Don’t threaten me with a good time

This made me smile and laugh irl

All paid by George Soros even

All the instability of the last 50 years can ultimately be tracked back to … the Arbor Day Foundation.

I’ve seen a couple and they were mostly Zionists defending the genocide. So far, they haven’t reflected well on their state, but if there’s anyone who actually doesn’t like the atrocities committed by Israel in Israel, I’d be curious to see if they exist here. The only one I’ve seen in articles is that one who sent to jail instead of participate in the IDF.

Hi, Israeli here.

I’ll start off by saying this turned out to be a VERY long post. I did my best to condense the absolutely necessary parts, and I still feel I’ve left a lot of important stuff out. Anyway, hopefully anyone who’s interested in the situation and reads this will be able to gain some insight.

The thing is, you guys are looking at the situation in Israel from your perspective without understanding the factors at play. To actually understand the situation among Jewish Israelis (who I’ll refer to as “Israelis” for simplicity’s sake) requires a thorough explanation about Israeli culture, politics and some history.

Saying “I don’t see any signs against genocide, that must mean all Israelis are pro-genocide” forces your perspective on the situation, like saying (in very broad terms) “I didn’t see any signs that talk about ‘all life matters’ in the BLM protests, that must mean they only value black lives”, so imaging that, but instead of an American saying it, it’s some dude in Thailand who has very little understanding of the racial situation on the US.

So, let’s go:

Right now, the country is pretty divided among supporters of the current government and those opposed to it. While the government has a 53% majority in the parliament, it really never had more than 50% supporters among the population (Firstly, some left wing parties didn’t get enough votes to get into parliament. Also, right after the elections the Likud government adopted a plan proposed by the religious far-right party that would, in essence, transform Israel into a Hungry-like hybrid regime which made many liberal Likud supporters oppose the government). The opposition grew stronger after Oct. 7th, though the government still has the support of (mainly) the far right, the ultra-orthodox religious parties and the Israeli version of Trump supporters who mainly want to “own the libs”. There are weekly polls that check how many people support the current government and Netanyahu is using every trick in the book to increase support among the public because his coalition is extremely fragile.

However, regarding the war in Gaza, there is a consensus that’s shared among a very large majority of the population from both sides:

1. The Israeli hostages must be returned. I cannot overstate how important this is. Firstly, Israel is a tiny country, quite communal and most Israelis have large families. The hostages aren’t “citizens”, “people” or even “fellow Jews”. They’re “The niece of my dentist”, “My ex’s uncle”, “The daughter of friends of my colleague” etc. Nearly Every Israeli knows someone who knows someone who’s been kidnapped. Secondly, one of the founding ethos of Israel is to have a safe place for Jews that’s free of persecution no matter what. The Oct. 7th massacre is seen not only as a tragedy, but as the state not performing one of its core functions to some extent. Lastly, redemption of prisoners is a major commandment in the Jewish faith. This is the main point on all virtually ALL Israelis can agree upon (Let me stress that again - the agreement isn’t that the hostages “should” be returned, but that they MUST be returned. That’s important for later).

2. Hamas must be destroyed. If they’re allowed to exist, this will happen again (There is, however, disagreement on how best can Israel vanquish Hamas).

These two objectives are seen among many (not sure if most) as contradictory - Hamas is using the hostages to force an Israeli retreat from Gaza, and the only way they will release all of the hostages is if that secures their rule in Gaza. This is also important to remember for later.

3. What Israel is doing in Gaza is somewhere between unfortunate and tragic, but it’s absolutely not genocide, rather a result of Hamas integrating itself into civilian infrastructure and hiding behind civilians (again, this is the mainstream opinion, not something agreed by ALL Israelis).

I, personally, subscribe to the first two points, do not believe they are contradictory and while I believe the IDF isn’t nearly as cautious about harming civilians in Gaza as it should be and that not allowing humanitarian aid into Gaza is immoral, both things do not constitute genocide.

