The findings by a Palestinian pollster signal more difficulties ahead for the Biden administration’s postwar vision for Gaza and raise questions about Israel’s stated goal of ending Hamas’ military and governing capabilities.
Washington has called for the West Bank-based Palestinian Authority, currently led by Abbas, to eventually assume control of Gaza and run both territories as a precursor to statehood. U.S. officials have said the PA must be revitalized, without letting on whether this would mean leadership changes.
The PA administers pockets of the Israeli-occupied West Bank and has governed Gaza until a takeover by Hamas militants in 2007. The Palestinians have not held elections since 2006 when Hamas won a parliamentary majority.
And Bush saw a huge surge of support after 9/11, even though he was widely unpopular leading up to it and nothing about it objectively reflected well on him. It’s a knee-jerk reaction to being attacked by an outside force.
Or it may have something to do with the fact that Hamas have actually proven willing to actually do something about the genocidal white supremacist settler-colonialist state threatening them with extinction - unlike the Israeli puppets that run the Palestinian Authority.
If Israel actually wanted to rid the area of Hamas, I think humanitarian aid and taking care of the people might have been more persuasive than bombing their families out of existence.
That’s a great plan once the hostages have been released.
Israel is playing on easy fucking mode here, and they’re choosing not to take advantage of it. High-density areas are hell to fight through in a counter-insurgency scenario, but they’re ideal for the whole ‘winning hearts and minds’ thing that has been core to counter-insurgency operations since the British in the fucking 1950s.
Israel chooses not to take advantage. Because they want the insurgency.
I’m not familiar, could you explain why High density areas are ideal for “winning hearts and minds”?
Basically one of the core issues with a competent government trying to ‘win hearts and minds’ is reaching people. Rural and isolated areas are the absolute hardest to deal with, because it’s hard to secure the area, hard to reliably communicate, and hard to construct infrastructure in the area. Without those three tools - security, propaganda, and material improvement of conditions - securing hearts and minds is a very difficult task. Infrastructure is more difficult to construct in isolated areas, but essentially infrastructure in all cases benefits from economies of scale - it’s much cheaper to build one major project for 100,000 people than 100 small projects for 1,000 people each, or worse, 1000 small projects for 100 people each.
You see this in the (successful) attempts of the British in Malaysia and the (unsuccessful) attempts of the Americans in Vietnam - the ‘strategic hamlet’ program sought to centralize populations so that they could be secured, means of communication could be supplied, and then the population could be won over with material improvements to their lives. You also see this to a lesser degree in Iraq and Afghanistan - Coalition forces had their strongest support in cities which could be secured and improved at a reasonable cost of investment (and amongst areas that would suffer from sectarian conflict if the national government fell, such as the Kurds and Tajiks).
Thanks for expanding on you what you mentioned
but they’re ideal for the whole ‘winning hearts and minds’ thing that has been core to counter-insurgency operations
Lol!
Yeah… no. “Hearts and minds” shitfuckery is propaganda for your own side, Clyde. That is all it has ever been.
The keys to winning at colonialist warfare - oops, I mean t to say “counter-insurgency” - is still the same as it has ever been… destroy the means of existence of the population the resistance exists within. Ie, what the Brits did in South Africa and Malaya (and others), what the US did in the continental US and what the US tried (and failed) to do in Vietnam.
Stop being naive.
Oh, the weirdo who keeps calling me Clyde is back.
You have fun ignoring the actual strategies used in counter-insurgency warfare in exchange for your weird, pseudo-religious view of world politics and The Great Satan.
actual strategies
You desperately wanting to cling onto GI Joe fairy tales does not make “hearts and minds” any less of a propaganda strategy purely intended to fool people like you, Clyde. I guess the people who came up with it knew their audience well enough, eh?
But hey… maybe I’m wrong. And in that case it should be very easy for you to find evidence of a colonialist war where this “hearts and minds” malarkey even influenced the final outcome of colonialist warfare.
