach town.
If you look away from Gaza for a moment to the other Palestinian territory -- the occupied West Bank -- you'll see gangs of a hooligans in pickup trucks with ski masks smashing water wells and killing cattle in small desert towns like it's high noon at the O.K. Corral.
The whole religious component is largely a distraction. There are people living on real estate that other people who have much bigger guns want. The solution is the same as it's always been: give folks a fair deal.
It's not a coincidence that this latest conflict is in Gaza. Gaza isn't religiously significant. It's just the densest, most brutal concentration camp in Israel. This is not over religion.
But it's in the name of religion, so it draws in the Christo-fascist zionists alongside the Israeli ones. They don't need educated support, just support. Religious nuance helps increase that.
That's totally true. I only mean to say that the fundamental drivers are typical to those outside of the holy lands. But you're right that the religious component is definitely leveraged. I'll also credit @keardap@lemmy.selfhost.quest for pointing out that the American Evangelical Christian nationalist movement is a huge contributor to the conflict. They're far more numerous than American Jews, and seem to be have greater influence on American policy in Israel than American Jews do.
That's really what I was insinuating as well. The National Prayer Breakfast needs to be ignored wholly by our politicians, but members from both "sides" attend because it's politically advantageous.
A documentary called The Family does a great job at explaining this.
There is oil just off Gaza's coast. But Israhell already controls that.
Tiktok says this is all about the Ben Gurion Canal Project. I haven't had the time to validate the potential veracity, but it seemed like an interesting rabbit hole.
Thanks. I’m interested.
What is the big distinction between the "people" and the "other people" that makes them different groups of people? Hint: the word starts with an "r" and ends with "eligion".
Flood it. God.did; worked apparently.
*Albeit briefly. So, I reckon we can shift the gulf some.
I think the proposal to nuke it may also leave it flooded - depends on the yield and qty.
Mythology won't help here. That's partly the problem already.
disregarding that fucked-ass comment,
is this a DJ Khaled reference?
Genesis
so it's racism then
The radioactive halflife of a nuke explosion is quite short, if we want a long term solution we need...Chernobyl 2.
nuclear boogaloo
how about an agnostic democracy that israelis and palestinians can both live in? like a european country or something...
Yeah, but the whole point of Israel, is that it's a home for Jewish people. That this apparently means an ethno apartheid state, is revolting. I have yet to hear a zionist to provide a good solution.
On that front Obama is correct: how are you going to create a Jewish state surrounded by Muslim states that oppose your existence fundamentally?
But at this point you can argue that living as a Palestinian in Israel and the occupied territories is worse than living in many (but clearly not all) Muslim countries as a non-Muslim.
So religious states, democracies or not, do exist and kinda can make it work in some cases, even if I would prefer a secular democracy for myself any day.
why the fuck do we need a jewish state? do we have a christian state? a buddhist state? not really. religious states are an outdated way to do government.
Breaking my own rule here, but whatever.
There's no need for a Jewish state per se. There's a need for a state for Jews, so they can live without fear of being persecuted, like they have been for hundreds of years.
Same reason there's a need for a Palestinian state.
so a european style democracy with a constitution that has "congress shall make no law" types of sentences in it
And yet, Muslim states exist.
they shouldn't. it's an ultra conservative old way of doing government.
As someone living in muslim state: no, religious state shouldn't exists.
It’s still a good idea.
It's actually pretty easy if you stop requiring support for settler colonialism. The rest of the world left that behind 70 years ago. Israel doesn't get to be special they can either give Palestinians voting rights (which would obliterate the idea of a Jewish state) or submit to a UN peacekeeping force between them and the Palestinians on the 1949 borders.
The only reason this is hard is because we keep bending over backwards to support their Apartheid. We know these answers. They've been done before.
lol
Okay. Where else in the world is settler colonialism actively being practiced? I'd really like to know, because they need to be put on blast too.
The complexity is that Israel (specifically Netanyahu has gone rouge, saying nothing will stop what they are doing) and that is starting to have consequences for Democrats, and the US world image. This, along with Blinkens recent statements, are a subtle way of telling them to stop, without Biden going back on his full support of Israel.
