I can offer this on the Israel conflict. In 1973 I was preparing to leave England to join my girlfriend who had left for kibbutz five days earlier, (I didn't know she was Jewish). I was celebrating my trip on the final Saturday when I was informed that the Yom Kippur War had broken out that day.
The Kibbutz office rang to ask if I still wanted to go. My girlfriend was already out there and I had given in the keys to my home and finished my work. I said, Yes.
I flew out to a kibbutz just north of Eilat, (my girlfriend was in the north) and began my duties on the kibbutz.
I quickly learned how close my girlfriend came to death. Her kibbutz was close to the Golan Heights. Syrian tanks came within hours of completely overrunning the Israel border. It was only poor Syrian communications that saved the country. Israel came within hours of Syrian troops rolling into Jerusalem. Egyptians destroying Eilat. Lebonon destroying Haifa and, as we know now Iran ruling the whole of the Middle East.
This was the second time in five years that Arab countries had launched surprise attacks on Israel and the murderous UN refusing to condemn the Arab nations, instead calling for an immediate ceasefire (sound familiar).
No, Israel must be allowed to clear Gaza of Hamas fighters, for the sake of Gazan civilians.
The Israeli brigade on the Golan had a great deal to do with that. They were practically wiped out but got a exchange ratio of 20:1 and hung on until reinforcements got there. One of the great defensive stands in history.
One kibbutznik arrived back on Kibbutz Grofit with an Israeli arm in his rucksack. He had recovered it from a Syrian soldier he killed who had it in his rucksack.
So Israel has to kill 30,000 women and children and maim another 300,000 as a means to what? Saving the 10 women and children left after they genocide the first million? Your logic is no different than the Nazis. I served on the military; killing and displacing millions of civilians is simply genocide. Please don’t equivocate.
You're applying modern day logic to a conflict that is older than time. What I see Israel doing is letting the Arab world know that they will never again allow themselves to be slaughtered like cattle as has happened in the past. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if Medina gets turned into glass with a warning that Mecca would be next...
I will try to tread carefully here, and hope that I have earned some consideration for my thoughts.
Words matter. Genocide is just about the most serious accusation one can make. I know that many disagree with the prosecution of this war, just as many anti-Vietnam protestors used accusations of “baby killers”. In my view, both are hyperbole that does not help with finding a solution.
While civilian deaths are a tragedy, a culture that promotes and encourages killing and death is also a tragedy. People who use the general population as a shield are the ones deserving of the most serious epithets.
Hi Jude, you have more than earned my respect. I know you comment with integrity and thoughtfulness. I do see your point about the term genocide being too often used and also used depending on whose “side” one is on. Sincerely, I believe that if the Hamas terrorists had killed and maimed as many Israelis as the IDF has done to the Palestinians, I would say that Hamas terrorists committed genocide also. I guess it could be a question of how many dead and wounded in how big an area and over long a person of time; so time and space matter. I appreciate this genocide is not on the scale of the Holocaust, the Cambodian genocide or Lenin’s genocide in Russia. So, to be unambiguous, what is your minimum number of dead and wounded over what minimum time to be considered a genocide? Take care, Jude.
I’m afraid I cannot give you a specific number, because I don’t believe numbers are the real issue here. To me, this is not about how many and from which side. It’s about stopping a group and a culture that is threatening civilization, and using the sensibilities of civilized people to do it.
They have set up a situation in which we don’t look at their culture, their ideas, and what they have clearly stated they intend to do. They have sacrificed their own children to manipulate the perceptions of decent people around the world. What kind of people do this?
Genocide is always an offensive and not a defensive act. Civilization must defend itself from people who attack, then use their own children as shields.
Casualities of war are always unfortunate but it is not genocide. Did we genocide Germany for bombing Dresden? Did we genociode Japan when we dropped the bombs?
After WW11 though we decided such tactics were no longer acceptable. I’ve read that Hitler used to say “Who now speaks of the Armenians?” referring to the Armenian genocide by the Turks. He meant that the extermination of the Jews would be ignored and soon forgotten by the world. Those days are long gone though. We now live in the internet age where everything is always online globally. What Israel is doing is not being ignored and will not be forgotten.
Isreal is not using those tactics. They are even warning the Palestinians where they will be bombing and sending aid. And yes, Hamas calling for the total eradication and genocide of the Jews will not be forgotten.
The Hutus, Biafrans, Miskitos, Bengalis, Rhodesians, ethnic Indians from East Africa and Fiji, ethnic Chinese from Vietnam, Uighurs, Tibetans, Rohingya, more or less everyone in the former Yugoslavia, Jews throughout the Islamic world (including much of Europe these days), and a bunch more would like a word with you.
All of these are post-WW2 and most are forgotten except when the Deep State/media has an interest in remembrance. I have left off ideological mass killings (Cambodia) and religious ones (Assyrian Christians) because those don't fit the the definition of genocide which require targeting an ethnic group.
If you stay in Chicago, you may get added to my list.
If Hamas was made up of men, the carnage wouldn't happen. As it is, they use women and children and non-combatant men as flak vests, the deaths as propaganda.
I served in the military. I know. If Hamas had killed 30,000 Israeli women and children, and maimed another 300,000, every Zionist would define it as genocide, and you know it.
I retired from the military with 29 years service. I know. Hamas intentionally targeted non-combatant children, women and men for torture and murder. 25,000 Germans were killed in a 3-day bombing of Dresden in WWII, the Nagasaki bombing in WWII killed up to 226,000 people, yet neither were an attempt at genocide, but were done to end the war. Perhaps you would find Israeli Jews and Arabs, and residents of the West Bank and Gaza dying scattered over another 100 years more acceptable.
Yes Jeff, I think that would be more honorable than allowing more women and children to be killed in a hopeless struggle against a far superior force. It is so tragic for all the belligerents and their civilians. Amazing how little civilization has progressed.
Why is no national leader, other than Netanyahu, calling for Hamas to surrender? Seems like they all want hostilities to continue under a phony, unserious ceasefire.
I’m with you on Israel/Gaza, Sasha. I’m not sure who to believe, I despair over tge atrocities of October 7, and despair over drone strikes, which I believe are immoral. But I do know we’re broke here in the USA, monetarily and morally. We can’t trust our own government and our SCOTUS seems completely ignorant of that fact.
