Israel at war

[Frankfooter]

The whole TikTok bill is more complicated than I want to get into right now.
I'm just curious if this is the argument that people actually believe - that TikTok is being banned because Israel demanded it.

Why do you think they passed it right now?

Congress accused of using TikTok ban to silence Israel criticism

Over the weekend, the House of Representatives passed legislation that seeks to bar TikTok from operating in the U.S. if it does not divest from its Chinese parent-company, ByteDance.

www.newsweek.com

 

[Valcazar]

Israel will stop the genocide, yes, but of course they won't stop the settler colonialism until outside pressure forces them.
2021, 2018, 2014, 2012, 2011, IIRC, all those attacks on Gaza stopped eventually. The longest being the Great March of Return, but that was only a weekly protest that lasted nearly a year. About 200 died and 14,000 or so injured, but it wasn't near what this was. This one is by far the most serious and deadly, and its only because Netanyahu is pressured and Biden is allowing it to happen. Previously Netanyahu knew when to stop before global outrage was too much, as when the 2021 protests became a PLM movement.

All Israeli attacks eventually stop.

So if they all stop eventually, only to restart again, what does throwing Biden out accomplish for you, exactly?

The bigger problem is how to end the Negroponte doctrine and allow the UN, ICC and ICJ to finally take place and even more importantly, for the grassroots support for BDS to do what it did to South African Apartheid.

Which voting Biden out accomplishes how?

Will Netanyahu still be in power to try another attack in the next 4 years with an orange POTUS? That's unclear. He's incredibly unpopular but Netanyahu has survived other political challenges. Would he try this again? Unlikely. If he did would rump back him, probably. But will rump live through another 4 years in office? Also unlikely.

Will the dems change if Biden loses? Very likely. The wave against AIPAC is real and losing will look massive.

So your strategy is to have Biden lose - hope that for the Dems this gets internalized as "He lost because of being too pro-Israel", then hope that in 4 years that is a sufficiently important cause that the Dems run on an pro-Palestine position and win?
This will "teach the Dems a lesson", presumably?

Your option is to put Biden back in, watch him protect Netanyahu as the ICC and ICJ try to rule and the US vetos those actions and blocks all UNSC resolutions, allowing the issue fester in the background for another 4 years until Ben Gvir or whoever leads next tries something much worse.

But you want the issue to fester.
You just said so.
You want to put the more pro-Israel party in, guaranteeing that the issue festers more and that eventual pressure makes the Dems support Palestine.
In fact, if Ben Gvir or whoever doesn't do something much worse, your whole plan falls apart.

Do you really see that as better?
Do you have an alternate storyline that looks more plausible and has a better outcome?

Do I think Biden and the Dems in charge is a better outcome for the middle east than Trump and the GOP?
Yes.

 

[Butler1000]

It's an interesting analogy to make.

I appreciate he admits he is forcing some things to make it fit - not everyone would do that.

As I said in the other thread, the threat of police violence is a real one.
The "People protested the vietnam war and got Nixon who escalated the war" is also a parallel about the unintended consequences worth reminding people of.
The campus protests are tougher to match up, of course - the Vietnam protests in 68 were at a different place than the campus protests now. The fact it isn't a war sending US troops to via draft can't be discounted.

But still, people are making the 68-2024 analogies for a reason and they aren't crazy to do so.

One of the Smarter new political commentators out there.

 

[Valcazar]

Maybe comparing this attack on Gaza to the Tet Offensive is closer.

Eh.
I can see an argument for that, but it's kind of thin.
The US was 4 years into having troops on the ground by then, no?

Still, there was a spike in outrage after.
I could see an actual Rafah ground assault being a reasonable analogy.

 

[Valcazar]

Why do you think they passed it right now?

Congress accused of using TikTok ban to silence Israel criticism

Over the weekend, the House of Representatives passed legislation that seeks to bar TikTok from operating in the U.S. if it does not divest from its Chinese parent-company, ByteDance.

www.newsweek.com

Because they got enough votes in the current environment.

But sure, some people on TikTok are saying it is because of Israel - so that must be true.

 

[Valcazar]

One of the Smarter new political commentators out there.

Well, if I hear more from him, I might end up agreeing.
He didn't embarrass himself here, so that's something.

