Zompist Bboard Again

Ares Land wrote: ↑Tue Feb 20, 2024 1:24 am That's one of the few things discussed here I know something useful about... the Neturei Karta story has been doing the rounds for at least ten years, probably more.
The Neturei Karta are a fringe religious group. They are a fanatic ultra-Orthodox religious group and to an outside eye they frankly seem more than a little insane. AFAIK they're a really tiny group.
In any case, they don't support Palestine. They are opposed to the existence of the State of Israel on religious grounds but they don't care one bit about the Palestinians or what happens to them.

The Bundists do though.

rotting bones wrote: ↑Tue Feb 20, 2024 1:27 am The Bundists do though.

I don't think anti-Zionism is a tenable position. It's pointless, to begin with; there is a state of Israel and it's here to stay. Besides, I've come to realize that antisemitism is way more widespread than you'd think.

Ares Land wrote: ↑Tue Feb 20, 2024 1:59 am I don't think anti-Zionism is a tenable position. It's pointless, to begin with; there is a state of Israel and it's here to stay. Besides, I've come to realize that antisemitism is way more widespread than you'd think.

I've decided to identify as a "Marxist Anti-national" as the Modi supporters say. Not an actual Marxist, only whatever bogeyman the nationalists are afraid of. As the terror of all nation states, not just Israel, I am now an enemy of the people. I need a villain costume.

Ares Land wrote: ↑Tue Feb 20, 2024 1:24 am The Neturei Karta are a fringe religious group. They are a fanatic ultra-Orthodox religious group and to an outside eye they frankly seem more than a little insane. AFAIK they're a really tiny group.

I can say with confidence that, to the inside eye, they appear no less insane.

Ares Land wrote: ↑Tue Feb 20, 2024 1:59 am

rotting bones wrote: ↑Tue Feb 20, 2024 1:27 am The Bundists do though.

I don't think anti-Zionism is a tenable position. It's pointless, to begin with; there is a state of Israel and it's here to stay. Besides, I've come to realize that antisemitism is way more widespread than you'd think.

Let me use this opportunity to ask: how much antisemitism is there in France at the moment? Because there’s a good chance I’ll be in Paris for a few months later this year, and it’s something I’ve been worried about.

bradrn wrote: ↑Tue Feb 20, 2024 2:46 am I can say with confidence that, to the inside eye, they appear no less insane.

Since humans appear insane to me in general, maybe they are the only sane people on the planet.

bradrn wrote: ↑Tue Feb 20, 2024 2:46 am Let me use this opportunity to ask: how much antisemitism is there in France at the moment? Because there’s a good chance I’ll be in Paris for a few months later this year, and it’s something I’ve been worried about.

I don't know if I'm a good judge for that sort of thing, but I don't think it's particularly dangerous. There were quite a few Orthodox Jews in my old neighbourhood back in Paris -- I don't remember any antisemitic incidents during the ten years or so I lived there. If you ever followed Alon Levy on Twitter, I think he lived something like two subway stops away and he also reported that things were pretty peaceful.
I really don't think public opinion has changed at all during the last few months.

The city's going to be a mess during the Olympics this summer but that's an entirely different issue

Ares Land wrote: ↑Tue Feb 20, 2024 4:29 am

bradrn wrote: ↑Tue Feb 20, 2024 2:46 am Let me use this opportunity to ask: how much antisemitism is there in France at the moment? Because there’s a good chance I’ll be in Paris for a few months later this year, and it’s something I’ve been worried about.

I don't know if I'm a good judge for that sort of thing, but I don't think it's particularly dangerous. There were quite a few Orthodox Jews in my old neighbourhood back in Paris -- I don't remember any antisemitic incidents during the ten years or so I lived there. If you ever followed Alon Levy on Twitter, I think he lived something like two subway stops away and he also reported that things were pretty peaceful.
I really don't think public opinion has changed at all during the last few months.

Good to know, thanks! I’ve seen a few worrying articles in The Times of Israel, but that kind of thing is too often sensationalised. (According to them, Sydney is basically a death-trap filled with Hamas supporters and neo-Nazis… which, well, it sort of is, but I’ve successfully avoided them with no particular effort required on my part.)

