State of the Discussion

Israel isn’t willing to leave Hamas in power, that’s their top priority.

So Israel is negotiating with the Palestinian Authority, then, right? To put them in charge?

I mean, that's the other, obvious government that could take over, and theoretically sorta legally is. Hamas was elected to run the Gaza Strip under Palestinian elections, and then seized full control of the Gaza Strip from the PA, but the PA still are the government of all of Palestine, in a theoretical legal sense. We can just sorta pretend the Hamas-Fatah civil war didn't happen, and Israel is 'fixing' it.

Like, legally, that's a grey area and no one would really have a problem with the PA ending up in control. And Fatah controls the PA, and Fatah has recognized Israel and works with them as part of the PA. They seem to be mostly honest partners, a lot of corruptions and criticized for things, but one of the things they are criticized for is letting Israel walk all over them.

So surely, that's what Israel is doing, working with the PA . Trying to put Gaza back how it was in 2003 or whatever. Now, obviously, Hamas, being a bunch of death-seeking fanatics who will never settle unless the other side is fully destroyed, will reject the idea of turning over Gaza to a bunch of people it thinks are cowards and collaborators with Israel.

So Israel will have to remove Hamas by force, but they're presumably planning to at least get the PA on board before that and say what they're planning on doing-

*is handed a note, reads it*

Sorry, this can't be right. I'll be right back.

*footsteps, door opens, closes, more footsteps, long whispered argument, door opens, closes, footsteps back*

So apparently _Hamas_ proposed handing Gaza over to the Palestinian Authority. Israel rejected it.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/hamas-said-to-agree-to-cede-gaza-governance-to-pa-netanyahu-not-going-to-happen/

So, again, as always, my question is when do we stop pretending that Israel is looking for any outcomes that are not 'Israel owns Gaza and eventually all of Palestine and none of the annoying existing people are there anymore'?

Now restored, as is the Gen. Charles Rogers Medal of Honor Monday page that people were talking about earlier.

As much as the idea that they're trying to erase all record of black achievement might turn you on, I'm pretty sure that's not what's happening.

Do we have any idea why he was withdrawn?

Or, to put it another way: Do we know why he wasn't going to make it though the confirmation hearing? Because that's essentially the only reason Trump would have withdrawn him.

Appreciate you having a look!

I agree that all that can and should be addressed, but they don't tell the whole story. A lot of men (especially, but not exclusively, white men) end up in online subcultures that encourage them to see themselves as victims. They're toxic, extremely self-destructive, and promote grievances against everyone else on the basis of race, gender, etc. Young men spend a LOT of time in these subcultures, and marinate in all sorts of delusions.

Reforms in schools can help with the social problems you presented, but they won't help mitigate cultural narcissism. There is a large segment of men that is simply resentful that they're single, or that they have competition for the workplace.

And only growing up can solve that.

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.

I was expecting a bunch of bad reviews from chuds who hadn't seen the movie but I expected them to be offset by Team Good people reviewing it as a masterpiece (who also hadn't seen it first).

If the latter don't show up, it might be legitimately bad.

I mean, as a movie. I don't mean morally.

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.

Wanting Hamas not to exist is like the people who think that Israel can be made not to exist, bloody stupid. For the foreseeable future, the Muslim world is going to be filled with a lot of groups that really shouldn't exist but they do. These groups will exist until Islam confronts itself and this might make the European Wars of Religion look like pikers. I don't think that better policy from the West can get read of the attraction of groups like Hamas but I don't think the West can bomb them out of existence either. Muslims themselves must decide to confront groups like Hamas or Boko Haram.

You didn't answer my first question, so I'm not surprised that you didn't answer the second. But why, after all this time, would you think I'm pretending about not understanding you? It's the normal state of affairs around here.

One of the reasons I like to talk about the Roswell Incident when it comes to conspiracy theories is that the government actually was covering something up during the Roswell Incident, it just wasn't what the UFO conspiracy people thought it was.

That is not how the issue is understood by the voting public and I think you know that too.

Obama was in a defensible place, constantly and prominently asking for security the GOP in Congress refused to fund while being careful to champion the cause of only the easiest, most sympathetic cases. Biden was a total disaster. As soon as he took office he ended remain in Mexico and reversed the other Trump EOs that were creating some breathing room. Then he sat for over 3 years while the asylum system was made into a total mockery. It's night and day.

I dunno. Omitting a national abortion ban from the platform for the first time in 40 years is a pretty big deal. Especially if you're looking to give cover to socially moderate women in swing states open to voting for you.

So at least the police reform/defund the police faction has been told that they are losers.

Was it a mistake to run a candidate in 2024 that argued for defunding the police back in 2020?

Because if we can't get people to say "holy crap, we never should have run Kamala", I'm going to say that you're making stronger statements than those that would more accurately describe the facts on the ground.

We'd probably benefit from definitions here. "They're engaging in commerce!" is one definition of communication/cooperation but it strikes me as trivial.

Like, if we'd not find it particularly notable for "the global left" to do the things we're talking about when we say "communication/cooperation", we may be doing the thing where we're complaining about humans but saying that it's "the global right" doing it.

You know, the way that kids these days conflate "entropy" with "capitalism".