The Candace thing makes me uncomfortable. I'm pro Israel but don't like some of the attacks on her from the right. Maybe she did want to leave but maybe she kinda sorta had to. Who knows but it's a loss for the Daily Wire. You need differing views at a media company.
Yes, and people differ very much on the history of it. I don't even really agree with Candace but I haven't seen enough to justify the attacks against her.
You are a voice of reason, Sasha, by not talking about something you think you don’t know enough about. More of us should subscribe to that.
But you do have enough objectivity, intellect, and common sense to say there isn’t a genocide on Israel’s part, which ignorant people would consider taking sides.
Thank you.
I would add about the two sides thing… one side is Iran. The other side is the entire western world. Israel is simply first in line.
Yeah, that is the bottom line: my concerns about the suffering of Gazans caused by Israel's war on Hamas are vastly outweighed by my concerns regarding the suffering Iran, Hamas, Hezbollah, etc would inflict on Israel and the US if they ever got the chance. When someone says "Death to America" 10,000 times or more over 40-some years, believe them. Rather than critiquing Israel's handling of the war, we need to all be demanding in unison that Hamas surrender, now. That is the only way the suffering of the people of Gaza can be ended.
And we can be quite certain that these same enemies of Israel and the US would have no moral qualms over their campaign of extermination against us. So we do need to "keep it real" when discussing all of this.
No, I don't care about squabbles on websites like the Daily Wire, yes I am sorry for Middleton but it is not news. The harassment of Trump is reaching epic proportions and may backfire if machine meddling with elections does not overwhelm whatever might happen to be the vote, doubt we will know and the R's are hopelessly incompetent. In the middle of an in migration here in AZ of Dems from CA and south of the border the R's are engaged in infighting while the Dems control the two largest cities, the governor and most every significant statewide office. You might remember just a few years ago Az was a Republican stronghold.
What if race is real though? What if racial differences really do exist and some groups do have more ability in sports or in academics? I’ve read that there’s only about 1.5% genetic difference between humans and chimpanzees yet we are quite different. What if only a tiny bit of genetic difference exists between racial groups but this small internal difference makes a big difference externally in a human society composed of many different racial groups? Most well educated people would say race is merely a social construct and that no reputable scientist would say it’s even real. What would happen though to a scientist who said that race is real and that this explains differences in behavior, intelligence and athletic ability?
He’d be immediately labeled a racist and his career would be ruined. He probably wouldn’t actually be paraded through the streets in chains with a duncecap on his head but by the time the left was done with him he’d feel as if he had been. If well educated people had critical thinking skills though instead of a package of beliefs taught to them by their professors they’d know quite well that no scientist could speak honestly about a super hot potato issue like race. Actually, there is no issue hotter than race. Not surprisingly then, scientists are very reluctant to say what they really think about race. If what the left says is true and scientists have absolute proof that races don’t exist then why is questioning this dogma so ferociously punished?
DNA scientist James Watson stripped of honors over views on race.
Brave and true on your part, Seva. Yes, race is just one of a number of issues/topics--including the entire field of History--in which honest, unfettered inquiry and dialog is no longer possible. We live in a post- Enlightenment/ post-intellectual era in which ideology and dogma limit both the terms of any discussion and the conclusions one can draw from it.
It cannot be ignored though. The consequences of pretending differences don’t exist have been too disastrous and are ever worsening plus this is far from being a black/white issue. I’m retired but worked for many years with legal immigrants from all over the world. All of them were appalled by black behavior and were often the targets of black crime and attacks. This situation is unsustainable. I like following research on the Neanderthals who lived in Europe and died out something like 30,000 years ago. We interbred with them and even have something like 2% Neanderthal DNA. Recently I read we’ve been able to decode their DNA after finding their DNA in ancient bones. They were significantly different from us yet still human. In other words, racially different. They were shorter, much more muscular and their brains were slightly different in ways that indicated different strengths and also weaknesses. We survived due to our strengths. Quite fascinating but in group terms, how would they have fit into a modern society? Would it have been an impossible fit or would it have worked out? We’ll never know in their case but we do know they were human yet significantly different.
I have studied Neanderthals also. On average, Asians have the highest amount of Neanderthal DNA, then whites, then blacks have almost no Neanderthal DNA on average. And average amount of Neanderthal DNA and average IQ score if the race are highly positively correlated; Asians have the highest average IQ, then whites, then blacks (lowest) are a full standard deviation lower average iQ than whites. This is well documented science.
There were Denisovans too who were similar to Neanderthals and apparently interbred with modern humans too. And there a couple of species in what is now Indonesia- the so called hobbits and another one. Origins of dogs are endlessly debated. They were all derived from wolves and probably in Siberia or the Stans. You can tame a wolf but not really domesticate one so there would have to be DNA changes which is why I pick 40,000 years which is the DNA frontier. They were clearly the first and origins are lost in pre-history. With the coming of agriculture, cats became both useful and feasible but that was much later.
Looking at racial differences is a fraught issue. It is possible to make an argument about culture without getting into all the BS about IQ tests being racist. Looking at subgroups provides some evidence. The highest income racial subgroup in the US is West African who outperform whites and Asians, not to mention black Americans. Ethiopians and West Indian blacks do quite well too. Among whites, Arabs are sort of the low end if you don't count European royalty as a group. Arabs are odd in that they once were high performers. Islam?
Scandinavians out perform Italians. American Indians were fairly recently derived from Asians and under perform most Asians as do Hmongs, another aboriginal group. Chinese and Japanese are ancient civilizations with a high emphasis on leaning. Hispanics aren't really a racial group and are exceptionally diverse internally. Colonial Mexico had 16 official racial groups which were various mixes of white, black and Indian. This is not counting significant groups of Chinese, Japanese, and Filipinos which were later absorbed. I once worked with a woman who had Spanish as a first language and family from Peru. Her name, however, was Takahashi.
“Looking at racial differences is a fraught issue.”
Bret Weinstein says in his interview with Coleman Hughes that he believes the IQ difference between blacks and whites is based on software (culture) rather than hardware (genes) and therefore can be fixed. We have totally failed to fix it though after 60 years, vast sums of money and so much social engineering that America is now a society that judges people on the basis of their group identity rather than as individuals. Is this supposed to be progress?
