Former President Barack Obama said a way forward for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is only possible if people acknowledge the “complexity” of the situation.
“If there’s any chance of us being able to act constructively to do something, it will require an admission of complexity and maintaining what on the surface may seem contradictory ideas that what Hamas did was horrific, and there’s no justification for it. And … that the occupation and what’s happening to Palestinians is unbearable,” Obama said in an interview on the podcast “Pod Save America.”
The former president’s comments come as the Israeli military focuses its offensive against Hamas in Gaza City and northern parts of the enclave.
Sadly, there is no way forward. The leaders of both sides want the complete elimination of the other.
So remove the leaders of both sides.
Unfortunately Hamas hasn’t held a single election since they were elected in 2006, and Netanyahu is looking similarly autocratic. The recent escalation is only going to make both sides more antagonistic.
In other words, this shit ain’t going away any time soon.
Why should hamas keep down their arms when they see what is happening in disarmed Westbank?
-
Unarmed protest is always an option. It’s a harder option, but it is an option.
-
Hamas could keep their weapons, and target actual military targets in Gaza.
-
Israel already withdrew from Gaza in '06, but Hamas is happy to launch rockets at civilian targets in Israel.
-
Hamas could launch rockets at civilian targets in Israel from non-civilian locations in Gaza, instead of using schools and hospitals.
Hamas has consistently picked the most hostile options because Hamas doesn’t just want a free Palestine, Hamas wants the destruction of Israel and rejects any territory existing as an Israeli state. Gaza isn’t even fully isolated by Israel, but Egypt wants nothing to do with Hamas either.
I’m not even saying armed resistance is wrong, but what Hamas does is. And yes, Israel’s government is also just as wrong, if not more so.
You must be new to the world then.
- Unarmed protests are not an option as evidenced by the great march of return in Gaza. Israhell knee capped Palestinians with bullets.
- How exactly? Are you providing them with precision weapons. Also Hezbolla is exclusively targeting military and Israhell killed Lebanese civilians. Hezbolla responded by promising to kill 1 Israeli civilian for every Lebanese civilian killed by Israel. Also you might not be familiar with Dahiya doctrine of Israel.
- Gaza does not exist in a vacuum. Gaza and hamas can see the occupation and annexation of the Westbank. They can see the desecration of Aqsa.
- You are pretending everything Israel says is true even though you know they lie all the time.
Why shouldn’t Hamas continue armed resistance? Westbank is the living example of what happens when resistance dwindles. Israhell takes all. Simple.
-
deleted by creator
Yes. If Arabs had helped they’d have their own state by now. But the monarchies helped suppress and kill Palestinian state hood because they are afraid of what the Levant Arab mindset represents. They are afraid of both islamist and secular Levant arab politics because they represent unity beyond borders.
Exactly. I’ve been recently thinking that maybe Israel and Palestine become a new country run by the world. It becomes a neutral globally enforced and patrolled market or exchange. Almost like a U.N. country, but somehow better because the U.N seems like a fucking joke. I’m not sure exactly what I mean here, but essentially, the world removes the two and force them to be one.
Even though it is complex, there are obvious crimes, let alone war crimes happening there. Looking at you IDF with your repeated bombing of civilians and the wounded.
I think you’ve just created a tinderbox of like…well…biblical proportions.
Umm… it’s already burning.
Just saying.
The UN is a pull organization. It has to request forces & money for operations. No nation or nation collective in their right mind would want to shell out the billions required to basically occupy the region, even with Jerusalem.
Make it a global trade hub. All nations will have an interest. With global trade comes investment, and the next thing you know, this small patch of the earth is the most valuable piece on it.
So make a place a global trade hub in theory can be as simple as saying it is so and watching every country trade there, only in one’s imagination.
So now the region is going to be made into a great Singapore for the Mediterranean using billions of dollars of tax money from nations including Egypt, Turkey, Greece, Cyprus, etc?
That’s not a global trade hub. That’s a globally subsidized tax haven. Whose long-term stability Congress from the whim of nations like the USA, China, Russia, the EU, Iran, Saudi Arabia, etc…
With that, it would be infinitely easier and more attractive for any nearby nation to create a special economic area to handle regional trade & take the jobs, and the best part? This would be funded by the respective nation itself.
The way you describe it is a tax haven. Make it not so.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
This is almost an appealing idea in a parallel universe where religion doesn’t exist, but unfortunately that’s not the one we live in. This conflict is one that extends to nearly every avenue, but at it’s core, it’s a religious one. Unless we’re ready as a global community to finally denounce religion and call the practice of it a silly and fruitless endeavor, which to be clear, we aren’t, then we’re never going to get anywhere pretending we can ignore the religious aspect of it. And that includes your utopian suggestion, which aside from all of its other very real problems would also likely enrage an enormous religious segment of the world who would see some of their holiest lands reduced to mere merchants dens. Even if you perhaps try to protect the religious sites, now you’re effectively enforcing a concept of religious sanctity on the global community, which is no less likely to offend.
Your idea is well-intended and nice to think about, but unfortunately unrealistic for many reasons, starting on the ground floor with problem of religion.
Yes, that’s why we don’t stop trying. I might not make a difference, but maybe the next generation or the next after that. The point is I’m not going to stop trying. There is no answer that everyone is going to like, but there is an answer that will help everyone. I mean Israel IS man made.
This is the answer and is being downvoted with no better suggestions. If you don’t have solutions and only criticism, you’re part of the problem.
Criticism, constructively made, helps avoid bad ideas, and makes good ones better. But you don’t always know the better way when you see a bad one— I don’t need to know how to build a boat to know a screen door won’t float.
Part of the problem is one side having a desire for autonomy, and limited, at best sense of self-determination. Robbing them and the state they have grievance with of both their autonomies and capacities for self-determination doesn’t seem like a good answer to the problems they both have.
That’s why you remove all the sides. Corporations already act without boundaries. They actually benefit from country boundaries ie: manufactured in China for cheap and sold in America for massive profit. Corporate interest is what is against no country boundries.
I agree. But downvotes to a legitimate solution without criticism or suggestions is pointless and contributes nothing to the discussion. I don’t care if you even suggest nuking the entire area. Just own it and defend your opinion.
Eh… I think I might care about somebody suggesting nuking the entire area. Not all ideas are created equal, and not all ideas are worth expressing.