The city's going to be a mess during the Olympics this summer but that's an entirely different issue

Oh yes, so I’ve been warned… the plan is for me to leave around the time it begins, but that may change. Luckily I’ll be far from the city centre (Saclay area), so with luck it might not be as bad there.

bradrn wrote: ↑Tue Feb 20, 2024 4:48 am Oh yes, so I’ve been warned… the plan is for me to leave around the time it begins, but that may change. Luckily I’ll be far from the city centre (Saclay area), so with luck it might not be as bad there.

As far as crime goes anyway, Saclay is about as safe a place as can be. It's really quiet suburbs, almost rural. The biggest danger might be boredom

Ares Land wrote: ↑Tue Feb 20, 2024 6:18 am

bradrn wrote: ↑Tue Feb 20, 2024 4:48 am Oh yes, so I’ve been warned… the plan is for me to leave around the time it begins, but that may change. Luckily I’ll be far from the city centre (Saclay area), so with luck it might not be as bad there.

As far as crime goes anyway, Saclay is about as safe a place as can be. It's really quiet suburbs, almost rural. The biggest danger might be boredom

Hmm… this prompted me to look on a map, and it looks like Saclay proper is farther from where I’m planning to stay than I thought it was. It’s quite a bit more rural too — I haven’t yet quite wrapped my head around the way European cities mix farmland and density.

But, in any case, it all depends on me getting through the interminable bureaucracy first… I guess there’s no point in me speculating when I can’t even get a visa yet…

Ares Land wrote: ↑Tue Feb 20, 2024 1:24 am That's one of the few things discussed here I know something useful about... the Neturei Karta story has been doing the rounds for at least ten years, probably more.
The Neturei Karta are a fringe religious group. They are a fanatic ultra-Orthodox religious group and to an outside eye they frankly seem more than a little insane. AFAIK they're a really tiny group.
In any case, they don't support Palestine. They are opposed to the existence of the State of Israel on religious grounds but they don't care one bit about the Palestinians or what happens to them.

From a cursory look the position of Neturei Karta is that Israel must only be recreated by a Messiah of God, and not through the actions of people in the secular world. From reading about the subject in the past, this sort of position is not unique to them amongst Haredim.

Ares Land wrote: ↑Tue Feb 20, 2024 1:59 am

rotting bones wrote: ↑Tue Feb 20, 2024 1:27 am The Bundists do though.

I don't think anti-Zionism is a tenable position. It's pointless, to begin with; there is a state of Israel and it's here to stay. Besides, I've come to realize that antisemitism is way more widespread than you'd think.

To me the existence of the State of Israel is a fact on the ground that is settled and will not be undone. However, the settlements are not, and can be undone at this point if the State of Israel so wishes. The only form of anti-Zionism in the form of opposition to the State of Israel itself that makes any sense is seeking a unification of Israel with the West Bank and Gaza and extension of citizenship and equal rights to the Palestinians to form a united national homeland for both Jews and Palestinians, with a right to return for both. But of course we know that will not happen, since too many Israelis insist on the existence of a specifically Jewish national homeland, and this could not occur without their consent.

So with that in mind, that leaves anti-Zionism in the form of not opposition to Israel itself but opposition to the policies of the Israeli government towards the Palestinians and Israeli Arabs and to the actions of the settlers. This is reasonable, and just might be achievable given the right political climate in Israel.

However, the matter is that much of "anti-Zionism" does manifest itself in opposition to Israel and the Israeli Jews themselves, and furthermore is often extended in a way to Jews in general. This is unacceptable - is an Israeli Jew born today responsible somehow for what happened in 1948 or 1967 (or likewise, for the sake of comparison, is a German born today responsible somehow for the Holocaust, or an American born today responsible somehow for the ethnic cleansing of much of North America by European settlers over a century ago)? And how on Earth is, say, an American Jew responsible somehow for the actions of the Israeli government and the settlers? So when "anti-Zionism" spills over into anti-Semitism, even in modified form, as it often does, it must be thoroughly rejected.

I predicted that the badly educated public's opinion of Israel is inaccurately tied to its view of Jews. This is not the usual position of anti-Zionism. Anti-Zionists usually offer a one state solution encompassing Israel and Palestine. It is anti-Israeli in the sense that it opposes the Israeli government's apartheid regime.

rotting bones wrote: ↑Tue Feb 20, 2024 10:52 am I predicted that the badly educated public's opinion of Israel is inaccurately tied to its view of Jews. This is not the usual position of anti-Zionism. Anti-Zionists usually offer a one state solution encompassing Israel and Palestine. It is anti-Israeli in the sense that it opposes the Israeli government's apartheid regime.

