d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > Political & Religious Debate > October Invasion Of Israel
Prev14534544554564571668Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll
Views: 123742Replies: 16675Track Topic
Member
Posts: 4,147
Joined: Jun 30 2022
Gold: 6.92
Warn: 10%
#4541
Nov 4 2023 06:26pm
Quote (Black XistenZ @ Nov 4 2023 08:56pm)
The offer which has been open since Oct 7th is to trade one Israeli/foreign hostage for dozens or even hundreds of incarcerated Hamas terrorists, a trade ratio that Israel obviously cannot accept in its current situation.

It's also obvious why Hamas isn't responding to Bibi's recent offer of a ceasefire in exchange for a release of the hostages. They would have no guarantee that the ceasefire lasts/they could escape Gaza during its duration/that Israel wouldn't still track them down and wipe them out at a later point in time. Dying now while prompting Israel to inflict as much PR damage onto itself as possible is the best the Hamas fighters can achieve in their current situation; it's also what their leadership wants.

But my question was why the Western pro-Palestinian and pro-peace crowd didn't pick up Bibi's proposal. They claim to be primarily concerned with the protection of innocent civilian life, they either conveniently ignore the hostage situation or outright condemn it, and their line of reasoning hinges on the notion that Hamas fights for the oppressed, downtrodden people of Palestine, that Hamas cares about their well-being and that improving the lot of the Palestinians is the ultimate goal of their actions. Under these premises, there is ZERO reason for the Western pro-Palestinian crowd to not support this proposal, to not demand a release of the hostage in exchange for a ceasefire. Yet they don't. Which imho shows that they subconsciously know how flawed the aforementioned premises are; that they know that Hamas doesn't actually give a shit about the civilians of Gaza and that the eradication of Israel, rather than improving the lives of Palestinians, is the true goal.


They traded at higher ratios than that before so it wouldn't be unheard of, and the current hysteria is largely created by the Israeli government with inconsistent claims and claims that haven't been backed up (40 beheaded babies!)

Sure they probably won't accept the offer, why would they? Does anyone think Israel would stop bombing? If they cared about the hostages they wouldn't be bombing gaza into dust to begin with would they? Usually if you are looking to free hostages you negotiate before dropping thousands of bombs on the area where they are held. Oops. How many have the IDF killed so far do you think?

Simple, they don't trust Bibi and don't believe it would result in a ceasefire. Ever read the story of the boy who cried wolf? Israel has cried wolf one too many times and even if their statements are well intentioned/true many people won't believe them and they have good reason not to. Were it an actual gesture of good faith they should have agreed to a limited trade at least, 0 reason to trust Israel at this point though.

This post was edited by DizzyBusiness on Nov 4 2023 06:40pm
Member
Posts: 4,147
Joined: Jun 30 2022
Gold: 6.92
Warn: 10%
#4542
Nov 4 2023 07:04pm
TFW when the globalist PR memo told you not to say ceasefire :wacko:
https://twitter.com/imraansiddiqi/status/1720673548224921690?t=vaaHIgzhByGiAlIC2uTVSw&s=19
Member
Posts: 54,180
Joined: May 26 2005
Gold: 4,945.67
#4543
Nov 4 2023 10:23pm
Quote (DizzyBusiness @ 5 Nov 2023 01:26)
They traded at higher ratios than that before so it wouldn't be unheard of, and the current hysteria is largely created by the Israeli government with inconsistent claims and claims that haven't been backed up (40 beheaded babies!)

The current hysteria is created by the massacre Hamas has perpetrated on Oct 10. They even - proudly! - posted dozens of clips of mutilated corpses and cheering crowds on their very own channels, ffs.

Quote
Sure they probably won't accept the offer, why would they? Does anyone think Israel would stop bombing? If they cared about the hostages they wouldn't be bombing gaza into dust to begin with would they? Usually if you are looking to free hostages you negotiate before dropping thousands of bombs on the area where they are held. Oops. How many have the IDF killed so far do you think?