Shouldn’t be too difficult for you, should it?
Sorry Bob, I just don’t care enough to argue with reactionary scumbags like you. Have fun playing with yourself, though!
reactionary scumbags
I’m not the one swallowing colonialist propaganda, Clyde - you are.
So that’s a no on the whole “provide-a-shred-of-evidence-for-your-claim” thing?
No surprises there.
Sorry Bob, I just don’t care enough to argue with reactionary scumbags like you. Have fun playing with yourself, though!
Agreed. At the very least they could have moved the women and children to safety.
Note: I have nothing against men, and I’m not calling the women weak. I’d say ALL civilians to be inclusive, but I think they could argue that Hamas militants were hiding amongst them (and seperating kids from all their family isn’t… ideal)
Implying women are family and fathers are not
Of course, fathers are just breadwinner - that’s their only value and purpose. They don’t “love” their families. Their lives are meaningless and they are violent terrorists.
/s
Only 10% said they believed Hamas has committed war crimes, with a large majority saying they did not see videos showing the militants committing atrocities.
Jesus Christ.
It’s relative. If you’ve seen people around you being abused you become a little desensitized to what ‘abuse’ is. If abuse is normal every day living for one person, and not for another; the later sees it as abuse and the former sees it as another normal day.
Put yourself in the shoes of a Gaza resident anytime in the last 50+ years and consider yourself lucky that your reality allows you to be able to identify an atrocity when you see one.
Consider the reality these people have experienced for generations before leveling judgement on their opinions.
The entire situation is nauseating. I understand that Israel is a U.S. ally and that sometimes supporting allies means making decisions against better judgement, but… I would rather the U.S. wasn’t involved in this at all. It’s a bloody mess. Literally.
Yeah, no, I don’t think I’m gonna play apologist for the opinion that “Hundreds of Israeli civilians had it coming for the crime of existing, I’m glad that they were gunned down by a terrorist attack, this isn’t a war crime in the least.”
That kind of “But they’ve been living in fear! It’s different!” justification is the same shit Israel has used throughout its history to justify its atrocities, and it’s no more valid in the mouth of Israel than it is in Palestine’s.
You’re missing the point. For whatever it’s worth, I do agree with what you’ve written here. But what I’m talking about is perspective in understanding why the opinion polls shows the numbers they do.
What I’m NOT talking about is it being an excuse for behaviour. Surely you can understand why attitudes and opinions might differ between geographic regions and due to history.
Get off your soapbox, and try to understand why people think the way they do. You may come closer to actually understanding the nuances of reality instead of cocooning yourself in talking points. It’s all about relative perspective if you want to understand numbers being thrown around
Edit:
Just to be more clear, what I’m talking about is the difference between
“Hundreds of Israeli civilians had it coming for the crime of existing, I’m glad that they were gunned down by a terrorist attack, this isn’t a war crime in the least.”
And
“Hundreds of civilians have been killed for years, I’ve seen it happening and nothing has changed over a reasonable period of time. I guess this isn’t a war crime.”
What I’m NOT talking about is it being an excuse for behaviour. Surely you can understand why attitudes and opinions might differ between geographic regions and due to history.
‘Understanding why’ and ‘playing apologist for’ are two entirely different games. I understand why the Nazis garnered support in Weimar Germany. I understand why the Israeli security state developed and has such wide support amongst Israelis. I understand why Palestinians support terrorism while locked in a purgatory of occupation and imprisonment.
I’m not going to play apologist for them. I’m not going to sit here and say “Oh, I guess that’s a little bad, but it’s okay, because they’re suffering too.”
Supporting war crimes is horrifying. “They’ve had atrocities inflicted on them often too!”, yeah, and so have the Israelis, and yet when Israeli polls come out with horrifying numbers like “70%+ of Israelis support bombing Palestinian civilians”, I’m aghast at that horrific shit too.