It is the foundations of deniability, so that if the critiques of war crime and genocide come fully to light in the public eye, the US has ground to shift to. Those drones capturing footage over Gaza can quickly be used to support whatever narrative shift the US deems most advantageous. Can the Dems lose support of Arab Americans and their allies? Can/will they lose Jewish support at home if crimes are unmasked and is that number more or less than being on the "right side" of things?
These are likely the questions that are swirling around the White House and State Department as we speak. Time is of the essence, as 2.5 million people are on the verge of succumbing to dehydration and starvation. If those distributions are equal, a heart breaking cataclysm, in the form of a mass casualty event, could occur at any time. 10,000. 100,000. Who knows how many won't be able to be saved even once aid comes through. Medical capacity is needed to reverse these things and none exists any longer. The UN is warning of this.
If it happens, blame will need to be swift to maintain appearances and Israel is running the risk of becoming the "Voldemort" of the Middle East overnight.
He wouldn't be the first powerful guy supported or even brought up by the US going rogue.
We don't talk about what happened with Sadam...
There are complex issues to solve, sure, but there's nothing complicated about the fact that we need to let humanitarian aid in and stop killing children, right this fucking minute. There are no excuses for what is happening right now.
"Stop killing children" should be enforced in both countries, though. It's not like Hamas is protecting the children in Gaza. Quite the opposite really.
No argument there, and I did not intend for my comment to say anything else.
I'm not saying the details of it are not complicated.
History is always complicated
Present events are always complicated
But the way this is reported in the western media is as though one needs a PhD in Middle Eastern studies to understand the basic morality of holding a people in a situation in which they don't have basic rights including the right that we treasure most the franchise the right to vote and then declaring that state a democracy
is actually not that hard to understand.
-- Ta-Nehisi Coates
I'm actually not sure which country you are talking about now. I don't know of anyone who calls Palestine a democracy. I think the reason people call Israel a democracy is that Israeli citizens have free elections and are not oppressed. I don't think they factor in oppression of other countries when they call something a democracy. If they did, the US and UK wouldn't count as democracies either.
Most political experts agree that they barely classify. The US has a rather unique electoral college system. The UK is most literally a constitutional monarchy. At best, they're hybrid systems.
If the options are Palestine and Israel, which country do you think it is?
Come on, use your brain.
No need to be condescending. With how polarizing this issue is, you are surely aware that there might be people on the Internet who would stand by these claims for either of the two countries. What I use my brain to conclude isn't relevant, the question is what you used your brain to conclude.
Stella has been all over Lemmy with this BS. They aren't really worth the effort. Speak to people who might be reading the thread, not to that troll.
Re-read my comment. It applies to you as well.
Hamas holding their own population as human shields and failing to provide basic infrastructure, or Israel blocking their own borders that stops Palestine civilians from access to necessity of life.
Im with the other poster, and if you didn't see both there is already a bias in your head that no reasonable and open discussion of facts would ever overcome.
Lol, what? You're buying into Israeli propaganda talking points to justify bombing civilians. I'm not going to entertain your bias.
Hamas isn't denying Gazans basic human rights. Israel is. This isn't up for debate.
Hamas wasn't stealing water pipes to make weapons?
(I'm not saying Israel hasn't done bad things, and I'm not saying one is worse than the other. But Hamas HAS been denying "their people" access to basic human rights in the process of "fighting for their people".)
"Genocide is bad and we should halt donated weapons to countries committing genocide" - very easy policy most people will agree on.
but they won't agree on what constitutes genocide
"We should halt all aid to terrorists and terrorist states." - very easy policy most people will agree on.
Absolutely not. Citizens can be just as much a victim of terrorist states as those they affect beyond their borders, and are just as deserving of humanitarian aid as any other civilian in an active warzone.
Ok, it's get real time: the ONLY reason the US supports Israel is because it's a staging area if shit kicks off in the middle east. That's it. The "Jesus" stuff if just an excuse to appease the zealots. And my opinion isn't anti-Semitism. It's anti-genocide.
Nuance? What's that? Just say horrific fuckin things to the people who disagree with you! Much more fun that way!
A plea for nuance from the enablers and backers of the apartheid regime is not something I'm going to take on board.
I'm aware of the historical context and Israel has a right to exist and Jews to be safe. But I stand firmly with the Palestinians as the victims of generations of aggression.