Yeah, sure, all the fault of the nefarious IDF, not of the guys who took them as hostages in the first place, right?!
It's simple to see why Israel cannot allow the presence of hostages to stop all of their operations against Hamas.

Quote
Simple, they don't trust Bibi and don't believe it would result in a ceasefire. Ever read the story of the boy who cried wolf? Israel has cried wolf one too many times and even if their statements are well intentioned/true many people won't believe them and they have good reason not to. Were it an actual gesture of good faith they should have agreed to a limited trade at least, 0 reason to trust Israel at this point though.

In case you don't remember: Israel had the Gaza Strip occupied in the early 2000s and then withdrew in 2005, gave the Palestinians back a sizable chunk of autonomy. The first thing they do is hold elections in which the Hamas butchers come to power via democratic means. Who then proceed to suspend any further elections. And to siphon off humanitarian aid to buy and produce weapons. And fire missiles at Israel every other day for years on end. Culminating in the Oct 10 attack. An attack which was met with great cheering and enthusiasm both in Gaza and among Palestinian communities around the world. A couple of days later, Hamas leadership publicly declared that they will pull off similar attacks whenever they get the chance, until Israel is no more. So why on earth should Israel trust them?

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Nov 4 2023 10:24pm
Member
Posts: 50,906
Joined: Jan 20 2010
Gold: 5,836.00
#4544
Nov 4 2023 10:52pm
we burgerstanis swear by our mmddyy just like our freedom pounds, freedom feet and freedom gallons
terrorists will never take away our fahrenheit either
Member
Posts: 49,289
Joined: Jun 18 2006
Gold: 11.77
#4545
Nov 5 2023 12:27am
Quote (bogie160 @ Oct 22 2023 05:53pm)
You're asking how not spending resources in Europe helps us spend resources in Asia? We're spending real, exhaustible reserves of weaponry in order to defeat a country we were never actually at war with. Why not destroy South Africa's military? Or Brazil's? India's? Our goal has never been to reduce every possible foe's military strength to zero. What sort of weird ideological argument is that?


Uhhh... Russia is a great power that has historically been our foe and it has a leader which has delusions of re-establishing his nation as an expansionist power in Europe. Fighting against his attempt to expand and engage in a genocide of Ukraine makes sense not just for Europe's sake but because his success would show how the post WW2 world order the United States helped create is basically meritless, paving the way for more nations(like this one in Asia called China) to embark on their own expansionist ambitions.

C'mon Bogie, supporting American primacy is classic Reaganism.

This post was edited by IceMage on Nov 5 2023 12:27am
Member
Posts: 50,906
Joined: Jan 20 2010
Gold: 5,836.00
#4546
Nov 5 2023 12:33am
Quote (IceMage @ Nov 5 2023 01:27am)
Uhhh... Russia is a great power that has historically been our foe and it has a leader which has delusions of re-establishing his nation as an expansionist power in Europe. Fighting against his attempt to expand and engage in a genocide of Ukraine makes sense not just for Europe's sake but because his success would show how the post WW2 world order the United States helped create is basically meritless, paving the way for more nations(like this one in Asia called China) to embark on their own expansionist ambitions.

C'mon Bogie, supporting American primacy is classic Reaganism.


How much threat to us does Russia pose compared to India? Not that simple a question, when you separate out hostility from power. China on the other hand has both.
The worst result of course, is when we take a half assed approach that doesn't actually stop the opposing power, but ratchets up hostilities with them while weakening our geopolitical hegemony and advertising our vulnerability. Paving the way for China in dramatic and obvious fashion as the rest of the world aligns against us and builds both economic and military partnerships to spite us. Is this really supporting America primacy in the long run?
Member
Posts: 49,289
Joined: Jun 18 2006
Gold: 11.77
#4547
Nov 5 2023 12:42am
Quote (Goomshill @ Nov 4 2023 11:33pm)
How much threat to us does Russia pose compared to India? Not that simple a question, when you separate out hostility from power. China on the other hand has both.
The worst result of course, is when we take a half assed approach that doesn't actually stop the opposing power, but ratchets up hostilities with them while weakening our geopolitical hegemony and advertising our vulnerability. Paving the way for China in dramatic and obvious fashion as the rest of the world aligns against us and builds both economic and military partnerships to spite us. Is this really supporting America primacy in the long run?


