zazen

Hagari's statement clearly said whilst accuracy is considered the focus is more on the damage part of the operation. Naturally a lot of civilian death comes with damage and unnecessarily destroying buildings that aren't used by Hamas ie levelling the place to make it uninhabitable. This intention and goal seems to be clearer by the destruction of crops where food is grown. ''High resolution satellite imagery shows bulldozers were used to destroy fields and orchards. Tracks are visible, as well as mounds of earth on the edges of the former plots.” - https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/12/18/israel-starvation-used-weapon-war-gaza#:~:text=The Israeli government is using,in Israeli forces' military operations. Above is why I took some time off. Saw the youtube video you shared earlier - didn't see anything propogandic about two guys walking around a neighbourhood even it was amongst a certain sect, neither was the way you shared it bad faith lol. The topic is a hypersensitive one to the ideological. Look forward to reading your insightful posts here again at some point.

@Nabd The lack of force or power projection (by Hezbollah, Iran etc) doesn't necessarily indicate weakness - which is a paradigm the US comes from and which is applied to other nations. Iran-Saudi-China have been peace making and integrating towards each other more and more including with Russia. These countries aren't geographically blessed the way US is in acting the way US does. The US can go around the world dick swinging and warmongering with minimal consequence because they have two vast seas to protect them with, a ally to the North and a weak neighbour to the South. Certain countries need to be more wary of any military adventures because the price to be paid is higher. Especially those with resources or ones with fault lines like India-Pakistan or Ukraine-Russia etc. Two groups having aligned interests doesn't mean conspiracy behind the scenes either - despite skirmishes done covertly in Syria lets say between Russia and Iran on who they want to remain in power - on a wider scale they have larger interests to be aligned on. They don't want to undo the work they've done (with BRICS and Iran joining the Shaghai Cooperation Organisation) and start wars to destabilise themselves and the region unlike vested interests of the West and Israel who wish to see Iran destroyed. Israel didn't defeat Hezbollah in 2006, US backed Saudi haven't defeated Yemen since 2015 and they don't seem weakened through attrition or in morale by their recent actions, Ukraine being backed by NATO and the West haven't won against Russia. 2 days ago Iran just seized back a oil tanker that was confiscated by US some years ago. Russia warned of Westward expansion that the West provoked and had to go in to Ukraine to secure its buffer zone and security interests - it gave red lines that were crossed and responded to - that's not a sign of weakness. Them being restrained all these years while the West flirted with how much they could push the boundaries and poke the bear wasn't indicative of them being weak by any means. States or non-state actors being backed by another state doesn't mean being dictated to by them. Houthis being Iran backed doesn't necessarily mean dictated to by Iran, like wise Israel being US backed doesn't necessarily mean US dictates Israel entirely. While it does provide influence, it isn't absolute control.

@kenway Good video, seems like the end result they predict will be a middle road taken by the judges - claiming in soft terms that genocide is underway but minimal measures will be applied in stopping it. The problem is one also of enforcement and entrenched interests. No one in the Middle East is interested in war escalation counter to the stereotypical claim of Muslims being violent - on the contrary the region has been calling for de-escalation, ceasefire and negotiations. Hezbollah had also only addressed Israel to say they will only retaliate in proportion and never in excess. South Africa are proactively protesting legally and Yemen economically by their blockade for which the US/UK are intervening militarily and with violence. If the elites ignore public protest, intervene through anti-BDS laws and now militarily to Yemens economic blockade - can people really wonder why unjust terrorist acts and violence occur as a means of seeking justice? The message sent is that the only price they understand is a blood price - even then, the US economy being oriented towards being a war machine will feed on that blood to as usual benefit the few at the expense of the many. WCSF (wounded child no surviving family) - a new acronym born from Israel’s Gaza onslaught. If they can’t re-define words at least they’ve created a new acronym, but one that isn’t the contribution or win they think it is.

