Lee: The people screaming genocide were applying the very broadly defined Convention Against Genocide to the Israel-Hamas War.
Many of the screaming people also talk about "deliberating targeting civilians". They're using the same definition I am and don't understand they've just defined all wars as genocide.
They also don't understand that Hamas not reporting how many of it's soldiers died doesn't mean everyone was a civilian. They especially don't understand dead civilians in Gaza are morally on Hamas' ticket and not Israel's.
Lee: Hamas action on 10/7 were an attempted genocide under this definition.
Hamas killed or kidnaped every Jew they could, civilian or solider. This was their plan and their goal. That's genocide under any definition.
This is claim amounts to "Hamas is seriously underreporting the number of dead".
I also find it a little weird to always report "woman and children" as one category since there's a vast difference between a random 10 year old and a 16 year old militant.
These sorts of numbers are why I oppose believing "genocide" or that Israel is targeting civilians or even that Israel isn't allowing food in. There aren't enough dead people for any of that to be true.
We had about 60k kids born, we had more than 17k people die from natural causes. With the way Hamas plays games with numbers, those 17k are probably in that 50k.
That's not to say life there doesn't suck, but it sucks because there's a war going on and not because Gaza is a massive death camp.
One of my friends lost her job from this sort of thing inside the US and most of her department will also go so it's unclear if anyone will pick it up.
She's working on repairing reefs. Florida might pick up the project, it might not.
The difference in who and how many die between various sources is a thing.
Yet another issue is the "natural" death rate. If we assume Gaza has the USA's death rate, then we should expect about 17k people to die every year from normal causes (so roughly 25k over the course of the war).
As far as I can tell, this cultural attitude predates not only the liberal order but the existence of Israel.
Around 1920 some high level British guy trying to make everyone happy said the Jews' first priority was getting a state but the Arabs' first priority was the Jews not having a state.
That. One of the problems is they moved so far away from the source material that there wasn't much left.
If they wanted to do a full remake and change everyone but still do female power, then copy Wicked and make the Queen Good-but-not-understood and Snow White Evil.
That upends the story but it's so obvious we'd care less about the Prince and the 7 being made into footnotes.
It would have effectively become a different story but it'd also own that.
Part of the problem is the Chinese are bad actors and can be trusted to lie if the truth would make them look bad. No, not just "lie", shout down, use intense political pressure for others to lie, and so on.
I'd say we're the ones who are being stupid. They are saying where their heads are at, and we pretend it means something other than what they say.
Yes, they're dialed up to eleven by the existence of Israel and/or the presence of Jews in the Middle East. Ergo yes, they're serious about driving away the Jews and/or destroying Israel.
That's their minimum threshold for "victory" and it's what they mean by "reasonable". Any suggestion that they let Jews keep a country is unacceptable, it's Arab land full stop.
This is what individuals on the street say during Youtube interviews.
This is what their negotiators argue for in peace talks.
This is what their charters have spelled out.
This is what they say to their people.
Whenever one of their leaders suggests a compromise short of that they have to walk that back.
This is not "Palestinians have bad leadership", this is "Palestinian leaders do what their people insist".
Yes, they're serious. It's reasonable for different cultures to have different mindsets. If they have to choose between having a better life by accepting the Jews and crushing side effects of war by not accepting them, then the people insist on the later, not the former.
All of the evidence we have supports that conclusion. All the "reasoning" which opposes it starts by assuming they're reasonable, putting ourselves into their shoes and asking why we would be enflamed.
DavidTC: ...really sounds like “This can be figured out.” not “We will never settle for anything other then the absolute!”.
At the negotiating table his actual peace proposals matched his charter and what he told his own people, not what you want to hear.
And you'll notice even in your Western facing article he didn't define "reasonable" much less say he would settle for something less than "No Israel, No Jews".
That's word salad designed to be spun to the West as what you want but to his own people as what they want.
DavidTC: ...the actual reason he rejected the agreements...
All I can evaluate is his actual proposals.
