I saw an article about them attacking Lebanon now. So, where will it stop? Have the Israeli government ever spoken about this?

  • yggstyle@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    116
    ·
    5 months ago

    This may not be a popular response but when did the nazi regime stop? When did China stop with it’s cleansing? America and manifest destiny? I could go on… Humanity needs to realize that we are pretty shitty in general and can’t be trusted when it comes to hatred, entitlement, and tribalism.

    The solution is a neutral third party with sufficient power to stop any country’s bullshit through economic and military (actual) peacekeeping… which doesn’t exist nor will it ever.

    So the short answer is they will stop when the cleansing is complete.

    After the deed is done we as ‘civilized’ nations will lament the tragedy and promise change… until the media cycle washes all those sins down the drain and it will be forgotten until next time.

    • Surp@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      5 months ago

      I am in no way saying what’s going on is right…anytime massive amounts of life is taken it’s horrible. With that being said you realize that there isn’t a single country in the entire world that wasn’t built on the blood of others? Every civilization that’s here now destroyed some other one. People act like they live in some place that asked nicely to have the land they have.

      • yggstyle@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        32
        ·
        5 months ago

        Oh, I’m fully aware. Tribalism is the lizard brain going deeeep in the paint. The problem is this: peaceful culture doesn’t fight back - aggressive culture exploits this: which one thrives? We have systematically bred for and codified our warlike nature. This is the result. Is it fixable? Many have tried. Our history books are littered with both failed attempts and their distorted remains. All I can say for certain is that the way the majority of countries are structured… isn’t it. This is fundamentally why achieving a fix is nearly impossible at scale: tribalism. Even if we are wrong it’s our wrong and we don’t want to lose it. This is rooted in fear of change which from a survival aspect makes sense… but becomes detrimental at scale.

        • Surp@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          5 months ago

          I agree with what you’re saying and it’s too bad most people are too stupid to move forward with that mindset because I for one would rather we could all get along but for invisible reasons many people can’t…which is in itself quite unintelligent

    • NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      party with sufficient power to stop any country’s bullshit

      No. That would not be a solution for anything! That would just be an even bigger threat to humanity.

      • yggstyle@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        5 months ago

        I disagree. It’s about execution - creating an environment that is resistant to corrosion. A standing force can absolutely be viewed in that manner - which is why it cannot be a single static standing force.

        The UN is the right idea but it needs teeth. And it needs the teeth to be double sided. If boots are on the ground peacekeeping they should be without bias and secondary interest. An attack on a peacekeeper has no guarantee of the creed nor country of origin of that keeper.

        Peacekeeping should be like a draft. Every country that participates must provide and maintain a set number of rolling participants. These people will serve and train initially in humanitarian deployments with others… half way through their ‘term’ they should be moved to peacekeeping duties. This is idealized but would be good for both building trust amongst peacekeepers and goodwill towards them. This solves the military portion (roughly) - I have a lot of thoughts on this and believe it to be solvable… it just won’t be. No country gets to benefit therefore it has no merit.

        That covered the military side… when talking about the economic side: the peacekeepers (let’s say un for simplicity) carry the ability to (by vote) censure a country and cut it off from direct trade / support. At that time any trade is then routed through the UN and it becomes the middleman. This allows economic pressures to be precisely controlled on an area. Once that country falls in line, by majority vote, operations are restored. Once again this is idealized and has no obviously advantaged party … so it has no merit and will never occur.

        Basically everyone is equally held accountable and equally invested. Of course this means everyone gets a seat at the table and everyone gets one vote. I’m certain we can already see why this has 0 chance of ever happening. Those in power seek to keep it - very few will willingly give some away.

        • NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          A nice dream, but only a dream.

          Unfortunately man is not perfect enough for it to work. Therefore the outcome can be nothing else than a huge threat for mankind.

          • yggstyle@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            I said as much multiple times.

