This is the reality of what Israel is doing (part 5)

[Eyesopenwideawake]

I used to start these threads with the fervent hope that each will be the last. I don't anymore.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/oct/05/israel-destroying-palestinians-war-hope

No, I said that the failure by some people to understand how an ethnically cleansed person may feel/react is rooted in supremacist ideals. Colonialism by it's very nature is supremacist.
https://www.enar-eu.org/europes-original-sin-white-supremacy-colonialism-and-the-contemporary-racial-wealth-gap/

Yes, Putin's bad, he also now occupies land which contains billions of dollars in resources. Name calling is all very well and good but there's also reality. That's why only the "Realist" International relations called Ukraine correctly.

You’d think so.

Well said. It shouldn't be complicated.

I disagree as unfortunately I think it is complicated.

Putin is bad. Hamas are bad. That is uncomplicated.

But there is a difference between saying that Putin’s beliefs meant that he would consider US plans to extend NATO eastwards to be an existential threat and he would act accordingly, and saying ‘Putin’ is a ‘good’ person with good intentions.

There is also a difference between an act being brave and the act and the person carrying it out being ‘good’. I believe it widely recognised for example that German soldiers including Nazis were courageous.
Absailing over a massive security fence into Israel to slaughter or capture innocent people including women and children was heinous on the part of Hamas, but it was also ‘brave’.

Unfortunately, unpleasant though it is to admit it, contrary to our our ideals, ordinary life does not always consist of a clear division between brave, heroic good people, and cowardly, weak, evil monstrous ones.

"Absailing over a massive security fence into Israel to slaughter or capture innocent people including women and children was heinous on the part of Hamas, but it was also ‘brave".

There was no bravery involved. None. Nothing brave about abseiling a security fence at all. It was vile, sick and brought nothing but misery to the people of Gaza after inflicting disgusting terror on innocent people at a festival and in kibbutz homes.

Nothing about the actions of Hamas on that day or since has been brave. Nothing.

It was vile, sick and brought nothing but misery to the people of Gaza after inflicting disgusting terror on innocent people at a festival and in kibbutz homes

That is not in dispute.

Which bit do you dispute then? The 'bravery' of the abseiling terrorists. I found that a strange comment and hence my reply to the comment. How on earth could anyone describe abseiling terrorists intent on rape, kidnap and murder 'brave' is unbelievable. Do you think.they were 'brave'?

Separate the issues:
someone can be brave ( issue 1) and commit evil acts ( issue 2).

‘Brave’ and ‘Good’ are not interdependent by necessity.
If you show me they are then I will apologise and take everything back.

What I do not dispute for one moment is that Hamas committed atrocities when they entered Israel on Oct 7.

But do I think the terrorists absailing over the security Israeli fence were brave? Yes, I do. They were taking on a massive defence system and military forces with few means by comparison. For all they knew they would have the might of the whole Israeli defence forces upon them within a very short time. (Who could have thought otherwise?)

Alternative words that might fit are audacious or daring.

I had missed this. No the Realists did not call Ukraine correctly. Mearsheimer, the arch realist is famous for calling Ukraine wrong and that's when his reputation really collapsed. He predicted Putin wouldn't invade.

As for white spremacy settler colonialism Jews are not white settlers in a foreign land so the whole argument collapses and Im not going over it again.

But there are Israeli settlers in a foreign land.

Or are the occupied territories now part of Israel

Its the framing of white settler colonialism and all its irrelevant baggage that is the issue. Deal with the issue of the west bank on its own terms. Dont shoe horn it into a different framework to suit external politics.

Reuters

Gaza war death toll could be 40% higher, says study

January 10, 2025
https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/gaza-war-toll-likely-significantly-undercounts-deaths-says-study-2025-01-09/

(n.b. This study concerns deaths caused by traumatic injuries. Deaths caused from indirect effects of conflict, such as disrupted health services and poor water and sanitation [which] often cause high excess deaths, are not included.)

You think the West Bank is a separate issue to Gaza? To East Jerusalem?

I can't quite wrap my head around you suggesting that the West Bank settlements are irrelevant baggage.

Would you care to expand on how invading a country, kicking out the occupants, replacing them with outsiders, and leaving the two ethnicities living under different legal systems with different rights, restrictions, requirements and privileges is irrelevant baggage?

