Well said in every respect. Yes, there are some on the left who support what Hamas has done, and while it isn't anywhere near a majority, it is still hurtful to Jews because we were comrades in arms around the issues of economic and social jsutice. We cannot and do not equate Hamas with Palestinians but recognize it as a genocidal, Islamo-fascist cult that wants to wipe out Jews (see their charter) and of course Israel. And no, it should not deter us from pursuing Palestinian national rights and restoring a liberal democracy in Israel and the U.S.
Yes, far too many have little understanding of the history of conflict in the Middle East, even more expect Biden to wield a magic wand to implement a cease-fire or provide undefined "security guarantees".
Any path to "peace" requires coordination of the major players in the Arab world. Diplomacy is a delicate and time-consuming path, which too few appreciate.
Biden's work, in a very short time, under impossible conditions, has allowed the commencement of humanitarian aid into Gaza, the release of 2 American hostages, and a delay of the ground invasion.
Biden is navigating between religious fanaticism on both sides. Hamas committed a massacre that deliberately resurrected the horrors of the Holocaust. Netanyahu embraced the religious right extremists in Israel to regain power and avoid the consequences of his personal corruption.
Biden has openly warned Netanyahu not to repeat the mistakes of the Bush administration post-911. None of the Arab neighbors have thus far been willing to absorb the Gazan Palestinians...in no small part because of concerns that some are active Hamas terrorists.
Would Israel pause its arial bombardment if Hamas paused its missile strikes? We won't know because Hamas shows zero signs of stopping.
My long-winded point is that this is an incredibly complex matter with few options, and no short-term solutions. Biden has played, and continues to play, his hand as well as any American president could.
Hi Oliver, I subscribed just so that I can comment on this post. I just want to ask why every US president falls all over themselves to appear to be pro-Israel to the point where they totally ignore the fact that there's more than one narrative in this story. Specifically, why is the word "occupation" never uttered by Biden or anyone in his administration? Nor did you use this word in your post. Is it not obvious that it gives essential context to this war, as opposed to merely portraying the Palestinians as terrorists?
Well occupation is a loaded term in this context meaning you are opposed to the Israeli position in total. The official US stance is basically for a two state solution and while I don’t pretend to be an expert on this, I generally agree with that idea. The ties between the US and Israel are extensive and strong and that’s why the alliance and support tends to transcend party.
I was an activist for many years for Palestinian liberation, hoping the illegal occupation would end. It's only a "loaded" term when you disregard the truth of it. I lived many years in the middle east, and I can tell you that Israel violates the Geneva Conventions daily. The "ties" between the US and Israel are based on money and guilt.
It is an illegal occupation. The US already gives more money to Israel, a developed country with a strong economy, than it gives any other country on earth except for Afghanistan. Biden promising US taxpayer money to the tune of $100 billion to help Israel kill more children is an outrage.
It broke my heart and infuriated me to hear Biden say the usual crap about Israel having the right to defend itself, when it has a long history of responding to Palestinian violence with overkill. Hamas' worst terrorism is inflicted on Palestinians on a daily basis. Palestinians have lost most of their land, are treated like criminals and most live in poverty. Children in Gaza subsist on UN food donations and are seriously malnourished while Israel has destroyed their cemeteries for their golf courses and swimming pools.
Before you pretend to know the facts, do some reading. A two state solution is no longer possible because 80 percent of the West Bank has already been stolen by Israel. And Israel will not agree to the Palestinians' internationally mandated right of return. They also deny them the right to a standing army. Basically, it would be more of the same as what they have to endure now. The Israeli government demands to have a presence in any future Palestinian state, which is outrageous.
I think your whole response shows why the term is loaded. I don't have a team in this fight. I think Israel is extremely guilty of using their power, furnished by us, to oppress people. I also think there is a very obvious problem with antisemitism in the Arab world. And yes, a two-state solution seems further off now more than ever but even more unlikely is the idea that either party gets complete control of the territory without an intolerable level of bloodshed.
Also "The "ties" between the US and Israel are based on money and guilt." is a ridiculous thing to say and borderline antisemitic in my POV.
To me, the whole mess is a failure of right-wing policy and governance. As much as I despise Netanyahu, I find it impossible to align myself in any way with an antisemitic terror group of religious extremists who would readily toss many of my friends off the roof of a tall building.
You can haul out the "antisemitic" trope but it doesn't erase reality, that the US refused to accept Jewish refugees at the end of WW2. Just so you know, I lived in the middle east and can tell you that its "leaders" have kept their people in ignorance, but that doesn't excuse the ridiculous "special relationship" the US has with Israel, enabling an apartheid state to flourish and to torment people and land under illegal occupation for decades. If you understand politics and sociology even a little, you will understand how oppression breeds extremism and extremism breeds violence. This has been Israel's formula for taking the land and water since 1948. What was tragic in the Hamas attack is that it should not have been a shock to anyone.