South Africa and Yemen standing up to Israel and the West is significant - we are entering a multipolar world where the global south are emboldened and will not sit by any longer at imperial bullying. Western audiences being drip fed propaganda for decades of their exceptionalism and others lack of it aren’t able to read the room of geopolitical reality. Western power projection is overestimated and a Eastern/Middle Eastern response and kneecapping of this projection is underestimated. The same way the Suez crisis of 1956 signalled the end of British hegemony - what is becoming today's Suez crisis (with the US/UK intervening) signals and spotlights the end of US hegemony and the ushering in of a multi polar world which they are arrogantly unwilling to accommodate without lashing out against. Houthis haven't been defeated since 2015 and have penetrated Saudi's US fortified missile/drone defense system which can hit oil fields - despite robust U.S support including advanced Patriot missiles. ''Such is the capability of the Iranian-provided missiles and drones that the current commander of US Central Command, responsible for all US forces operating in the Middle East, recently testified before Congress that the US no longer enjoys the presumption of air superiority in the Mideast Gulf.'' Iran are much stronger, larger, advanced and have much better protection against any possible ground invasion thanks to their geographical situation (a mountainous moat as compared to the flat land in other Middle Eastern regions). Their long range missiles can sink any carriers and the strait of Hormuz can be choked and blocked affecting the West. ''The reality of modern warfare is that small nations and non-state actors such as the Yemenis can be armed with modern military weaponry that negates the military impact of multibillion-dollar investments such as the carrier battlegroup. It costs the Yemenis tens of thousands of dollars to fire their drones and missiles against Israel and maritime shipping; it costs the US navy millions of dollars to shoot them down. Moreover, it costs the US navy hundreds of millions of dollars just to keep a carrier battle group deployed and operating, while the Yemenis can credibly threaten to sink a carrier using weapons that cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. This failure goes far beyond the issue of security for the Red Sea. The United States has long maintained that it could guarantee that if Iran ever sought to close the strategic Strait of Hormuz, the US navy would be able to reopen it in a very short period. But Operation Prosperity Guardian puts a lie to that claim. The fact is, the world balance of power has changed dramatically, and legacy systems like the carrier battlegroup are no longer the dominant means of power projection they once were. The USA has, in effect, put all its eggs in one basket through its over-reliance upon the carrier battlegroup when it comes to force projection. The looming failure of Operation Prosperity Guardian exposes the impotence of the USA when it comes to being able to accomplish its plans for regional dominance in the Persian Gulf, South Pacific and Taiwan, and signals a new era where the appearance of an American fleet off the shores of a faraway land no longer inspires fear and intimidation. For a nation like the United States, which has premised so much of its foreign and national security on the notion of strength-based deterrence, the revelation that its military power projection capabilities are more bark than bite undermines its credibility as an ally and partner in a world largely defined by conflicts created by, or on behalf of, the United States.''

@kenway Well said, the word fatigue is the best way to describe it when claims are made that contradict facts and heavy terms are used that need to be defined by both sides for effective communication. The term terrorist has become a weaponised label no one wants to be associated with the same way no one wants to be accused of genocide. @Nivsch I think the reason some hesitate to call Hamas terrorists especially like that South African guy is because in South Africa’s history it was Nelson Mandela who helped end apartheid / injustice and go on to become the first democratically elected President of the country - yet he was labeled a terrorist. The locals saw him as a freedom fighter and the movement as a resistance to oppression likewise how some view Hamas who are as the embodiment of Palestinian resistance with an armed wing and who deploy terrorist tactics. Just today Biden called Houthis terrorists - yet he actually removed that designation in 2001 - https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1256923 They haven’t killed anyone in their protest to Israel, only blockaded shipments going to Israel (a taste of their own medicine for blockading Gaza for 18 years) within their own territorial waters and asked for a ceasefire or aid to be allowed in- for this they get bombed. It seems whoever goes against the empires interest are deemed terrorists. The message sent is that container ships and bottom line profits are more important than innocent babies, children, men and women being killed and displaced in Gaza. If we go by the definition of terrorism as the ‘unlawful use of violence or intimidation for political ends’ - wasn’t the UK and US striking Yemen without passing Parlimanent in UK and Congress in US unlawful? And for which political end, for their own countries politics or for another countries ie Israel’s political end. If lawful use of violence is used does that make it right? For example, just to show how sneaky laws can be in legalising what could otherwise be called terrorism: There exists a Act “known informally as the Hague Invasion Act - a United States federal law described as "a bill to protect United States military personnel and other elected and appointed officials of the United States government against criminal prosecution by the international criminal court. The Act authorizes the president of the United States to use "all means necessary and appropriate to bring about the release of any U.S. or allied personnel being detained or imprisoned by, on behalf of, or at the request of the International Criminal Court". This authorization led to the act being colloquially nicknamed "The Hague Invasion Act", as the act allows the president to order U.S. military action, such as an invasion of the Netherlands, where The Hague is located, to protect American officials and military personnel from prosecution or rescue them from custody.” https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members'_Protection_Act

