this post was submitted on 23 Jun 2024

257 points (90.5% liked)

No Stupid Questions

35647 readers

885 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)

Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.

Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.

Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.

Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.

Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.

Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.

Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.

Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.

Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.

Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.

Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

257

So is Israel just going to completely overtake Palestine? (lemmy.world)

submitted 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

254 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I saw an article about them attacking Lebanon now. So, where will it stop? Have the Israeli government ever spoken about this?

(page 5) 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Lebanon (at least Hezbollah in Lebanon) began attacking Israel on Oct 8 in solidarity with Hamas. Things have gradually been escalating since then.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 4 months ago

Facts have no standing in this area of discussion.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 4 months ago

As longs as inertia prevails in the world stage, sadly, I don’t see a near term future where a light might shine in the end of the tunnel for Palestine’s future.

But if it serves a consolation, simmering tensions are purging therein the Netanyahu’s regime. His close allies aren’t aligned with the PM’s vision of the plausibility of defeat of Hamas (as if the Israel’s anger agains Palestine had anything to do with Hamas; it’s was a fallacious pretext).

[–] [email protected] 103 points 4 months ago (6 children)

This may not be a popular response but when did the nazi regime stop? When did China stop with it's cleansing? America and manifest destiny? I could go on... Humanity needs to realize that we are pretty shitty in general and can't be trusted when it comes to hatred, entitlement, and tribalism.

The solution is a neutral third party with sufficient power to stop any country's bullshit through economic and military (actual) peacekeeping... which doesn't exist nor will it ever.

So the short answer is they will stop when the cleansing is complete.

After the deed is done we as 'civilized' nations will lament the tragedy and promise change... until the media cycle washes all those sins down the drain and it will be forgotten until next time.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

party with sufficient power to stop any country's bullshit

No. That would not be a solution for anything! That would just be an even bigger threat to humanity.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago (6 children)

I disagree. It's about execution - creating an environment that is resistant to corrosion. A standing force can absolutely be viewed in that manner - which is why it cannot be a single static standing force.

The UN is the right idea but it needs teeth. And it needs the teeth to be double sided. If boots are on the ground peacekeeping they should be without bias and secondary interest. An attack on a peacekeeper has no guarantee of the creed nor country of origin of that keeper.

Peacekeeping should be like a draft. Every country that participates must provide and maintain a set number of rolling participants. These people will serve and train initially in humanitarian deployments with others.. half way through their 'term' they should be moved to peacekeeping duties. This is idealized but would be good for both building trust amongst peacekeepers and goodwill towards them. This solves the military portion (roughly) - I have a lot of thoughts on this and believe it to be solvable... it just won't be. No country gets to benefit therefore it has no merit.

That covered the military side... when talking about the economic side: the peacekeepers (let's say un for simplicity) carry the ability to (by vote) censure a country and cut it off from direct trade / support. At that time any trade is then routed through the UN and it becomes the middleman. This allows economic pressures to be precisely controlled on an area. Once that country falls in line, by majority vote, operations are restored. Once again this is idealized and has no obviously advantaged party ... so it has no merit and will never occur.

Basically everyone is equally held accountable and equally invested. Of course this means everyone gets a seat at the table and everyone gets one vote. I'm certain we can already see why this has 0 chance of ever happening. Those in power seek to keep it - very few will willingly give some away.

load more comments (6 replies)

[+] [email protected] -17 points 4 months ago (12 children)

This is the most reasonable approach, but as seen with the UN, wich as the sum of its parts failed to keep dictatorships out wich now basically control everything but the security Council and the ICJ, its a Utopist approach sadly. There cant be a peace unless Israel takes over Palestine and treats the people that live there now as equal (wich they do already btw, the myth about apartheid is BS there are many Arab Palestinians living in Israel and many went to work in Israel from gaza) but the problem with the surrounding terrorists is another problem.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

UN, which... failed to keep dictatorships out

The UN while created with noble intentions certainly fell for the paradox of tolerance. They tolerate the dictatorships and human rights abusers because if they didn't they'd be much less empowered to take action against them, or worse they'd form their own competing UN made up of nations motivated to join them and you'd just end up with another NATO and Warsaw Pact for example. It's damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Ultimately the challenge comes down to how do you ultimately tame the leaders of the world who have absolute power. The founding fathers of the United States of America thought they had the solution with democracy and the many checks and balances they implemented into this new form of government they setup, but even that has its challenges and failures that they never could have forseen. The UN was the next experiment, trying to take the similar principles onto the world stage, and it's been less successful (but at least has had some successes)

[+] [email protected] -8 points 4 months ago

The UN while created with noble intentions certainly fell for the paradox of tolerance. They tolerate the dictatorships and human rights abusers because if they didn't they'd be much less empowered to take action against them, or worse they'd form their own competing UN made up of nations motivated to join them and you'd just end up with another NATO and Warsaw Pact for example. It's damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Yes absolutely but the dictatorships and shitshow countries (china for example) keep growing in numbers, if this trend isn't reversed fast, UN fails as a whole and there is no saving.