This is why the argument against supporting Ukraine is so weak... it completely leans on how it's distracting us from other things. It's never an affirmative argument for why Russia defeating Ukraine is a good thing for the world order, or how it's in the strategic interest of the United States. It's always "but whatabout China".

It also completely side steps the obvious reality that Putin succeeding in Ukraine reveals the weakness of the US-led world order, resulting in an opening for China to take Taiwan.

Biden's "half-assed approach", along with our Western partners, along with the grit of Ukrainians, is the only reason they still exist as a nation. He's been too slow on some military support but if Trump won in 2020 there would be no Ukraine today. If he wins in 2024, there might not be a Ukraine a few years from now.

This post was edited by IceMage on Nov 5 2023 12:45am
Member
Posts: 49,289
Joined: Jun 18 2006
Gold: 11.77
#4548
Nov 5 2023 12:54am
Also it's kind of weird to pretend India is a similar threat to the United States or our allies when Russia literally has engaged in a genocidal war against their neighbor. India hasn't done that, China hasn't done it. If they do, I hope we have an American president who knows how to bring nations together to fight against it, like Biden has the past couple years.
Member
Posts: 49,289
Joined: Jun 18 2006
Gold: 11.77
#4549
Nov 5 2023 12:58am
I need to add one more thing... for the Trump supporters here who attempt to argue against supporting Ukraine, based on the justification that we need to focus on China, I'm a little confused. Isn't a US-led world order a relic of the neo-con Republican era? Shouldn't the US pull back from upholding this global order, and focus on our own problems? If that's the case, why do you even care about China's rise? Why should we care if China takes Taiwan, or if they exert more influence in their own region? Can you explain to me why we should care?
Member
Posts: 50,906
Joined: Jan 20 2010
Gold: 5,836.00
#4550
Nov 5 2023 01:02am
Quote (IceMage @ Nov 5 2023 01:42am)
This is why the argument against supporting Ukraine is so weak... it completely leans on how it's distracting us from other things. It's never an affirmative argument for why Russia defeating Ukraine is a good thing for the world order, or how it's in the strategic interest of the United States. It's always "but whatabout China".


Most of what goes on in the world doesn't need an affirmative argument for our non-intervention. Most of it is not our business, or not within our means to affect positive change. That's what makes it weak to argue intervention is justified unless we can make an affirmative argument that the non-interventionalist scenario is a positive good. The question isn't some simple calculation of "do we want this result", its "can we actually change the result, and what would it cost us"

Quote
It also completely side steps the obvious reality that Putin succeeding in Ukraine reveals the weakness of the US-led world order, resulting in an opening for China to take Taiwan.

Biden's "half-assed approach", along with our Western partners, along with the grit of Ukrainians, is the only reason they still exist as a nation. He's been too slow on some military support but if Trump won in 2020 there would be no Ukraine today. If he wins in 2024, there might not be a Ukraine a few years from now.


And yet, the current course we're headed towards is Russia keeping the ethnic Russian parts of Ukraine he already annexed and at best our half of solomon's baby being hung around the neck of europe like an albatross, a liability of refugees and extremism and corruption and weapons proliferation. We're revealing the weakness of the US-led world order right now. If America hadn't tried to seize Ukraine by color revolution in the first place, they'd still exist as a nation under the status quo ante and America's interests would have been no different than they were a decade ago. Now American interests are being reduced to a level of praying desperately that western Ukraine doesn't implode in the near future. Its not what winning looks like.
Go Back To Political & Religious Debate Topic List
Prev14534544554564571668Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll

© 2003-2026 d2jsp  Contact