Since you called me an antisemite, I have cancelled my subscription. Oh, one more thing - try researching the connections between American politicians, Israel and the weapons industry next time you think it's "antisemitic" to mention it, and how that old guilt helped create them.
Not to be redundant, but your long reply warrants another. (And I venture to say that Oliver Willis knows more about the facts of all his topics than do his interlocutors). Who are you to say a two-state solution is no longer possible?. And to say what Israel will or will not agree to? You too need to look at the history of the "peace process" and who said no, to what proposals, and when. Your reasoning leads only to the elimination of Israel. And just a few facts to sprinkle into your thoughts: Hamas has been given billions of dollars over the years. They could have used it to build a model civil city, with infrastructure, economic development, schools, hospitals. Instead (because they just do not care) they used it to build their own genocidal war machine and, oh, yes -- to support their "leaders" in luxury in Qatar. So, I will meet you on the field of pursuing justice and statehood for Palestinians, ending the settlement, reparations for families who left Israel. But never on the field of putting Hamas into that discussion.
Billions have been spent on building schools and hospitals and other infrastructure, and every couple of years Israel bombs Gaza and it all gets destroyed again. No, they could not have built a "model city" as you laughingly suggest. When imports and exports and peoples' movements are severely restricted how they begin to create a viable economy in such a tiny enclave? They have no control of their borders, or water or electricity sources, as we can see now, Israel just flicks a switch and turns if off whenever they please.
Also, one of the main reasons the peace process floundered was because Israel would not agree to compensate people who were forced out, or agree to the right of return. The PLO, rightfully refused to sell out the Palestinian diaspora.
This is a straw man argument. The two narratives are recognized and supported by American and international policy. But "occupation", suppression of Palestinian rights is NOT part of the Hamas story, and conflating them does a favor only to Hamas. There are absolutely, definitively not two sides to the Hamas story: they are an Islamo-fascist cult whose charter calls for the elimination of Jews worldwide and one state Islamic fascist state in the entire Middle East, beginning of course with the elimination of Israel, but not stopping there. Therre is no other acceptable side but to destroy the cult. But on the rest of the story: Two sides, yes. End the occupation, withdraw from the settlements, honor a Palestinian state (the first ever in all of history by the way; there has never before been one.)
I paid to post a comment. It does not matter whether or not there was a Palestinian state, but there actually was, to the extent where the Palestinians had their own banks, government and currency. Your argument is Zionist bullshit.
In America, we stole land from the indigenous people even though they had no "state." Try to actually read history before you spew propaganda.
Hi, Marycat...glad you paid. Oliver Willis deserves our support. Thanks for the mature debate we're having, especially the "Zionist bullshit" you so elegantly summon up. So. History. I am a historian of sorts, and smart enough to know that history is the refuge of ignoramuses, bullshitters, and rabid ideologues as much as it is a source of truth for good debate. You'll have to figure out which group you're in, because here's some more: Since the Greeks ruled the region, and left, there was never a self-governing Palestinian entity in that territory or elsewhere. Yes, there were banks, currency and local/regional/provincial governments, ALL of them part of the Ottoman Empire. No doubt, local people worked as civil servants but their ultimate bosses and government were back in Istanbul/Constantinople. The Ottomans used the designation "Palestine" for the entire Middle East territory (along with other provincial names) and it included provinces in what is now Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and more. The ancient Greeks used the name for a territory very close to the modern configuration. Not since the Greeks left was the term used. The very first time in modern history that "Palestine" was a defined territory with borders in that general configuration we all know was when it was made a "protectorate" under the British. Arabs and Jews, Christians, Moslems all lived there and referred to themselves as Palestinians. So -- what does this have to do with Hamas. ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. Hamas doesn't care about Palestine or Palestinians. It is a genocidal cult that includes in its charter the elimination of Jews and the establishment of an Islamo-fascist state throughout the Middle East. And what does it have to do with a Palestinian state? Again, absolutely nothing. Did Palestinian Arabs have a culture and roots in their village and communities? Absolutely yes, and when they were displaced those roots became the foundation of their national consciousness, as legitimate as any other in the world. So if you stop spitting nasty words at me for a minute, please understand that I agree: settlements must go; reparations must be paid and anyone who actually lived in what is now Israel should be allowed to return. And while we're at it I'd like to see reparations for the 800,00 Jews who were forced out of Arab countries by violence, persecution, confiscation, and pogroms. (BTW when the West Bank was in Arab hands between 1949 and 1969 no one bothered to create a State. Ditto for Gaza. No, better to leave the Palestinian Arabs in bitter misery, the better to use them as human weapons. Resettlement has been an internationally accepted solution for refugees, except for the Palestinians -- human pawns to Arab pretensions. Arab countries did NOT want a state and they didn't want the Palestinians. Now the world must concentrate and focus: two states, two peoples, two claims. Whether you, Marycat, want it or not. Look forward to having you join the struggle.