Those numbed three points are in the Israeli consensus, but we have one more crucial piece of context before I get to the demonstrations - There are two groups of Israelis who do not believe the 1st and 2nd points are contradictory. Each belongs to opposing ends of the political spectrum - in the right there are those who think military pressure is the only way to, somehow, secure the release of the hostages. The other group is left  leaning, and it believes that withdrawing from Gaza for the release of the hostages and building a civilian opposition against Hamas Will solve the issue in the long run. They also believe the current government doesn’t really want to get rid of Hamas, rather they want to make sure Hamas will remain the only Palestinian ruler in the strip, so the government has an excuse to continue the current treatment of Palestinians (both as individuals and as a people). The first group thrives on extremism and sowing division (and if this reminds you of a certain US political party and a US politician in particular, you are absolutely on the money), and the second group is trying to build on a consensus, and make room for liberal right leaning people in order to gain influence (the opposition is actually composed of two liberal right wing parties).

Oh, wait, just one other thing - There’s a joke that goes: A Jewish man is stranded on an island for 20 years. He is finally rescued, and the rescuers see the life he built for himself. Among all the things they see, there are two synagogues. They ask the man “you were on this Island alone. Why do you need two synagogues for?” The man looks lovingly at the first synagogue and says “Well, this is the synagogue where I prayed every day for someone to come and rescue me, and this” he says while looking disdainfully at the second synagogue “is the synagogue where I wouldn’t be caught dead in”. Point is, Jews and Israeli Jews in particular, love to argue and have disagreements. Think The Life of Brian’s The People’s Front of Judea and Judean People’s Front. So when I say “there are two groups”, it’s more like “there are about 1,000 groups that can be broadly divided in two camps”.

You’d think this leads to a society that’s fractured on many levels so that it can’t really operate, but Israelis are also very good at putting differences aside and coming together to achieve a common goal.

So, finally, about the protests - as you may have guessed, the people who are protesting belong to the second camp. And yes, many of them think what’s happening in Gaza is wrong. But remember the whole “putting our differences aside and coming together to achieve a common goal” and the “The hostages must be returned”? That’s the strategy in a nutshell. The protesters are trying to use the single most agreed upon goal, and build a consensus for a deal from there. That’s the reason you won’t see anything about Gazans in the protests. Going outside the consensus gives the far right more ammunition to paint the protesters as traitors and to rally the moderate right against them. The push for a deal NOW (the main rally cry) will cease virtually all IDF operations in Gaza anyway, so in some of the protesters’ minds (mine included), protesting against the IDF while correct in a vacuum actually goes against that very cause. Now, I don’t really know US history that well, but think what would happen if the Vietnam anti-war movement made room for more conservatives on the grounds that the war is harming the US. Maybe Nixon’s “law and order” campaign would have failed and he’d have lost the elections. I might be talking out of my ass here, but even if I’m wrong I hope this at least gives a better understanding about the strategy used by the protesters in Israel - they’re saying “You don’t have to join us because you’re a hippie peacenik. You have to join us because that’s what’s best for our country”.

I’d like to stress that the protesters are NOT hiding their opinions. They just want to make as much room for other supporters. Some people are willing to protest for a cease-fire if that means getting the hostages back, but would not be willing to protest alongside a sign that says “The IDF is killing innocent people”.

So that was about the situation in Israel. If you came this far, I hope you found the read worth your time. Now I’d like to ask for a bit more of your time in return.

I have a question for the people who are protesting against Israel to stop the “genocide” unconditionally (or those who are in support of said protests), but are not protesting against Hamas to release the hostages unconditionally (or those who see no need for these protests) - I assume you don’t agree with Hamas’s actions on Oct. 7th, but obviously you don’t believe these actions justify what Israel is doing in harming innocent people (BTW, most Israelis would agree. If you don’t understand how this can be, refer to the 3rd point stated previously).

I’d like to ask why does this logic not work the other way around? If what Israel is doing is reprehensible regardless of anything Hamas has done previously and should be opposed, then surely what Hamas has done is also reprehensible regardless of what Israel has done previously and should be opposed. Is it just a matter of numbers, so there’s a “minimum casualty” that justifies protests, and below that the victims are SOL?

Not saying that’s the case, but that’s what I was able to come up with. Maybe I’m missing some context.

And before you say that’s just whataboutism - I don’t think it is. Both things are a part of the same situation, so I think this is more a case of a cop seeing two cars driving on the road at night and stopping only one of them (where the driver happens to be black).