If it’s just a cultural difference why have we ended up like this and if the left really believed the IQ difference is culture rather than genes why have they given up on trying to improve the schools and instead focused on replacing meritocracy wherever it can be found with Equity? Doesn’t their commitment to Equal Outcomes look a lot like a belief that blacks can’t compete without dumbed down and rigged standards or even totally eliminated standards? And where is the black outrage about being classified as unable to compete with other races?
Asia is a big place with many different types of people. Is this the average IQ of all Asians including Cambodians, Indonesians and Indians or just the Chinese vs all whites? Always seems to be the latter which is why I don’t consider it a reliable statistic.
But we didn’t have dogs 30,000 years ago. I think we’ve only had dogs like 10 or 15 thousand years. Before that they were wolves and not very friendly.
I did read that and it was excellent. I’ve lived in Chicago all my, spent 4 years in the Marines and worked with immigrants from all over the world that I knew well since I worked with them for many years and often asked them about their former countries. In group terms, I have always seen a difference in blacks that I never saw in the Vietnamese, Mexicans, Assyrians, Indians or whatever. They are physically stronger, less intelligent, bad temperament, little self control or impulse control. Pretty much all these immigrants also saw them that way and often said they had no idea blacks were like that before they came here since there were no blacks where they came from. You said you live in Skokie but that’s certainly close enough to Chicago to know what blacks are like. I believe AI though can well be enough of a game changer for humanity to give us a way out of this impossible situation. I follow AI every day and am awed by it. I have great confidence in it.
Come to Chicago and take a stroll through a black neighborhood and see how well that works out for you. Don’t you be squeaking to me about racism. I’ve lived in Chicago all my life and have seen this city ruined by blacks and this is far from the only city this has happened to. No doubt you consider people like Fani Willis, Letitia James and Alvin Bragg competent people who got those jobs due to ability rather than their race.
“No doubt you consider people like Fani Willis, Letitia James and Alvin Bragg competent people who got those jobs due to ability rather than their race.”
You’re wrong, as usual.
Most of the time when someone is accused of being racist, it’s not true. You wear it proudly.
July 4, 1821, secretary of state John Quincy Adams gave a speech to Congress on American foreign policy.
He said of the United States that “Wherever the standard of freedom and independence has been or shall be unfurled, there will her heart, her benedictions and her prayers be. But she goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy.” Monroe Doctrine, signed 1823
Man, I can't disagree with anything here(not that I am looking to). Israel: The only safe space for Arabs in the Middle East is... Israel. Candace: free spirit like Tucka and was never a good fit with snidely Ben.
Republican party: Folks 'retiring' is part of the anti-MAGA game. 32+ 'retired' in 2018 at a time when incumbents won 93% of the time; the game is to thwart Trump as they admittedly "make more money when our guys lose." Pretty pathetic, but pay attention - the UniParty is in charge and the Outsider disrupted trillions of Sodom on Potomac's game with your tax money. Occam's Razor here...
"I do not have reliable narrators to tell me the truth about what's happening."
Amen. That's exactly how I feel about so many things, not just Israel-Palestine. Everyone these days is so certain about everything...and when ever someone's certain it's a sure sign they're not listening to anything else but their own opinion....
Do I understand you that Israel cannot be committing genocide because if that was the intent, then it would have done it already? So it follows that a man committing a rape using less than maximal force and taking a long time to complete the act cannot be guilty of the intent to rape because if he REALLY wanted to rape her he would have used maximal force and completed it by now. I suspect, because you are reasonable intelligent person, that you know your stated justification is absurd on many levels. But I will have to say that is a new justification to hear from either conservatives or evangelicals. I am a member (former member ,now) of both groups. Kyrie Eleison. May God have mercy on all of our souls. I know I need it.
The ICJ wouldn't have ordered Israel to take steps to prevent genocide if the court wasn't concerned that genocide was already happening or was likely to.
Anyway I look at the situation I come to the same conclusion: Israel's actions are indefensible.
John, while you may disagree with Israel's approach to the war in Gaza, to label their actions as "indefensible" is a headscratcher... Israel, literally, is "defending" itself in reaction to an unprovoked sneak attack on civilian targets... defending one's nation after an attack can never be "indefensible."
What was "indefensible" in all of this was Hamas' attack on October 7... they are wholly responsible for this mess, both from the initial attack and then cowardly hiding amidst the civilian population in Gaza. The suffering would end today if Hamas laid down its arms and surrendered. I urge you to join me in calling for them to do so.
Unlike some on this site, the right and wrong of this issue seems pretty straightforward to me. Where, in your view, am I off base?
And I say all of this as a long time critic of certain aspects of Israeli policy, including regarding settlements.
Dropping 2,000 lb bombs on densely populated Gaza sure does look like intentional extermination by Israel. Too many here consider these people savages who need to dealt with accordingly. A horrible way to view these poor people but that belief is deeply embedded in many conservatives.
I dislike kangaroo courts located in Europe or NYC. You might not be aware that the US has not signed that treaty on the basis that Americans couldn't get a fair trial.
Libertarian, while we are simpatico on many issues, we do have a disagreement on this one. Allow me to pose roughly the same question to you that I just posed to John Kirsch--how would you have the Israelis respond to Hamas' sneak attack? And, please, this cannot include a "ceasefire." Israel and Hamas had one in place on October 6, and it was horribly violated the next day. No rational person or state would consent to again trying that failed strategy. As Geo. W once put it. "Fool me once, shame on you...fool me twice...it's a bad thing to get fooled."
Hi Pacificus, first, if I was Israel I would not have created Hamas to counter the PLO. But that isn’t helpful now. I am not so smart to know a sound answer to your question so please accept an overly simplistic and respectful reply. I think Israel and the bordering Arab countries should carve out enough land for the Palestinians and include access to the sea. Fence it on hard and patrol that border vigorously. Then leave it to the Palestinians and their sponsors (who they seem to lack) to feed, clothe and develop them and their tiny nation. I prefer the US not fund them, Ukraine, Israel or any other foreign nation. If you have a strategy in mind, I would read it with an open mind and heart. Take care, amigo.
Thanks for your reply. True, Hamas seems to have been, at least in part, a creation of the Israeli government, but as you observe, that is a moot point now--October 7 was the proverbial game changer, the Frankenstein monster they created must now be destroyed. In my view, none of your suggestions for a resolution of the conflict could even be considered until Hamas is destroyed/surrenders.
