Six hostages brutally murdered by Hamas in Gaza, including Israeli-American Goldberg-Polin

[Danthemailman]

Jeff Walz praised by MAGA for opposing his brother Tim Walz

"We've just become a third world banana republic," Jeff Walz reportedly wrote on Facebook, criticizing his brother Tim Walz's politics.

www.newsweek.com

It's nice to see that some people are waking up but sadly, too many people will never wake up.

 

[rjs330]

Definitely sad, but that is what you get when you fight wars the western way. That is the way of losers.

In order to win a war, you have to defeat the enemy military and civilians. You do that by killing them until they publicly admit defeat and give up. If they won't give up, then keep killing them. You may have to kill most or all of the civilians population if they won't give up.

That, of course, is genocide and a war crime, but it is the only way to win. Note that the last time America won a war was when it nuked Japan. Currently, the western way of war means never winning another war again.

Getting back to Israel, no Palestinians means no problems. Depopulate Gaza and the West Bank by killing everybody and driving off the rest.

Before you blame me, this is the scenario in Isaiah 17. Apparently, Israel is going to nuke all of its neighbors. Of course, this puts into the play WW3. Note that this Isaiah 17 scenario appears to be at Israel's doorstep right now.

The west diesnt really have the stomach for war anymore. We want to fight nice wars. The problem is too many Arabs these days don't fight nice wars. Yet the west demands Israel fights one way while the Arabs fight another way. Israel is trying but it's not possible. They are going to be heavily criticized by the left west no matter what they do. They are fighting the war they can fight to do thier best. Israel knows if they really let loose with full force it would create an immediate crisis. This slow crawl is tge only way to keep the hounds at bay. We'll see if Israel eventually says they have had enough.

There was an old Christian Rock artist, Larry Norman who wrote a song calked peacepollutionrevolution. In it he says "if your wise you keep.your eyes on Pallistine"

Israel is the key that unlocks the door to the coming of the son of perdition and then the 2nd coming of Christ. I'm anxiously awaiting to see if this is the beginning of that time.

 

[wing2000]

It seems many Israelis, including his defense minister, have had enough of Benjamin Netanyahu's leadership. Under his leadership, Israel suffered it's worse security breach since it was formed in '48. He needs to go....

https://www.axios.com/2024/08/30/netanyahu-gallant-shouting-match-israel-cabinet

 

[public hermit]

It seems many Israelis, including his defense minister, have had enough of Benjamin Netanyahu's leadership. Under his leadership, Israel suffered it's worse security breach since it was formed in '48. He needs to go....

https://www.axios.com/2024/08/30/netanyahu-gallant-shouting-match-israel-cabinet

Perhaps the worse security breach since '48 is part of why he wants the war go on?

 

[MartyF]

Referring to the Naqba as a security breach shows a special lack of knowledge. Here:

Amazon.com

You'all can read up and learn some history.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

I would have to say that comparing this situation is to other wars (with regards to a strategic approach) is ignoring a lot of other dynamics that are providing the backdrop for this particular conflict.

While there's certainly plenty of valid criticism that can be made about Netanyahu's approach...

A couple of facets worth considering:

1) Hamas has structured the conflict in such a way where it's nearly impossible to get them while still maintaining a level of civilian casualties that the international community would deem "tolerable" (via regular use of human shields, and intentionally placing - what they know will be strategic targets - near places like schools and hospitals)

2) There's some serious religious division between the two entities, and not just "your catholic uncle and baptist uncle argued over thanksgiving dinner" kind of division, this division runs a lot deeper after decades of trading bombs.

3) It's hard to go to the negotiating table with an entity, whose core principle is that you (and your people) should not exist and need to be wiped off the face of the earth.

4) In this particular conflict, the lines between "enemy combatant" and "civilian" can be much more blurry than in what westernized countries see as "civilized warfare" (if there is such a thing). Largely due to the fact that there are more similarities than differences between a Hamas member and a substantial chunk of the Palestinian population.

The population of Gaza is 58% fighting-aged males - 90% of which, hold the exact same troubling viewpoints as Hamas, and 75,000 of which, own firearms.

The comparison I'd use was if a law enforcement entity was trying to take out an extreme, heavily armed right-wing militia group in the US, and 58% of the civilian population in that region were males aged 16-30, and 90% of those males were members of some "less intense" right wing affiliation (not directly members of the militia, but regularly carried firearms, used a lot of the same rhetoric and symbolism, and some of which, would regularly fraternize with the militia members and occasionally even let the militia group members set up shop and/or store their weapons in their houses)

Absent some high-level, CIA-type, "high value target precision-style" hit on each and every individual member of the militia, the chances of taking the fight to militia group without accidentally killing some non-militia members (or people who happen to standing near them) is going to be slim and none.