It's called ethnic cleansing.

I didn't say the West Bank settlements were irrelevant baggage. I said the theory of white settler colonialism was irrelevant. Jews are not outsiders to the region. The other issues you refer to can be resolved through concepts of human rights and do not need a framework of white settler colonialism to either understand, or resolve. As I did not refer to those things only you could conceive of them as irrelevant baggage. Im not responsuble for your interpretation.

By definition settlers will be outsiders. By definition settlers who do not integrate, establish colonies, and are therefore colonial. In the West Bank this is by displacing the incumbent Arab population.

Jewish settlers are very much outsiders to the West Bank.

Sorry to tell you but it's your responsibility to make your message clear, and I'm still confused.

Simple question: what gives Israeli Jews the right to appropriate land and property from Arab and Palestinian Muslims in the West Bank and in East Jerusalem (anywhere in fact but let's stick to the occupied territories).

I think there was a Texan woman who said recently, regarding her wish to live in Israeli settlements in Gaza, 'Colonialism gets a bad rap.' I expect there are others who share her conviction that they are settlers practising a form of colonialism, and that it's a good thing. There are quite a lot of Americans moving to settlements in the West Bank, also. I'm not sure how you think this is not settler colonialism?

I never said anyone had the right. I am querying the concept of white settler colonialism as I don't think anyone has the right white or otherwise. I have been perfectly clear and the fact that you can't understand it is because of your own conceptual frameworks. It rather nicely shows the problem of white settler colonialism as a framework to understand the Occupation of the West Bank.

"There are subtle differences, and much depends on the context.
Audacious means someone who is not afraid to do something that may be controversial or to draw attention to themselves. It doesn't necessarily imply any actual danger. Lady Gaga is audacious. A fireman running into a burning house is not audacious.
Brave, fearless and courageous are pretty much synonyms. It can describe a scientist, a soldier, an investor, a dancer, or a teacher. A fireman running into a burning house is brave, courageous and fearless."

It is unusual for a terrorist action to be described as 'brave'. Their 'bravery' (I despute that term, see above) led on to a conflict in Gaza that led to the death of thousands of their people, well done them eh. Not the brightest move. We're they thinking it would solve their problems, Sinwar is counted amongst the dead.

Brave 😂
Stupid, foolhardy, suicide for their people, lack of forward thinking, accomplished no good is my way of thinking

You will notice that Sebag Montefiore here condemns the occupation of the West Bank using a framework of justice and rights without resorting to the ahistorical, inaccurate nonsense of white settler colonialism. www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/10/decolonization-narrative-dangerous-and-false/675799/

Amid efforts abroad to prosecute combat soldiers, IDF to try to conceal their identities
Troops under rank of brigadier general to have faces blurred, names hidden when interviewed, but no action taken against core source of info -- social media posts by soldiers themselves

https://www.timesofisrael.com/amid-prosecution-attempts-abroad-idf-to-conceal-identities-of-all-combat-soldiers/amp/

——-
what does IDF want to hide ?

Quite a lot of war crimes, murder, arson, sexual violence, torture, maiming of children, looting...

read about it few days ago in the Spanish news. Apparently they are scared of hind foundation and arresting those members with double nationality

There's a small paragraph about the West Bank in this article, but only to make the point that, despite the number of Palestinians killed there since 2022, it is not a genocide. He never discusses whether the occupation of the West Bank is, or is not, white. settler colonialism. I don't think he uses a framework of justice and rights to condemn the occupation of the West Bank, either. He simply states, 'I should also say that Israeli rule of the Occupied Territories of the West Bank is different,' (to Gaza), and, to my mind, unacceptable, unsustainable, and unjust.' This is quite vague criticism. The article does not really concern itself with the West Bank, apart from this paragraph, so I don't think it makes your point well.

It fully refutes the issue of white settler colonialism in the region. He literally uses the word unjust in regatd to the West Bank. You dont need a whole article about the West Bank to see that someone who entirely rejects the framework of white settler colonialism can also see the Occupation of the West Bank as unjust. I dont have access to the dna of the sttlers there and neither do you. It makes no difference to the politics of an unjust occupation. Its an odd rabbit hole some of you seem to going down which is dependent on people's racial makeup to ascertain whether their actions are acceptable. Its not a route I would go down.