Israel-Hamas War 2023

[Josquius]

<snip>

Also if they didn't dress slutty they would not have been raped.

Always a terrible analogy people dredge up and stretch to odd situations.
In that situation the rapist is obviously bad. Nobody thinks different.
Though drinking too much and running around in a dark and empty park whilst clearly dressed like they're stumbling home from the nightclub and the girl is clearly stapling a victim in the making sign to her chest. Taking basic precautions for your safety is just common sense.

What Israel have done here has slight aspects of that - only it's innocent people who get hurt rather than the shitty decision makers - but more than that they've decided since a man in that park raped their sister that one awful night they now have to murder everyone who goes anywhere near that park after 5pm.

A really warped analogy but then vipers was better.

[garbon]

It feels like we have now jumped the shark and Jos/Viper have clearly demonstrated they will only say vile, crazy things about this conflict.

[Tamas]

<snip>

Also if they didn't dress slutty they would not have been raped.

Always a terrible analogy people dredge up and stretch to odd situations.
In that situation the rapist is obviously bad. Nobody thinks different.
Though drinking too much and running around in a dark and empty park whilst clearly dressed like they're stumbling home from the nightclub and the girl is clearly stapling a victim in the making sign to her chest. Taking basic precautions for your safety is just common sense.

What Israel have done here has slight aspects of that - only it's innocent people who get hurt rather than the shitty decision makers - but more than that they've decided since a man in that park raped their sister that one awful night they now have to murder everyone who goes anywhere near that park after 5pm.

A really warped analogy but then vipers was better.

Ok, so in your example is it the girl's fault or the rapist's fault that she got raped?

My problem with Viper's post wasn't that he called out supposed mistakes in Israeli security policies, nor that he criticised Bibi (who, I have repeatedly written, is a great risk and should be in prison), but rather that his whole post was reeking of switching blame, responsibility, even agency, from the Palestinians actually doing the murdering raping and kidnapping, onto the people being murdered, raped and kidnapped.

[Josquius]

[quote author=Jo

Ok, so in your example is it the girl's fault or the rapist's fault that she got raped?

My problem with Viper's post wasn't that he called out supposed mistakes in Israeli security policies, nor that he criticised Bibi (who, I have repeatedly written, is a great risk and should be in prison), but rather that his whole post was reeking of switching blame, responsibility, even agency, from the Palestinians actually doing the murdering raping and kidnapping, onto the people being murdered, raped and kidnapped.

This is similar to the typical right wing "personal responsibility" use of this analogy.
All that matters is immediate crime and punishment. This guy did something bad and he did that entirely by his own choice thus that's the only thing to consider in tackling crime.

The typical left wing view on the other hand would look at things more holistically. Less into waiting for crime to naturally  happen then reacting.
Obviously the criminal committed a crime and should be punished. This is rarely in any doubt whatsoever. However this is done and the most important thing to look at going forward is the root causes of the crime, what secondary responsibility of people failing to do their job was at play, and how we can address these to stop it happening again.

In this case obviously the 7th October attacks were bad. It's daft to suggest this is in question.
However there absolutely were massive failings from the Israeli side and there should be a case from the victims/their families against the state.

Additionally that a crime was committed in October doesn't give the people who fucked up so massively in doing their job of ensuring public safety carte blanche to kill thousands of innocents just because they live in the same place as  the attackers.

[Tamas]

look at going forward is the root causes of the crime, what secondary responsibility of people failing to do their job was at play, and how we can address these to stop it happening again.

Right, so Israel has concluded the root cause is Hamas' stranglehold on Gaza giving them the resources and opportunities  to put their twisted agenda into action, and they are addressing this by (trying to) ensure Hamas' power is destroyed regardless of the collateral damage.

Just because you don't agree with the conclusions of the RCA it doesn't mean it didn't happen.

[Josquius]

look at going forward is the root causes of the crime, what secondary responsibility of people failing to do their job was at play, and how we can address these to stop it happening again.

Right, so Israel has concluded the root cause is Hamas' stranglehold on Gaza giving them the resources and opportunities  to put their twisted agenda into action, and they are addressing this by (trying to) ensure Hamas' power is destroyed regardless of the collateral damage.

Just because you don't agree with the conclusions of the RCA it doesn't mean it didn't happen.

Yes. The people who fucked up have came to some conclusions that wonderfully reward them with just what they wanted, turning what should have been a damning fuck up for them into a big opportunity - and damn the human comsequences

It's comparable to but considerably  worse than Thatcher with the Falklands. At least she didn't seek to conquer Argentina.... And there weren't British settlers already In Argentina continuing to report to london.

[Tamas]

look at going forward is the root causes of the crime, what secondary responsibility of people failing to do their job was at play, and how we can address these to stop it happening again.