It’s not okay. It’s not to be justified.
Get off your soapbox, and try to understand why people think the way they do. You may come closer to actually understanding the nuances of reality instead of cocooning yourself in talking points. It’s all about relative perspective if you want to understand numbers being thrown around
Man, I don’t know what you think I’m doing here. What talking points am I cocooning myself in? Please, give an example.
Dude, maybe I’m not explaining myself properly because I feel like we’re talking about two different things.
You said you “understand why Palestinians support terrorism while locked in a purgatory of occupation and imprisonment” if you understand this, then do you think their (meaning the average person) definitions of certain terms may be different to what we see?
If my definition of normal is not your definition of normal then can you judge the “normalcy”?
Again, I’m not saying this excuses behavior. But I do think it sheds light on why the poll is at 10%. The average Palestinian has seen copious amounts of indiscriminate violence (as has the average Israeli resident), do you reckon they might have a different bar for what constitutes a war crime or atrocity based on what they’ve been seeing around them for years?
Personally, I think this low poll numbers speaks more to what people are defining as an atrocity over there. Shits gotten so bad that murder is common.
As for talking points…man, I want to apologize for that. I felt myself getting emotionally invested in this back and forth and really shouldn’t have said that. I think “apologist” just triggered me because it’s gained a bit of a stigma
My point here is twofold:
-
That not defining murdering civilians as a war crime is horrifying regardless of whether or not you’ve had war crimes perpetrated on you, and that Israel’s extremists peddle the same basic line of “It’s just paying them back”, and it’s fucking horrifying there too.
-
That the deliberate denial of atrocities is a common phenomenon amongst radicalized supporters of causes, such as how British imperialists denied their atrocities and ignored evidence to the contrary, or the denial amongst some Americans of US atrocities at home and abroad.
Whether either or both apply, it is fucking disgusting and horrifying. Again, Israel makes the same excuses for their high level of support for murdering Palestinians - it’s no more justified there than it is here.
I agree with you on both points. Whats missing is the difference in definition of “war crime” and “atrocity” by the average citizen. These polls weren’t conducted solely on politicians, dignitaries, intellectuals, and the like.
If you don’t recognize an act as a war crime any more because of your lived experience. Are you able to willfully apply (or not apply) that label correctly?
Again, thinking about why the poll reflects the attitude towards Hamas + atrocities. Its not a matter of tit-for-tat I think; that is, its not “well they’ve been committing these ‘atrocities’ against us, so us doing it to them is valid/justified”. I think its “things have been happening and i don’t know what a war crime is, so when we do the same thing to them it can’t be a war crime…can it?”
In order for “deliberate denial of atrocities” to apply, you have to recognize an atrocity first and then deliberately deny it. Undoubtedly, the case amongst most intellectuals inside Gaza is that they recognize it very well. But I’d argue it isn’t true for the average citizen on either side of the fence. I’m talking about the people that are watching all this unfold from inside the border, Israelis and Palestinians. Shop keepers, taxi drivers, etc.
In fact, I’d wager that if a similar poll was conducted on Israeli citizens they’d most likely have a similar response to “did the IDF commit atrocities”. Its status quo over there. I’m not debating if these people are right or wrong in their thinking, I imagine there’s a whole conversation to be had around the notion.
So while it is definitely not right to say that Hamas did not commit war crimes or that they aren’t responsible for atrocities, I think its important to understand (and not vilify) that the very definitions we’re using for those terms may not be consistent inside that particular region. And that this should play into our accounting for why only 10% of Palestinians think Hamas committed war crimes.
That’s it. That last line, that’s all I’ve been trying to say
-
They have lived in fear under Hamas, but also are not going to side with the people deleting generations of their people from the face of the earth daily.
It’s not about ‘sides’, it’s about not believing that Hamas has done things that it is well-recorded and easily found doing.
a yes, bevause they have time and internetbto browser their phone all day
Internet penetration rate in Palestine is upwards of 70%, Jesus Christ
i was talking about gaza
The poll is of people in Gaza and the West Bank.