It just didn’t seem coherent, was like a master class in whataboutery. Some standalone points did seem like good counters but then the facts seem to go against their own - like the claim they didn’t bomb any hospitals. The military strategy doesn’t seem to match their objective of targeting Hamas either. If you notify a building before bombing it then Hamas will surely run away also or relocate.

True, pure misuse and abuse of a model/framework. The worst use of that argument is that the less developed need to develop to be given a state or shouldn’t govern themselves because by looking around at other Arab nations they’re dysfunctional. If I’m not mistaken that almost sounds colonial. @Danioover9000 Good points and observations made 👍🏻

Almost like bingo. Will be interesting to hear Norman Finklesteins take on it. I found this comment on youtube interesting:

@Danioover9000 I'd only add that though dark humour exists but if the person dishing it out has stated such things like that they don't care for Palestinian life - that obviously indicates a clear lack of empathy and good faith in any discussion. Some of Jaylimix's reasoning and points have been interesting and made me think which I appreciate but then past posts like the one below leave a bad taste in wanting to respond to them. I've more often seen dehumanising language come from the pro-Israeli side than the pro-Palestinian side. Maybe certain rhetoric has become so normalised in Israel that referring to the other side in such ways as virus, rats, animals etc doesn't seem to come across bad to their own conscience until they start interacting with the outside world in which they get some negative feedback for their choice of words. It's language like this that can lead to genocides and normalising ethnic cleansing. Likewise in the case of the Rwandan genocide it starts with speaking of the other side in such ways on public radio stations (referring to them as rats, cockroaches etc) that immunizes them to committing future death and destruction.

Maybe you're mixing falling into unconsciousness with going beyond it towards consciousness. Instinct, unconsciousness and evolution aren't higher than intelligence, consciousness and enlightenment. Instinct, unconsciousness and evolution are the base - intelligence, consciousness and enlightenment are the height of human potential. Someone who is conscious would be aware of taking another life unjustly, especially at a mass scale and systematically. Like what I wrote earlier in this thread: Hitler took Nietzche's concept of the superman (ubermensch) and perverted it. It takes a level of wisdom and consciousness to understand the same level of wisdom and consciousness. Hitler became a false prophet of Nietzche's philosophy and not only misinterpreted it but acted upon that interpretation to create the atrocity he did. When Nietzsche talks of the will to power it doesn't mean will to dominate and win the survival of the fittest - to be absolutely darwinian. Yes, its intoxicating, grand and stroked the ego - but this is the same myth and archetype of the Hero which other cultures feel affinity to. It's just not done at the expense of others. Power isn't a problem, its the misuse of it that is. Power in the service of lower forces wreak inhumane atrocity.

A serious escalation. Some points: Today a ship was seized by Iran - which used to be theirs and had barrels of oil cargo. Could also be deflection from the ICJ hearing. Houthis have the capability of hitting oil fields in Saudi which will tailspin the world into inflation and financial instability like we’ve never seen. Instead of intervening in stopping innocents dying in Gaza and strong arming a peaceful solution the US/UK are doing Israel’s bidding and escalating things / saving face as Western hegemons. Henry Kissinger said ‘to be a enemy of the US is dangerous but to be a friend is fatal’ - because you become a lapdog and sacrificial lamb for imperial interest.