To summarize: should Israel be more cautious to avoid casualties of actual non-combatants when they can?...obviously yes, they don't need to be trying to drop 1,000 pound bombs in residential areas, that's on them and they should be (and have been) condemned for doing so. However, this benchmark of "Israel is wrong if they kill more non-Hamas members than Hamas members" is an unrealistic and unreasonable one for the aforementioned reasons.

Under that framework of "anything that could accidentally kill non-Hamas members can't be tolerated", you're basically relegating Israel to spend the rest of their existence hiding under the iron dome and hoping that it can take out 90% of the rockets fired in at them (with maybe an occasional HVT hit)

 

[public hermit]

To summarize: should Israel be more cautious to avoid casualties of actual non-combatants when they can?...obviously yes, they don't need to be trying to drop 1,000 pound bombs in residential areas, that's on them and they should be (and have been) condemned for doing so. However, this benchmark of "Israel is wrong if they kill more non-Hamas members than Hamas members" is an unrealistic and unreasonable one for the aforementioned reasons.

It's not just a matter of numbers. At some point, the dis-proportionality creates even more terrorists. You end up perpetuating the very thing you are trying to eradicate. This war isn't the norm. The norm was how things stood the day before the initial massacre. It wasn't a great norm, we all agree, but it was not this. This war can't be the default position. And it think it's pretty clear that Israel dominates this situation, not Hamas. Israel has the bulk of the cards and is not playing them well, at all.

 

[MartyF]

1) Hamas has structured the conflict in such a way where it's nearly impossible to get them while still maintaining a level of civilian casualties that the international community would deem "tolerable" (via regular use of human shields, and intentionally placing - what they know will be strategic targets - near places like schools and hospitals)

Evidence? Or is this one of those I just gotta take your word for it things?

Israel has not even attempted to avoid what I would call civilian casualties. However, Israel has repeated considered children and toddlers to be enemy combatants.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2015/05/07/israels-new-justice-minister-considers-all-palestinians-to-be-the-enemy/

Toddlers are shot by Israeli soldiers in the head and heart.

Children of Gaza

Doctors and aid workers describe desperate conditions in the Gaza Strip since Israel responded to Hamas' attack last October, and their efforts to rescue children, the most vulnerable victims of violence.

www.cbsnews.com

What would it take for you to realize Israel is not trying to avoid civilian casualties?

2) There's some serious religious division between the two entities, and not just "your catholic uncle and baptist uncle argued over thanksgiving dinner" kind of division, this division runs a lot deeper after decades of trading bombs.

The Jews believe Jesus is in Hell under conditions I'm not allowed to describe here. Islam considers Jesus to be an honored Prophet.

Israel is currently robbing and murdering Christians . . .

Israeli settler seizure of Christian land a 'threat to peaceful coexistence', says EU

EU expresses 'deep concern over the implications' of police and settler takeover of Greek Orthodox church land

www.middleeasteye.net

Palestinian Christian activist arrested for protesting seizure of family land by settlers

Israeli police have arrested a Christian activist who was arrested for protesting the seizure of her family land by armed settlers in the occupied West Bank.

www.presstv.ir

For Palestinian Christians, a Sunday spent mourning civilians killed at a Gaza church

Services across the Holy Land memorialized the Palestinian civilians killed Thursday when an Israeli airstrike hit the Church of St. Porphyrius in Gaza City, where some 400 people were sheltering.

www.wbur.org

If you're supposedly a follower of Jesus, aren't you a tad worried about being on the wrong side of the conflict?

3) It's hard to go to the negotiating table with an entity, whose core principle is that you (and your people) should not exist and need to be wiped off the face of the earth.

Really?! You think this applies to the Palestinians? Sorry, it doesn't.

Here:

Amazon.com

You can read about it.

4) In this particular conflict, the lines between "enemy combatant" and "civilian" can be much more blurry than in what westernized countries see as "civilized warfare" (if there is such a thing). Largely due to the fact that there are more similarities than differences between a Hamas member and a substantial chunk of the Palestinian population.

So, for you, toddlers and babies = Hamas.

The population of Gaza is 58% fighting-aged males - 90% of which, hold the exact same troubling viewpoints as Hamas, and 75,000 of which, own firearms.