 

[Butler1000]

Well, if I hear more from him, I might end up agreeing.
He didn't embarrass himself here, so that's something.

Go to the channel. They produce content every Monday, Tuesday and Thursday. He is partnered with Krystal Ball(real name). Former Hill hosts who put it on the map.

 

[Valcazar]

Go to the channel. They produce content every Monday, Tuesday and Thursday. He is partnered with Krystal Ball(real name). Former Hill hosts who put it on the map.

Yes, I know The Hill.
That he is on it and partnered with Krystal Ball is a strong mark against him.
But maybe he can transcend all that.

 

[Butler1000]

Yes, I know The Hill.
That he is on it and partnered with Krystal Ball is a strong mark against him.
But maybe he can transcend all that.

They both created the channel. Opposing views. But they do well on independent topics and goid interviews as well. The Youtube channel will have a trove to get a better idea.

Don't discount them. Over 1 million subs and a large subsriber for money audience as well

 

[Valcazar]

They both created the channel. Opposing views. But they do well on independent topics and goid interviews as well. The Youtube channel will have a trove to get a better idea.

Don't discount them. Over 1 million subs and a large subsriber for money audience as well

I honestly didn't even recognize Saagar.
He looks different from what I remember.

I thought he was someone new, worth checking out.

"They are popular on youtube" just means they are good at getting a youtube audience. (And good for them!)
If it's the same two people doing the same schtick (and considering I didn't even realize it was a different show, it seems they are just doing the same schtick) then I'm not going to expect much from them.

That they represent a viewpoint that has an audience is very different from "they do good political analysis".
Joe Rogan is super popular and he is terrible at analyzing politics.

I know you find "But they're popular!" important, but I don't.

 

[shack]

This is completely consistent with everything I know about Ziontologists.

You haven't explained what a ziontologist is. And why would somebody study zionts?

 

[Butler1000]

I honestly didn't even recognize Saagar.
He looks different from what I remember.

I thought he was someone new, worth checking out.

"They are popular on youtube" just means they are good at getting a youtube audience. (And good for them!)
If it's the same two people doing the same schtick (and considering I didn't even realize it was a different show, it seems they are just doing the same schtick) then I'm not going to expect much from them.

That they represent a viewpoint that has an audience is very different from "they do good political analysis".
Joe Rogan is super popular and he is terrible at analyzing politics.

I know you find "But they're popular!" important, but I don't.

No corporate censorship like they ran into at the Hill. And yes they have good analysis. Just because you don't agree doesn't make it valid. As well I find actually listening to viewspoints I disagree with both informative and allows me to gain insight into how a different audience thinks.

That is your primary problem. You refuse to acknowledge other opinions as valid, and have no empathy or understanding of differing viewpoints. You just claim a false superiority, one based in so called pragmatism that is really just refusal to consider change is possible. And a myopic view, supporting corruption, lies, false policy, all in the name of a house of cards of so called stability that is eroding, with no solution, just duct tape to try to hold it through another election cycle.

You don't see the the combination of factors driving the recent protests as an example. How both right wing isolationism has grown, especially among Democratic voters, coupled with an anti war message on the left. Both are actually in favor of the same thing, for different reasons but the same outcome.

I actually don't agree with them. But I empathize with them, understand there reasoning as valid, while stating my support for Israel remains valid as well. You don't.

Its sad.

 

[Frankfooter]

So if they all stop eventually, only to restart again, what does throwing Biden out accomplish for you, exactly?
Which voting Biden out accomplishes how?
So your strategy is to have Biden lose - hope that for the Dems this gets internalized as "He lost because of being too pro-Israel", then hope that in 4 years that is a sufficiently important cause that the Dems run on an pro-Palestine position and win?
This will "teach the Dems a lesson", presumably?

Pro human rights position, not a pro Palestine position.
Yes, right now this is what I see as the best way to change the system without advocating for a butler 'tear it all down' approach. Turf the part of the party that's beholden to AIPAC, kill their influence and try to support the progressives in the party. To find a way to make it better.

But you want the issue to fester.
You just said so.
You want to put the more pro-Israel party in, guaranteeing that the issue festers more and that eventual pressure makes the Dems support Palestine.
In fact, if Ben Gvir or whoever doesn't do something much worse, your whole plan falls apart.