It would be better in my opinion to have two options, democratic union and whatever the dictatorships do with each other, because the only thing that united them is being against democracy and Israel. UN, in my personal opinion, already failed as a whole and is beyond saving.

Ultimately the challenge comes down to how do you ultimately tame the leaders of the world who have absolute power. The founding fathers of the United States of America thought they had the solution with democracy and the many checks and balances they implemented into this new form of government they setup, but even that has its challenges and failures that they never could have forseen.

The big part of a government is, that it has power to enforce whatever it decides, UN gladly does not have any meaningful power, Israel would be gone by now otherwise.

The UN was the next experiment, trying to take the similar principles onto the world stage, and it's been less successful (but at least has had some successes)

Well those successes slowly but steadily crumble away, the most institutions have failed, WHO is doing its job only half assed (especially the making shure hospital aren't used as military bases) the human rights Council is majorly filled with people that think human rights are shit and only need to apply it when it fits against the west or Israel specifically, the General Assembly is almost the same. (fun fact, the day of the Russian attack on Ukraine the general assembly voted about condemning Israel for something... Again. Most resolutions are against Israel.) Oh and the entire UNHWR wich is definitely more than partially responsible for hamas doing what they do.

UN isn't even a diplomatic forum anymore.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 4 months ago (1 children)

The claim of Israeli apartheid does not pertain to the status of Israeli Arabs fyi. It pertains to de facto Israeli control of Gaza and the West Bank, where any time they want the IDF can exercise as much control as they want, by virtue of superior firepower.

Hamas, for instance, only persisted because the Israelis allowed it. Israel controlled the majority of access to the regions, and could and did unilaterally police them with military force at will.

[+] [email protected] -12 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Yeah shure because Hamas isnt constantly firing rockets into Israel... If there is a defakto control how exactly would the 7th October have happened...

This is just idiotic.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 4 months ago (1 children)

De facto control does not mean 100% control over every event that happens. People are still humans, and capable of making errors. It is not mind reading/mind control powers, those are still impossible.

[+] [email protected] -11 points 4 months ago (4 children)

Yeah shure...

Israel has defakto 0 control over Gaza except for the borders normally. Everything inside is controlled by Hamas. And if you think otherwise you have never been there and you don't know anything about it.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Except they would routinely send in military forces to capture terrorist suspects in a process they referred to as "mowing the grass". It's even more pronounced in the West Bank, where the Israeli settlements are thoroughly intermingled with the Palestinian ones, and the Palestinians had relatively few powers over their own security.

It's not a simple thing, unfortunately. Middle Eastern politics seldom are, just in general.

[+] [email protected] -8 points 4 months ago (5 children)

The civilians in Palestinia in general are victims, thats clear, but the reason they are is hamas and the narrative they propagate about the victim hood that got somehow transferred through generations just as their state as refugees would have according to them.

But yes the settlement thing is a shitshow, but nither side recognized the existence of the other and both claim the possession of the entire area, however, Israel clearly has more rights to it due to the fact that the people in Gaza and the other parts aren't the people that lived there before Israel, they are mostly the descendants of the Arabs that attacked Israel shortly after it was declared a state, with the intention of a genocide. The original Palestinians live in Israel (many of them btw killed on the 7th October pogrom/genocide attempt) and have the same rights as the Christians, jews and everyone else, Israel is a super diverse country with lots of immigrants from all over the world. The claims about apartheid by Hamas (supported by un) are absolutely outlandish and just not true.

Oh and... When you have terrorists as you neighborhood you gotta make shure they don't plot teroristic shit and remove the ones that do. That doesn't mean anything about control thats just trying to keep a never ending Forrest fire within certain boundaries.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 4 months ago (1 children)

The claim of Israeli apartheid is not a hamas claim, it's acknowledged by various Israelis as well. Neither Gaza nor, especially the West Bank, has had full independence in many years.

Note, I am not talking about any Israeli citizens. I am talking about Israeli non-citizens who live under Israeli restrictions and off-and-on military control. This is the nature of apartheid. A people that is separate, but not fully independent. An in-between state of conquest, where you're sort-of conquered but not really and have some, but not full, freedoms.

[–] [email protected] -5 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Uhhh autonomous regions that don't see themselves as part of a country and behave like that are obviously not treated like citizens... Thats not apartheid thats common sense. And Israel blockade of Gaza is 100% justified because hamas uses basically everything as weapon transport.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Except it is not under full Palestinian control either. Some things are controlled by Palestinians, other things are indeed controlled by Israelis. When a country is exercising partial control over citizens that are not its own, something odd is happening.