I agree that not all ideas are equal, but disagree about their expression. Discourse and communication is the only way we learn and become better people. If I’m wrong, which happens too often, I want someone to be able to explain why. I’d rather the racists hurl slurs, so they can exposed and taught, then to stay silent and never be confronted.
No, we absolutely do not nuke the area. That’s what Buttholeyahu wants to do. You know the corrupt leader of Israel. What about America, yeah there’s a shitload of corruption here too and it’s still wrong.
Another thought that I had was having international governing bodies get together and force Israel to pay for the relocation, education, housing, and UBI for every single Palestinian citizen for the remainder of their lives if they would agree to peaceful relocation to another host country. This is a much less preferable idea to the previously mentioned one, but it seemed like a potentially feasible one.
Forced migration, which this would be, is a bad idea, as has been born out repeatedly through history.
- if it’s to many countries, it splinters communities.
- if it’s to just one country, few are open to taking even small numbers of people in, let alone five and a half million.
- if one was open to it, none have the infrastructure in place to receive so many people.
- people get attached to land, and the idea of it.
To that last point, that land is not interchangeable, and any assumption that it is is remaining ignorant of some of the desires of the parties involved.
I could go on, but I don’t think that would add to discourse. This is a hard problem, renewed with every moment of violence. I don’t believe we should expect any of the grievances each side has stacked up to be let go of without honouring their non-violent desires.
I’d just take Israel paying for their relocation.
If you think you can reduce the solution to this problem (or even a proper description of the problem itself) into a quick reply on a web forum, you’re part of the problem.
Honestly, everyone I’ve seen weigh in on this has fucked it up, on all sides, at all times, going all the way back.
Maybe a bunch of armchair geniuses should stay out of it, unless they’re willing to drop what they’re doing and go over there to help. Meddling from external parties is part of how this got so fucked up (over and over and over).
The problem is asshole leaders are being petty little brats. There is a solution, but both parties involved are being selfish assholes and the citizens end up dying and suffering. There are easy solutions to everything when you remove the angry assholes.
A child knows right from wrong until they are corrupted by an adult. The answer is easy. The evil ones who benefit are making it hard.
While you armchair genius. No insight. No congregation of minds to develop even a strategy of a path forward. Just criticism for those who want to make the world better. Pathetic. I assume you’re commenting from Gaza because you went over there to help.
Edit: That was reactionary and uncharacteristic. Some of us want to learn from each other and try to understand the situation to build a consensus for what a solution might look like.
Well done; you missed the point entirely, slung some useless mud, and figured out a way to turn it into self- praise. You should run for office.
Everyone stop what you’re doing at look over here at… “TokenBoomer”… they’ll get to the bottom of this, on a web forum, deep in a thread with… Hey! 5 boosts! We’re almost there, I can feel it.
Like and subscribe, thoughts and prayers.
Fuck thoughts and prayers. They have done nothing. Thoughts and prayers are tools of the usless and inept.
I understood your point. I just don’t agree with it. This is a social space. We can only learn by participation. My statement could have been phrased better. But I still agree with the sentiment. I’m no one special and have no misconceptions about solving the world’s problems. But I do have opinions, and enjoy learning from other’s perspectives.
The greatest danger to our future is apathy.
Jane Goodall
Exactly, change the leader or change the leader
It’s a never-ending organic entity. You have to keep at it The problem with the insanity analogy is that it takes a billion times to do something sometimes before even beginning to see the start of a change.
Take away their toys and put them in time oot.
Ah. Yes. That’s the easy way to do it.
deleted by creator
Lol not true. Palestine disarmed in the Westbank and got nothing except brutal apartheid and evictions as a result.
And we can stop giving them money unless they start playing nice.
It’s not the government who is settling the West Bank. Yes, it is their policy, but it’s regular Israeli citizens who are killing Palestinians, burning their homes down or taking their homes from them and driving them away.
I mean, the government is incentivizing it and enabling it.
Settlers wouldn’t settle the West Bank if the Israeli military wasn’t protecting them. The government is absolutely the problem.
Go try and take someone’s home by force. It won’t go well. But it will go a lot better when it’s sanctioned by an overwhelming military force.
And in turn, Western governments are enabling the Israeli government. If the West sanctioned Israel as hard as they sanctioned Iran or Russia, they’d probably think twice about annexing the West Bank. But instead of sanctions they get weapons.
enact a european style democratic state with no official religious affiliation. problem solved. jews and muslims don’t actually hate each other. they live side by side all the time.
He also said:
If you want to solve the problem, then you have to take in the whole truth. And you then have to admit nobody’s hands are clean
which is something I totally agree on. There is no “good or bad” team in the Middle East…all parties are involved in this conflict and it’s cause!
Hey, don’t forget those of us who made this mess and walked away, and every country on Earth that continues to keep the whole Middle East area relevant through our continued oil addiction.
Hey, don’t forget those of us who made this mess and walked away,
The early 20th century British Empire?
through our continued oil addiction.
Israel, let alone Gaza, don’t exactly produce a lot of oil, and I certainly don’t know that they sell it.
This whole conflict in Israel is more about land, and the West supports Israel bEcAuSe DeMoCrAcY in an otherwise unfriendly region. The region as a whole might be messy “because oil,” but that’s rather tangential to this conflict.
Israel is adjacent to an incredibly strategic shipping location - the Suez Canal. The Suez Canal links the Mediterranean to the Indian Ocean without having to go around Africa or around Siberia.
Israel isn’t strategically important because it has big oil reserves. It’s strategically important because it’s near a lot of important things. Oil and shipping play a bigger role than you’d think.
You mean the canal that is entirely within Egypt? That argument seems like a stretch to me, and clearly wasn’t the argument the above was trying to make either.
They’re a democracy and have historically been opposed to many counties the West was already opposed to. Their strategic importance is military, not oil.
Israel, the UK and France invaded Egypt in 1956 after Egypt expropriated the Suez Canal from its French & British owners. Then they fought a war in 1967 to keep it open. The conveyance of European trade through the Suez Canal is a major part of Israel’s geopolitical importance.
Great point.
deleted by creator
look around
“You take my water, burn my olive trees, destroy my house, take my job, steal my land, imprison my father, kill my mother, bombard my country, starve us all, humiliate us all, but I am to blame: I shot a rocket back.”
Of course. Those kids in refugee camps, hospitals and ambulances have their hands soaked in blood.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Could we have this guy back, please?