The calls to nuance and complexity is insulting, like people can't see what's right infront of them and form an opinion of their own. What complexity is there in bombing hospitals, ambulances, schools and refugee camps, while denying food, water, and medical supplies to millions
Ignoring nuance is claiming only one side is right. It's easy and borderline brainless to simply claim Israel is the only side wrong for bombing hospitals.
But this ignores that Hamas is committing war crimes by using civilian facilities as staging grounds to launch attacks on Israel. This ignores that Hamas' charter calls for the destruction of Israel, and the only thing stopping them is lack of weapons. This ignores that Hamas, the democratically elected ruling party of Gaza, has continued to use resources to attack Israel instead of building infrastructure to actually function independently.
Ignoring nuance is to ignore history. Ignoring that the West created this whole situation, by both promising one region to two peoples then creating division where there was none to make colonial rule easier, and by also so brutally attempting to wipe out an entire people it created a hardline cultural belief that swift and severe military action is necessary to insure "never again," (and two wars in '48 and '67 didn't help either).
None of this is to say Israel is innocent of wrongdoing - they sure as shit aren't and certainly seem happy to bomb 100 Palestinian civilians if it means they get 1 Hamas fighter. But rejecting nuance pushes a belief one side is right and one side is wrong, and that the only sides here are national ones. Both suck, both are morally wrong. The only "right side" is Palestinian and Israeli civilians being killed because the only "wrong side" - extremist Israeli and Palestinian leaders - are happy to kill as many civilians as possible for some acres of land.
But please, do tell me how my opinion is wrong and there's no complexity here.
Honestly if the Jews in the Warsaw ghetto didn't want to get wiped out like that, they shouldn't have rebelled. Their hands weren't clean.
There's nuance to everything but when war criminals like this and other US president speak about it, it loses any shred of credibility. It's like asking a dictator with a PR team about something that's happening half way across the globe. Of course they're going to say include vaguely valid points to take a higher ground.
Take him to hague with rest of the crew and put him on a trial. I'll want to hear what nuance opinions he has about that.
I think the nuance is understanding the evils of the Israeli state without blaming Jews or endorsing violence against Israeli civilians. You aren't doing that here, but lots of people are doing this right now (the people "forming an opinion on their own" aren't always forming great opinions). Anyone suggesting that nuance is unnecessary is begging you to only see their side of things. There are zero issues in the world that don't require some degree of nuance; why you would think such a complex and long-standing conflict like this one is better without critical thinking is the real insult here.
It's weird that Obama is being nuanced here, yet the US has been unwavering in supporting Israel, including during Obama's term. Maybe his stance has changed. Or maybe it's easy for him to say things when he doesn't have to act on it at all. Talk is cheap, after all.
People have a right to be safe but no state has a right to exist, let alone a state defined by being a settler colonial project.
Maybe I could agree with you, but they did face an injustice like no other. They have a right to a homeland but it should never have been Israel.
What the hell does 'right to a homeland' mean?
Where's the homeland to rest of the genocides around the world? let's bring in Uyghur population to Israel too, Rohingya Muslims? Ugandan genocide?
When are they going to get their own homeland?
oh oh but this one is so much more special because it ties in with your religious beliefs in the west, right?
the rest? they just can fucking just get wiped out for all you care.
lose the facade you ducking hypocrites.
Man fuck off, that was a lot of shite you typed. I don't have religious beliefs for one and you can scroll through my history to see my strong support for Palestine.
Fuck you.
Probably one of the most complex issues that I don't see being brought up is Gaza's culture built around Sharia law.
Yeah, there are plenty of innocent people are children suffering. This still doesn't mean that if Gazans had there way, Israel would be a better place.
That said, the US should end all aid to Israel and let them fund their own genocide. They can afford it. They have a fucking intel fab for fuck's sake.
This feels a bit like saying "you know, the trail of tears was bad, but we don't bring up the complex issues of Cherokee slavery".
Sharia law isn't a monolithic belief and is subject to reform. But it's entirely a secondary consideration when you have a state committing genocide.
Yes.
Do you have any understanding of the Palestinian history? Isreal funded religious extremism in order to opposed the leftist secularist political organizing within Gaza.
why would they? it's not like the west has painted muslims and the middle east people as the bad guy for decadessss. From media to hollywood, middle east is a lawless hellhole and they had no hand it making it that way. like at all…
most of them probably can't even find them in a map, but once they see a middle eastern anywhere, they know they have to instantly hate on them.