These past couple of weeks, I’ve been hearing a lot of people, TRYING not to point my finger at Jews here, but yeah, a lot of Jewish voices, saying things like “civilians have always been collateral damage in war”, and a lot about “ceasefire just gives Hamas time to reload,” and “We can’t be squeamish about casualties.” O yeah, and accusing anybody who doesn’t want innocent Palestinians killed as “antisemitic” and “pro-terrorist”. I’m really getting repeats of 911 in the media, and I’m scared Israel is going to blow this like we did.
Great piece. One ?: in the end of graph 4 you say "people just forget." You think it's some type of American specific amnesia or willful blindness to history? I lean towards to the latter. Thanks for the work.
Key note about lemmings going over cliffs into the sea. The helos being used to document the wildlife scared the poor critters, and they ran away to their deaths from terror. It is not their normal behavior. Never has been, nor will it continue. Just shows to go ya.
I'm all for a ceasefire, but without guarantees that ALL the hostages will be released and that there won't be another pogrom (because that's what Oct 7 was folks, a pogrom), then a "ceasefire" won't be worth the air used to say it or the ink used to print it.
Well said.
Well said in every respect. Yes, there are some on the left who support what Hamas has done, and while it isn't anywhere near a majority, it is still hurtful to Jews because we were comrades in arms around the issues of economic and social jsutice. We cannot and do not equate Hamas with Palestinians but recognize it as a genocidal, Islamo-fascist cult that wants to wipe out Jews (see their charter) and of course Israel. And no, it should not deter us from pursuing Palestinian national rights and restoring a liberal democracy in Israel and the U.S.
I completely agree. I will say that although I’m not a Biden fan in many ways, his responses thus far do seem to show brain and heart.
Yes, far too many have little understanding of the history of conflict in the Middle East, even more expect Biden to wield a magic wand to implement a cease-fire or provide undefined "security guarantees".
Any path to "peace" requires coordination of the major players in the Arab world. Diplomacy is a delicate and time-consuming path, which too few appreciate.
Biden's work, in a very short time, under impossible conditions, has allowed the commencement of humanitarian aid into Gaza, the release of 2 American hostages, and a delay of the ground invasion.
Biden is navigating between religious fanaticism on both sides. Hamas committed a massacre that deliberately resurrected the horrors of the Holocaust. Netanyahu embraced the religious right extremists in Israel to regain power and avoid the consequences of his personal corruption.
Biden has openly warned Netanyahu not to repeat the mistakes of the Bush administration post-911. None of the Arab neighbors have thus far been willing to absorb the Gazan Palestinians...in no small part because of concerns that some are active Hamas terrorists.
Would Israel pause its arial bombardment if Hamas paused its missile strikes? We won't know because Hamas shows zero signs of stopping.
My long-winded point is that this is an incredibly complex matter with few options, and no short-term solutions. Biden has played, and continues to play, his hand as well as any American president could.
Hi Oliver, I subscribed just so that I can comment on this post. I just want to ask why every US president falls all over themselves to appear to be pro-Israel to the point where they totally ignore the fact that there's more than one narrative in this story. Specifically, why is the word "occupation" never uttered by Biden or anyone in his administration? Nor did you use this word in your post. Is it not obvious that it gives essential context to this war, as opposed to merely portraying the Palestinians as terrorists?
Well occupation is a loaded term in this context meaning you are opposed to the Israeli position in total. The official US stance is basically for a two state solution and while I don’t pretend to be an expert on this, I generally agree with that idea. The ties between the US and Israel are extensive and strong and that’s why the alliance and support tends to transcend party.
I was an activist for many years for Palestinian liberation, hoping the illegal occupation would end. It's only a "loaded" term when you disregard the truth of it. I lived many years in the middle east, and I can tell you that Israel violates the Geneva Conventions daily. The "ties" between the US and Israel are based on money and guilt.
It is an illegal occupation. The US already gives more money to Israel, a developed country with a strong economy, than it gives any other country on earth except for Afghanistan. Biden promising US taxpayer money to the tune of $100 billion to help Israel kill more children is an outrage.