If we're going to speculate then imho he couldn't accept (or make) a peace proposal without a (non)serious RoR because he was afraid his own people would kill him if he did.
Also imho this is why the Palestinians so rarely make counter proposals. They understand just how badly "No Israel, No Jews" plays in the West and just how unreasonable it is, but they also have to live with their people.
Yes. It's really telling that they didn't just make Snow stronger and a Mary Sue, they also nerfed everyone else. She defeated the Queen by protesting/telling off the Queen's guards. Everyone is just waiting for her to assume her leadership position by virtue of her inner nobility and point out their flaws.
And this is after massive story fixes and reshoots. Presumably the original was even worse.
Slade (and the rest of the board), my apologies. I should have phrased that very differently.
If Hamas is left in charge, they will continue to run the educational system and indoctrinate every child in their ideology.
When you say something like "Israel blowing people up creates more terrorists" you are ignoring the whole "Hamas is left in charge is the alternative" which will also create terrorists.
So apparently _Hamas_ proposed handing Gaza over to the Palestinian Authority. Israel rejected it.
Israel thinks the PA is not up to the task. Maybe it's the shear incompetence and corruption. Maybe it's the PA's ideological support for an Israel destroying "Right to Return"(*). Maybe it's the paying terrorists by the number of Jews they kill.
However, if we use the normal rules for wars, if Israel wins and Hamas surrenders, Israel gets to have more of a say in who runs the place afterwards than Hamas or the PA.
(*) During Trump's first term he proposed a RoR only into a Palestinian state and the PA said that was hot garbage.
Slade: Trying to reach it by causing more people to want to perpetrate them is a questionable strategy.
So in other words, letting Hamas run the educational system and indoctrinate every child into it's ideology will result in fewer people that back Hamas?
Slade: Good Lord, the only existential threat Hamas poses is to its own people.
We went to war after 911.
I fail to see why Israel shouldn't be able to after a worse attack. Especially with the group right there on their border claiming they will do it again.
Israel wants to win and have it's civilians to not be subjected to random terror attacks. That's a reasonable goal but Hamas will never agree to it.
Disney repeatedly cancelling red carpet opening is a strong tell.
It does sound like they went full woke with it. Prince was downgraded to a commoner and Snow repeatedly saves him. Rather than serve the dwarfs when she's at their place Snow just orders them around.
Far as I can tell, the cease fire technically ended a while ago. Ergo Hamas has stopped handing back hostages and Israel and Hamas were supposed to negotiate what comes next.
They disagree fundamentally on pretty core issues (like whether Hamas will continue to exist and engage in terrorism) so resuming the war is almost expected.
On “Open Mic for the week of 3/17/25”
Lee: The people screaming genocide were applying the very broadly defined Convention Against Genocide to the Israel-Hamas War.
Many of the screaming people also talk about "deliberating targeting civilians". They're using the same definition I am and don't understand they've just defined all wars as genocide.
They also don't understand that Hamas not reporting how many of it's soldiers died doesn't mean everyone was a civilian. They especially don't understand dead civilians in Gaza are morally on Hamas' ticket and not Israel's.
Lee: Hamas action on 10/7 were an attempted genocide under this definition.
Hamas killed or kidnaped every Jew they could, civilian or solider. This was their plan and their goal. That's genocide under any definition.
"
This is claim amounts to "Hamas is seriously underreporting the number of dead".
I also find it a little weird to always report "woman and children" as one category since there's a vast difference between a random 10 year old and a 16 year old militant.
"
These sorts of numbers are why I oppose believing "genocide" or that Israel is targeting civilians or even that Israel isn't allowing food in. There aren't enough dead people for any of that to be true.
We had about 60k kids born, we had more than 17k people die from natural causes. With the way Hamas plays games with numbers, those 17k are probably in that 50k.
That's not to say life there doesn't suck, but it sucks because there's a war going on and not because Gaza is a massive death camp.
"
Yes. That. Good summation.