See my reply to Seva for a few more observations. Best wishes to you.
John Mearsheimer talked about this with Lex Fridman. He said they had no good options put picked the worst one among them. They should have gone after Hamas with targeting of their leaders rather than war on the Palestinians. And why was the border with Gaza so unguarded on Oct 7? Where were the soldiers? They’d been redeployed to the West Bank to help settlers steal Palestinian land. You have no problem with that but I do.
“John Mearsheimer: Israel is punishing Palestinians.” (12 min)
Lex Fridman interviews John Mearsheimer. Nov 21, 2023
Actually, Seva, I have had problem with the Israeli settlement policy for quite some time. It certainly has contributed to making a difficult situation worse. But that does not have anything to do directly with the problem at hand, i.e., responding to the Oct 7 Hamas attack.
Targeting only the leaders of Hamas? Not really a solution. They will just create new leaders. Netanyahu, as we know, has his many critics, but I don't see how any Israeli government could survive by pledging to leave intact a terrorist organization with a demonstrated propensity for mass sneak attacks... just don't see how you do that.
And again: Israel is not "punishing" Palestinians--Hamas is doing that, by its cowardly act of hiding amidst civilians. We do need to maintain moral clarity on that point. And, more despicably, it seems clear that Hamas welcomes a high civilian death toll as a means of currying international sympathy for its cause. In your case, that appears to be working.
"Peace" is impossible while Hamas survives. It's that simple. They need to surrender--now.
“Israel is not "punishing" Palestinians--Hamas is doing that“
It’s not Hamas dropping 2,000 bombs on Gaza. Also, you always mention Oct 7 as if the war began on that date and before that there was peaceful coexistence which was shattered by the totally unprovoked attack by Hamas on Israel. That is not an accurate history of this 75 year old conflict.
Israel would not be dropping 2,000 pound bombs on Gaza were Hamas not hiding there, it's that simple. Hamas, surrender now and end the suffering of your people--assuming that they care about that suffering.
I'm not trying to give an "accurate history" of the war--not sure anyone can do that, not really. And not suggesting that all was rosy pre-October 7. But there was a ceasefire in place on October 7 that Hamas violated in the most despicable manner they could muster. So they, and the people they supposedly represent, are entirely responsibility for this latest escalation and are now suffering the consequences of it. Again, I don't see how any Israeli government could survive by allowing the continued existence of an organization that has long called for the destruction of Israel and on October 7 took a major step in the realization of that aim. "Peace" is impossible until Hamas is gone, and even then, it will now take years of small confidence building steps by both Israel and the Palestinians before a durable peace agreement could be reached. That is the price that Hamas--and the people the supposedly represent--must now pay for their treachery. Maybe think twice before again choosing to escalate the conflict.
And let's be clear--Israel has shown substantial restraint in their response to being attacked. Under certain scenarios, Gaza could have been reduced to a parking lot in a week. Were the tables turned, do you think Hamas would show the same restraint in attacking Israel? The question answers itself.
Stop all the wars the US is fomenting, close the hundreds of bases around the world and cut defense spending until the Pentagon passes an audit, which it has yet to do.
Candace Owens was definitely "given a choice" because of her stance on Israel, not even anti-Israel, just not gung-ho give them everything they want and maybe bombing children is not the best idea. As Saager Enjeti said, Owens has said a lot of crazy stuff, but it was *only* after she started rejecting the overtly Zionist stance of her fellow Daily Wire talking heads that she was not so gently pushed to remove herself. Given the blowback the Daily Wire is getting due to its rather hypocritical stance on "free speech" and "open discourse," I'd think if that wasn't the case, Jeremy Boering would have stated that the decision to part was mutual. They basically gave her the Tucker Carlson treatment. And Dave Rubin, whom I used to respect, has turned into a very petty man. Or maybe he always was, but like so many people, I agreed with most of what he said so I didn't see it.
I follow Breaking Points and like Saagar. Krystal is usually awful but I sure do agree with her on Gaza. No denying that our proxy war on Russia in Ukraine, which has been destroyed, and our support for what Israel is doing to Gaza has greatly damaged us globally. Regardless of whether or not we should be involved in Ukraine or with Israel the fact is that it has hurt us big time globally.
At the risk of touching the third rail, I don’t believe there is one right side, and one wrong side to the Israeli-Palestinian problem either. Both sides have legitimate concerns. Unfortunately, rational discussion has been replaced by volume, vehemence and vitriol which makes achieving a lasting, acceptable resolution all but unachievable.
"Until I have understood it completely, I don’t feel comfortable talking about it."
The above is why I subscribe to Sasha's Substack. Sasha, thank you for your honesty - we can't get it from 99% of the people who claim they are "journalists". Her and I probably don't agree on most everything but I can appreciate someone who tells me that either they know the truth or they don't.
I can offer this on the Israel conflict. In 1973 I was preparing to leave England to join my girlfriend who had left for kibbutz five days earlier, (I didn't know she was Jewish). I was celebrating my trip on the final Saturday when I was informed that the Yom Kippur War had broken out that day.
The Kibbutz office rang to ask if I still wanted to go. My girlfriend was already out there and I had given in the keys to my home and finished my work. I said, Yes.
I flew out to a kibbutz just north of Eilat, (my girlfriend was in the north) and began my duties on the kibbutz.
I quickly learned how close my girlfriend came to death. Her kibbutz was close to the Golan Heights. Syrian tanks came within hours of completely overrunning the Israel border. It was only poor Syrian communications that saved the country. Israel came within hours of Syrian troops rolling into Jerusalem. Egyptians destroying Eilat. Lebonon destroying Haifa and, as we know now Iran ruling the whole of the Middle East.
This was the second time in five years that Arab countries had launched surprise attacks on Israel and the murderous UN refusing to condemn the Arab nations, instead calling for an immediate ceasefire (sound familiar).
No, Israel must be allowed to clear Gaza of Hamas fighters, for the sake of Gazan civilians.
The Israeli brigade on the Golan had a great deal to do with that. They were practically wiped out but got a exchange ratio of 20:1 and hung on until reinforcements got there. One of the great defensive stands in history.
One kibbutznik arrived back on Kibbutz Grofit with an Israeli arm in his rucksack. He had recovered it from a Syrian soldier he killed who had it in his rucksack.