The key thing is that an enlightened anti-Zionism, in the form of sincerely seeking the unification of Israel and Palestine into a single national homeland for both Jews and Palestinians with citizenship and equal rights for both, is not what many people who claim to be "anti-Zionist" are really thinking of.

Travis B. wrote: ↑Tue Feb 20, 2024 11:36 am The key thing is that an enlightened anti-Zionism, in the form of sincerely seeking the unification of Israel and Palestine into a single national homeland for both Jews and Palestinians with citizenship and equal rights for both is not what many people who claim to be "anti-Zionist" are really thinking of.

Like who, Hamas? Many Palestinians explicitly use "From the river to the sea" as a one-state slogan. Pro-Palestinian activists like Secular Talk and HasanAbi use Anti-Zionism to mean the one-state solution. I'm sure you can find a lot of protestors who support Hamas and their eternal war mindset. You can also find Stalinists in a lot of indigenous rights protests. YouTube has recommended antisemitic content to me recently, which has never happened before, but they were all marginal Western voices.

Now, I'm not sure the one-state solution is practical, but that's beside the point.

rotting bones wrote: ↑Tue Feb 20, 2024 11:49 am

Travis B. wrote: ↑Tue Feb 20, 2024 11:36 am The key thing is that an enlightened anti-Zionism, in the form of sincerely seeking the unification of Israel and Palestine into a single national homeland for both Jews and Palestinians with citizenship and equal rights for both is not what many people who claim to be "anti-Zionist" are really thinking of.

Like who, Hamas? Many Palestinians explicitly use "From the river to the sea" as a one-state slogan. Pro-Palestinian activists like Secular Talk and HasanAbi use Anti-Zionism to mean the one-state solution. I'm sure you can find a lot of protestors who support Hamas and their eternal war mindset. You can also find Stalinists in a lot of indigenous rights protests. YouTube has recommended antisemitic content to me recently, which has never happened before, but they were all marginal Western voices.

I was thinking particularly of the kind of people who we see supporting Hamas here (whether in Palestine or in the West), and who have spouted anti-Semitic garbage as of late (whether at demos or on the Interwebs), which are probably why you are seeing YouTube recommend anti-Semitic content recently.

rotting bones wrote: ↑Tue Feb 20, 2024 11:49 am Now, I'm not sure the one-state solution is practical, but that's beside the point.

To me the one-state solution is ideal but I too have the feeling that it is a pipe dream, and that what is achievable is a two-state solution where the settlers are expelled from the West Bank and Palestine gains full sovereignty.

Travis B. wrote: ↑Tue Feb 20, 2024 11:56 am I was thinking particularly of the kind of people who we see supporting Hamas here (whether in Palestine or in the West), and who have spouted anti-Semitic garbage as of late (whether at demos or on the Interwebs)

Hamas doesn't have any institutional support outside the Arab Far-Right network. Their grassroots support is trying to commit righteous suicide instead of being harassed by Israel for decades. Just like the Israelis who characterize Palestinians as Amalekites are not representative of all Zionists, Hamas is not representative of the anti-Zionist movement.

Travis B. wrote: ↑Tue Feb 20, 2024 11:56 am which are probably why you are seeing YouTube recommend anti-Semitic content recently.

They were all Western Catholics, actually.

rotting bones wrote: ↑Tue Feb 20, 2024 12:11 pm

Travis B. wrote: ↑Tue Feb 20, 2024 11:56 am I was thinking particularly of the kind of people who we see supporting Hamas here (whether in Palestine or in the West), and who have spouted anti-Semitic garbage as of late (whether at demos or on the Interwebs)

Hamas doesn't have any institutional support outside the Arab Far-Right network. Their grassroots support is trying to commit righteous suicide instead of being harassed by Israel for decades. Just like the Israelis who characterize Palestinians as Amalekites are not representative of all Zionists, Hamas is not representative of the anti-Zionist movement.

Oh, I agree, Hamas isn't representative of all Palestinians, just as the Israeli far right isn't representative of all Zionists, much the less all Israelis or all Jews in general.

rotting bones wrote: ↑Tue Feb 20, 2024 12:11 pm

Travis B. wrote: ↑Tue Feb 20, 2024 11:56 am which are probably why you are seeing YouTube recommend anti-Semitic content recently.

