Nivsch

That is what every mind including my mind trying to do, but in parallel I try to seek the truth because I also confident enough in my side's partial - but significant and solid - justness in the big picture as complex as it will be, and the obligation to differentiate between health, poison and hypocricy.

@Bobby_2021 https://www.ynetnews.com/article/bji6rgaat

@Bobby_2021 where did you see they prevent humanitarian aid? I appreciate your reasonable approach and I know you are, and if Israel would not allow any track (or just 8 tracks) to enter I would agree with you, but there is no evident for that. Netanyahu must be very stupid to do that when he knows he need Biden's support. This isn't make sense. I would not hurry to trust casual not-innocent media on youtube and search for something official. I add here a counter media to buffer out the poison.

But UNRWA has been proven without any doubt to tie connections with and give a blind eye to terror, for example with a terror tunnel that found under an UNRWA building. To say that this means that Israel did it to kill people intentionally is 30 steps forward in the author wishes and imaginations.

Sometimes truthful, but there is still a component it has that other sources have not - the experience and knowledge on its own state's thinking. In the same way that I know what my motives and intentions are, and nobody can know this better than me. About objective results in the field a non Israeli media will indeed show things Israel is uncomfortabe to show.

Sometimes yes.

This is too indirect and interpreted. When you have a psychological assumption about the other side you think you know how it thinks, but this is not how it thinks but how you think about him. I think that Israelis would never do a genocide because I live with Israelis from birth.

Yes every media will tend to show things it is comfortable with and weaken the importance of the content it uncomfortable with. Though not to the same degree. But I agree with you in that you can never rely on one source.

Of course I have, show me some that you think of and we can talk if you want.

I understand that nobody will hurry to like a stranger invader who destroy your home even if he liberates you from years of harsh living under a terror organization rule. Life is complex.

Bias = A magic word you can always run towards when feeling uncomfortable.

@Emerald It can't be genocide under the killed ratio of 1 hamas member to 1.5 civilian when we know that the main hamas strategy is to hide behind civilians otherwise it has no chance against an organized army, therefore this strategy is in its DNA. You can say there is a collective punishment, or an unjust damage to Gaza etc. But genocide it isn't. The colonization narrative is false because it assumes that a stranger was parachuted onto an originally Arab land what isn't true at all because we know that for many centuries Jews and Arabs lived in this land together, along with the fact that most of the palestinians been here in 1948 came to the region as work immigrant during the last 2 centuries under the Ottoman rule. The differences in the developmemt I mentioned weren't to justify problems happening in Gaza but to explain why the west fails to distribute correctly the responsibility between Israel and Palestine when using those differences as an excuse to demand responsibility from almost only one side in the broad dynamic of the conflict along with the current situation's deeper causes.

If we want to be even more fair we want to see everyone as super intelligent nature's creation. Just to think about how intelligent is our body in how it balance all the process within it etc. we tend to underestimate it especially in the west and in how we think of our health And from that position try to look at every human being and give him more credit. But that insight emphasizes even more the importance of demanding equal responsibility from both sides in a conflict.

@royce I really try to use my own words as much as I can but english is also limited 🙃

@royce What is going on here is that the Palestinians in the end of the day get unproportionally easier "pass" to their actions because they are, in average, less evolved so they being treated like a child, whereas the Israelis are being demanded for full responsibility, also unproportionally, out of their more evolved position. But this paradigm is very limited and even almost completely false because the more evolved side cannot control nor educate the less evolved one, and therefore cannot be holded as more responsible then him in an atmosphere of conflict, beside a little bit because he can manage better his emotions, but also only a little better. In a family for example, this is different because the less evolved side wants to hear. Also, the less evolved one is NOT less smart in his ability to turn day into night if this helps him to survive, and people overlook this too, because in survival we are all equally smart, and therefore do not understand the sophisticated ways it uses to achieve its goal.

It is harder to make the most smart move for yourself and for the surrounding the bigger your PTSD from terror becomes.

I understand what you say here. Because a human is a human and no one is above anyone else. Isn't nationalism sometimes just an unavoidable and a legitimate protective mechanism against really toxic forces that otherwise would affect the society if it wasn't nationalistic? Because again if we choose to be the most truthfull, we might collapse ourselves and then we will must be even less truthfull (then we were in the nationalism state) in order to survive.

Our method is based on a coalition of diverse parties, not only from the deep right wing. Most of the time Netanyahu's coalition was a mixture which was more moderate in average. Two years ago we had a different governemt for a short period. Also Netanyahu is very charismatic and know how to kidnapp the crowd.

But why not to have? Is this a problem in your opinion? And why? After all this Israeli identity is what, I think, protects women, LGBTQ and individual right. Without this identity I dont know how those values were able to be applied and protected. Anyway the Center Left are always fully for two state solution, at least until oct 7th for sure. Now this is a bit more complicated I guess.

I think this kind of thinking you described applies to the deep right wing. In my surrounding circles of family and friends, education, meetings, even conversation within the party "yesh atid" (in the center-left sector) I like to discuss sometimes because they are very reasonable, I have never tackled this kind of talking like really. Yes, in more broad circles I hear sometimes people who are not moral and have no problem to "destroy them all" even from people who I know they are good and sensitive people when I talk to them on private! But then I remember he was hiding in his home when terrorists came to his town in oct 7th and I really cannot blame him.

I don't know. The education I got, that was the formal one, encouraged us to want peace. To say to you there wont be militant voices here? I can't. I am curious to know how would you react if your town was massacared and civilians from the massacare's country ware celebrate this with candies in their streets. Actully I am not curious becasue the answer is simple - of course you would dehumanized them.

You are invited to bring here examples you think on.

Yes a great tribe with the most mutual help and worry to each other I have ever seen.

All of these you think this is IDF policy only in this war or also before? I am not denying too loose actions from soldiers that are happening. In the other hand I have never heard about an army that does or did a cleaner war in such a tough and dangerous field. Not that I dont think it doesn't need to be improved because it is. But if you take out the current trauma response from the equation and look on the previous operations, I really don't think there is an army that did such diverse tactics (parachuted massages, knocks on roofs and more) to ensure civilians lives like IDF did.

@royce You don't have to read who you think is biased. Make your own claims.