Before Israel started their genocidal actions, 38.36% of the population was under 15.

West Bank And Gaza Population Ages 0 14 Percent Of Total

Actual value and historical data chart for West Bank And Gaza Population Ages 0 14 Percent Of Total

tradingeconomics.com

I guess you really do consider toddlers = Hamas.

Admit that the only viewpoint from a Palestinian you don't consider troubling is self-deletion.

The comparison I'd use was if a law enforcement entity was trying to take out an extreme, heavily armed right-wing militia group in the US, and 58% of the civilian population in that region were males aged 16-30, and 90% of those males were members of some "less intense" right wing affiliation (not directly members of the militia, but regularly carried firearms, used a lot of the same rhetoric and symbolism, and some of which, would regularly fraternize with the militia members and occasionally even let the militia group members set up shop and/or store their weapons in their houses)

Absent some high-level, CIA-type, "high value target precision-style" hit on each and every individual member of the militia, the chances of taking the fight to militia group without accidentally killing some non-militia members (or people who happen to standing near them) is going to be slim and none.

Might you want to know what might have caused this group to come into existence in the first place? Or just roll in the tanks like Khrushchev?

BTW, thinking like yours caused My Lai.

To summarize: should Israel be more cautious to avoid casualties of actual non-combatants when they can?...obviously yes, they don't need to be trying to drop 1,000 pound bombs in residential areas, that's on them and they should be (and have been) condemned for doing so. However, this benchmark of "Israel is wrong if they kill more non-Hamas members than Hamas members" is an unrealistic and unreasonable one for the aforementioned reasons.

The actual viewpoint is that Israel is illegally occupying Gaza, the West Bank, and East Jerusalem. They should vacate immediately under international law. Any bomb dropped or gun fired is an illegal act and even if it accidentally kills a Hamas member, it is still murder.

Under the Geneva Code of 1949 which Israel agreed to, Hamas has the right to defend itself. Israel as an illegal occupier does not have the right to defend itself.

Under that framework of "anything that could accidentally kill non-Hamas members can't be tolerated", you're basically relegating Israel to spend the rest of their existence hiding under the iron dome and hoping that it can take out 90% of the rockets fired in at them (with maybe an occasional HVT hit)

If Israel actually sought peace, no wars would exist in the middle east. Wars in the middle east are the result of Israel.

 

[MartyF]

Bad analysis. Hamas cowards hide among civilians and put their own people at risk. Israel goes out of its way to protect civilians but as long as Hamas use its own people for shields unfortunately innocents will die.

The IDF purposefully targets civilians - shooting toddlers one in the head and once in the heart.

Children of Gaza

Doctors and aid workers describe desperate conditions in the Gaza Strip since Israel responded to Hamas' attack last October, and their efforts to rescue children, the most vulnerable victims of violence.

www.cbsnews.com

‘I’m bored, so I shoot’: The Israeli army’s approval of free-for-all violence in Gaza

Israeli soldiers describe the near-total absence of firing regulations in the Gaza war, with troops shooting as they please.

www.972mag.com

 

[Postvieww]

The IDF purposefully targets civilians - shooting toddlers one in the head and once in the heart.

Children of Gaza

Doctors and aid workers describe desperate conditions in the Gaza Strip since Israel responded to Hamas' attack last October, and their efforts to rescue children, the most vulnerable victims of violence.

www.cbsnews.com

‘I’m bored, so I shoot’: The Israeli army’s approval of free-for-all violence in Gaza

Israeli soldiers describe the near-total absence of firing regulations in the Gaza war, with troops shooting as they please.

www.972mag.com

One of your stories is very sad that any civilians are hurt but an air strike did not specifically target that child. If Hamas did not imbed with civilians and leave Israel no other choice but to capitulate more civilians could be saved. The other link an Al Jazeera story I put zero confidence in. Israel was mercilessly attacked and has every right to root out and eliminate the enemy. Did you speak out against the hamas attack, rapes, murders and captured civilians?

 

[MartyF]

One of your stories is very sad that any civilians are hurt but an air strike did not specifically target that child.

No, the first story discusses how toddlers are being shot in the head and heart. You might want to actually read it instead of just pretending that you did.

If Hamas did not imbed with civilians and leave Israel no other choice but to capitulate more civilians could be saved.

Absolutely no evidence of this.

The other link an Al Jazeera story I put zero confidence in.

That would also be false.

Israel was mercilessly attacked and has every right to root out and eliminate the enemy.