Sadly that doesn't surprise me
So Israel has to kill 30,000 women and children and maim another 300,000 as a means to what? Saving the 10 women and children left after they genocide the first million? Your logic is no different than the Nazis. I served on the military; killing and displacing millions of civilians is simply genocide. Please don’t equivocate.
You're applying modern day logic to a conflict that is older than time. What I see Israel doing is letting the Arab world know that they will never again allow themselves to be slaughtered like cattle as has happened in the past. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if Medina gets turned into glass with a warning that Mecca would be next...
Killing tens of thousands and maiming hundreds of thousands of undefended women and children is genocide. Nothing old or modern about the definition.
I will try to tread carefully here, and hope that I have earned some consideration for my thoughts.
Words matter. Genocide is just about the most serious accusation one can make. I know that many disagree with the prosecution of this war, just as many anti-Vietnam protestors used accusations of “baby killers”. In my view, both are hyperbole that does not help with finding a solution.
While civilian deaths are a tragedy, a culture that promotes and encourages killing and death is also a tragedy. People who use the general population as a shield are the ones deserving of the most serious epithets.
Hi Jude, you have more than earned my respect. I know you comment with integrity and thoughtfulness. I do see your point about the term genocide being too often used and also used depending on whose “side” one is on. Sincerely, I believe that if the Hamas terrorists had killed and maimed as many Israelis as the IDF has done to the Palestinians, I would say that Hamas terrorists committed genocide also. I guess it could be a question of how many dead and wounded in how big an area and over long a person of time; so time and space matter. I appreciate this genocide is not on the scale of the Holocaust, the Cambodian genocide or Lenin’s genocide in Russia. So, to be unambiguous, what is your minimum number of dead and wounded over what minimum time to be considered a genocide? Take care, Jude.
Libertarian, thanks for your thoughtful response.
I’m afraid I cannot give you a specific number, because I don’t believe numbers are the real issue here. To me, this is not about how many and from which side. It’s about stopping a group and a culture that is threatening civilization, and using the sensibilities of civilized people to do it.
They have set up a situation in which we don’t look at their culture, their ideas, and what they have clearly stated they intend to do. They have sacrificed their own children to manipulate the perceptions of decent people around the world. What kind of people do this?
Genocide is always an offensive and not a defensive act. Civilization must defend itself from people who attack, then use their own children as shields.
Casualities of war are always unfortunate but it is not genocide. Did we genocide Germany for bombing Dresden? Did we genociode Japan when we dropped the bombs?
If we had lost the war, history probably would have documented it as genocide.
And that is indeed the definition of genocide-losing.
After WW11 though we decided such tactics were no longer acceptable. I’ve read that Hitler used to say “Who now speaks of the Armenians?” referring to the Armenian genocide by the Turks. He meant that the extermination of the Jews would be ignored and soon forgotten by the world. Those days are long gone though. We now live in the internet age where everything is always online globally. What Israel is doing is not being ignored and will not be forgotten.
Isreal is not using those tactics. They are even warning the Palestinians where they will be bombing and sending aid. And yes, Hamas calling for the total eradication and genocide of the Jews will not be forgotten.
The Hutus, Biafrans, Miskitos, Bengalis, Rhodesians, ethnic Indians from East Africa and Fiji, ethnic Chinese from Vietnam, Uighurs, Tibetans, Rohingya, more or less everyone in the former Yugoslavia, Jews throughout the Islamic world (including much of Europe these days), and a bunch more would like a word with you.
All of these are post-WW2 and most are forgotten except when the Deep State/media has an interest in remembrance. I have left off ideological mass killings (Cambodia) and religious ones (Assyrian Christians) because those don't fit the the definition of genocide which require targeting an ethnic group.
If you stay in Chicago, you may get added to my list.
If Hamas was made up of men, the carnage wouldn't happen. As it is, they use women and children and non-combatant men as flak vests, the deaths as propaganda.
I served in the military. I know. If Hamas had killed 30,000 Israeli women and children, and maimed another 300,000, every Zionist would define it as genocide, and you know it.
I retired from the military with 29 years service. I know. Hamas intentionally targeted non-combatant children, women and men for torture and murder. 25,000 Germans were killed in a 3-day bombing of Dresden in WWII, the Nagasaki bombing in WWII killed up to 226,000 people, yet neither were an attempt at genocide, but were done to end the war. Perhaps you would find Israeli Jews and Arabs, and residents of the West Bank and Gaza dying scattered over another 100 years more acceptable.
Ridiculous argument. Killing tens of thousands of women and children, and maiming hundreds of thousands is genocide. Pure and simple.
If the Israelis wanted genocide it would have happened. War is not genocide, even from the safety of your living room.
"So Israel has to kill 30,000 women and children and maim another 300,000 as a means to what?"
1. Says Who...Hamas?
2. Its War Hamas is using the non combatants as shields.
3. " I served on the military; killing and displacing millions of civilians is simply genocide."
Was the Bombing of Hamburg genocide?
4 IF The Israelis were bent on Genocide, there would not be a living Palestinian in Gaza today.
Is it time for Hamas to surrender?
Yes Jeff, I think that would be more honorable than allowing more women and children to be killed in a hopeless struggle against a far superior force. It is so tragic for all the belligerents and their civilians. Amazing how little civilization has progressed.
Why is no national leader, other than Netanyahu, calling for Hamas to surrender? Seems like they all want hostilities to continue under a phony, unserious ceasefire.
Clear Gaza but at what cost to the innocent?
I’m with you on Israel/Gaza, Sasha. I’m not sure who to believe, I despair over tge atrocities of October 7, and despair over drone strikes, which I believe are immoral. But I do know we’re broke here in the USA, monetarily and morally. We can’t trust our own government and our SCOTUS seems completely ignorant of that fact.
"Is Kamala Harris lying, gaslighting or just not very smart?"
Embrace the "and", Sasha.
Can’t imagine someone like that is in the position she is in. Amr Australia. She has the intellect of seaweed.
Regardless of intellect, she had many of her superiors gushering after demonstrating that her most talented position was on her knees.
Never judge a hooker by her lovers????
Amr
D- all of the above!!!