You can justify it if you like, but it is not the normal way of things where free people are concerned.

[–] [email protected] -4 points 4 months ago (1 children)

No its not normal and people living in a country governed by terrorists are never free, be gay in the autonomous region and you get to choose between being thrown of a building or hung or something worse...

There is no such thing as freedom as long as there are terrorists and as long as most support them.

Oh and both Israel and the autonomous region do claim ownership of each others territory and by that the people, so. Yes. Its complicated.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Extremely complicated, certainly. But I hope my point that the apartheid claim, very specifically, is pretty hard to argue with comes through. It does not refer to any Israeli citizens, that's a separate topic. It is not strictly hamas propaganda, it's just a criticism of one part of a very complicated and difficult situation. The line that it is propaganda is actually itself, propaganda.

The only way to make it untrue was if Palestinians had full legal control over the West Bank, which they do not. Gaza is a murkier situation. It's really about the West Bank though, not hamas or Gaza.

[–] [email protected] -5 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I meant the claim some people propagate about the apartheid within Israeli society, wich is propaganda. The claim that there is some sort of apartheid between Israeli and Palestinians is nothing to argue about, thats basically a fact, the reasons however are another thing.

The legal autonomy of Palestinia would mean Israels acknowledgement of Palestinia as a country, wich should not happen, as it would likely cause even more problems. In my personal opinion Israel needs to take action and remove the autonomous region from the map, there is no working two state solution as it will always lead to problems. True peace will only be possible when integration happens and the terrorists are hunted down to extinction or until they only exist in prison forever.

This is also why i strongly condemn the acknowledgement of Palestinia, especially after 7th October. This only fuels the Hamas and Islamistic jihad recruitment massively "It works!" works wonders in such cases, thats why it should not work.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 months ago (24 children)

The only issue with that is Israel's wish to remain a Jewish state. If they added all of those Palestinians as free and equal citizens, then that would shift the demographics of Israel sufficiently to put that at risk. So, they have to choose between values of freedom and equality, vs being a Jewish state, vs giving up that land.

Or they could attempt to remove all the people somehow.

No easy solutions, unfortunately. As usual for the Middle East.

load more comments (24 replies)

load more comments (4 replies)

load more comments (3 replies)

load more comments (10 replies)

[–] [email protected] 23 points 4 months ago (2 children)

I am in no way saying what's going on is right...anytime massive amounts of life is taken it's horrible. With that being said you realize that there isn't a single country in the entire world that wasn't built on the blood of others? Every civilization that's here now destroyed some other one. People act like they live in some place that asked nicely to have the land they have.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 4 months ago

No. Moral. States

[–] [email protected] 28 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Oh, I'm fully aware. Tribalism is the lizard brain going deeeep in the paint. The problem is this: peaceful culture doesn't fight back - aggressive culture exploits this: which one thrives? We have systematically bred for and codified our warlike nature. This is the result. Is it fixable? Many have tried. Our history books are littered with both failed attempts and their distorted remains. All I can say for certain is that the way the majority of countries are structured... isn't it. This is fundamentally why achieving a fix is nearly impossible at scale: tribalism. Even if we are wrong it's our wrong and we don't want to lose it. This is rooted in fear of change which from a survival aspect makes sense... but becomes detrimental at scale.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 4 months ago

I agree with what you're saying and it's too bad most people are too stupid to move forward with that mindset because I for one would rather we could all get along but for invisible reasons many people can't..which is in itself quite unintelligent

load more comments (3 replies)

[–] [email protected] 7 points 4 months ago (11 children)

Israel can't just overtake it. There is too many people there. They already tried that tactic for the last 30(?) years when gaza was a prison.

I don't think they know what they want and can even achieve in this campaign. I don't think they will invade Lebanon.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

It's been clear and consistent since day 1 of the war. Israel wants the return of the hostages taken on Oct 7, the removal of Hamas from power, and the inability for Hamas or any other group to repeat a deadly attack within Israel.

That was the goal on Oct 7, that's still the goal. Anything else is just politics and propaganda.

Now, how effectively they have done so, and the methods they've employed are another discussion entirely.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 months ago

Yes well we would all like impossible things, but that's not really an achievable goal and everybody on all sides are aware of that.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I don't think they know what they want

What would YOU want if you were a military leader of Israel there? (NOT a political one, just a soldier)

I think that they want exactly that. A military goal, not a political one.

For example "kill everybody there who takes a weapon and aims it at Israel, and then take this weapon away from his corpse."

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Militarily? I don't think anyone can expect they can achieve any kind of real military goal.

Maybe what you said, to kill some combatants and many times the amount of civilians with them. But that's not really a military goal.

load more comments (1 replies)

load more comments (8 replies)

load more comments