- Messages
- 985
I do agree that the IDF should have been there to prevent this atrocity, however in wartime perhaps they were spread thin.
The IDF lets shit like this happen all the time. It has nothing at all to do with being "spread thin"
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I do agree that the IDF should have been there to prevent this atrocity, however in wartime perhaps they were spread thin.
You do know that the IDF allows this to happen. They sit there and watch while the terrorist settlers do this. There are tons of videos online (many filmed by the settlers themselves) where they march right by the soldiers. Hamas is not moral, and neither is the IDF.Didn’t the IDF arrest someone in connection with this murder? How many people has Hamas arrested due to their actions on 10/7? I do agree that the IDF should have been there to prevent this atrocity, however in wartime perhaps they were spread thin.
Trump is probably on the phone with Bibi asking, "Why are you trying to fuck me over? Don't you know a ceasefire now helps Kamabla? What's more important, the lives of the hostages, Gaza Palestinians and IDF forces or me winning this election?"Would be a super BFD if this could get done by Thursday evening.
I’ve linked the story before, but it must have gotten lost in the shuffle or ignored by others.![]()
‘Everything is legitimate’: Israeli leaders defend soldiers accused of rape
Israeli society is divided over arrest of 10 soldiers for brutal gang rape of a Palestinian prisoner caught on video.www.aljazeera.com
"Video has emerged of a gang rape of a Palestinian prisoner by guards at the Sde Teiman detention facility in the Negev desert, southern Israel.
The video, which has been verified by Al Jazeera, shows the prisoner being selected from a larger group lying bound on the floor. The victim is then escorted to a wall, where guards, using their shields to hide their identity from the camera, proceed to rape him.
The attack is believed to have been so brutal that, after he was transferred to hospital, Israeli media reported that the victim was unable to walk.
Ten soldiers were ultimately arrested for the rape on July 29, in a case that has rocked Israeli society. The soldiers belong to a unit known as Force 100, which is tasked with guarding the Sde Teiman facility, according to Haaretz.
Military prosecutors released three of the arrested soldiers on August 4, adding to the two previously released by investigators following a military court hearing in Kfar Yona on July 30, at which protesters gathered in support of the soldiers under arrest."
Has this been discussed at all? Seems like kind of a big deal.
You got to remember Rai, Israel has done so many bad things in Gaza to the Palestinians that it would be fairly easy for one more such incident to get lost in the chaos and madness.I’ve linked the story before, but it must have gotten lost in the shuffle or ignored by others.
Israel was the one that turned down the deal in May that would have released all the hostages because Netanyahu wants to occupy Gaza as part of the deal. They also proceeded to assassinate the main ceasefire negotiator. To me, that doesn't show me that they're "willing to negotiate"Israel is willing to negotiate. Hamas isn't. The best thing for Palestinians will be for Hamas to be destroyed, once and for all. Otherwise we'll just be back here again in five years.
1. You can't really conclude anything about willingness to negotiate from this. I am no fan of Hamas, that's for sure, but I'm quite skeptical of Israel's actual intent here. Since the details have to be worked out, and Israel has a long history of moving goal posts at the last minute when the details are presented (as do Palestinian negotiators), all you can conclude here is that Israel is willing to talk the talk.Israel is willing to negotiate. Hamas isn't. The best thing for Palestinians will be for Hamas to be destroyed, once and for all. Otherwise we'll just be back here again in five years.
So the problem lies with one side?1. You can't really conclude anything about willingness to negotiate from this. I am no fan of Hamas, that's for sure, but I'm quite skeptical of Israel's actual intent here. Since the details have to be worked out, and Israel has a long history of moving goal posts at the last minute when the details are presented (as do Palestinian negotiators), all you can conclude here is that Israel is willing to talk the talk.
If I go to the car dealer and the guy offers me a $1K trade-in for my 2011 Porsche Cayenne, I'm not likely to stick around to negotiate further. What should I say? No, I'm looking for more like $15K? Then he says, "I'm willing to negotiate. How about $2k?" I would leave on the spot. He's not really willing to negotiate.