No, what I want is for a ceasefire right now and for the leaders of both sides to be investigated and charged for all war crimes. For a campaign to end the occupation, apartheid and genocide and implement equal rights. What I want is for the progressive dems to move in and try to right the ship.

There is little chance any of that can happen bar a Berlin wall moment in the US so the best way I can see of changing the system is to turf Biden and AIPAC influence and play the longer game for systematic change. Its a very crappy second choice but its still better than the status quo.

Your option seems to be vote for it all to exactly the same and screw whatever happens over there as it doesn't matter.
What you seem to be arguing is that the genocide doesn't matter.

Do I think Biden and the Dems in charge is a better outcome for the middle east than Trump and the GOP?
Yes.

Trump in power would right now would be no better than Biden. But Biden being supported in his Israel position is essentially no different than rump in the Middle East except for a bit more ass kissing for Saudi cash.

 

[Frankfooter]

Eh.
I can see an argument for that, but it's kind of thin.
The US was 4 years into having troops on the ground by then, no?

Still, there was a spike in outrage after.
I could see an actual Rafah ground assault being a reasonable analogy.

Israel is 75 years into the occupation and 17 years into the Gaza blockade.
There is a much stronger argument that this round of genocide in Gaza, the 6 months of bombing are the Tet offensive compared to the long term occupation and continues 'mowing the grass' over the last couple of decades.

If you're using the Tet analogy its not one event within the last 6 months, its the last six months itself.

 

[Klatuu]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1784516493671379147

 

[Frankfooter]

Haaretz posted an article asking the same question about whether Netanyahu really wants to invade Rafah.

Is Israel's coveted Rafah operation a strategic target or a bargaining chip?

***

www.haaretz.com

Meanwhile, this is happening to American students protesting against genocide.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1784525013531459753

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1784561050148577651

 

[Valcazar]

No corporate censorship like they ran into at the Hill. And yes they have good analysis. Just because you don't agree doesn't make it valid. As well I find actually listening to viewspoints I disagree with both informative and allows me to gain insight into how a different audience thinks.

Sure, which is why I occasionally check them and other analysis out.
This analogy was ok, he didn't embarrass himself.

But mostly when I have been directed their way, they've been mediocre.

That is your primary problem. You refuse to acknowledge other opinions as valid, and have no empathy or understanding of differing viewpoints.

You think the way I treat you on an escort board is the way I interact with people in real life?

You just claim a false superiority, one based in so called pragmatism that is really just refusal to consider change is possible. And a myopic view, supporting corruption, lies, false policy, all in the name of a house of cards of so called stability that is eroding, with no solution, just duct tape to try to hold it through another election cycle.

"Refusal to consider change is possible"? LOL
Amazing.

You don't see the the combination of factors driving the recent protests as an example. How both right wing isolationism has grown, especially among Democratic voters, coupled with an anti war message on the left. Both are actually in favor of the same thing, for different reasons but the same outcome.

Go on.
Elaborate your thesis.
This is usually the part where you say "magic ponies and revolution", isn't it?

You're not under some kind of delusion that I think these protests aren't real and significant, are you?

As for that last sentence, we've talked about your red-brown alliance ideas before and their historical track record.

I actually don't agree with them. But I empathize with them, understand there reasoning as valid, while stating my support for Israel remains valid as well. You don't.

Dude.
You're someone who has argued that committing war crimes against Palestinians is both good and correct.

Also, are you under the impression I am against the protests and on the side of the universities here?

 

[Valcazar]

Pro human rights position, not a pro Palestine position.
Yes, right now this is what I see as the best way to change the system without advocating for a butler 'tear it all down' approach. Turf the part of the party that's beholden to AIPAC, kill their influence and try to support the progressives in the party. To find a way to make it better.

But you aren't "turfing the party that's beholden to AIPAC" - you're putting the GOP in charge and they are more pro-Israel.

No, what I want is for a ceasefire right now and for the leaders of both sides to be investigated and charged for all war crimes. For a campaign to end the occupation, apartheid and genocide and implement equal rights. What I want is for the progressive dems to move in and try to right the ship.

By throwing them out of power, you want them to right the ship?