'we didn't realise they were going to use the weapons like that'
The problem is that no American has any credibility: historically fucking over poor and indigenous communities has been an average Tuesday for the US. There is no path out of this that makes anyone happy. Killing people is never okay and trying to justify it based upon "complexity" is insulting. Fuck religious zealots.
I really wish everyone would accept this so world leaders could just buckle down and resolve any sort of permanent solution. Israel would have to make concessions but oh boo-fucking-hoo. The Palestinians don't even have anything they could concede in the first place. Hell, the only thing Hamas would have to concede is "No, you don't get to destroy Israel," since anything else they'd get in a permanent agreement is going to be a step up from the current situation. The UN is fucking impotent though and partially responsible in the first place, but even with the power they do have seem unwilling to use it to try and fix anything. The whole time the US is happy to sell as many weapons as possible to Israel just on the off chance Iran looks the wrong way, but as long as a bomb lands on an Arab we're seemingly not too fussed about it. Wonder how quickly Israel would be willing to make concessions towards a two-state solution if the West told them "no more weapons."
Christopher Hitchens made an argument regarding the religious undertones of the conflict and why peace cannot easily be found. https://piped.video/watch?v=rc90pcx6kNU
Of course, by this point there's also hate passed on from one generation to the next.
More breaking news. Obama says breathing is good for your health.
And while you say this, this thread is full of people claiming it is actually very simple. sigh
No shit Sherlock! But the keyboard warriors on the internet with dumb takes aren't the ones enabling and funding the killing of civilians though, are they?
This guy has been, since well, he's a US president so it must come naturally.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Former President Barack Obama said a way forward for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is only possible if people acknowledge the “complexity” of the situation.
“If there’s any chance of us being able to act constructively to do something, it will require an admission of complexity and maintaining what on the surface may seem contradictory ideas that what Hamas did was horrific, and there’s no justification for it.
And … that the occupation and what’s happening to Palestinians is unbearable,” Obama said in an interview on the podcast “Pod Save America.”
The former president’s comments come as the Israeli military focuses its offensive against Hamas in Gaza City and northern parts of the enclave.
Behind the scenes, American officials also believe there is limited time for Israel to try to accomplish its stated objective of taking out Hamas in its current operation before uproar over the humanitarian suffering and civilian casualties reaches a tipping point.
If you genuinely want to change this … you’ve got to figure out how to speak to somebody on the other side and listen to them and understand what they are talking about and not dismiss it,” Obama said.
The original article contains 268 words, the summary contains 181 words. Saved 32%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
Fuck Israel. They get a free pass every time.
The world needs to stsrting usiing proper words: what Israel is trying to achieve in Palestine is an Holocaust.
No no, its only a Holocaust if it comes from the German Region.
This is just sparkling genocide.
It's a hOlOCaUsT !!!111
Because it is. Complexity doesn't mean hiding reality. Write me when you need more help interpreting texts. You're welcome.
It feels like Israel uses its own population as a buffer between the IDF and hamas. That and the sheer audacity to have a concert right next to Gaza was a recipe for disaster that Israel took advantage of for its own ambitions. It's certainly short sighted to think Israel and the US can get rid of hamas. The US should have learned this lesson in Iraq when they created a vacuum after they removed sadam. Palestine definitely has the world's favor right now and hamas would be smart to play on that
It's not like the Israeli government intentionally set up a music festival next door to Hamas to get participants killed. Your implication is incredibly nefarious. This was a privately run festival full of people who were advocating for Palestinian rights, set up more than 3km away from the border. How much of a buffer zone between Gaza and Israel are you suggesting there should be? 5km? 10km? For context, the width of Gaza is as narrow as 4.5km.
You're right. What an unpredictable reaction by Hamas. They really went too far that time. How could they not appreciate what those concert goers were doing for them?! They really were about to turn a corner towards peace. Israel was 🤏🏿 from lifting the apartheid but forget it now! All that work out the window coz of what Hamas did October 7. Sorry Palestine, you really messed up this time.