Nah, he might seem reasonable here but his foreign policy scatterbrain pattern is part of why Ukraine is in such dire straights now. Man hesitated to stand up to Russia when they went into crimea, the point when they could have been stopped, and where Ukraine could have been swept into the EU orbit with far less bloodshed.
Obama standing up to Russia during the Crimea invasion would make for some interesting alt-history.
With Russia under stronger sanctions earlier, perhaps they would have less opportunity to feed and fund the alt-right to the same extent as it has been.
Please, they’ve been stirring shit up on a shoestring budget for decades. It’s almost impressive what they’ve been managing to do.
They should run a frugal youtube channel and teach the CIA how its done.
The “lead from behind” guy who delivered $4 billion in cash by US military to Iran? No Thanks
The guy whose quantity of melanin drove Bubbas insane?
“It’s the WHITE HOUSE!”
The guy who doesn’t understand that genocide is not at all complex? The guy who bombed a wedding and a hospital? And intentionally targeted American citizens with drone strikes? No thanks.
The drone strike guy who didn’t close gitmo?
What israel is doing in Palestine is what oBomber did during his entire presidency.
Let’s judge people on their actions instead of hollow words. Even the walking orange did better than Obama when it comes to foreign policy by withdrawing from Afghanistan.
Don’t forget the tan suit and bicycle helmet!
Worst president ever, ever!
/S
Obama is a Centrist-Democrat. Right-wingers AGREED with his policies enough that all they complained about was how much melanin his clothes lacked and lack of head protection. That meant the policies and actions were favorable to Right-wing nuts :-( Cancelling student debt, bailing out families in need, reinforcing the Social-Security, VA, CDC, EPA, FDA and making Roe-Wade into law ( along with the ACA ) in so many ways were sidelined and ignored while 2008 taught the lessons that werent learnt, 2019 hit so hard and so fast nothing could have been effective at stopping the long plunge into the depths.
Centrists do nothing except maintain the status-quo while silently allowing everything that failed to stay broken, while the next cycle of things to break happens over and over again until that deep dark pit becomes the new reality.
Do you think anyone outside of the 30% of Confederate descendants in the US agrees with you?
I’m a leftist and I agree with him. Sure, obama wasn’t as bad as Bush or Reagan, but he was still pretty shit.
I judge by results, and he’s right that even trump was better on foreign policy than Obama. Staying in the forever wars for his entire 2 terms is completely unforgivable.
You forgot the /s. https://www.cfr.org/timeline/trumps-foreign-policy-moments
I guess unless you are unironically admitting to being a racist xenophobe.
Literally scoreboard. Trump got us out of the forever wars, Obama made them worse. Sure, he took 4 years to do it when it should have taken 3 months, but doing it is strictly better than not doing it. And Obama didn’t do it.
Got it. Racist xenophobe confirmed.
You libs are so fucking stupid. Learn to question what you’re told, institutions lie all the time.
Pro-tip, if you want to pretend to be a leftist on the internet, it helps to not call trump better than Obama.
Good luck!
He’s been programed since birth to worship tough guys, i.e., The Czar.
Leftists don’t actually like Obama. Did you not know that? I’m a socialist, and on this particular issue, trump was very obviously better. He didn’t commit nearly as many war crimes.
Isn’t it sad that you’re so fixated on defending “lefties” that you’re willing to ignore that Obama was a warmonger that indiscriminately targeted civilians to further US imperialism?
But keep going about the repubs vs dems circlejerk.
Isn’t it sad that you ignore that the Republican presidents didn’t close gitmo either and that Trump actually increased the drone strikes?
Lol I hope you’re getting paid to do your farcical trolling. I said nothing about repubs vs dems - YOU did. I just mentioned the racists, sexists and bigots that are the only ones on your side of this argument.
I’m sorry was my side the one supporting a racist apartheids state akin to literal Nazi’s?
No, your side are actual Nazis.
Which side is that? Your only rebuttal is tu quoque but I haven’t declared support for any party.
Or is it a law of nature that if you criticize precious GenocIde Joe that you must vote on the elephant logo?
Does noise constantly echo in your empty skull?
No because the words of western leaders are so hollow that the echo cancels out. You should try taking both your eye patches off.
No. I need my left eye patch. I’m a pirate. You’re a loser.
bloppydee dooo dee dooo! lmao
Is it hard keeping up with all the accounts you’re in charge of at The Troll Farm, tovarisch?
Not really since every rebuttal I receive here cannot seem to reason past the level of ad-hominems.
High school never ends [for now]. Remember that, people.
And when you distill complex conduct into easy bites about said high schoolers, the other high schoolers of the world will take high schooler level actions.
Perhaps we need a more educated world to move forward…
We certainly are catering to the least intelligent among us in almost every respect. Oddly enough I was thinking about this earlier tonight.
I went to use the bathroom at a restaurant and they had some framed newspapers hanging up in there that were run by the local newspaper in 1918. The whole front page was news about WWI but it looked very different from war coverage in newspapers today. Each article was very detailed and covered distinct parts of the conflict during that week. There were sections on American, Canadian, and English troops detailing whether they had advanced or retreated, how much fighting they had to do, and references to commanding officers, obscure geographic landmarks, and lines from speeches made by foreign leaders. It was clear from the way they were written that the author expected his audience to be familiar with all of this to the point that he could mention them in passing without offering any explanation as to how they were related or what significance they held.
This is in stark contrast to current reporting on the Palestinian conflict and to a lesser degree the war in Ukraine. Journalists rarely mention details in such a way and when they do they offer much more context, assuming the reader is unfamiliar with much of what is being discussed. Of course, they’re not wrong in that assessment but I do wonder how much of that has to do with the public being slowly conditioned to expect simplicity in reporting. These articles often read more like a political interpretation than a description of events. Nuance and the expectation of sustained interest in the subject seems almost entirely absent.
During my relatively long life I’ve witnessed journalism morph from giving information to forming opinion. Sometimes they do it openly, sometimes they try to pass it as the context you mention.
I believe context is necessary now because of how fragmented people’s attention is. We used to have 5 tv channels and two main newspapers and that was it. It was easier to keep the focus and remember the context back then.
Or, rather, we were all inside the same information bubble. Now everyone is in their own bubble, and there’s no more common understanding of reality.
This conflict makes it super clear, because of its complexity and long history, that people don’t have the time or bandwidth to understand the whole thing and end up repeating what they hear inside their bubble.