One of my friends lost her job from this sort of thing inside the US and most of her department will also go so it's unclear if anyone will pick it up.
She's working on repairing reefs. Florida might pick up the project, it might not.
"
https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/gaza-fatality-data-has-become-completely-unreliable
The difference in who and how many die between various sources is a thing.
Yet another issue is the "natural" death rate. If we assume Gaza has the USA's death rate, then we should expect about 17k people to die every year from normal causes (so roughly 25k over the course of the war).
"
The solution for "how to deal with" the other religion is the normal rules apply.
If it's an argument that we never use against a country that's not Jewish, then the issue is us and not them.
"
As far as I can tell, this cultural attitude predates not only the liberal order but the existence of Israel.
Around 1920 some high level British guy trying to make everyone happy said the Jews' first priority was getting a state but the Arabs' first priority was the Jews not having a state.
"
That. One of the problems is they moved so far away from the source material that there wasn't much left.
If they wanted to do a full remake and change everyone but still do female power, then copy Wicked and make the Queen Good-but-not-understood and Snow White Evil.
That upends the story but it's so obvious we'd care less about the Prince and the 7 being made into footnotes.
It would have effectively become a different story but it'd also own that.
"
Part of the problem is the Chinese are bad actors and can be trusted to lie if the truth would make them look bad. No, not just "lie", shout down, use intense political pressure for others to lie, and so on.
"
I'd say we're the ones who are being stupid. They are saying where their heads are at, and we pretend it means something other than what they say.
Yes, they're dialed up to eleven by the existence of Israel and/or the presence of Jews in the Middle East. Ergo yes, they're serious about driving away the Jews and/or destroying Israel.
That's their minimum threshold for "victory" and it's what they mean by "reasonable". Any suggestion that they let Jews keep a country is unacceptable, it's Arab land full stop.
This is what individuals on the street say during Youtube interviews.
This is what their negotiators argue for in peace talks.
This is what their charters have spelled out.
This is what they say to their people.
Whenever one of their leaders suggests a compromise short of that they have to walk that back.
This is not "Palestinians have bad leadership", this is "Palestinian leaders do what their people insist".
Yes, they're serious. It's reasonable for different cultures to have different mindsets. If they have to choose between having a better life by accepting the Jews and crushing side effects of war by not accepting them, then the people insist on the later, not the former.
All of the evidence we have supports that conclusion. All the "reasoning" which opposes it starts by assuming they're reasonable, putting ourselves into their shoes and asking why we would be enflamed.
"
DavidTC: You think war is better than incompetence and corruption?
I think Israel evaluates this on whether they'll end up with a terror army on their border again, not based on the suffering of Gaza civilians.
DavidTC: we are talking about stopping the war.
Israel isn't willing to return to October 6th and wait for the next terror attack. They view the current situation as better.
Rather than calling for Israel to not worry about terrorism the world should be calling for Hamas to surrender.
DavidTC: You mean the thing the PA agreed to end a month ago as part of the ceasefire?
Paying for random Jews to be murdered is so heinous that offering to stop doesn't do them much credit nor earn them much trust.
"
DavidTC: ...really sounds like “This can be figured out.” not “We will never settle for anything other then the absolute!”.
At the negotiating table his actual peace proposals matched his charter and what he told his own people, not what you want to hear.
And you'll notice even in your Western facing article he didn't define "reasonable" much less say he would settle for something less than "No Israel, No Jews".
That's word salad designed to be spun to the West as what you want but to his own people as what they want.
DavidTC: ...the actual reason he rejected the agreements...
All I can evaluate is his actual proposals.
If we're going to speculate then imho he couldn't accept (or make) a peace proposal without a (non)serious RoR because he was afraid his own people would kill him if he did.
Also imho this is why the Palestinians so rarely make counter proposals. They understand just how badly "No Israel, No Jews" plays in the West and just how unreasonable it is, but they also have to live with their people.