There is little chance any of that can happen bar a Berlin wall moment in the US so the best way I can see of changing the system is to turf Biden and AIPAC influence and play the longer game for systematic change. Its a very crappy second choice but its still better than the status quo.

So you would have people sacrifice all other policy goals on the hope that in four years the Democrats win with a less pro-Israel position?
Despite having just proved (by putting the GOP in power) that the winning electoral position is to be more pro-Israel?

Your option seems to be vote for it all to exactly the same and screw whatever happens over there as it doesn't matter.
What you seem to be arguing is that the genocide doesn't matter.

No.
I am arguing that your plan isn't going to work the way you think it is.

I get that "We have to do something, this is something, let's do that" is very appealing, but it isn't good strategy.
It's not good even if the only thing you want is better outcomes for the Palestinians.
It's even worse if you want better outcomes on many things.

Trump in power would right now would be no better than Biden. But Biden being supported in his Israel position is essentially no different than rump in the Middle East except for a bit more ass kissing for Saudi cash.

You think Trump has the same Israel/Palestine policy as Biden?
Because "no better" is the exact same thing as "no worse" to you?

 

[Frankfooter]

But you aren't "turfing the party that's beholden to AIPAC" - you're putting the GOP in charge and they are more pro-Israel.
By throwing them out of power, you want them to right the ship?
So you would have people sacrifice all other policy goals on the hope that in four years the Democrats win with a less pro-Israel position?
Despite having just proved (by putting the GOP in power) that the winning electoral position is to be more pro-Israel?
No.
I am arguing that your plan isn't going to work the way you think it is.

I get that "We have to do something, this is something, let's do that" is very appealing, but it isn't good strategy.
It's not good even if the only thing you want is better outcomes for the Palestinians.
It's even worse if you want better outcomes on many things.

What plan do you think would work better towards those same goals then, valcazar?
Clearly you must think there is a better strategy that you have yet to share.

You think Trump has the same Israel/Palestine policy as Biden?
Because "no better" is the exact same thing as "no worse" to you?

Straw man.
Of course you can be different but no better.

 

[Butler1000]

Okay I have read, re-read, and read it a third time. Possibly even a fourth time. To me, it sounds like you are stringing words together in an attempt to say something profound, but they are not making sense to me.

What "combination of factors" have led to the recent protests? - There is only one factor, which is primarily Israel's genocide and war crimes of the Palestinians that people are outraged by, and our govts being complicit in it, and turning a blind eye to it.

Right wing isolationism has grown amongst Democratic voters? - Dem voters are usually moderate. Isolationism is an alt-right populist ideology. How are they even related?

Anti-war message on the left - It is not so much anti-war, as it is opposition to oppression, genocide and war crimes. Infact the anti-war messaging is on the right, when they oppose aid to Ukraine.

You seem to be conflating various unrelated things. Just because they appear to be the same, doesn't mean they are.

Perhaps you need to clarify more.

So ask voters one main reason they are opposed to the war is the cost. They are sick of sending 100's of billions out while their own nation is crumbling. And yes that is common on the left and right. The right want tax breaks, the left want more localized social services. But both are in agreement they want the money to stay home. Whether military aid, NATO, or over spending on the US Military. The obvious divergence on humanitarian aid, but I've seen the laft asking why we have homeless as well.

The next is both sides want to reduce American interference in other nations. The right due to isolationism as policy, the left due to humanitarian and imperialism concerns.

Finally even on the border the policy is getting mixed reaction. Local homeless advocates wonder how in NY the illegal immigrants end up in hotels while tent cities are expanding. Both there and in other cites.

While the end use of the money is in question, the fact of USA foreign policy denying them their wants are coming into play. And in the case of young people especially a shift away from leftist leanings is also emerging. They want what the parents and Grandparents have, and see no way to get it. While not being to even able to afford monthy bills. Then see the money going to places and are asking why?

People are complicated. Differing forces can come together over common cause and enemies. Some of the associated Anti-semitism is right wing off campus agitators. Protests are not just on the campuses but online as well. The crowd outside the recent Press dinner was a mixed crowd. And people can and will state one reason they are protesting while holding personal and not necessarily as politically correct opinions as well.

Watch both conventions this summer if the protests last. The GOP is going to have their own voter problems, although I expect the Dems to get it worse.

Get it now?