@kenway True, Owen Jones made a video about the viewing of that 50min video and said no rape or beheadings were seen although atrocities definitely were no doubt. If theirs no dirt to leverage these judges with behind the scenes then surely they will use emotional appeal to pull at heartstrings to compensate for lack of legal or moral grounds. Any sympathy from Oct 7th was abused and misused in disproportionate response. I don’t think we’ll ever get to know what truly happened on October 7th, it could have been a military operation that got messy in confrontation with IDF or independent factions/individuals split off/broke through the fence along with them. Hamas would never admit that they had ordered the raping or killing of civilians rather than just the military objective to get hostages as a bargaining chip in exchange for their women/children political prisoners. Neither will Israel allow for investigation into the rape allegations or the burnt cars that were suspiciously buried - maybe due to evidence pointing only to Israel’s ability to rain down such firepower on them that Hamas don’t posses. Some possible excuses : Trying to put myself in a lawyers shoes to defend Israel and I’m actually lost for any argument. Even saying that if ‘we as Israel wanted to commit genocide we already would have as we have the capability’ doesn’t work. Capability doesn’t mean acceptability by the world or that such actions won’t have consequences for the perpetrator - which is why ethnic cleansing or genocide has to be a slow and covert process rather than a fast and overt extinction like event.

Great summary of what took place. They presented it in such a way that not only is Israel on trial but International law is itself at trial and in the hot seat - almost like a stress test for the international system. Also by comparing other genocides to which they intervened on which were much less devastating and where less explicit genocidal intent was shown puts them in a awkward position if they weren't to intervene to stop a case which is much clearer - and stressing the fact that the founding of the UN and conventions were exactly fit for purposes such as this. They nullified Israel's response of self defence before it's even made like you said as the occupier can't claim such things against the occupied. One defence which is more of a emotional one from Israel's side is that the statements of intent are done by radicals or extremists - yet it was made clear that all such people hold positions of authority to dictate policy and not just some random pedestrian. The argument of cherry picking statements from extremists doesn't work when there's enough quantity of cherries to pick that show a certain rot exists in the basket that contaminates the society, politics and geopolitics of the state. @Danioover9000 Fair to say Israel got legally bodied. Israel likes to use disproportionate force (Dahiya doctrine) - seems like they got a disproportionate response in legal terms and evidence lol A great link outlining all the statements and well categorised: https://crimesbyisrael.com/ Will be interesting to see Israel's defence. Although, one shouldn't let what is decided (or coerced) in the chambers of law to dishearten and muzzle what echoes so loudly in the chambers of the heart as to what is just and right.

@Nivsch True, the mind is cunning at rationalising either way. The problem can be that a legal judgement doesn’t always match a moral judgement. What’s legal may be logically correct but not emotionally right. Legal judgements can be correct in the black and white of ink but not humanely right to the red pulsing essence of blood that runs the heart. A final verdict won’t come till many years but all South Africa is asking for now is to cease the conflict to prevent a genocide in the making a subset of which is ethnic cleansing. It doesn’t have to be a finalised case to affect things only a plausible one which all who are signed to the convention are obligated to act upon in stopping it. There is global pressure on the West to not fiddle around or coerce judgment with the power that they have. Beside Israel being on trial it is also international law itself which is. The eyes of the world are watching it to be applied fairly and if not this sets a dangerous precedent - and only further diminishes the Wests standing due to their stark selective application of the principle of law. It’s telling that South Africa and Yemen have stood up to Israel and the West - we are entering a multipolar world where the global south are emboldened and will not sit by any longer at imperial bullying. Western audiences being drip fed propaganda for decades of their exceptionalism and others lack of it aren’t able to read the room of geopolitical reality.

Al Jazeera are live streaming it on YouTube for those that prefer YouTube. When we witness isolated statements of intent and footage of death and destruction separately it stings but doesn’t paralyse the way it does when it’s shown compiled together the way the South African case presents it - almost like a tranquilliser to your moral compass that could wake anyone with heart and good conscience out of apathy. May justice and peace prevail.