Israel cut their power dipshit 🙄
It’s this collapse in truth that worries me more than anything. People will simply ignore reality rather than admit that this is more complicated than good side v. bad side.
What’s the saying? “In war, truth is the first casualty”?
Sadly not new, nor likely to stop anytime soon. All we can do, as outside observers, is try to champion the truth, and avoid embracing lies, regardless of whether they fit our biases or not.
Only found if you have an internet connection … which Gazans haven’t had regularily since Oct 7.
Gazans haven’t had one regularly, but the West Bank has largely maintained service, and has a considerably higher level of support for Hamas.
I don’t think ‘lack of access to information’ is the issue here.
And the West Bank isn’t Gaza, is it?
Please stop trying to justify the unjustifiable.
… the West Bank was polled here along with Gaza.
What am I trying to justify?
Thinking that Palestinians in the West Bank should somehow override how Gazans polled, ofc without Gazans having stable access to the internet.
The West Bank Palestinians are pissed at the Zionists for burning down their homes and taking property that isn’t theirs to take. Colonialism at its finest right there.
Gazans are dying by the thousands, and since 50% of the Gazan population was children (prior to Oct 7) Israel/IDF practiced child slaughter.
Oh, and here’s a tidbit from the poll you obviously missed … nonetheless, the majority of the Palestinians remains unsupportive of Hamas.
Consider the following:
-
The IDF defends and arms terrorists and commits terrorist acts on a daily basis
-
All israeli adults serve military duty in the IDF and are reservists. Unlike the Palestinians which are not all part of the Hamas army.
-
Current adult Israelis voted for Netanyahu which violently opresses them and commits genocide.
-
Hamas did not shoot any children
-
Hamas did not rape any women
-
Hamas did not torture any prisoners
This is in retaliation to the IDF which has been comitting all these war crimes even before 7 Oct.
If you ask Ukranians about their army killing colonists in Crimea they’re probably pretty fine with it as well.
The IDF defends and arms terrorists and commits terrorist acts on a daily basis
Indeed, including terrorists like Hamas.
All israeli adults serve military duty in the IDF and are reservists. Unlike the Palestinians which are not all part of the Hamas army.
A country having universal conscription does not make every civilian a fucking target. What the fuck are you, Henry Kissinger (Rest In Piss)?
Hamas did not shoot any children
Hamas did not rape any women
Hamas did not torture any prisonersFucking doubt.
Current adult Israelis voted for Netanyahu which violently opresses them and commits genocide.
Oh, all of them?
This is in retaliation to the IDF which has been comitting all these war crimes even before 7 Oct.
Again, I reiterate - that Israel is horrible does not justify Hamas being horrible or Palestinians supporting the horrible things that Hamas does, or vice-versa.
If you ask Ukranians about their army killing colonists in Crimea they’re probably pretty fine with it as well.
I would be deeply disappointed if they did, because having armed forces murdering civilians is fucking horrific.
You’re in for a treat when you start reading about the Azov brigade. They’ve got literal Nazi’s.
And I still support Ukraine. But the western media trying to paint them as the cleanest war heroes ever is just a fairy tale. Violent resistance against oppression is never a pretty tale of roses. Especially in Hamas case when more than half the “soldiers” are untrained 19 year olds with guns
If israel treated Palestinians they would have all been appalled by what Hamas does.
The Hamas approval rating is basically a “how evil is israel” poll.
Fucking doubt.
https://youtu.be/mc5iG3DX7ho?si=k_JRYozXtplUgx6T
Zero evidence after two months == it didn’t happen 100%.
If there was any evidence the IDF would have been showing it on national TV for three weeks straight.
You’re in for a treat when you start reading about the Azov brigade. They’ve got literal Nazi’s.