For example: your opinion is largely influenced by your location and your own history, much more than by the facts of the conflict. I come from Argentina, where most people support Israel, and I live in Ireland, where most people support the Palestinians. There’s understandable reasons for that. Argentina suffered two Islamic terrorist attacks against local Jewish institutions, while Irish people identify with Palestinians because of the British oppression.
I personally live in my own bubble of course, we all do. I know my opinion is heavily influenced by my own history.
As a consequence I end up getting involved in online discussions where I argue for nuance and against simplification, but that just puts me on the “wrong side” of both “sides”. So for my own mental health I’ve been trying to stop participating. I only wanted to chime in here because your comment seemed to capture some of what I think.
I know exactly what you mean about being on the wrong side of both sides. In the US our two political parties are so ingrained in culture that people feel like they can’t disagree on any subject without being cast out. I’ve always thought the idea that you would fall perfectly into one of two categories was asinine. That’s led to me taking positions on many subjects that aren’t extreme enough for the purists on either side. It’s incredibly annoying because you can tell that for many of them the things they’re saying aren’t deeply held beliefs and yet they’re defended as if they are. Really though, they’re simply the dominant narrative in that person’s bubble.
I just posted a video about this in the Breadtube community if you’re interested. It’s about being able to disagree without disrespecting.
Please share.
Sure.
Loved the video. Is that you?
Please participate. Your perspective is important. You’re referencing consensus reality and it is indeed disintegrating.
I’m here for comments like yours. Thanks.
Thanks! I’m glad you found it interesting. It’s sometimes hard to know if other people enjoy what I write or if I’m just rambling into the void for no reason.
A more educated world, or a less educated one. If there is nobody around to teach the tradition of violence in the region, nobody would have any interest in perpetuating it.
Education isn’t the problem. It’s self control. People think they prioritize rational decisions but if that were true, cigarettes would be long gone and global warming would be solved. We prioritize feelings which is why GOP loves to fear monger and push religion. Nothing scarier than a eternal suffering, especially since eternity lasts a long time.
In this case, we have two countries that have held a religious divide for decades based on who believes they’re actually worshipping the correct people so they don’t get sent to eternal suffering. Except, they’re willing to kill for their religious text because they feel so deeply that theirs is superior.
How can we as outsiders possibly take the right actions when the irrational people are willing to commit genocide over their feelings brains?
I would argue education is important, because this isn’t actually really a religious conflict, and perpetuating that belief causes harm - namely that this is some intractable millennia old conflict rooted in fundamental beliefs and not one only a hundred years old largely just about lines on a map.
2,000 years ago the region was largely inhabited by Jews, under the Roman Empire, and known as Judaea. With the split of the Roman Empire by around 300AD, the region became known as Palaestine under the Byzantine Empire, and obviously started seeing a lot of Christian activity. By the 800s, the region was conquered by Islamic caliphates, and by the 1500s was part of the Ottoman Empire. For nearly 400 years Jews, Muslims, and Christians all got along perfectly fine in Palestine under the Ottomans.
But with WW1, Britain was fighting the Ottomans. Britain promised the region to the people who by that point came to see themselves as “Palestinians” (largely Muslim but with a sizable Christian minority), as well as to Jewish diaspora if they’d help fight the Ottomans. They did, the Ottoman Empire collapsed, and Britain created the state of Mandatory Palestine, but decided to just keep it and rule it themselves. This was an unpopular move, but to make sure they didn’t have to fight everyone, manufactured Jewish vs Palestinian antagonism so they’d just fight each other instead of British colonial rule. This unfortunately worked.
After WW2, Britain decided it didn’t want all its colonies anymore, especially the mess it created in Palestine, so just left and told the brand new UN to fix it. The UN drew some borders, which the newly created modern nation of Israel was fine with. The people who would inhabit the newly created modern nation of Palestine were not fine with it, nor were the other neighboring nations, so there was a war in '48 and it’s basically gone down hill from there.
I’m not a historian and that’s a very, very, very superficial explanation of one of the longest inhabited regions in the planet, but it’s just worth noting this conflict is not really religious in nature. It’s two peoples, of various religions (or no religion at all, since there are secular Jews), who are fighting over land and recognition as a sovereign state due to a manufactured nationalism and border dispute barely more than 100 years old.
Your “very superficial explanation” is already orders of magnitude deeper than most people’s understanding of the conflict.
It only took me a day to learn just that, so why more people don’t bother to understand the conflict more before commenting is shameful, especially because it’s nothing really new.
But it also doesn’t really matter because the people who do know more and are in a position to create (inter)national policy haven’t seemed to be able to find a solution, so I doubt armchair internet historians will either. 🫤
Yes, in spite of all the efforts decade after decade there has been no solution. Sometimes it was close (like when Arafat and Rabin shook hands) but any progress was always destroyed by the extremists on one side or the other, or by outside interests.
I don’t think there’s a solution. External pressure will hopefully stop this escalade, but the conflict will persist.
maybe I just need coffee but this seems completely incoherent to me
Or did your education stop at middle school?
Reddit probably rotted my brain, but I’m struggling to determine how this is anything but “everyone sucks here.” On this matter, I don’t think anyone has been truly in the right in a century. Can anyone provide a convincing argument otherwise?
I think he’s trying to get around the black and white viewpoints, and bring up the idea that Israel is committing war crimes here, which is outside the Overton window on the subject currently in US politics.
Exactly. One does not do politics and convince their opposition if they don’t use conciliating language.
Nah, you can go through the comments here and find people taking the easy, position here too. “Bombing kids is bad, so Israel is bad, so Palestine must be good, therefore I support Palestine.” No nuance, no attempts to look at a more complex situation or consider anything other than the most basic information.
Both sides suck, both sides will happily commit war crimes, and civilians on both sides are getting hurt. One side is getting more hurt than the other, but that’s just a difference in capability, not belief.
Stupid Palestinians fighting against colonists for the right to exist on their own land. DAE both sides?
How does this argument work when it comes to Russians in Crimea?
Both Jews and Palestinians have claims to the area as “their own land.”
You may note that when Russia invaded Crimea, the West did basically fuck all about it. Russia invaded it and so Russia has kept it. You wanna play that argument, then Israel gets to keep everything they got in '48 and '67.