No, according to the 1949 Geneva Convention Israel and the U.S. agreed to, Israel does not have the right to defend itself. According the International Court of Justice, Israel is illegally occupying the Golan Heights, East Jerusalem, the West Bank, and Gaza and is legally required to vacate. However, we currently live in a lawless world and Israel is a rogue terrorist country.

Did you speak out against the hamas attack, rapes, murders and captured civilians?

Definitely . . . anyone who unlawfully murdered or kidnapped civilians should be arrested and publicly put on trial.

In addition, I have seen no evidence that my money is being used to support Hamas in any way shape or form. However, my money is being taken from me to pay for weapons, bombs, and bullets to allow Israel to kill toddlers, steal, rape, and pillage

One thing though - I have seen no evidence of Hamas raping anyone - especially on October 7. Falsely accusing people of rape to support the murder of innocent toddlers is evil and wrong.

BTW, 2/3rds of Israelis believe gang-raping innocent Palestinians is ok.

65% of Israeli Jews oppose criminal prosecution for soldiers suspected of raping Palestinian detainees

A shocking new poll shows that almost two out of three Jewish Israelis oppose criminal prosecution for soldiers suspected of gang-raping Palestinian detainees at the Sde Teiman torture facility.

mondoweiss.net

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Evidence? Or is this one of those I just gotta take your word for it things?

You don't have to take just my word for it...


How about the UN?
Numerous reports during the 2014 Gaza War stated that Hamas used human shields. The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay accused Hamas militants of violating international humanitarian law by "locating rockets within schools and hospitals, or even launching these rockets from densely populated areas".[16] A UN inquiry found “weapons had been placed inside an UNRWA school in the Hamas-run Gaza Strip and that it was highly likely that an unidentified Palestinian armed group could have used the school premises to launch attacks.”[17][18]

What about the European Union?
Hamas Arabic-speaking spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri called up Gaza civilians on Hamas's Al-Aqsa TV 8 July 2014 to stay put in areas under fire by Israel, prompting accusations from Israel and others – the European Union, for example[19][20] – that Hamas was calling on people to volunteer as "in effect human shields".

How about independent journalists?
During the war, Israel also damaged hospitals,[29] alleging they were concealing "hidden missiles".[30] A team of Finnish journalists from Helsingin Sanomat working at the Gaza Al-Shifa hospital reported seeing rockets fired from near the Al-Shifa hospital.

The Washington Post described Al-Shifa hospital as a "de facto headquarters for Hamas leaders, who can be seen in the hallways and offices".[34] French-Palestinian journalist Radjaa Abu Dagg reported being interrogated by an armed Hamas member inside Al-Shifa Hospital and ordered to leave Gaza.[35][36][37]

How about Amnesty International?
In 2015, The Washington Post reported that an Amnesty International report condemned Palestinian militias for storing munitions in, and launching rockets from civilian structures and reported that the launching of attacks and storing of rockets "very near locations where hundreds of displaced civilians were taking shelter."

The report stated "the available evidence indicates that Palestinian armed groups fired rockets and mortars from residential areas during the July/August 2014 conflict, and that on at least some occasions, projectiles were launched in close proximity to civilian buildings…Palestinian armed groups stored rockets and other munitions in civilian buildings and facilities, including UN schools, during the conflict…

Or the Red Cross reports

Or, how about just actual pictures of it happening?

(children being bunched up near a mortar)

(children and civilians on top of the building of the residence of a Hamas leader)


Or how about Hamas's own words?
(per a report from NATO)

Hamas MP Fathi Hamed stated that "For the Palestinian people, death has become an industry, at which women excel...the elderly excel at this...and so do the children. This is why they have formed human shields of the women, the children."[89] Following the release of the Goldstone Report, the former commander of the British forces in Afghanistan Colonel Richard Kemp was invited to testify at the UN Human Rights Council 12th Special Session that during Operation Cast Lead, Israel encountered an "enemy that deliberately positioned its military capability behind the human shield of the civilian population".[90]

The Jews believe Jesus is in Hell under conditions I'm not allowed to describe here. Islam considers Jesus to be an honored Prophet.

Israel is currently robbing and murdering Christians . . .

It's my understanding that the Jewish faith doesn't have the same concept of "Hell" as Christians do.