It broke my heart and infuriated me to hear Biden say the usual crap about Israel having the right to defend itself, when it has a long history of responding to Palestinian violence with overkill. Hamas' worst terrorism is inflicted on Palestinians on a daily basis. Palestinians have lost most of their land, are treated like criminals and most live in poverty. Children in Gaza subsist on UN food donations and are seriously malnourished while Israel has destroyed their cemeteries for their golf courses and swimming pools.
Before you pretend to know the facts, do some reading. A two state solution is no longer possible because 80 percent of the West Bank has already been stolen by Israel. And Israel will not agree to the Palestinians' internationally mandated right of return. They also deny them the right to a standing army. Basically, it would be more of the same as what they have to endure now. The Israeli government demands to have a presence in any future Palestinian state, which is outrageous.
I think your whole response shows why the term is loaded. I don't have a team in this fight. I think Israel is extremely guilty of using their power, furnished by us, to oppress people. I also think there is a very obvious problem with antisemitism in the Arab world. And yes, a two-state solution seems further off now more than ever but even more unlikely is the idea that either party gets complete control of the territory without an intolerable level of bloodshed.
Also "The "ties" between the US and Israel are based on money and guilt." is a ridiculous thing to say and borderline antisemitic in my POV.
To me, the whole mess is a failure of right-wing policy and governance. As much as I despise Netanyahu, I find it impossible to align myself in any way with an antisemitic terror group of religious extremists who would readily toss many of my friends off the roof of a tall building.
You can haul out the "antisemitic" trope but it doesn't erase reality, that the US refused to accept Jewish refugees at the end of WW2. Just so you know, I lived in the middle east and can tell you that its "leaders" have kept their people in ignorance, but that doesn't excuse the ridiculous "special relationship" the US has with Israel, enabling an apartheid state to flourish and to torment people and land under illegal occupation for decades. If you understand politics and sociology even a little, you will understand how oppression breeds extremism and extremism breeds violence. This has been Israel's formula for taking the land and water since 1948. What was tragic in the Hamas attack is that it should not have been a shock to anyone.
Since you called me an antisemite, I have cancelled my subscription. Oh, one more thing - try researching the connections between American politicians, Israel and the weapons industry next time you think it's "antisemitic" to mention it, and how that old guilt helped create them.
Not to be redundant, but your long reply warrants another. (And I venture to say that Oliver Willis knows more about the facts of all his topics than do his interlocutors). Who are you to say a two-state solution is no longer possible?. And to say what Israel will or will not agree to? You too need to look at the history of the "peace process" and who said no, to what proposals, and when. Your reasoning leads only to the elimination of Israel. And just a few facts to sprinkle into your thoughts: Hamas has been given billions of dollars over the years. They could have used it to build a model civil city, with infrastructure, economic development, schools, hospitals. Instead (because they just do not care) they used it to build their own genocidal war machine and, oh, yes -- to support their "leaders" in luxury in Qatar. So, I will meet you on the field of pursuing justice and statehood for Palestinians, ending the settlement, reparations for families who left Israel. But never on the field of putting Hamas into that discussion.
Billions have been spent on building schools and hospitals and other infrastructure, and every couple of years Israel bombs Gaza and it all gets destroyed again. No, they could not have built a "model city" as you laughingly suggest. When imports and exports and peoples' movements are severely restricted how they begin to create a viable economy in such a tiny enclave? They have no control of their borders, or water or electricity sources, as we can see now, Israel just flicks a switch and turns if off whenever they please.
Also, one of the main reasons the peace process floundered was because Israel would not agree to compensate people who were forced out, or agree to the right of return. The PLO, rightfully refused to sell out the Palestinian diaspora.
The U.S. has cut back considerably on non-military foreign aid to Israel.
Here’s a good overview of the history of American policy re the Israeli-Palestinian conflict:
https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/what-us-policy-israeli-palestinian-conflict
This is a straw man argument. The two narratives are recognized and supported by American and international policy. But "occupation", suppression of Palestinian rights is NOT part of the Hamas story, and conflating them does a favor only to Hamas. There are absolutely, definitively not two sides to the Hamas story: they are an Islamo-fascist cult whose charter calls for the elimination of Jews worldwide and one state Islamic fascist state in the entire Middle East, beginning of course with the elimination of Israel, but not stopping there. Therre is no other acceptable side but to destroy the cult. But on the rest of the story: Two sides, yes. End the occupation, withdraw from the settlements, honor a Palestinian state (the first ever in all of history by the way; there has never before been one.)