If you’re arguing it’s Russia’s to take “back” because Crimea is part of Ukraine which used to be part of the Soviet Union, that’s also not a great argument. Ukraine’s borders were accepted and recognized internationally. By that token you could argue Palestine should be able to “take back” all of their territory to the '48 borders, and Israel was content with that border at the time. The Arab nations weren’t happy with that in the first place though, which is why they tried to wipe out Israel.
So maybe you argue that it’s the pre-1948 border they should be able to “take back,” and it should all just be one state, like Mandatory Palestine as it was under British Rule. Except neither side really wants a one-state solution and obviously the elimination of the entire Jewish people is not a good one.
You can keep going farther back and claim that it was all Ottomans anyway so only those who have really lived there since the 7th Century have a claim (ie. Palestinians). Of course they’re only there because of the Rashidun Caliphate, so why stop there? If we push back farther we should really give the region to the Greeks. If they pass we can give it to the Italians, and if they pass, oh look, hey, ethnic Jews have a claim to the area before even Rome showed up.
Now obviously, the modern Israeli government is tremendously overreacting and the West should sanction them to hell until they return to the table for a two-state solution (or any solution both sides agree on), Netanyahu is gone, and Palestinians are given their own recognized state. Palestinians need support, aid, and the backing of the globe to push for their rights as a country. But Hamas is not necessarily going to get them that either.
When are we giving Native Americans their land back?
Jews have zero claim to that land. There are original Palestinian jews and the israeli government is literally racist against them. This has nothing to do with ancestry. The israelis are mostly Eastern European or American jews. There is a good reason why Netanyahu looks so much like Putin.
israel’s borders are not accepted at all. Only countries half way across the globe from them accept their borders.
The only just solution is a one state solution with the returnal of the Palestinian land to the Palestinians. Just like the returnal of Crimean land to the Ukrainians.
Crazy how people are actually defending colonists as if they’re now rightful owners to land because they’ve been committing genocide for long enough.
70 % of the Jews living in Israel currently were born there. And about 20 % of Israelis are non-Jewish Arabs.
More than half of the Jews in Israel are Mizrahi. Your theory of European colonizers populating Israel is factually incorrect.
It’s the official policy of many of the most powerful nations of the world that only Palestine sucks here and that Israel can do no wrong and must be supported unconditionally. An “everyone sucks here” position would be much closer to the truth.
Palestinians and Israelis are overall fine, except when you have to listen to them talk about each other, it’s their governments that are so fucked.
This entire conflict is a story of overstepping state entities victimizing innocent civilians on both sides of this war nobody but them and their cronies wanted.
As much as we all hate comments like this…
“This.”
(Well said. Short, to the point, and the best summary I’ve seen in a while.)
The victims. They are in the right. But they have no voice. Ironically though, as toxic as social media is, governments can’t get by with the same shit that they did 50 years ago (Sauce: US in Central America).
That’s basically the rational take here. Israel was attacked and is defending itself, but going far and beyond self defense using the extermination of terrorists as an excuse to commit genocide. Palestinian civilians are caught up in the crossfire and are innocent of any wrongdoing, but the Palestinian government knowingly harbors Hamas within their borders and refuses to cooperate with Israel at every opportunity to create a two state system. Finally, there’s Hamas, who are bad guys full stop with no redeeming qualities.
So, Obama’s take is pretty solid. Nobody has their hands clean in all of this and everybody sucks, but there are still ways to stop the bloodshed, but those solutions are complicated. Especially when nobody really wants to come to the negotiation table right now. Israeli citizens right now remind me of American citizens in the wake of 9/11 - bloodthirsty and hungry for vengeance at any cost. So long as they remain furious, Netanyahu has a clear political motivation to continue the attacks.
This did not start this past October. Israel has been treating Gaza as an open air prison for over a decade. And before that there’s all the settler bullshit and decades of war crimes justified by dehumanizing Palestinians.
Of course the Palestinians haven’t been peaceful. Neither side has been peaceful since the 1940’s.
The government of Gaza is Hamas, elected in 2007.
Israeli civilians have also been caught in the crossfire. You know from the terrorist attack they committed 3 weeks ago that killed 1,400 and then the 200 innocent people they kidnapped and imprisoned as hostages somewhere in Gaza, which is what this is all about?
If Hamas freed the hostages, Israel would have a much harder time conducting this war in the way they are, but you can’t literally kidnap someone’s citizens and expect anything less.
What about Netanyahus relationship with the PLO before Hamas. He’s been playing both sides using the fear of Palestinian militants as a political football, just trying to stay elected and ignoring the views of the average secular Israeli.
Israel is being led by a group of religious extremists.
It’s complicated, and both sides have committed unbelievable atrocities, but Israeli leadership have overplayed their card. Their crimes over the last few weeks will echo for decades to come.
My guess it will have the opposite effect than they intended, Israel will lose out in the long term.
Time will tell.
You’re right that both sides have been awful.
While Israel may be led by a group of religious extremists, so is Palestine and Gaza specifically by extremist terrorists.
This round of tit for tat will echo like all the previous rounds over the last 70 years.
Until Hamas frees the hostages, it’s virtually impossible to overplay the hand.
This will just be another footnote of ugly killing on both sides in a long history of ugly killings.
I’m not so sure. The current geopolitical outlook leaves Israel in a tough spot. With the failure of globalisation and the declining importance of the Middle Eastern hydrocarbons, there is actually a breaking point.
I don’t necessarily think that breaking point would be reached, but if the current government does not restrain themselves and play their card correctly, it will count against them going forward.
Despite what Americans think, their previous actions have counted against them, too.
I’m the modern information age. The old tactics of statecraft and economic dominance fall apart. The opposing axis wanted Israel to respond like this. It’s a huge mistake for them to continue with this approach.
It’s a multipolar world these days.
Which are the poles you see in this multipolar world than were different from the poles over the last 50 years?
Suppose when you take the foreign policy of globalisation out of the equation, the geopolitical arena looks a lot different.
It’s hard to know how the relationships will develop. Israel geographical location has become at least 50% less important.
When you consider the possible impact of climate change and demographics over the next decade, coupled with the increasingly fragile financial outlook.
It’s not unfathomable that Israel ends up in an extremely exposed position without significant support from the West.
China and Russia are bound together by mutual interest in hydrocarbons, and Irans leaders would attempt to capitalise on every opportunity.
In a destabilised world, everyone will try to sieze the opportunity. It’s going to get very busy, Netanyahu is assuming a lot when he thinks that Israel is going to stay relevant in the long term.