Jesus Christ, imagine not knowing that the Azov Battalion hasn’t been an independent paramilitary for almost a fucking decade now.
Good job gobbling up Russian propaganda, though! Low-information twats who think they know everything are great for unwittingly spreading false information that suits their biases!
The Hamas approval rating is basically a “how evil is israel” poll.
And what’s the “How are the war crimes?” question? Also a “How evil is Israel?” poll?
youtu.be/mc5iG3DX7ho?si=k_JRYozXtplUgx6T
Zero evidence after two months == it didn’t happen 100%.
If there was any evidence the IDF would have been showing it on national TV for three weeks straight.
Fucking lmao.
AZOV’S ORIGINS
The Azov Regiment began as one of many militias of volunteer fighters who banded together to fight pro-Russian separatists backed by Moscow who carved out two breakaway regions in eastern Ukraine in 2014 after Russia annexed the Crimean peninsula.
Mariupol is the spiritual home of the Azov Regiment which it helped Ukraine recapture from pro-Russian fighters in 2014 and where it had a permanent base until the 2022 invasion.
The militia emerged from Andriy Biletskiy’s Patriot of Ukraine organisation that critics say championed white nationalist, anti-immigrant extreme-right ideas.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/3/1/who-are-the-azov-regiment
Azov is a far-right all-volunteer infantry military unit whose members – estimated at 900 – are ultra-nationalists and accused of harbouring neo-Nazi and white supremacist ideology.
The unit was initially formed as a volunteer group in May 2014 out of the ultra-nationalist Patriot of Ukraine gang, and the neo-Nazi Social National Assembly (SNA) group. Both groups engaged in xenophobic and neo-Nazi ideals and physically assaulted migrants, the Roma community and people opposing their views.
I’m pretty sure that they’ve got some Nazi shit going on there. Mind showing me where im misinformed?
AZOV’S ORIGINS
ORIGINS
ORIGINS
Our media’s “obsession” with the Azov Regiment (the volunteer militia the Azov Battalion no longer exists) – a single unit of the Ukrainian National Guard – is based largely on superficial or out-of-date research.
Multiple expert assessments made in 2022 conclude the modern Azov Regiment is a fairly typical fighting unit, with little, if any, political bent.
There isn’t space to canvas all these in a short piece, but this is the conclusion of Anton Shekhovtsov, Ivan Gomza, Anders Umland, and Vyacheslav Likhachev. For a concise summary, Likhachev’s point-by-point rebuttal of the Azov-Nazi narrative comes highly recommended.
Read more: Cyberwar: Keeping track of the battle to keep Ukraine online
The Azov Regiment of 2022 bears little relation to the ragtag militia the Azov Battalion of 2014, formed from a few dozen football hooligans, and – yes – far-right extremists.
Crucially, in late 2014, Azov was absorbed into the Ukrainian National Guard, allowing greater state oversight, with considerable attention paid to cleansing the ranks of far-right elements, in what should be recognised as an example of successful deradicalisation.
The Azov Regiment has been repeatedly reconstituted; its extremist early leaders such as the odious Andriy Biletsky are long gone, and, more recently, its fearsome, pseudo-pagan regimental emblem has been abandoned.
Both Shekhovtsov and Gomza describe Azov as “depoliticised”, with Umland writing “its recruits now join not because of ideology, but because it has the reputation of being a particularly tough fighting unit”.
Nonetheless, Russian state media makes endless reference to the diabolical “Azovtsy” to justify its brutal invasion of Ukraine.
Russia will use any excuse it wants to invade. If Azov didn’t exist it woud be NATO being too close. Putin just wants more land that’s all.
That said you can’t just discard the Azov origin which is only 8 years old. That’s like saying ISIS origins don’t matter. The old gang with a new name is just the old gang.