The Candace thing makes me uncomfortable. I'm pro Israel but don't like some of the attacks on her from the right. Maybe she did want to leave but maybe she kinda sorta had to. Who knows but it's a loss for the Daily Wire. You need differing views at a media company.
She really shouldn't comment, and this goes for everyone, when you don't know the history of the area. And she clearly doesn't know it.
If she wants to expand her brand, she had to leave. Like Tucker leaving fox.
What makes you say she doesn't know it? I'm skeptical of that comment. More likely she doesn't accept the spin you would put on it.
Thank you. We're funding it, BTW, so we all have every right to comment.
Yes, and people differ very much on the history of it. I don't even really agree with Candace but I haven't seen enough to justify the attacks against her.
You are a voice of reason, Sasha, by not talking about something you think you don’t know enough about. More of us should subscribe to that.
But you do have enough objectivity, intellect, and common sense to say there isn’t a genocide on Israel’s part, which ignorant people would consider taking sides.
Thank you.
I would add about the two sides thing… one side is Iran. The other side is the entire western world. Israel is simply first in line.
Yeah, that is the bottom line: my concerns about the suffering of Gazans caused by Israel's war on Hamas are vastly outweighed by my concerns regarding the suffering Iran, Hamas, Hezbollah, etc would inflict on Israel and the US if they ever got the chance. When someone says "Death to America" 10,000 times or more over 40-some years, believe them. Rather than critiquing Israel's handling of the war, we need to all be demanding in unison that Hamas surrender, now. That is the only way the suffering of the people of Gaza can be ended.
And we can be quite certain that these same enemies of Israel and the US would have no moral qualms over their campaign of extermination against us. So we do need to "keep it real" when discussing all of this.
No, I don't care about squabbles on websites like the Daily Wire, yes I am sorry for Middleton but it is not news. The harassment of Trump is reaching epic proportions and may backfire if machine meddling with elections does not overwhelm whatever might happen to be the vote, doubt we will know and the R's are hopelessly incompetent. In the middle of an in migration here in AZ of Dems from CA and south of the border the R's are engaged in infighting while the Dems control the two largest cities, the governor and most every significant statewide office. You might remember just a few years ago Az was a Republican stronghold.
“What can't we talk about?”
What if race is real though? What if racial differences really do exist and some groups do have more ability in sports or in academics? I’ve read that there’s only about 1.5% genetic difference between humans and chimpanzees yet we are quite different. What if only a tiny bit of genetic difference exists between racial groups but this small internal difference makes a big difference externally in a human society composed of many different racial groups? Most well educated people would say race is merely a social construct and that no reputable scientist would say it’s even real. What would happen though to a scientist who said that race is real and that this explains differences in behavior, intelligence and athletic ability?
He’d be immediately labeled a racist and his career would be ruined. He probably wouldn’t actually be paraded through the streets in chains with a duncecap on his head but by the time the left was done with him he’d feel as if he had been. If well educated people had critical thinking skills though instead of a package of beliefs taught to them by their professors they’d know quite well that no scientist could speak honestly about a super hot potato issue like race. Actually, there is no issue hotter than race. Not surprisingly then, scientists are very reluctant to say what they really think about race. If what the left says is true and scientists have absolute proof that races don’t exist then why is questioning this dogma so ferociously punished?
DNA scientist James Watson stripped of honors over views on race.
The Guardian. Jan 13, 2019
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2019/jan/13/james-watson-scientist-honors-stripped-reprehensible-race-comments
Brave and true on your part, Seva. Yes, race is just one of a number of issues/topics--including the entire field of History--in which honest, unfettered inquiry and dialog is no longer possible. We live in a post- Enlightenment/ post-intellectual era in which ideology and dogma limit both the terms of any discussion and the conclusions one can draw from it.
It cannot be ignored though. The consequences of pretending differences don’t exist have been too disastrous and are ever worsening plus this is far from being a black/white issue. I’m retired but worked for many years with legal immigrants from all over the world. All of them were appalled by black behavior and were often the targets of black crime and attacks. This situation is unsustainable. I like following research on the Neanderthals who lived in Europe and died out something like 30,000 years ago. We interbred with them and even have something like 2% Neanderthal DNA. Recently I read we’ve been able to decode their DNA after finding their DNA in ancient bones. They were significantly different from us yet still human. In other words, racially different. They were shorter, much more muscular and their brains were slightly different in ways that indicated different strengths and also weaknesses. We survived due to our strengths. Quite fascinating but in group terms, how would they have fit into a modern society? Would it have been an impossible fit or would it have worked out? We’ll never know in their case but we do know they were human yet significantly different.
I have studied Neanderthals also. On average, Asians have the highest amount of Neanderthal DNA, then whites, then blacks have almost no Neanderthal DNA on average. And average amount of Neanderthal DNA and average IQ score if the race are highly positively correlated; Asians have the highest average IQ, then whites, then blacks (lowest) are a full standard deviation lower average iQ than whites. This is well documented science.
There were Denisovans too who were similar to Neanderthals and apparently interbred with modern humans too. And there a couple of species in what is now Indonesia- the so called hobbits and another one. Origins of dogs are endlessly debated. They were all derived from wolves and probably in Siberia or the Stans. You can tame a wolf but not really domesticate one so there would have to be DNA changes which is why I pick 40,000 years which is the DNA frontier. They were clearly the first and origins are lost in pre-history. With the coming of agriculture, cats became both useful and feasible but that was much later.
Looking at racial differences is a fraught issue. It is possible to make an argument about culture without getting into all the BS about IQ tests being racist. Looking at subgroups provides some evidence. The highest income racial subgroup in the US is West African who outperform whites and Asians, not to mention black Americans. Ethiopians and West Indian blacks do quite well too. Among whites, Arabs are sort of the low end if you don't count European royalty as a group. Arabs are odd in that they once were high performers. Islam?
Scandinavians out perform Italians. American Indians were fairly recently derived from Asians and under perform most Asians as do Hmongs, another aboriginal group. Chinese and Japanese are ancient civilizations with a high emphasis on leaning. Hispanics aren't really a racial group and are exceptionally diverse internally. Colonial Mexico had 16 official racial groups which were various mixes of white, black and Indian. This is not counting significant groups of Chinese, Japanese, and Filipinos which were later absorbed. I once worked with a woman who had Spanish as a first language and family from Peru. Her name, however, was Takahashi.