@Danioover9000 @kenway I think Norman Finkelstein will be commentating the hearing live. Most people won’t read the full 80 page South African document so here’s a tweet thread with interesting parts: Apparently this is one of their defences:

You guys clearly understand the concept of being pushed to the limit of exploding after years and decades of trauma but then can't seem to apply this same concept to the Palestinians or for what Hamas did on October 7th which yes - was horrible. Were women truly oppressed under patriarchy - was the feminist movement including the suffragettes in England who vandalised buildings and committed arson justified in fighting for women's right to vote? The level of resistance will be in line with the level of oppression. When describing situations it doesn't have to be the most absolute use of a word to apply as people can be partially metaphorical to make the point. Like when people refer to Gaza as a open air prison - it isn't true in its most literal sense but partially true in the sense that freedom of movement and restrictions exist for Gaza. If we're talking international law then definitions require more precision to be used and applied (genocide, ethnic cleansing for example). Otherwise, certain words are used as analogous to make a point. A revolt or resistance doesn't have to exclusively be only to the most extreme absolute versions of oppression and it doesn't deny the fact that some form of oppression is occurring that needs resisting to. Ethnic cleansing/displacement is still happening and has been for decades - they aren't supposed to resist that? When people are denied a state their denied a certain type of more 'civilised' and accepted means of protection/deterrence - when a group of people don't have a military, navy, air force, intelligence agencies or the backing of a global superpower they need to resort to guerrilla warfare and other unsavoury uncivilised tactics like suicide or terrorist attacks - which they are then gaslighted as savages for and I get it, it is savage - but it doesn't detract from their cause being a just one of equal human rights, self determination and dignity even though they go about it in undignified unjust ways of which they have been left with little choice.

Correct, so why do they exist and what are they resisting? The same human rights organisations that talk about what Israel is doing and claim it as an occupation and apartheid to which Israelis deny and call anti-Semitic. From today: The West have literally no idea how to defend Israel’s actions when probed properly like above. Snowden commenting on the situation now:

All about the headline not the trendlines. Propaganda is effective when it doesn't trigger people's cognitive alarms ie subtle and often - almost like ingesting microplastics through water. Tiny manipulations build up to warp our minds and control the narrative in favour of the vested interests. Sneaky af. Possibly it could be a risk in terms of intelligence sharing and spying within the state, not really a threat in terms of violence. Beyond that I'm not sure what else would be objectionable about Ariel as my knowledge is limited. Definitely the Palestinians can also be stubborn - but it must be understood why they don't feel they should be the ones conceding as they see themselves as the more wronged party. I think that's all that most of the people in this thread are trying to shine light on and which the Israeli side can be blind to - which is that the Palestinians have been unjustly wronged. From Israel's side they can't see that it seems - maybe due to entitlement to the land ancestrally, the Gods chosen people concept or because their too traumatised and wrapped up in their own trauma caused by people on another continent (Europe) but for which the Palestinians need to suffer and pay for their sins.

Good to see both sides at the table rather than on fighting for sure. The number of proposals is always given as if to show Israel as the peacemaker and the Palestinians as the savages who deny deal after deal - what's left out are the details of the proposals. For example just from the Annapolis conference link you shared: 'Abbas refused to sign on Olmert's peace offer as Olmert did not allow Abbas more than one day to study the map. Nevertheless negotiations continued, but got increasingly difficult as Olmert became entangled in domestic corruption charges.' - surely you should be given more than a day to study the map of what will be your peoples future state. 'The Israeli settlement of Ariel, deep inside a potential Palestinian state, was a controversial issue for Olmert and Abbas' - why would any state have a settlement or area from a former state they had such hostility with which could put their future state at risk. Would Ukrainians ever agree to have a Russian settlement in Ukraine after the war ends? 'Negotiations were formally suspended in January 2009, when Israel invaded the Gaza Strip. But Abbas continued to call on the US to broker a deal.' - sounds like the Palestinian side wanted peace unlike what is portrayed as Abbas called on the US to continue the process. Israels shown a very serious desire for peace? Eating away at land at the West Bank continuously no matter which government has been in power since decades isn't a sign of being serious about it. In the words of Avi Shlaim - Israel is like a man who pretends to be negotiating the division of a pizza while he keeps eating it lol.