I paid to post a comment. It does not matter whether or not there was a Palestinian state, but there actually was, to the extent where the Palestinians had their own banks, government and currency. Your argument is Zionist bullshit.
In America, we stole land from the indigenous people even though they had no "state." Try to actually read history before you spew propaganda.
Hi, Marycat...glad you paid. Oliver Willis deserves our support. Thanks for the mature debate we're having, especially the "Zionist bullshit" you so elegantly summon up. So. History. I am a historian of sorts, and smart enough to know that history is the refuge of ignoramuses, bullshitters, and rabid ideologues as much as it is a source of truth for good debate. You'll have to figure out which group you're in, because here's some more: Since the Greeks ruled the region, and left, there was never a self-governing Palestinian entity in that territory or elsewhere. Yes, there were banks, currency and local/regional/provincial governments, ALL of them part of the Ottoman Empire. No doubt, local people worked as civil servants but their ultimate bosses and government were back in Istanbul/Constantinople. The Ottomans used the designation "Palestine" for the entire Middle East territory (along with other provincial names) and it included provinces in what is now Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and more. The ancient Greeks used the name for a territory very close to the modern configuration. Not since the Greeks left was the term used. The very first time in modern history that "Palestine" was a defined territory with borders in that general configuration we all know was when it was made a "protectorate" under the British. Arabs and Jews, Christians, Moslems all lived there and referred to themselves as Palestinians. So -- what does this have to do with Hamas. ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. Hamas doesn't care about Palestine or Palestinians. It is a genocidal cult that includes in its charter the elimination of Jews and the establishment of an Islamo-fascist state throughout the Middle East. And what does it have to do with a Palestinian state? Again, absolutely nothing. Did Palestinian Arabs have a culture and roots in their village and communities? Absolutely yes, and when they were displaced those roots became the foundation of their national consciousness, as legitimate as any other in the world. So if you stop spitting nasty words at me for a minute, please understand that I agree: settlements must go; reparations must be paid and anyone who actually lived in what is now Israel should be allowed to return. And while we're at it I'd like to see reparations for the 800,00 Jews who were forced out of Arab countries by violence, persecution, confiscation, and pogroms. (BTW when the West Bank was in Arab hands between 1949 and 1969 no one bothered to create a State. Ditto for Gaza. No, better to leave the Palestinian Arabs in bitter misery, the better to use them as human weapons. Resettlement has been an internationally accepted solution for refugees, except for the Palestinians -- human pawns to Arab pretensions. Arab countries did NOT want a state and they didn't want the Palestinians. Now the world must concentrate and focus: two states, two peoples, two claims. Whether you, Marycat, want it or not. Look forward to having you join the struggle.
Agreed. And I love Kal-El photos
Well said, really wish we could slow down with selling weapons to genocidal regimes too. Even my country, Canada does this, it's infuriating!
Don't stop saying this, Oliver. When it comes to War, we must be vigilant.
Agreed.
Can we slow down the arms sales? We are producing and providing almost 50% of the weapon systems to include small arms.
We still produce bomblet bombs and have not signed the agreement to outlaw these weapons.
Children often find the ones that don’t go off.
Not all these “ systems” work.
I want a World Wide Stand down.
A peace conference.
In the 80’s I read a GPO forecast for WW3 . If you wanted to you could buy DOD pubs.
It all started with pin pricks and then it was on.
Mike
Exetertowncrier.com
Great article Oliver. I appreciate your thoughtful position.
These past couple of weeks, I’ve been hearing a lot of people, TRYING not to point my finger at Jews here, but yeah, a lot of Jewish voices, saying things like “civilians have always been collateral damage in war”, and a lot about “ceasefire just gives Hamas time to reload,” and “We can’t be squeamish about casualties.” O yeah, and accusing anybody who doesn’t want innocent Palestinians killed as “antisemitic” and “pro-terrorist”. I’m really getting repeats of 911 in the media, and I’m scared Israel is going to blow this like we did.
Great piece. One ?: in the end of graph 4 you say "people just forget." You think it's some type of American specific amnesia or willful blindness to history? I lean towards to the latter. Thanks for the work.
Key note about lemmings going over cliffs into the sea. The helos being used to document the wildlife scared the poor critters, and they ran away to their deaths from terror. It is not their normal behavior. Never has been, nor will it continue. Just shows to go ya.
I'm all for a ceasefire, but without guarantees that ALL the hostages will be released and that there won't be another pogrom (because that's what Oct 7 was folks, a pogrom), then a "ceasefire" won't be worth the air used to say it or the ink used to print it.
Noah Smith suggests a three state solution for geographic reasons. That’s an idea to explore.