Fascinating! Thanks Richard for sharing you extensive knowledge and delightful way of presenting it. Take care, amigo.
“Looking at racial differences is a fraught issue.”
Bret Weinstein says in his interview with Coleman Hughes that he believes the IQ difference between blacks and whites is based on software (culture) rather than hardware (genes) and therefore can be fixed. We have totally failed to fix it though after 60 years, vast sums of money and so much social engineering that America is now a society that judges people on the basis of their group identity rather than as individuals. Is this supposed to be progress?
If it’s just a cultural difference why have we ended up like this and if the left really believed the IQ difference is culture rather than genes why have they given up on trying to improve the schools and instead focused on replacing meritocracy wherever it can be found with Equity? Doesn’t their commitment to Equal Outcomes look a lot like a belief that blacks can’t compete without dumbed down and rigged standards or even totally eliminated standards? And where is the black outrage about being classified as unable to compete with other races?
“Race, Genes and IQ Differences.” (7 min)
Bret Weinstein interviews Coleman Hughes
https://youtu.be/IztL_m3pd70
“Asians have the highest average IQ”
Asia is a big place with many different types of people. Is this the average IQ of all Asians including Cambodians, Indonesians and Indians or just the Chinese vs all whites? Always seems to be the latter which is why I don’t consider it a reliable statistic.
One theory as to why modern humans prevailed is we had dogs and they didn't. Huge force mulplier for hunting and sentry duty.
But we didn’t have dogs 30,000 years ago. I think we’ve only had dogs like 10 or 15 thousand years. Before that they were wolves and not very friendly.
Some theories say we had dogs 40,000 years ago. That was when dog DNA diverged from wolf DNA.
Fascinating theory that I’ll try to learn more about.
A Troublesome Inheritance by Nicholas Wade is an excellent book about the questions you raise.
I did read that and it was excellent. I’ve lived in Chicago all my, spent 4 years in the Marines and worked with immigrants from all over the world that I knew well since I worked with them for many years and often asked them about their former countries. In group terms, I have always seen a difference in blacks that I never saw in the Vietnamese, Mexicans, Assyrians, Indians or whatever. They are physically stronger, less intelligent, bad temperament, little self control or impulse control. Pretty much all these immigrants also saw them that way and often said they had no idea blacks were like that before they came here since there were no blacks where they came from. You said you live in Skokie but that’s certainly close enough to Chicago to know what blacks are like. I believe AI though can well be enough of a game changer for humanity to give us a way out of this impossible situation. I follow AI every day and am awed by it. I have great confidence in it.
Wow, you are truely racist. Not surprised at all. How awful.
Come to Chicago and take a stroll through a black neighborhood and see how well that works out for you. Don’t you be squeaking to me about racism. I’ve lived in Chicago all my life and have seen this city ruined by blacks and this is far from the only city this has happened to. No doubt you consider people like Fani Willis, Letitia James and Alvin Bragg competent people who got those jobs due to ability rather than their race.
“No doubt you consider people like Fani Willis, Letitia James and Alvin Bragg competent people who got those jobs due to ability rather than their race.”
You’re wrong, as usual.
Most of the time when someone is accused of being racist, it’s not true. You wear it proudly.
You’re absurd.
July 4, 1821, secretary of state John Quincy Adams gave a speech to Congress on American foreign policy.
He said of the United States that “Wherever the standard of freedom and independence has been or shall be unfurled, there will her heart, her benedictions and her prayers be. But she goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy.” Monroe Doctrine, signed 1823
It's called NON-interventionist.
Man, I can't disagree with anything here(not that I am looking to). Israel: The only safe space for Arabs in the Middle East is... Israel. Candace: free spirit like Tucka and was never a good fit with snidely Ben.
Republican party: Folks 'retiring' is part of the anti-MAGA game. 32+ 'retired' in 2018 at a time when incumbents won 93% of the time; the game is to thwart Trump as they admittedly "make more money when our guys lose." Pretty pathetic, but pay attention - the UniParty is in charge and the Outsider disrupted trillions of Sodom on Potomac's game with your tax money. Occam's Razor here...
"I do not have reliable narrators to tell me the truth about what's happening."
Amen. That's exactly how I feel about so many things, not just Israel-Palestine. Everyone these days is so certain about everything...and when ever someone's certain it's a sure sign they're not listening to anything else but their own opinion....
Ukraine is worse that way
Do I understand you that Israel cannot be committing genocide because if that was the intent, then it would have done it already? So it follows that a man committing a rape using less than maximal force and taking a long time to complete the act cannot be guilty of the intent to rape because if he REALLY wanted to rape her he would have used maximal force and completed it by now. I suspect, because you are reasonable intelligent person, that you know your stated justification is absurd on many levels. But I will have to say that is a new justification to hear from either conservatives or evangelicals. I am a member (former member ,now) of both groups. Kyrie Eleison. May God have mercy on all of our souls. I know I need it.
The ICJ wouldn't have ordered Israel to take steps to prevent genocide if the court wasn't concerned that genocide was already happening or was likely to.
Anyway I look at the situation I come to the same conclusion: Israel's actions are indefensible.
John, while you may disagree with Israel's approach to the war in Gaza, to label their actions as "indefensible" is a headscratcher... Israel, literally, is "defending" itself in reaction to an unprovoked sneak attack on civilian targets... defending one's nation after an attack can never be "indefensible."
What was "indefensible" in all of this was Hamas' attack on October 7... they are wholly responsible for this mess, both from the initial attack and then cowardly hiding amidst the civilian population in Gaza. The suffering would end today if Hamas laid down its arms and surrendered. I urge you to join me in calling for them to do so.
Unlike some on this site, the right and wrong of this issue seems pretty straightforward to me. Where, in your view, am I off base?
And I say all of this as a long time critic of certain aspects of Israeli policy, including regarding settlements.
The ICJ has zero credibility on this or any other issue.
Attacking the messenger doesn't invalidate the message.
Dropping 2,000 lb bombs on densely populated Gaza sure does look like intentional extermination by Israel. Too many here consider these people savages who need to dealt with accordingly. A horrible way to view these poor people but that belief is deeply embedded in many conservatives.
I dislike kangaroo courts located in Europe or NYC. You might not be aware that the US has not signed that treaty on the basis that Americans couldn't get a fair trial.