Bro we've been over the peace offers before and why they weren't good enough for the Palestinians or deemed as fair. It wouldn't be a true state or sovereign basically. A few Israeli security points would remain, demilitarised, no ability to form alliances or agreements with other nations without Israels approval, resources such as water still within Israels control etc. What difference is there to that and what the current situation is in West Bank? Israeli military control it and what have they done with their power or allowed to be done? Settlement expansion. Also, stopping settlement expansion isn't enough anymore, a lot will have to be removed which is almost impossible considering how far right the settlers are and now that they are armed. Its a tough situation because the land that is actually seen as the holiest part to Jews is in the West Bank which is supposed to make up any future Palestinian state.

Man is animal, but he is also more than animal. If we reduce ourselves just to our instincts then why not just breed like rabbits and eat sugar all day. It's because instinct was harnessed through discipline that civilisations were created, not because we indulged instinct which is what end of empires do when abundance satiates them. Universal consciousness / godhead /life itself is older than even instinct - it's this life that is exploring itself and evolving itself back to its own realisation but through the material world of biology and instinct. Biology and instinct chain down the soul which wants to transmute its limitations, not indulge them risking its own destruction and that of others.

@Nivsch People can see Israel's side in this - they just don't agree to the entitlement that some of its population have. When people mention apartheid, occupation or ethnic cleansing they're referring to West Bank or Gaza more so than Israel proper. Like that video you shared of that girl asking where is apartheid - its like showing Beverly Hills mansions and saying where is the income inequality? But completely missing out the ghettos of LA. You have acknowledged the settlers are a problem also so you're aware of it, maybe just not the scale or how big of a problem it is. The settler expansion in West Bank gets in the way of a two state solution. But if there isn't going to be a two state solution because the settlers aren't going to move then what is Israels choice? To go on as its going on and hope the world just forgets about Palestinians? It can't go on the way it is.

Instinct, unconsciousness and evolution aren't higher though. Hitler took Nietzche's concept of the superman (ubermensch) and perverted it. It takes a level of wisdom and consciousness to understand the same level of wisdom and consciousness. Hitler became a false prophet of Nietzche's philosophy and not only misinterpreted it but acted upon that interpretation to create the atrocity he did. When Nietzsche talks of the will to power it doesn't mean will to dominate and win the survival of the fittest - to be absolutely darwinian. Yes, its intoxicating, grand and stroked the ego - but this is the same myth and archetype of the Hero which other cultures feel affinity to. It's just not done at the expense of others. Power isn't a problem, its the misuse of it that is. Power in the service of lower forces wreak inhumane atrocity.

Resistance is baked into occupation - it can be expected until that occupation has completely subjugated the original population, genocides or cleanses them or has finally integrated them into a democratic state like America and Australia for example. How this occupation is resisted will differ - India mostly had peaceful resistance against British occupation while the Algerian, Kenyan, Vietnamese or South African resistance included violence. Are Nelson Mandela from South Africa or Matt turner from the slave revolt terrorists? The level of resistance depends on the level of oppression. The feminist suffragettes in England for example protested, vandalised property and committed arson in order to obtain the right to vote. Were they oppressed to the level Palestinians are? When the avenues to peaceful protest have been blocked oppressed people are left with no other option. The BDS movement which helped end South African apartheid is out lawed legislatively - theres no talks of a two state and if there is one its only dangled like a carrot to keep them pacified and waiting while their land gets rapidly taken away in West Bank - any discussions of a state only offer 'less than a state' in the words of Rabin with limited right of return, security presence etc which fails meeting the international standard of a sovereign state. Israel thought it can just go on as is and the Palestinian issue is just a thorn on its side that needs removing whenever it pricks them - that the world will forget about them and it could go on to normalise with the Arab nations - this is why they had a uprising and put their cause back on the world stage including Israel's atrocities which they self incriminate themselves with boastfully - it was a cry for the world not to forget them, a violent cry.