Right, so Israel has concluded the root cause is Hamas' stranglehold on Gaza giving them the resources and opportunities  to put their twisted agenda into action, and they are addressing this by (trying to) ensure Hamas' power is destroyed regardless of the collateral damage.

Just because you don't agree with the conclusions of the RCA it doesn't mean it didn't happen.

Yes. The people who fucked up have came to some conclusions that wonderfully reward them with just what they wanted, turning what should have been a damning fuck up for them into a big opportunity - and damn the human comsequences

It's comparable to but considerably  worse than Thatcher with the Falklands. At least she didn't seek to conquer Argentina.... And there weren't British settlers already In Argentina continuing to report to london.

A couple of things: while -again- you obviously have a valid point that own failings need to be reviewed in cases like this, I am not comfortable with your and Viper's primary focus on it. At the end of the day there was a very simple solution to avoid all these deaths on October 7: Palestinians not committing the murders. All other solutions to avoid them are more complex and uncertain in results. Your view on it does feel very much like victim-blaming.

And on the Falklands: I shouldn't be surprised you think it's Thatcher's fault the hapless agency-less Argentinians invaded the island. 

[grumbler]

It is a false narrative that the U.S. with the stroke of a pen can make Israel stop fighting a war.

Probably not.  But the US did end apartheid in South Africa more or less with the stroke of a pen.

F.W. de Klerk ended apartheid, not the United States. I think your analysis of those events is severely off base.

The White South Africans were forced into it. Any analysis that pretends that they did it because they wanted to his not only off base it's a severe distortion of history.

You are way over-generalizing.  The white South Africans were comprised of a large set of disparate people with disparate views on Apartheid.  Any analysis that fails to acknowledge this is not only off base it's a severe distortion of history.

US policy on Apartheid led to trade sanctions in 1986 (the Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act).  South Africa adopted a  democratic constitution in 1993.  Someone claiming a causal link needs to demonstrate why it took so long and none of the intervening events were the actual causes, if the CAAA was supposed to be the cause.

[Valmy]

It is a false narrative that the U.S. with the stroke of a pen can make Israel stop fighting a war.

I do not disagree. However the intention of not sending money to the Israelis is not to control their behavior.

[DGuller]

It feels like we have now jumped the shark and Jos/Viper have clearly demonstrated they will only say vile, crazy things about this conflict.

Ish.

[crazy canuck]

It is a false narrative that the U.S. with the stroke of a pen can make Israel stop fighting a war.

Probably not.  But the US did end apartheid in South Africa more or less with the stroke of a pen.

F.W. de Klerk ended apartheid, not the United States. I think your analysis of those events is severely off base.

The White South Africans were forced into it. Any analysis that pretends that they did it because they wanted to his not only off base it's a severe distortion of history.

You are way over-generalizing.  The white South Africans were comprised of a large set of disparate people with disparate views on Apartheid.  Any analysis that fails to acknowledge this is not only off base it's a severe distortion of history.

US policy on Apartheid led to trade sanctions in 1986 (the Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act).  South Africa adopted a  democratic constitution in 1993.  Someone claiming a causal link needs to demonstrate why it took so long and none of the intervening events were the actual causes, if the CAAA was supposed to be the cause.

White South Africans were the ones who ended apartheid.  That is why I said white South Africans.  Pretending that other South Africans end apartheid is ridiculous.


Almost as ridiculous as pretending that the actions of the United States and the UK didn't play a role in the decision of White South Africans to end apartheid.

[OttoVonBismarck]

It is a false narrative that the U.S. with the stroke of a pen can make Israel stop fighting a war.

I do not disagree. However the intention of not sending money to the Israelis is not to control their behavior.

Well, intentions vary, right? I see a lot of leftist reddit types saying Biden can end the war by cutting Israel off. So for at least some section of people there is that view of it.

But even from a game theory perspective, cutting off Israeli aid likely reduces U.S. ability to control Israel's behavior, not increase, so it would be at cross purpose to the goals espoused by those advocating for it.

[OttoVonBismarck]

White South Africans were the ones who ended apartheid.  That is why I said white South Africans.  Pretending that other South Africans end apartheid is ridiculous.

I specifically said F.W. de Klerk, because that is factual, but it did involve more than just him and more than just whites. There was a negotiation process between the ANC and the NP, the NP would likely not have agreed to a democratic constitution without a consultative process. A lot of NP hardliners had fears the ANC would do things they deeply opposed (the ANC was linked to communist powers historically, so there was a fear they might attempt to make post-apartheid South Africa into a communist state--which did not happen and there were negotiations around many of those key points.)

[viper37]

<snip>

Also if they didn't dress slutty they would not have been raped.

You can be as moronic as Raz when you want to.

[Admiral Yi]

Always a terrible analogy people dredge up and stretch to odd situations.
In that situation the rapist is obviously bad. Nobody thinks different.

On October 7 50% of Gazans and 75% of West Bankers thought different.