Indeed.
Libertarian, while we are simpatico on many issues, we do have a disagreement on this one. Allow me to pose roughly the same question to you that I just posed to John Kirsch--how would you have the Israelis respond to Hamas' sneak attack? And, please, this cannot include a "ceasefire." Israel and Hamas had one in place on October 6, and it was horribly violated the next day. No rational person or state would consent to again trying that failed strategy. As Geo. W once put it. "Fool me once, shame on you...fool me twice...it's a bad thing to get fooled."
Hi Pacificus, first, if I was Israel I would not have created Hamas to counter the PLO. But that isn’t helpful now. I am not so smart to know a sound answer to your question so please accept an overly simplistic and respectful reply. I think Israel and the bordering Arab countries should carve out enough land for the Palestinians and include access to the sea. Fence it on hard and patrol that border vigorously. Then leave it to the Palestinians and their sponsors (who they seem to lack) to feed, clothe and develop them and their tiny nation. I prefer the US not fund them, Ukraine, Israel or any other foreign nation. If you have a strategy in mind, I would read it with an open mind and heart. Take care, amigo.
Thanks for your reply. True, Hamas seems to have been, at least in part, a creation of the Israeli government, but as you observe, that is a moot point now--October 7 was the proverbial game changer, the Frankenstein monster they created must now be destroyed. In my view, none of your suggestions for a resolution of the conflict could even be considered until Hamas is destroyed/surrenders.
See my reply to Seva for a few more observations. Best wishes to you.
John Mearsheimer talked about this with Lex Fridman. He said they had no good options put picked the worst one among them. They should have gone after Hamas with targeting of their leaders rather than war on the Palestinians. And why was the border with Gaza so unguarded on Oct 7? Where were the soldiers? They’d been redeployed to the West Bank to help settlers steal Palestinian land. You have no problem with that but I do.
“John Mearsheimer: Israel is punishing Palestinians.” (12 min)
Lex Fridman interviews John Mearsheimer. Nov 21, 2023
https://youtu.be/pX4WcB5r8zE?si=z0SYD5OSW-qAIN73
Actually, Seva, I have had problem with the Israeli settlement policy for quite some time. It certainly has contributed to making a difficult situation worse. But that does not have anything to do directly with the problem at hand, i.e., responding to the Oct 7 Hamas attack.
Targeting only the leaders of Hamas? Not really a solution. They will just create new leaders. Netanyahu, as we know, has his many critics, but I don't see how any Israeli government could survive by pledging to leave intact a terrorist organization with a demonstrated propensity for mass sneak attacks... just don't see how you do that.
And again: Israel is not "punishing" Palestinians--Hamas is doing that, by its cowardly act of hiding amidst civilians. We do need to maintain moral clarity on that point. And, more despicably, it seems clear that Hamas welcomes a high civilian death toll as a means of currying international sympathy for its cause. In your case, that appears to be working.
"Peace" is impossible while Hamas survives. It's that simple. They need to surrender--now.
“Israel is not "punishing" Palestinians--Hamas is doing that“
It’s not Hamas dropping 2,000 bombs on Gaza. Also, you always mention Oct 7 as if the war began on that date and before that there was peaceful coexistence which was shattered by the totally unprovoked attack by Hamas on Israel. That is not an accurate history of this 75 year old conflict.
Israel would not be dropping 2,000 pound bombs on Gaza were Hamas not hiding there, it's that simple. Hamas, surrender now and end the suffering of your people--assuming that they care about that suffering.
I'm not trying to give an "accurate history" of the war--not sure anyone can do that, not really. And not suggesting that all was rosy pre-October 7. But there was a ceasefire in place on October 7 that Hamas violated in the most despicable manner they could muster. So they, and the people they supposedly represent, are entirely responsibility for this latest escalation and are now suffering the consequences of it. Again, I don't see how any Israeli government could survive by allowing the continued existence of an organization that has long called for the destruction of Israel and on October 7 took a major step in the realization of that aim. "Peace" is impossible until Hamas is gone, and even then, it will now take years of small confidence building steps by both Israel and the Palestinians before a durable peace agreement could be reached. That is the price that Hamas--and the people the supposedly represent--must now pay for their treachery. Maybe think twice before again choosing to escalate the conflict.
And let's be clear--Israel has shown substantial restraint in their response to being attacked. Under certain scenarios, Gaza could have been reduced to a parking lot in a week. Were the tables turned, do you think Hamas would show the same restraint in attacking Israel? The question answers itself.
Stop all the wars the US is fomenting, close the hundreds of bases around the world and cut defense spending until the Pentagon passes an audit, which it has yet to do.
💯
Candace Owens was definitely "given a choice" because of her stance on Israel, not even anti-Israel, just not gung-ho give them everything they want and maybe bombing children is not the best idea. As Saager Enjeti said, Owens has said a lot of crazy stuff, but it was *only* after she started rejecting the overtly Zionist stance of her fellow Daily Wire talking heads that she was not so gently pushed to remove herself. Given the blowback the Daily Wire is getting due to its rather hypocritical stance on "free speech" and "open discourse," I'd think if that wasn't the case, Jeremy Boering would have stated that the decision to part was mutual. They basically gave her the Tucker Carlson treatment. And Dave Rubin, whom I used to respect, has turned into a very petty man. Or maybe he always was, but like so many people, I agreed with most of what he said so I didn't see it.
I follow Breaking Points and like Saagar. Krystal is usually awful but I sure do agree with her on Gaza. No denying that our proxy war on Russia in Ukraine, which has been destroyed, and our support for what Israel is doing to Gaza has greatly damaged us globally. Regardless of whether or not we should be involved in Ukraine or with Israel the fact is that it has hurt us big time globally.
At the risk of touching the third rail, I don’t believe there is one right side, and one wrong side to the Israeli-Palestinian problem either. Both sides have legitimate concerns. Unfortunately, rational discussion has been replaced by volume, vehemence and vitriol which makes achieving a lasting, acceptable resolution all but unachievable.
"Until I have understood it completely, I don’t feel comfortable talking about it."
The above is why I subscribe to Sasha's Substack. Sasha, thank you for your honesty - we can't get it from 99% of the people who claim they are "journalists". Her and I probably don't agree on most everything but I can appreciate someone who tells me that either they know the truth or they don't.