This article is a great summary. Especially near the middle: https://www.thenation.com/article/world/azov-battalion-neo-nazi/
"
There is a kernel of truth in the allegations that Azov is just a Russian bogeyman. The Kremlin and Ukraine’s neo-Nazis have a symbiotic relationship that reaches to the very heart of this war: Putin needed a pretext to justify his illegal invasion; for that, he turned to Azov. Moscow seized on Azov’s existence to paint all of Ukraine as a cesspool of fascism in need of “denazification.” Azov is the linchpin in Putin’s narrative—without it, his excuse for the war is gone.
In turn, Azov’s defenders have capitalized on Russia’s obsession by implying that anyone who criticizes the group is a Putin apologist. Moscow and Azov use each other to defend the indefensible: For Russia, it’s acceptable to invade a sovereign country to fight neo-Nazis; for the West, it’s appropriate to lionize neo-Nazis because they’re fighting Russia
OUT WITH THE OLD, IN WITH THE OLD:
The problem with insisting that Azov’s neo-Nazism is just a Russian lie is the abundance of evidence to the contrary. Seven years’ worth of Western articles chronicling the group’s nature was too much to ignore. This left Azov’s whitewashers with the unenviable task of cobbling together a come-to-Jesus story in which Azov began as a neo-Nazi paramilitary group but somehow saw the error of its ways before 2022.
The narrative that emerged goes like this: (a) Azov’s deradicalization started after it joined Ukraine’s National Guard—over time, Biletsky and other veterans of the 2014 battalion were filtered out, implying that the new leadership is neo-Nazi free; (b) yes, there are a few leftover neo-Nazis in the National Corps, Azov’s political party; but © that doesn’t matter, because the Azov Regiment—later a brigade—has long since separated from the National Corps, which is little more than a fringe political sideshow.
"
-
We are shocked! Who would have thought.
US backed anything in this is probably going to be a problem for everyone.
“US-backed” here meaning “The internationally recognized legitimate authority of Palestine”
Yes, except in this case Biden has publicly backed only Netanyahu up until yesterday.
So like that’s an issue, right?
It is. But the implication that Abbas is ‘US-backed’ misses that Abbas is the head of the PLO, and the PLO is the internationally recognized government of Palestine, rather than someone the US is trying to insert into the conflict or prop up.
Did you read in the poll that Palestinians want Abbas to quit? Cause it’s there.
Yes, I did, that doesn’t change that ‘US-backed’ is misleading here. I have no problem with Abbas resigning or the Palestinian people desiring him to resign, my only point is that Abbas isn’t some US-backed warlord or puppet. He’s the winner of the last legitimate elections of Palestine (over 20 years ago now, if I’m not mistaken), the internationally recognized leader of the legitimate Palestinian government, and the US’s support, insofar as it exists at all, is to the PLO rather than propping up him personally.
It’s not misleading. If you know anything about American history and how they’ve mucked about in other nations’ leadership, you would understand.
Jesus Christ.
I think this is the poll in question:
https://www.pcpsr.org/en/node/961
pdf warning:
https://www.pcpsr.org/sites/default/files/Poll 90 English press release 13 Dec 2023 Final New.pdf
😲
Hamas had wide support before Oct 7, wide support for the attack, and now wide support under invasion to return the hostages and dismantle Hamas.
Tldr: Hamas was and is supported by the Palestinians.
P.s. I’m kinda curious how they conducted a real survey
Yeah, so Israel’s done some really fucked up shit, clearly, but when I see polls like this that indicate significant Palestinian support for Hamas, my sympathy for them dips substantially. If you’re going to back a terrorist group, I don’t much care if you get bombed along with them.
You should care if civilian get bombed not out of sympathy for them but because it’s the right thing to do. Everything is fucked over there and will make you uncomfortable.
If you’re going to back a terrorist group, I don’t much care if you get bombed along with them.
Of course they’re going to support Hamas. The terrorist cell are the only ones even remotely in the corner of the Palestinians who were first being Apartheid-level oppressed by the Israeli government, and now are getting absolutely smoked by the IDF.