            The point of that statement was to highlight that it is possible to construct something that does not allow for consolidation and corruption of power… which it did. Your view simply was looking at present day examples which, as you correctly identified, do not work. That doesn’t mean nothing can work however … which is why I disagreed.

            It’s a fun mental exercise to what if and try to construct something that could work. Can’t tear something down without considering what rebuilding it would look like.

      • Carrolade@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        5 months ago

        The claim of Israeli apartheid does not pertain to the status of Israeli Arabs fyi. It pertains to de facto Israeli control of Gaza and the West Bank, where any time they want the IDF can exercise as much control as they want, by virtue of superior firepower.

        Hamas, for instance, only persisted because the Israelis allowed it. Israel controlled the majority of access to the regions, and could and did unilaterally police them with military force at will.

          • Carrolade@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            14
            ·
            5 months ago

            De facto control does not mean 100% control over every event that happens. People are still humans, and capable of making errors. It is not mind reading/mind control powers, those are still impossible.

              • Carrolade@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                9
                ·
                5 months ago

                Except they would routinely send in military forces to capture terrorist suspects in a process they referred to as “mowing the grass”. It’s even more pronounced in the West Bank, where the Israeli settlements are thoroughly intermingled with the Palestinian ones, and the Palestinians had relatively few powers over their own security.

                It’s not a simple thing, unfortunately. Middle Eastern politics seldom are, just in general.

                  • Carrolade@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    8
                    ·
                    5 months ago

                    The claim of Israeli apartheid is not a hamas claim, it’s acknowledged by various Israelis as well. Neither Gaza nor, especially the West Bank, has had full independence in many years.

                    Note, I am not talking about any Israeli citizens. I am talking about Israeli non-citizens who live under Israeli restrictions and off-and-on military control. This is the nature of apartheid. A people that is separate, but not fully independent. An in-between state of conquest, where you’re sort-of conquered but not really and have some, but not full, freedoms.

                  • CapeWearingAeroplane@sopuli.xyz
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    6
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    5 months ago

                    Israel recognised Palestinian civilian and security control of the West bank in the Oslo accords from the 90’s. They are blatantly shitting on their own promises whenever a genocidic occupier or their enabling security forces set foot on the West Bank without express permission from the Palestinian West Bank government.

              • zbyte64@awful.systems
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                5 months ago

                I mean if you born in Gaza your birth needs to be registered with Israel. Otherwise you will lack the necessary documents to get through the checkpoints.

      • Keeponstalin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        5 months ago

        The Apartheid is very much real, and, while to a much lesser extent than the Palestinian Occupied Territories, also applies to the Palestinian Citizens of Israel

        Socio-economic gaps between Palestinian and Jewish Israeli citizens are the result of discriminatory policies pursued over decades. Historically, Israel prevented its Palestinian citizens from accessing livelihoods under its 18-year-long military rule, and used them, at different times, as a source of cheap labour in order to preserve the interests of the Jewish majority. In addition to cruel land seizures, other discriminatory policies have led to Palestinians’ social and economic deprivation: the exclusion of Palestinian localities from high priority areas for development, the discriminatory allocation of land and water for agriculture as well as discriminatory planning and zoning, and the failure to implement major infrastructure development projects in Palestinian communities.

        The blockade and Israel’s repeated military offensives have had a heavy toll on Gaza’s essential infrastructure and further debilitated its health system and economy, leaving the area in a state of perpetual humanitarian crisis. Indeed, Israel’s collective punishment of Gaza’s civilian population, the majority of whom are children, has created conditions inimical to human life due to shortages of housing, potable water and electricity, and lack of access to essential medicines and medical care, food, educational equipment and building materials.

        Other reports about how Israel is an Apartheid State:

        Human Rights Watch Report

        B’TSelem Report with quick Explainer

          • Keeponstalin@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            Criticism of the Human Rights Abuses of the Israeli State and Anti-zionism are not antisemitism. You are choosing to be willfully ignorant. Israel does NOT represent all Jewish people, nor does their actions. There have been prominent Jewish people extremely critical of Zionism since it’s inception, are you seriously saying they are antisemitic too?