Thank you kind stranger for sparing some wisdom and making me see the light. Ahh thanka youuu
If he is talking about the complexity of the human, tribal brain, I agree.
former drone striker in chief trying to remind us of his legacy of absolutely failing to acknowledge, let alone tackle, the role of US imperialism in the middle east.
This specific conflict is more related to early 20th Century Britain promising two different people the same land after the Ottoman Empire collapsed and then being dicks about it for another 20 years. So UK imperialism, not US for once.
The US certainly still arms Israel, but the US arms basically anyone they consider an ally. The US would arm Israel if Palestine were its own state, were part of Israel, or if the whole conflict never happened. But Israel wouldn't have existed at all past '67 without Western equipment.
Seriously, you Americans had one great president. He also seems plenty young (when compared to other presidents) enough to be one again. Can't you elect him again or something? He needs more time as boss to do his thing.
Sadly, no. If he could run an unlimited amount, then we might have another king like it's 1776 all over again!
He was a pretty good president, but it's probably for the best that there's a 2 term limit.
yeah yeah it's complex. Apartheid in South Africa, Nazism was also rocket science.
To be able to indoctrinate a thousand people into being capable of the atrocities committed on October 7, you have to teach people from a very young age that the enemy is not human, but demons and that no form a violence is unacceptable to use against them. Hamas has been the government of Gaza (and therefore in control of the schools) for enough time to indoctrinate children from a very young age all the way up to adulthood.
If you're looking for comparisons to Nazis, maybe consider applying some of those comparisons to the group whose goal is to kill Jews. Internet contrarianism is fun and all, but this has gotten out of hand.
If you're looking to compare to genocide, maybe consider the group in power that started off saying they just want an ethnostate and they will relocate some people, and when that becomes unfeasible they begin to murder them en masse...
You seem just as biased as anyone else here. If you want to champion Obama's complexity you should be willing to check that bias.
Wait until you learn about Egyptian media. Borat-like in their antisemitism.
Wouldn't surprise me. Though at the moment I'm a little more concerned about the antisemitism in my own country.
It seems that the "it's ok to criticize Israel" doctrine just handed out free dog whistles to anti-semites. They just did a find and replace on their conspiracy theories to sub out "the Jews" for "Israel" and apparently a lot of people think it's "ok" now. While not all criticism of Israel is anti-semitism, some of it is.
Obama is correct. People need to take a little time to stop and think. It's not a bad thing to think before pushing insane narratives on the internet.
Are you talking about Tsahal? And what about these girls signing isreali bombs?
and if you think it is fake or AI-fied (nbcnews) https://media-cldnry.s-nbcnews.com/image/upload/newscms/2020_02/3174521/200107-kiryat_shmona-mc-11274.JPG
Obama, be trolling
he’ll do anything for Iran
this f**king joke has no right to tell anyone how to move forward
https://www.dailydot.com/debug/jill-stein-2012-debate-arrest-hofstra-university/
his solutions for peace involved chaining people to chairs for wanting equal rights
uh yeah. no. what people need to acknowledge is that israel shouldn't be there and that dipshits shouldn't use the bible to create nations. how the fuck did you think it would turn out. blood blood blood
I'm squarely Pro-Palestinian in this conflict, but I will say it: what you're saying is bullshit.
Israel should exist.
If not due to the fact that Jews in Palestine existed before Zionism and have a right just as much as other Palestinians to want a country.
If not due to the fact that some 60% of Israelis are Mizrahis, i.e., Arab Jews that were kicked out of virtually every other Arab country.
If not due to the fact that the Two State Solution, endorsed by basically the entire international community via the UN (resolution 242), means that ...Israel should also exist.
If not due to any of those things.... simply because 75 years after the founding of Israel, an Israeli nation exists. Entire generations of people have been raised with this self identity. They have the right to exist.
There is no putting the genie back in the bottle. Israel exists, and the Israeli people exists as an entity not exactly the same as the Jewish people. The debate about Israel's existence is a waste of time and it does a disservice to the Palestinian cause.
Why do people claim UN is a democratic organization and not the one for the superpowers benefits? that can veto any resolutions they don't agree with to bully smaller countries into agreement?
Other countries just line up in positions where they get the least amount of economic or political retaliation.
Why do you think no US president or war criminal from US is tried in hague? or why Putin and Xi will live rest of their lives happily without a shred of repercussions?
These cherry picked talking points are getting old.