2. Whether we are here in five years anyway depends more on Israel than on Hamas. Hamas is a symptom. The problem is the apartheid state in which Israelis have long been permitted (in the West Bank, where there has not really been Hamas) to steal and kill Arabs with no real consequences. Sometimes the Israeli military shows up to protect the settlers after they have committed crimes; sometimes the military is on-site when the crimes occur. IIRC, I read about one instance when the settlers were burning olive trees on Palestinians' land and the military was forcibly keeping the landowners and the community away. There was no authority whatsoever for burning the trees. It was just terrorism.
The people of Gaza have substantially more cause to revolt than did Americans in the 1770s. They are treated objectively worse, by a fair margin. So if we celebrate the American revolution, we can't exactly condemn the people of Gaza for their own desire to kick out the occupiers. There are many ways to do that, and one approach is non-violent resistance. I'm pretty sure the window for that is closed, and for that I blame the PLO -- but letting Israel off the hook for that is like letting Bull Connor off the hook if the peaceful protesters in Birmingham pulled out shotguns and opened fire.
Until the Israeli government stops adopting the positions of religious extremists as their official policy, we will never have peace in the region and that has nothing to do with Hamas.
Are you suggesting going back to the status quo and allowing Israel to continue its apartheid system is the solution?So the problem lies with one side?
"Hamas is a symptom. The problem is the apartheid state"
This is why it will go on and on.
Israel was the one that turned down the deal in May that would have released all the hostages because Netanyahu wants to occupy Gaza as part of the deal. They also proceeded to assassinate the main ceasefire negotiator. To me, that doesn't show me that they're "willing to negotiate"
Seems like a lot of victim blaming to me. "Palestinians have had it rough, so their only recourse is to rape and murder hundreds of Israeli civilians at a time." Hamas is a cancer, and when a cancer is killing you (you in this case being the idea of a Palestinian state), you have to get rid of the cancer. The Jews have been violently attacked by their neighbors as long as Israel has existed. They have a right to defend themselves, and they have a right to exist. Hamas does not recognize either of those rights. Trying to play off an Islamist terrorist group as "irrelevant" when Hamas is the literal reason there has been a war in Gaza for nearly a year is shortsighted and misguided.1. You can't really conclude anything about willingness to negotiate from this. I am no fan of Hamas, that's for sure, but I'm quite skeptical of Israel's actual intent here. Since the details have to be worked out, and Israel has a long history of moving goal posts at the last minute when the details are presented (as do Palestinian negotiators), all you can conclude here is that Israel is willing to talk the talk.
If I go to the car dealer and the guy offers me a $1K trade-in for my 2011 Porsche Cayenne, I'm not likely to stick around to negotiate further. What should I say? No, I'm looking for more like $15K? Then he says, "I'm willing to negotiate. How about $2k?" I would leave on the spot. He's not really willing to negotiate.
2. Whether we are here in five years anyway depends more on Israel than on Hamas. Hamas is a symptom. The problem is the apartheid state in which Israelis have long been permitted (in the West Bank, where there has not really been Hamas) to steal and kill Arabs with no real consequences. Sometimes the Israeli military shows up to protect the settlers after they have committed crimes; sometimes the military is on-site when the crimes occur. IIRC, I read about one instance when the settlers were burning olive trees on Palestinians' land and the military was forcibly keeping the landowners and the community away. There was no authority whatsoever for burning the trees. It was just terrorism.
The people of Gaza have substantially more cause to revolt than did Americans in the 1770s. They are treated objectively worse, by a fair margin. So if we celebrate the American revolution, we can't exactly condemn the people of Gaza for their own desire to kick out the occupiers. There are many ways to do that, and one approach is non-violent resistance. I'm pretty sure the window for that is closed, and for that I blame the PLO -- but letting Israel off the hook for that is like letting Bull Connor off the hook if the peaceful protesters in Birmingham pulled out shotguns and opened fire.
Until the Israeli government stops adopting the positions of religious extremists as their official policy, we will never have peace in the region and that has nothing to do with Hamas.
Not sure how you can read that, but to be clear for you, no.Are you suggesting going back to the status quo and allowing Israel to continue its apartheid system is the solution?