‘Desperate’ does not even begin to describe the situation of Palestinian civilians. If you were in the same position, and the only people fighting for you is a terrorist cell, I doubt you’d be that moralistic either.
hamas doesn’t fight for gaza civilians.
they steal humanitarian aid from them, use them as human shields, and caused this catastrophe upon them.
And the Israeli government has been doing far, far worse.
Stealing humanitarian aid? The IDF have been straight up bombing refugee camps that they themselves told Palestinians to go to. Not to mention, the Israeli government is directly the reason why humanitarian aid needed to be sent there in the first place, having cut off essential supplies to Gaza.
Using them as human shields? The IDF is performing straight up genocides.
Hostages? The IDF have been doing the same for decades. They literally process Palestinians via a seperate IDF-run court for any and all ‘offences’. The conditions they are held in are little better than that of the hostages held by Hamas, but they hold far greater numbers.
Caused this catastrophe upon them? I don’t know what part of Hamas’s actions you think somehow warrant straight up genocide of Palestinian civilians, but you’re wrong.
Hamas are a bunch of shit heads, but they’re also the only people that can and will push back against the IDF for its abuses of the Palestinian people.
Again, given the insane amount of deplorable shit the Israeli government puts the Palestinians through, it isn’t surprising that they will support shitheads like Hamas. It’s basically a choice between the Apartheid level oppressors or a shit head terrorist cell fighting against the Apartheid level oppressors.
propoganda, fake news, half truths, and bias.
also hamas are not a “bunch of shit heads”. they were voted democratically to end Israel existance.
propoganda, fake news, half truths, and bias.
Lol great bait mate. Try trolling harder.
They were voted in democratically, because the other option was Fatah. Netanyahu was voted in democratically multiple times, because some people cannot stand the thought of not killing more Palestinians and not stealing more of their land.
so option 1 was “death to israel” and option 2 was “death to israel” thanks for proving my point I guess
If your family were to be bombed we would see if your tune changed. “The enemy of my enemy is my friend.” Israel is working hard to make as many enemies as possible.
You’re right that he would feel different if his family was bombed by the IDF.
But then you have to consider how he would feel if his family were kidnapped, raped and murdered by Hamas.
This is a textbook cycle of violence.
Hamas is the only group that fights for the Palestinians. Supporting America or the PLO only gets them killed. They don’t give a shit about your support since you’re killing them.
Thinking you’re going to make someone turn against a group by killing their wife and kids and then saying “See, THEY are the bad guys!” is some next level stupid"
I would guess the Palestinians see Hamas like the US looks back on the revolutionary founding fathers, people who fought back against an oppressive government in the pursuit of independence. Both situations are far more complex than that, but for the average person who sees regular violence against their group they will support the people who fight back.
Hamas is not fighting for Palestinian independence, it is fighting for the destruction of Israel. The two situations are not even remotely similar.
It’s the same thing what are you talking about
No, they’re not, what are you talking about?
Such substance in these comments.
They are fighting for an end to the occupation. These their are literal words.
The occupation is israel. An illegal colony on top of Palestine.
If the israelis want to live in Palestine many Palestinians are actually in favor (though with the recent conflict that has probably declined).
Fuck, man, the solution to mutual hate isn’t “Keep shooting until there isn’t anyone left.”
What if there is no solution to mutual hate, which is why this conflict has been going on for decades?
Edit: to be clear I’m not advocating for genocide here, I’m saying that there probably is no simple solution to peace in the middle east.
“What if we HAVE to do genocide, guys, there’s no other option”
There are longer and fiercer conflicts than this that have been resolved without genocide. You don’t get an excuse to get your genocide boner up.
I can see how you thought that’s what I was saying, but it’s not what I meant.
Ah, my apologies then.
No worries, it was on me. Having reread what I wrote I can see how it sounded like that’s what I was saying.
deleted by creator