They were all Western Catholics, actually.

Interesting.

bradrn wrote: ↑Mon Feb 19, 2024 6:34 pmI’ve seen suggestions that the goal would be for Gaza to become something like the West Bank, where the government is more willing to cooperate with Israel, and the IDF has the ability to do much smaller-scale and more targeted operations. There are still regular terrorist attacks from the West Bank, but they’re much smaller, and more often nipped in the bud.

The West Bank where support for Hamas has quadrupled since the attack that 80% of the population there consider a legitimate act of resistance? Where 90% think Abbas should resign and 60% think the entire government should be replaced? Where more Palestinians were killed in 2023 than any year since OCHA began keeping track? That West Bank, that's the model? So instead of killing 2000 folks and destroying 25% of houses every decade, Israel will instead each year kill a couple hundred and demolish a thousand houses--again, for the foreseeable future?

[…] so far the IDF has murdered more hostages outright than it has saved.

Does anyone outside Hamas and Islamic Jihad really know what the precise statuses of the hostages are? To me, this statement sounds more like Hamas propaganda than anything else.

I'm going strictly by the reports in the international news. On December 15th of last year, they shot to death three hostages who had escaped captivity. On February 11th, they free two (and only had to kill 70-100 Palestinians--most non-combatants of course--to do it).

If you know of more cases where the IDF has rescued hostages in raids (or killed them trying to escape), please share.

If making sure they get medical attention is a priority, why is the IDF bombing and laying siege to hospitals?

The one doesn’t follow from the other. Hamas, by and large, isn’t keeping the hostages in hospitals.

But isn't that the official justification for the current raid on Nasser Hospital? From the WaPo:

Interrogations of suspects led Israel to “confirm” that hostages were held at the hospital, Levy said, while interviews with previously released hostages “yielded valuable information about the conditions in which hostages were held.” [Israeli government spokesperson Eylon] Levy said Israel believes that the bodies of deceased hostages were also held there.

When it comes to rescuing hostages, by far the most successful operation so far has been the cease-fire and negotiated settlement last November, yet the government point-blank refuse to contemplate another.

Something which makes me extremely angry, let me tell you. And has sparked huge protests, too, so I’m clearly not the only one.

Although, Israel is not the only guilty party here… it sounds like Hamas has been refusing to compromise too.

Refusing to compromise or refusing to negotiate? These are two very different stances.

Because freeing the hostages doesn’t seem to be a particular priority of this government. It’s a priority of the IDF, and of all reasonable people, but the government doesn’t seem to care one way or another as long as they can stay in power. God help Israel if that happens.

But it has no problem using them justify its actions. The latest, of course, is Benny Gantz saying that either Hamas and other actors give them up or the IDF will invade Rafah. Given the situation there (an estimated 1.5 million refugees with nowhere else to flee to), this amounts to "Give us your hostages or we'll start killing ours."

Linguoboy wrote: ↑Tue Feb 20, 2024 3:10 pm

bradrn wrote: ↑Mon Feb 19, 2024 6:34 pmI’ve seen suggestions that the goal would be for Gaza to become something like the West Bank, where the government is more willing to cooperate with Israel, and the IDF has the ability to do much smaller-scale and more targeted operations. There are still regular terrorist attacks from the West Bank, but they’re much smaller, and more often nipped in the bud.

The West Bank where support for Hamas has quadrupled since the attack that 80% of the population there consider a legitimate act of resistance? Where 90% think Abbas should resign and 60% think the entire government should be replaced? Where more Palestinians were killed in 2023 than any year since OCHA began keeping track? That West Bank, that's the model? So instead of killing 2000 folks and destroying 25% of houses every decade, Israel will instead each year kill a couple hundred and demolish a thousand houses--again, for the foreseeable future?

Look, I’m not saying it’s good in any absolute sense. The whole situation is a horrible tragedy within a catastrophe. It’s just that the West Bank is somewhat less bad than Gaza.

Perhaps it’s selfish, but the viewpoint from which I tend to think about this is: ‘what is the chance that a family member of mine gets murdered in a terrorist attack?’ At this point, they’re still more likely to be murdered by an invasion from Gaza than by an invasion from the West Bank.

[…] so far the IDF has murdered more hostages outright than it has saved.