...but not sure what that has to do with anything. Being that all 3 are Abrahamic religions, there's going to be some aspects of overlap and division. The fact that Islam considers Jesus a prophet, and Jewish faith considers Jesus to be just another Jewish guy who tried to lead a revolt against the Romans and got killed for it, is irrelevant to the topic at hand, and is irrelevant to the broader conversation about which religions, in particular, have the biggest modern day issues with religious intolerance and propensity for leveraging violence.

If you're supposedly a follower of Jesus, aren't you a tad worried about being on the wrong side of the conflict?

I'm not, I'm an atheist (per my profile indicator on the left hand side)

Really?! You think this applies to the Palestinians? Sorry, it doesn't.

You are being redirected...

It would appear that 3/4 of Palestinians hold views about Jews that would be considered appalling if espoused by a right-wing entity in the US. And Palestinian leaders have repeatedly declined two-state offers, and Arafat in particular saying that "any peace talks are temporarily until the destruction of Israel can be realized"

If Israel actually sought peace, no wars would exist in the middle east. Wars in the middle east are the result of Israel.

How many times have two-state solutions been put on the table, and how many times have they been rejected by the Palestinian side?


Basically what you're proposing is that if Israel laid down its weapons and completely got out of Gaza, there would be no more war in the middle east? That's a pretty bold prediction considering that A) the other surrounding Islamic countries don't think Israel should even exist, and B) there have been plenty of conflicts over there in that region that haven't even involved Israel.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

It's not just a matter of numbers. At some point, the dis-proportionality creates even more terrorists. You end up perpetuating the very thing you are trying to eradicate. This war isn't the norm. The norm was how things stood the day before the initial massacre. It wasn't a great norm, we all agree, but it was not this. This war can't be the default position. And it think it's pretty clear that Israel dominates this situation, not Hamas. Israel has the bulk of the cards and is not playing them well, at all.

But given the ideological make-up of the population

You are being redirected...

And given the fact that one of the deeply held beliefs of a substantial portion of the region is that Israel shouldn't even exists. (and they've been attacked by other entities for whom they've never occupied), so I don't know that "it's going to create more antisemitic terrorist" reasoning is a great one. It would seem as if those kinds of attitudes seem to have no problem perpetuating on their own, absent any direct occupation from Israel.

Hezbollah has even greater numbers than Hamas. And obviously the nation of Iran would wipe them out tomorrow if they knew there would be no backlash for it.

 

[public hermit]

But given the ideological make-up of the population

You are being redirected...

And given the fact that one of the deeply held beliefs of a substantial portion of the region is that Israel shouldn't even exists. (and they've been attacked by other entities for whom they've never occupied), so I don't know that "it's going to create more antisemitic terrorist" reasoning is a great one. It would seem as if those kinds of attitudes seem to have no problem perpetuating on their own, absent any direct occupation from Israel.

Hezbollah has even greater numbers than Hamas. And obviously the nation of Iran would wipe them out tomorrow if they knew there would be no backlash for it.

Okay, let's assume you're right. What's the end game here? Is the idea to keep killing as many as possible, including civilians, until there are no more individuals with anti-Israel sentiments? There seems to be no end in sight. At some point, there has to be a cease fire and discussion on a way forward. Unending war cannot be the answer.

 

[Desk trauma]

Unending war cannot be the answer.

Why not? Not like anyone is going to stop them.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Okay, let's assume you're right. What's the end game here? Is the idea to keep killing as many as possible, including civilians, until there are no more individuals with anti-Israel sentiments? There seems to be no end in sight. At some point, there has to be a cease fire and discussion on a way forward. Unending war cannot be the answer.

A two-state solution would be the best option.

However, that doesn't seem to get a lot of traction. What would need to happen is a change in leadership on the Palestinian side, in order to accept one of the two-state solutions proposals that their predecessors have declined. And the the ball would be in Israel's court to make good on the arrangements of the previous offer, else be "exposed" to the international community as "not really wanting peace".

I think the "good as it's gonna get" offer was the one made in 2000
Ehud Barak (then PM of Israel) offered to form a Palestinian state initially on 73% of the West Bank (that is, 27% less than the Green Line borders) and 100% of the Gaza Strip. In 10–25 years, the Palestinian state would expand to a maximum of 92% of the West Bank (91 percent of the West Bank and 1 percent from a land swap).

However, this attitude from the PLO wasn't helpful:
PLO leadership stated that it considered any peace with Israel was to be temporary until the dream of Israel's destruction could be realized.

Had Arafat accepted that offer in 2000, they'd have had a sovereign state established for a quarter of a century by this point, by next year, that state would had reached the full expansion agreement of 92% of the West Bank and 100% of the Gaza Strip.