"
Yes. It's really telling that they didn't just make Snow stronger and a Mary Sue, they also nerfed everyone else. She defeated the Queen by protesting/telling off the Queen's guards. Everyone is just waiting for her to assume her leadership position by virtue of her inner nobility and point out their flaws.
And this is after massive story fixes and reshoots. Presumably the original was even worse.
On “Trump’s CDC Director Nominee Withdrawn Before Hearing”
Kennedy is extremely good at presenting anti-science views as being pro-science.
It seems Weldon is not.
On “Open Mic for the week of 3/17/25”
Slade (and the rest of the board), my apologies. I should have phrased that very differently.
If Hamas is left in charge, they will continue to run the educational system and indoctrinate every child in their ideology.
When you say something like "Israel blowing people up creates more terrorists" you are ignoring the whole "Hamas is left in charge is the alternative" which will also create terrorists.
"
So apparently _Hamas_ proposed handing Gaza over to the Palestinian Authority. Israel rejected it.
Israel thinks the PA is not up to the task. Maybe it's the shear incompetence and corruption. Maybe it's the PA's ideological support for an Israel destroying "Right to Return"(*). Maybe it's the paying terrorists by the number of Jews they kill.
However, if we use the normal rules for wars, if Israel wins and Hamas surrenders, Israel gets to have more of a say in who runs the place afterwards than Hamas or the PA.
(*) During Trump's first term he proposed a RoR only into a Palestinian state and the PA said that was hot garbage.
"
Slade: Trying to reach it by causing more people to want to perpetrate them is a questionable strategy.
So in other words, letting Hamas run the educational system and indoctrinate every child into it's ideology will result in fewer people that back Hamas?
How does that work exactly?
"
Slade: Good Lord, the only existential threat Hamas poses is to its own people.
We went to war after 911.
I fail to see why Israel shouldn't be able to after a worse attack. Especially with the group right there on their border claiming they will do it again.
Israel wants to win and have it's civilians to not be subjected to random terror attacks. That's a reasonable goal but Hamas will never agree to it.
"
Philip: and the proper Israeli response is to resume bombing civilians?
Israel blew up 4 Hamas leaders and their crews. We don't know how many civilians were killed.
Yes, Hamas claims that every death is a civilian death. I suggest we not treat that claim seriously.
RE: negotiations
Again, they disagree on pretty core issues and they're always going to disagree.
"
Disney repeatedly cancelling red carpet opening is a strong tell.
It does sound like they went full woke with it. Prince was downgraded to a commoner and Snow repeatedly saves him. Rather than serve the dwarfs when she's at their place Snow just orders them around.
"
Reviews are really bad. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cSLKrkSAq9o
Rotten tomatoes is extremely low for a Disney movie.
Rachel Zegler's songs are one of the few high points of the movie.
Plot was redone to go serious girl-boss in charge.
"
Hamas has convinced Israel it is an existential threat. Full stop.
Implications:
Israel isn't willing to leave Hamas in power, that's their top priority.
If Hamas insists on staying in charge and continues to launch terror attacks and/or hold hostages, the war will go on.
This also means the two state solution is off the table for now. Israel isn't giving Hamas a state.
Also off the table is rebuilding Gaza.
And I get that actually destroying Hamas is probably impossible, so this is the new normal.
"
This is like saying only the Germans can remove Adolf from power and reshape Germany.
Israel can keep the war up in Gaza forever. If they insist on living in shattered rubble rather than have peace then that's their choice.
Let the civilians of Gaza flee to whatever country will take them.
"
Far as I can tell, the cease fire technically ended a while ago. Ergo Hamas has stopped handing back hostages and Israel and Hamas were supposed to negotiate what comes next.
They disagree fundamentally on pretty core issues (like whether Hamas will continue to exist and engage in terrorism) so resuming the war is almost expected.
"
DavidTC: we’re nearing the point where the government is going to be start held in contempt in multiple places.
And what happens at that point?
If it's not [this specific lawyer will have something bad happen to them] then I'm not hopeful anything will change.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.