Does anyone outside Hamas and Islamic Jihad really know what the precise statuses of the hostages are? To me, this statement sounds more like Hamas propaganda than anything else.

I'm going strictly by the reports in the international news. On December 15th of last year, they shot to death three hostages who had escaped captivity. On February 11th, they free two (and only had to kill 70-100 Palestinians--most non-combatants of course--to do it).

If you know of more cases where the IDF has rescued hostages in raids (or killed them trying to escape), please share.

One other person was rescued earlier this year. But this is forgetting the ~100 hostages who were rescued in the hostage deal, which I consider a direct consequence of the military pressure Israel has placed on Hamas.

If making sure they get medical attention is a priority, why is the IDF bombing and laying siege to hospitals?

The one doesn’t follow from the other. Hamas, by and large, isn’t keeping the hostages in hospitals.

But isn't that the official justification for the current raid on Nasser Hospital? From the WaPo:

Interrogations of suspects led Israel to “confirm” that hostages were held at the hospital, Levy said, while interviews with previously released hostages “yielded valuable information about the conditions in which hostages were held.” [Israeli government spokesperson Eylon] Levy said Israel believes that the bodies of deceased hostages were also held there.

I don’t recall this… although, note that your quotes imply the hostages had been taken away by the time the IDF got there.

Something which makes me extremely angry, let me tell you. And has sparked huge protests, too, so I’m clearly not the only one.

Although, Israel is not the only guilty party here… it sounds like Hamas has been refusing to compromise too.

Refusing to compromise or refusing to negotiate? These are two very different stances.

There’s a point at which they sort of blend into the same thing.

Because freeing the hostages doesn’t seem to be a particular priority of this government. It’s a priority of the IDF, and of all reasonable people, but the government doesn’t seem to care one way or another as long as they can stay in power. God help Israel if that happens.

But it has no problem using them justify its actions. The latest, of course, is Benny Gantz saying that either Hamas and other actors give them up or the IDF will invade Rafah. Given the situation there (an estimated 1.5 million refugees with nowhere else to flee to), this amounts to "Give us your hostages or we'll start killing ours."

Let me stress once again that ‘the Israeli government’ is not a single entity. Gantz is from the opposition, and cares a lot more about the hostages than Netanyahu and Smotrich do. He’s willing to leave Hamas alone for a bit if that helps release the hostages, whereas Netanyahu just wants to kill everyone irrespective.

(Personally, I think Israel must invade Rafah at some point, unless by some miracle Hamas surrenders. But if delaying that allows us to release the hostages, it’s worth it.)

EDIT: hmm, apparently I got confused. Gantz isn’t really part of the opposition… he’s been in a rotation government with Netanyahu. But he’s from a different party, which looks a little less hawkish.

bradrn wrote: ↑Tue Feb 20, 2024 6:21 pmPerhaps it’s selfish, but the viewpoint from which I tend to think about this is: ‘what is the chance that a family member of mine gets murdered in a terrorist attack?’ At this point, they’re still more likely to be murdered by an invasion from Gaza than by an invasion from the West Bank.

Is that really the case though? Gaza is under complete siege. Moreover, the complacency and attempted cooptation which enabled the October 7th attacks is gone for at least a generation. The West Bank is larger in both population and size and has more connexions to Israel. It seems to me that if you're worried about another terrorist attack, that's where it's most likely to come from.

One other person was rescued earlier this year. But this is forgetting the ~100 hostages who were rescued in the hostage deal, which I consider a direct consequence of the military pressure Israel has placed on Hamas.

I consider it more indirect (after all, Hamas got something in return for those hostages besides just not being bombed by the IDF for a few days) but I won't quibble.

The one doesn’t follow from the other. Hamas, by and large, isn’t keeping the hostages in hospitals.

But isn't that the official justification for the current raid on Nasser Hospital? From the WaPo:

Interrogations of suspects led Israel to “confirm” that hostages were held at the hospital, Levy said, while interviews with previously released hostages “yielded valuable information about the conditions in which hostages were held.” [Israeli government spokesperson Eylon] Levy said Israel believes that the bodies of deceased hostages were also held there.

I don’t recall this… although, note that your quotes imply the hostages had been taken away by the time the IDF got there.

Where does it do that exactly?

Refusing to compromise or refusing to negotiate? These are two very different stances.

There’s a point at which they sort of blend into the same thing.

Perhaps, but I'd say it's begging the question to say that that point has been reached already.