Yeah, probably one of the few cases where it actually would have been better for the government to remain in shutdown.

Is this that reknowned sense of humor?

Stunning wit here.

Stunning ability to take a joke in the other replys.

How is what I am describing one-state? The reasonable path forward, which limits bloodshed and violence, is supporting both Israel’s and Palestine’s right to exist.

Well, then they are getting closer to losing that toy.

True. I say we give back the land to the people that were there first. Egypt and Jordan.

Wishing it to be untrue doesn’t work unfortunately

No, I’m not commenting on Israels methods which clearly could be better, to put it mildly. That doesn’t mean it’s logical to dream there can ever be peace with jihadists

I can understand why you’d think that coming from a position of logic, but no, it’s Islam.

You’re right, it’ll probably go from >50% to 99%. And probably few of them will ever acknowledge that their religion and support of Hamas is what led to this tragedy.

Clearly because he wants to eliminate the jihadist terrorist organisation. I’m not claiming that’s the right decision but I understand it. But it seems a lot of Israelis don’t support him.

But just because Netanyahu is no longer interested in peace doesn’t automatically make Hamas a peaceful group. The group that performs suicide bombings, uses human shields, beheads civilians, would stone you to death for drawing a picture of the prophet. They are not looking for peace no matter how much you downvote

No Israeli government has reduced or at least stopped settlements since Rabin was murdered.

Quoth the Haaretz: “Jigal Amir won”.

The possible silver lining is that Netanyahu also demonstrated that the right-wing’s idea of how to ensure security – namely, by antagonising Palestinians into submission – doesn’t work. But that kind of insight will take a while to actually sink in.

And another thing that needs to happen is Israelis not shying away from looking at what’s being done to Palestinians. The Israeli press is self-censoring, knowing that noone wants to watch or read about the crimes the IDF is committing. It’s wilful ignorance: People want to support the IDF because they at least at some level still believe in the antagonising Palestinians into submission approach, yet they can’t bear to acknowledge what that entails. Which is kinda actually a real silver lining: Imagine if the Israeli press glorified, instead of ignored, all those mass graves and whatnot, what that would say about their audience. In the end it’s still only the Kahanites who actually get a hard-on when seeing Arab corpses.

…the same, side note, btw also happened in the Third Reich: First Nazis were very overt, the pogroms were open, public, they were dragging people through streets and whatnot. They very quickly changed approach, made sure that people were able to ignore what was being done, were able to come up with lies such as “they’re only expelling the Jews” and actually believe in them. Precisely because not every German back then got a hard-on when seeing a Jewish corpse either.

So, please, Israeli people, get rid of those chucklefucks in government before they put you in camps for protesting.

Biden’s primary stated reason for defending Israel is a promise to his dying father.

Not his conscience, not the people alive and around him today, not the people who voted for him, not the people who he’s depending on to get re-elected.

Sorry America, an 80 year old white man is making an undemocratic choice due to a promise he made to another old white man. Awesome.

For the poll to drop after a genocide starts, one would need to imagine that most of the drop is anti genocide. “Critical support”, when taken in a serious context, usually means one would still vote in an electoral system for that leader who did the thing versus an alternative.

It’s hard to imagine what a hardliner would want more at a point where the track is basically kettle and bomb, malnourish to death, is short of enslave and malnourish to death. Like nukes don’t work because then you can’t use the land for a couple decades.

sadfsdfasfasf

Ummm… staying home not voting against Trump, is welcoming his election. You flip flopped on this comment from acknowledging the difference but in the end throw your hands up offering, “but that won’t happen anyway, they’ll vote Biden” … I don’t think they will, and staying home to do so is a .5 vote for red team. It’s just the math of elections. Staying home with your vote is still not casting it for the not evil orange dictator

It’s really not. US long term strategy is to disengage from the Middle East to focus on bringing freedom™ to Africa. The plan is to leave Israel and Saudi Arabia to babysit, which is what the ill-fated Abraham Accords were for from a US perspective. The US doesn’t give a rats ass about the Palestinians, but being implicated in a genocide is inconvenient.