            Israel is the one that intentionally conflates the two in order to deflect from criticizm. When Israel commits war crimes, or human rights abuses, or land grabbing, they are the ones that claim they do so for all Jewish people. When Zionist actions are criticized, they call it antisemitic. The conflation of the two is genuinely antisemitic, as the actions of Israel in no way represent all Jewish people.

            If you don’t want to be naive, I suggest you read the reports by human rights organizations. They are not antisemitic, unless you think advocates for a Secular Bi-National State with equal rights for both Israelis and Palestinians is also antisemitic, which is insane.

            Year before Oct 7 - Jewish Voice for Peace

            2023 is ‘deadliest year’ for Palestinian children say human rights groups (Oct 6th)

            HRW Events of 2022 and HRW Events of 2023

              • CapeWearingAeroplane@sopuli.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                9
                ·
                edit-2
                5 months ago

                You are aware that what Israel is doing in Gaza is comparable to the nazi treatment of e.g. the Warsaw ghettos… right?

                Take a step back, and look at the Israeli soldiers mocking Palestinian dead, mistreating the wounded and captured, and shooting at clearly unarmed civilians for fun. All this while they brag about it on video. Look at that and tell me that it doesn’t give you a sick feeling to your stomach of the type you haven’t had since you saw photos of concentration camps.

                There are dozens of children that have literally STARVED TO DEATH in Gaza because of Israel’s actions. They’re dying the same deaths that Jews were put through in concentration camps. Don’t you see the horrifying irony in this?

                Israel is at a point where humanitarian workers from recognised international organisations have been targeted and killed, and they brush it off as a “mistake”.

                I cannot think about anything in the past 70 years that compares to what Israel is doing, and I hope beyond hope that some force will smite their government and armed forces such that the slaughter will stop. Because it is a slaughter. It’s not a war when Israel is counting its dead on its fingers, while there are enough missing Palestinians in the rubble to fill a football stadium. It’s just Israel wilfully bombing, burning and slaughtering, with nobody stopping them.

                All this, and you have the fucking audacity to talk about antisemitism? Take a look at the world, and ask yourself how calling for an end to this can have anything to do with the religious beliefs of the perpetrators.

                  • StupidBrotherInLaw@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    9
                    ·
                    5 months ago

                    What a class A moron. You can’t even respond to a single thing they say, so it’s just “mental diarrhea”. Every one of your comments is evading their points so hard, your mental gymnastics would qualify you for the Special Olympics if they didn’t have a minimum IQ requirement.

              • aliteral@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                5 months ago

                As a person with jewish ancestry, what you are spewing makes me feel ill. Antizionism is not antisemitism. If it were, so many jews will be antisemitic? Please, grow up.

                  • aliteral@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    5 months ago

                    Oh, I learned plenty, and not from Islamic centered resources. But you wouldn’t be able to discern it because you are speaking from hate, not from facts. Besides, there are many jewish academics who support Palestine and are against the genocide of Palestinians. And neither they nor I claim that supporting them is antisemitic or that it requires the genocide of the Israeli people. Only someone with a warped and dellusional understanding of history could make the claims you make.

      • Trainguyrom@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        UN, which… failed to keep dictatorships out

        The UN while created with noble intentions certainly fell for the paradox of tolerance. They tolerate the dictatorships and human rights abusers because if they didn’t they’d be much less empowered to take action against them, or worse they’d form their own competing UN made up of nations motivated to join them and you’d just end up with another NATO and Warsaw Pact for example. It’s damned if you do, damned if you don’t.

        Ultimately the challenge comes down to how do you ultimately tame the leaders of the world who have absolute power. The founding fathers of the United States of America thought they had the solution with democracy and the many checks and balances they implemented into this new form of government they setup, but even that has its challenges and failures that they never could have forseen. The UN was the next experiment, trying to take the similar principles onto the world stage, and it’s been less successful (but at least has had some successes)