Obviously, the international community would have to take the kid gloves off in terms of drawing a harder line with Iran. As has been shown over time, anti-Israel extremism hasn't been the result, solely, of their attacks on Palestine. Iran's propaganda machine combined with their bank account has shown to be a fairly effective motivator in that regard as well.

 

[Postvieww]

No, according to the 1949 Geneva Convention Israel and the U.S. agreed to, Israel does not have the right to defend itself. According the International Court of Justice, Israel is illegally occupying the Golan Heights, East Jerusalem, the West Bank, and Gaza and is legally required to vacate. However, we currently live in a lawless world and Israel is a rogue terrorist country.

You can take that up with the God of the Bible and creator of the universe. I believe according to scripture God has a very different opinion.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Under the Geneva Code of 1949 which Israel agreed to, Hamas has the right to defend itself. Israel as an illegal occupier does not have the right to defend itself.

I think ultimately, holding only Israel to international border agreements of 1949 and some faux view of "decency in honoring the deal", when international conditions changed drastically between 1949 and the late 1970s, is a combination of disingenuousness and revisionist history.

This chart shows what the original Jewish population in each of these countries were in the late 40's (first column), and what they were by the mid 70's (2nd column)

In effect, it's saying
"Okay, as this new nation that's going to be a safe haven for Jewish people in the middle east, you're restricted to keep your country confined to the particular borders (roughly the size of New Jersey)"

Then over the next two decades, almost every predominately Arab country either forcibly expelled Jews by mandate, or purposely made conditions so abysmal that the Jews had pretty much no choice but to relocate to Israel. (a total displacement of nearly 800,000 people (more than doubling the size of the Israeli population during that time window)

Putting the onus on Israel to try to sustain/support 1.5 million people in a territory size that was originally intended for 670,000 people, and then having international entities wag their finger at them for expansion is grossly unfair.


That'd like if I said "Okay people of "Group XYZ", in order to provide a safe haven, I'm going to allocate this 60 unit apartment complex for you 60 families to live in, but it has to stay confined to just these 60 units", then spend the next 10 years standing by and doing nothing while adjacent city leaders are making unlivable rules for XYZs in the adjacent cities that end up forcing 80 additional families to move into that apartment complex, and when the people in that complex make the decision to expand the complex a bit to accommodate the new population size, the neighbors on all sides start incessantly throwing rocks at the apartment and claiming that the apartment complex shouldn't even exist and needs to be wiped from the neighborhood.

 

[Postvieww]

I think ultimately, holding only Israel to international border agreements of 1949 and some faux view of "decency in honoring the deal", when international conditions changed drastically between 1949 and the late 1970s, is a combination of disingenuousness and revisionist history.

This chart shows what the original Jewish population in each of these countries were in the late 40's (first column), and what they were by the mid 70's (2nd column)
View attachment 354149


In effect, it's saying
"Okay, as this new nation that's going to be a safe haven for Jewish people in the middle east, you're restricted to keep your country confined to the particular borders (roughly the size of New Jersey)"

Then over the next two decades, almost every predominately Arab country either forcibly expelled Jews by mandate, or purposely made conditions so abysmal that the Jews had pretty much no choice but to relocate to Israel. (a total displacement of nearly 800,000 people (more than doubling the size of the Israeli population during that time window)

Putting the onus on Israel to try to sustain/support 1.5 million people in a territory size that was originally intended for 670,000 people, and then having international entities wag their finger at them for expansion is grossly unfair.


That'd like if I said "Okay people of "Group XYZ", in order to provide a safe haven, I'm going to allocate this 60 unit apartment complex for you 60 families to live in, but it has to stay confined to just these 60 units", then spend the next 10 years standing by and doing nothing while adjacent city leaders are making unlivable rules for XYZs in the adjacent cities that end up forcing 80 additional families to move into that apartment complex, and when the people in that complex make the decision to expand the complex a bit to accommodate the new population size, the neighbors on all sides start incessantly throwing rocks at the apartment and claiming that the apartment complex shouldn't even exist and needs to be wiped from the neighborhood.

The Bible predicts that most of the world will turn against Israel and that they will ultimately prevail. This anti-Israel sentiment by many is not in alignment with the Creator of the universe. So where does that leave those anti-Israel individuals?

 

[Desk trauma]

The Bible predicts that most of the world will turn against Israel and that they will ultimately prevail.

Great, so we can stop with the subsidies?