Just wanted to add that it’s going to be multifaceted threats along with the multipolar geopolitical outlook. In situations like that, things get very simple. Things start to boil down to very simple decisions.
Nothing justifies war crimes.
But people justify Hamas attacks all the time by claiming they just defend themselves.
Did you really just just conflate every Hamas operation as a war crime?
That’s… Impressive.
Netanyahu also stoked the anti-Oslo crazies to the point that Rabin was assassinated. He’s more responsible for the current state of the conflict than anyone, period.
Here is a 2 minute video about being able to hold the idea that Hamas and Israel are both in the wrong and civilians are getting hurt on both sides as a result.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://piped.video/L0Zb9iUi0JM
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
It’s not true that civilians are getting hurt in Gaza because of Hamas. They were already being killed off before the attacks.
I think that’s basically what he’s saying with more words. You’re not wrong in this case, but the “everybody sucks here” line is most often used by people who don’t actually know the details of what they’re talking about, but need to have an opinion on the record. (Other recent example being the Ukraine war situation)
In my opinion, this whole situation is too drunk guys who got in a fight over something stupid. Palestine got knocked out early, and so Israel is being vilified simply for being the one still standing, but now Palestine has got up and kidney punched Israel while it was turned away, and people are rooting for the underdog since they got back up. The problem with this, and the reason that Obama is speaking the way that he is, is because people seem to be forgetting all of the other horrible things that Hamas has done too, because they’re currently the crowd favorite.
So yes, everybody sucks here, and I think people are having a hard time coming to terms with the fact that, sometimes in a fight, there isn’t actually a 100% good guy. It’s just too drunk guys getting in a fight over something stupid.
the “everybody sucks here” line is most often used by people who don’t actually know the details of what they’re talking about
Agree or disagree with other people’s opinions, so be it. But this comment is such a unearned hand waving away of other people’s thoughtful comments/opinions made on the subject, and it’s not a true representation of what’s going on.
See, reading your comment makes me think that you didn’t actually read the rest of mine, because that’s not what I said. I’m not talking about the people here… Mostly.
me think that you didn’t actually read the rest of mine
I did.
Well then I’m not sure where to go from here, because you’re implying that I said things which I didn’t.
Well then I’m not sure where to go from here, because you’re implying that I said things which I didn’t.
What I quoted, which is what you did say, is very explicit…
I think that’s basically what he’s saying with more words. You’re not wrong in this case, but the “everybody sucks here” line is most often used by people who don’t actually know the details of what they’re talking about, but need to have an opinion on the record. (Other recent example being the Ukraine war situation)
There’s truly no reason for us to continue to go back and forth on this endlessly, that text is very specific and straightforward.
Your analogy assumes some sort of equivalency between the two drunk men, but in reality there’s a huge discrepancy of power between Israel and Palestine, one so vast that your analogy comes off as reductive. It’s not just “two drunk guys in a fight”, it’s more like a drunk guy and a child, which the drunk guy has been picking fights with since the child was born, and all of the drunk guy’s friends keep helping him beat this child up.
There’s a power discrepancy now, but there wasn’t always.
By this analogy, Palestine is a drunk 17 year old, who along with a bunch of 20-something friends jumped one another kid when he just turned 18. Except the 18 year old won the fight and the older pals of the original drunk kid have backed off. Beaten to shit, the 17 year old keeps trying to swing at the 18 year old, who continues just kicking him while he’s down and everyone is looking on in horror but unwilling to jump back in the fight.
The fact they went 1 v 8 probably contributes a lot to Israel’s absolute unwillingness to not put themselves in a position where they are less powerful.
I see where your coming from, and I suppose I should clarify: in this case, the reason that I invoke the simile, is that the original reason for ALL this drama, is religion. There is more than enough physical space for them both to live in the region happily, but because this is the Land of Israel that we’re talking about, they both claim exclusive right to it, and only one can have it.
Events since this original issue obviously can’t go overlooked, but it all stems from this unreasonable unwillingness to share plenty.
It’s a tale as old as time. Just like the Hatfields and McCoys. They’ve hated each other for so long neither side remembers what started it and both sides have a list of grievances longer than they can keep track of and the score can never be settled. It’s to the point where there is no right side; both are wrong. You can make arguments that one side is more wrong than the other, but I’m not in favor of a “let the least wrong win” approach. Both sides are objectively wrong and both sides must stop.
This is simply not true. Palestinians were copacetic before the British mandate, the Balfour declaration, the declaration of the state of Israel and the Nakba.
“It’s complicated” is a constantly used rhetorical strategy by those in power to put off moral judgement.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RxC5HhKQ5ks 80 second video. This situation isn’t complicated at all.
Michael Brooks is missed. Great name btw.
I truly do think that Islamophobia and the United States having a lot of historical and economic ties to Israel are why we’ve allowed this to go on unchecked for decades.
Public opinion is definitely shifting in favor of Palestine though.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://www.piped.video/watch?v=RxC5HhKQ5ks
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
Thanks. People want to pretend this started a month ago and not understand the history.
Because the truth is that Israel is WAY worse than Palestine. They’re openly calling for genocide. Resistance to oppression is good, actually, and so basically whatever Palestine does while still being oppressed is morally fine, while Israel continuing to oppress them is not. Anything anybody says criticizing palestine’s reaction to oppression is whataboutism, because they’re literally the victims of genocide.
Hamas is openly calling for genocide too, and they’ve been doing it longer than Israel.
Also, funny story, Israel is also literally the victims of genocide, (the Holocaust?), which is why their motto is “never again”.
There is no “way worse”, just ignorant keyboard warriors, and a shitty situation made worse by shitty people.
Do you think the Holocaust means that the descendents of it’s victims can’t be genociders themselves? It altyally makes more sense, when you consider the cycle of abuse. Israel has been genociding Palestine for longer than Hamas has even existed, so no, that’s false.
Israel is way worse than Palestine, and you are the ignorant one if you disagree based entirely on the US/Israeli propaganda you’ve seen. You should research this yourself if you don’t believe me. Would you rather be right, or correct?
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Israel are the beneficiaries of the Holocaust.
Literally, the major bump in population they experienced as a result of WWII was Jews who were able to go through a Nazi/Israel visa program to transfer them and their money. Like Hitler was planning to send them to Madagascar after he seized France, and then Israel reached out to him and negotiated a deal for him to send them settlers.
This agreement was seen as such a “success” the Roma (who unfortunately had a bit of a fascist sympathizing streak at the time) wanted to strike a similar agreement with Mussolini when he invaded Egypt to get their own “Israel” along the Red Sea coast.
The actual place most of the post war victims went to was to America where Jews had found success developing community safety via integration with surrounding communities.
If the entire holy land was nuked and radioactive, people would still try to occupy the wasteland so they could get back in first. Don’t think there is a solution
Honestly, this is nonsense.
They aren’t fighting over Jerusalem or Bethlehem or Jericho. This is a war over grazing lands and a beach town.
If you look away from Gaza for a moment to the other Palestinian territory – the occupied West Bank – you’ll see gangs of a hooligans in pickup trucks with ski masks smashing water wells and killing cattle in small desert towns like it’s high noon at the O.K. Corral.
The whole religious component is largely a distraction. There are people living on real estate that other people who have much bigger guns want. The solution is the same as it’s always been: give folks a fair deal.
It’s not a coincidence that this latest conflict is in Gaza. Gaza isn’t religiously significant. It’s just the densest, most brutal concentration camp in Israel. This is not over religion.
But it’s in the name of religion, so it draws in the Christo-fascist zionists alongside the Israeli ones. They don’t need educated support, just support. Religious nuance helps increase that.
That’s totally true. I only mean to say that the fundamental drivers are typical to those outside of the holy lands. But you’re right that the religious component is definitely leveraged. I’ll also credit @[email protected] for pointing out that the American Evangelical Christian nationalist movement is a huge contributor to the conflict. They’re far more numerous than American Jews, and seem to be have greater influence on American policy in Israel than American Jews do.
That’s really what I was insinuating as well. The National Prayer Breakfast needs to be ignored wholly by our politicians, but members from both “sides” attend because it’s politically advantageous.
A documentary called The Family does a great job at explaining this.
There is oil just off Gaza’s coast. But Israhell already controls that.
Tiktok says this is all about the Ben Gurion Canal Project. I haven’t had the time to validate the potential veracity, but it seemed like an interesting rabbit hole.
Thanks. I’m interested.
deleted by creator
Flood it. God.did; worked apparently.
*Albeit briefly. So, I reckon we can shift the gulf some.
I think the proposal to nuke it may also leave it flooded - depends on the yield and qty.
Mythology won’t help here. That’s partly the problem already.
disregarding that fucked-ass comment,
God.did
is this a DJ Khaled reference?
Genesis
so it’s racism then
The radioactive halflife of a nuke explosion is quite short, if we want a long term solution we need…Chernobyl 2.
nuclear boogaloo
how about an agnostic democracy that israelis and palestinians can both live in? like a european country or something…
Yeah, but the whole point of Israel, is that it’s a home for Jewish people. That this apparently means an ethno apartheid state, is revolting. I have yet to hear a zionist to provide a good solution.
On that front Obama is correct: how are you going to create a Jewish state surrounded by Muslim states that oppose your existence fundamentally?
But at this point you can argue that living as a Palestinian in Israel and the occupied territories is worse than living in many (but clearly not all) Muslim countries as a non-Muslim.
So religious states, democracies or not, do exist and kinda can make it work in some cases, even if I would prefer a secular democracy for myself any day.
why the fuck do we need a jewish state? do we have a christian state? a buddhist state? not really. religious states are an outdated way to do government.
Breaking my own rule here, but whatever.
There’s no need for a Jewish state per se. There’s a need for a state for Jews, so they can live without fear of being persecuted, like they have been for hundreds of years.
Same reason there’s a need for a Palestinian state.
so a european style democracy with a constitution that has “congress shall make no law” types of sentences in it
And yet, Muslim states exist.
they shouldn’t. it’s an ultra conservative old way of doing government.
As someone living in muslim state: no, religious state shouldn’t exists.
It’s still a good idea.
It’s actually pretty easy if you stop requiring support for settler colonialism. The rest of the world left that behind 70 years ago. Israel doesn’t get to be special they can either give Palestinians voting rights (which would obliterate the idea of a Jewish state) or submit to a UN peacekeeping force between them and the Palestinians on the 1949 borders.
The only reason this is hard is because we keep bending over backwards to support their Apartheid. We know these answers. They’ve been done before.
The complexity is that Israel (specifically Netanyahu has gone rouge, saying nothing will stop what they are doing) and that is starting to have consequences for Democrats, and the US world image. This, along with Blinkens recent statements, are a subtle way of telling them to stop, without Biden going back on his full support of Israel.
It is the foundations of deniability, so that if the critiques of war crime and genocide come fully to light in the public eye, the US has ground to shift to. Those drones capturing footage over Gaza can quickly be used to support whatever narrative shift the US deems most advantageous. Can the Dems lose support of Arab Americans and their allies? Can/will they lose Jewish support at home if crimes are unmasked and is that number more or less than being on the “right side” of things?
These are likely the questions that are swirling around the White House and State Department as we speak. Time is of the essence, as 2.5 million people are on the verge of succumbing to dehydration and starvation. If those distributions are equal, a heart breaking cataclysm, in the form of a mass casualty event, could occur at any time. 10,000. 100,000. Who knows how many won’t be able to be saved even once aid comes through. Medical capacity is needed to reverse these things and none exists any longer. The UN is warning of this.
If it happens, blame will need to be swift to maintain appearances and Israel is running the risk of becoming the “Voldemort” of the Middle East overnight.
He wouldn’t be the first powerful guy supported or even brought up by the US going rogue.
We don’t talk about what happened with Sadam…
deleted by creator
There are complex issues to solve, sure, but there’s nothing complicated about the fact that we need to let humanitarian aid in and stop killing children, right this fucking minute. There are no excuses for what is happening right now.
“Stop killing children” should be enforced in both countries, though. It’s not like Hamas is protecting the children in Gaza. Quite the opposite really.
I’m not saying the details of it are not complicated.
History is always complicated
Present events are always complicated
But the way this is reported in the western media is as though one needs a PhD in Middle Eastern studies to understand the basic morality of holding a people in a situation in which they don’t have basic rights including the right that we treasure most the franchise the right to vote and then declaring that state a democracy
is actually not that hard to understand.
I’m actually not sure which country you are talking about now. I don’t know of anyone who calls Palestine a democracy. I think the reason people call Israel a democracy is that Israeli citizens have free elections and are not oppressed. I don’t think they factor in oppression of other countries when they call something a democracy. If they did, the US and UK wouldn’t count as democracies either.
If they did, the US and UK wouldn’t count as democracies either
Most political experts agree that they barely classify. The US has a rather unique electoral college system. The UK is most literally a constitutional monarchy. At best, they’re hybrid systems.
Well there are 240 hostages that are held captive in an underground lair by some psychopaths. The PM of Israel may not want to keep those people there any longer than necessary.
Perhaps Hamas should release the hostages so there’s no longer a reason for Israel to deny calls for a ceasefire?
Odd that no one is calling on Hamas to do this, isn’t it? It’s almost like everyone knows Hamas is evil and will continue to keep those people imprisoned. But if we’re demanding Israel to do things we know they won’t do, why not also demand Hamas to do things we know they won’t do?
yes no one is calling for the return of hostages
that is a reasonable thing to say
Jesus man, open your eyes and ears. Nobody is saying Hamas should do that. Listen to what Obama is saying in the video, for the love of God.
Of course we all want civilian hostages released. Don’t be dumb.
Except apparently Israel because they are bombing the event living shit out of Gaza. Hostages aren’t bomb proof, so tell me, how does Israel know they’ve not killed some when they kill 30 civilians to kill a Hamas leader (whose name slips them at the moment)
They don’t and i’d characterize much of their bombing as a war crime.
“Genocide is bad and we should halt donated weapons to countries committing genocide” - very easy policy most people will agree on.
Nuance? What’s that? Just say horrific fuckin things to the people who disagree with you! Much more fun that way!
A plea for nuance from the enablers and backers of the apartheid regime is not something I’m going to take on board.
I’m aware of the historical context and Israel has a right to exist and Jews to be safe. But I stand firmly with the Palestinians as the victims of generations of aggression.
The calls to nuance and complexity is insulting, like people can’t see what’s right infront of them and form an opinion of their own. What complexity is there in bombing hospitals, ambulances, schools and refugee camps, while denying food, water, and medical supplies to millions
Ignoring nuance is claiming only one side is right. It’s easy and borderline brainless to simply claim Israel is the only side wrong for bombing hospitals.
But this ignores that Hamas is committing war crimes by using civilian facilities as staging grounds to launch attacks on Israel. This ignores that Hamas’ charter calls for the destruction of Israel, and the only thing stopping them is lack of weapons. This ignores that Hamas, the democratically elected ruling party of Gaza, has continued to use resources to attack Israel instead of building infrastructure to actually function independently.
Ignoring nuance is to ignore history. Ignoring that the West created this whole situation, by both promising one region to two peoples then creating division where there was none to make colonial rule easier, and by also so brutally attempting to wipe out an entire people it created a hardline cultural belief that swift and severe military action is necessary to insure “never again,” (and two wars in '48 and '67 didn’t help either).
None of this is to say Israel is innocent of wrongdoing - they sure as shit aren’t and certainly seem happy to bomb 100 Palestinian civilians if it means they get 1 Hamas fighter. But rejecting nuance pushes a belief one side is right and one side is wrong, and that the only sides here are national ones. Both suck, both are morally wrong. The only “right side” is Palestinian and Israeli civilians being killed because the only “wrong side” - extremist Israeli and Palestinian leaders - are happy to kill as many civilians as possible for some acres of land.
But please, do tell me how my opinion is wrong and there’s no complexity here.
There’s nuance to everything but when war criminals like this and other US president speak about it, it loses any shred of credibility. It’s like asking a dictator with a PR team about something that’s happening half way across the globe. Of course they’re going to say include vaguely valid points to take a higher ground.
Take him to hague with rest of the crew and put him on a trial. I’ll want to hear what nuance opinions he has about that.
Honestly if the Jews in the Warsaw ghetto didn’t want to get wiped out like that, they shouldn’t have rebelled. Their hands weren’t clean.
I think the nuance is understanding the evils of the Israeli state without blaming Jews or endorsing violence against Israeli civilians. You aren’t doing that here, but lots of people are doing this right now (the people “forming an opinion on their own” aren’t always forming great opinions). Anyone suggesting that nuance is unnecessary is begging you to only see their side of things. There are zero issues in the world that don’t require some degree of nuance; why you would think such a complex and long-standing conflict like this one is better without critical thinking is the real insult here.
It’s weird that Obama is being nuanced here, yet the US has been unwavering in supporting Israel, including during Obama’s term. Maybe his stance has changed. Or maybe it’s easy for him to say things when he doesn’t have to act on it at all. Talk is cheap, after all.
People have a right to be safe but no state has a right to exist, let alone a state defined by being a settler colonial project.
Maybe I could agree with you, but they did face an injustice like no other. They have a right to a homeland but it should never have been Israel.
What the hell does ‘right to a homeland’ mean?
Where’s the homeland to rest of the genocides around the world? let’s bring in Uyghur population to Israel too, Rohingya Muslims? Ugandan genocide?
When are they going to get their own homeland?
oh oh but this one is so much more special because it ties in with your religious beliefs in the west, right?
the rest? they just can fucking just get wiped out for all you care.
lose the facade you ducking hypocrites.
Man fuck off, that was a lot of shite you typed. I don’t have religious beliefs for one and you can scroll through my history to see my strong support for Palestine.
Fuck you.
Ok, it’s get real time: the ONLY reason the US supports Israel is because it’s a staging area if shit kicks off in the middle east. That’s it. The “Jesus” stuff if just an excuse to appease the zealots. And my opinion isn’t anti-Semitism. It’s anti-genocide.
Probably one of the most complex issues that I don’t see being brought up is Gaza’s culture built around Sharia law.
Yeah, there are plenty of innocent people are children suffering. This still doesn’t mean that if Gazans had there way, Israel would be a better place.
That said, the US should end all aid to Israel and let them fund their own genocide. They can afford it. They have a fucking intel fab for fuck’s sake.
‘we didn’t realise they were going to use the weapons like that’
We thought they were going to build schools and hospitals with those bombs!
More breaking news. Obama says breathing is good for your health.
And while you say this, this thread is full of people claiming it is actually very simple. sigh
No shit Sherlock! But the keyboard warriors on the internet with dumb takes aren’t the ones enabling and funding the killing of civilians though, are they?
This guy has been, since well, he’s a US president so it must come naturally.
