A Political Thread pt. 2

[Welsh Exile]

The question was rhetorical. I know US are going do sweet FA to N and Israel.

And why do you think that is?

 

[ncurd]

And why do you think that is?

Large Jewish population (2.5%) and voting block focused in Democrat states. To win the popular vote traditionally republicans need 30% of Jews voting for then.

They have a large pro-Israel lobby.

 

[Welsh Exile]

Large Jewish population (2.5%) and voting block focused in Democrat states. To win the popular vote traditionally republicans need 30% of Jews voting for then.

They have a large pro-Israel lobby.

2.5% is large now? And 30% of that 2.5% is a lot? Maybe I'm missing something but the stats you posted seem to contradict the point you are making especially when we are talking about heinous people that are on a par with Hamas terrorists.

 

[Welsh Exile]

If anything they're more concerned about losing younger voters hence why Harris has been a bit tougher on Isreal in her speeches.

 

[Welsh Exile]

I'll save you the bother though, the real reason is pretty simple, Isreal is an ally of the west as they largely share our norms and values and also share vital intelligence with us from people who would like to see the West eradicated but, more importantly, it's because they, like the rest of the world, recognise Isreal as a sovereign country and its right to defend itself. That's it pretty much. Conversely, countries don't tend to recognise terror organisations that's sole purpose is to eradicate Jewish people and its state from existence.

 

[McTallshort]

America supports Israel because it's cheaper than having a 5th Fleet. Think it was Reagan that said that

 

[Welsh Exile]

America supports Israel because it's cheaper than having a 5th Fleet. Think it was Reagan that said that

Military intelligence is certainly a factor as it is with all of a nations states allies. But if the assertion is, Isreal are as bad as Hamas, which was the viewpoint originally stated, why is there no budge from America in terms of support against the state itself? It can't be just militarily (possible I suppose) there has to be some kind of moral alignment as well. I.e Isreal is a liberal democracy which is pretty unique for that region of the world.

 

[General Melchett]

Military intelligence is certainly a factor as it is with all of a nations states allies. But if the assertion is, Isreal are as bad as Hamas, which was the viewpoint originally stated, why is there no budge from America in terms of support against the state itself? It can't be just militarily (possible I suppose) there has to be some kind of moral alignment as well. I.e Isreal is a liberal democracy which is pretty unique for that region of the world.

There's no budge from America due to the small matter of an election coming up in a couple of months.

Netanyahu knows the Democrats are walking a no win tightrope and by dragging out the war he's hoping to tip the balance in Trump's favour which is his own best hope of political survival. If Trump wins he can crack on but if Harris wins then she'll be in a much stronger position to pressure him into accepting a deal after which he's probably toast. So much hinges on this election IMO - Ukraine too.

Labour have a massive majority and are in a secure enough position to do what they did. Starmer could have a threesome in the rose garden and he'd still be on safe ground.

 

[Which Tyler]

But if the assertion is, Isreal are as bad as Hamas, which was the viewpoint originally stated.

Is it?

 

[Welsh Exile]

There's no budge from America due to the small matter of an election coming up in a couple of months.

Netanyahu knows the Democrats are walking a no win tightrope and by dragging out the war he's hoping to tip the balance in Trump's favour which is his own best hope of political survival. If Trump wins he can crack on but if Harris wins then she'll be in a much stronger position to pressure him into accepting a deal after which he's probably toast. So much hinges on this election IMO - Ukraine too.

I agree with all that but what I was getting at is if say Harris becomes president she's not going to suddenly start treating Isreal like Hamas. She's going to generally align with Israel's aims (while pushing back on things she and her team feel they need to as you rightfully pointed out) but this talk of "well are America going to arrest these war criminals because they're as bad as Hamas" is incorrect.

 

[Welsh Exile]

Is it?

Yes. If you post an article which states America are charging Hamas leaders for October 7th and then say "I wonder if they will do the same for Isreal" the assertion is clearly that the acts of October 7th and Israel's response are the same and therefore, at the very least, as bad as each other.

 

[General Melchett]

I agree with all that but what I was getting at is if say Harris becomes president she's not going to suddenly start treating Isreal like Hamas. She's going to generally align with Israel's aims (while pushing back on things she and her team feel they need to as you rightfully pointed out) but this talk of "well are America going to arrest these war criminals because they're as bad as Hamas" is incorrect.

I read that 2/3 of Israelis want Netanyahu out. He's on a very sticky wicket as it is and I agree Harris wouldn't be seeking his arrest or anything of that nature but a fresh mandate would allow her to apply enough pressure that ensures him losing his grip on power. The election is a win or bust moment for Netanyahu IMO and he's doing his best to influence it.

 

[Welsh Exile]

I read that 2/3 of Israelis want Netanyahu out. He's on a very sticky wicket as it is and I agree Harris wouldn't be seeking his arrest or anything of that nature but a fresh mandate would allow her to apply enough pressure that ensures him losing his grip on power. The election is a win or bust moment for Netanyahu IMO and he's doing his best to influence it.

Agree, but again, I'm not talking about Netenyahu, I'm talking about Americas perception of the conflict and why there is a clear distinct difference drawn, from them (and the majority of the planet) between Hamas and Isreal.

 

[Which Tyler]

Yes. If you post an article which states America are charging Hamas leaders for October 7th and then say "I wonder if they will do the same for Isreal" the assertion is clearly that the acts of October 7th and Israel's response are the same and therefore, at the very least, as bad as each other.

It really isn't.
Christian Wade and Jo Marler both play rugby.
Are they the same thing as well?

ETA: Sorry, a better equivalence could be "Christian Wade is a rugby player, and Saracens are a rugby team - are they the same thing?"

IMO: Hamas are a terrorist organisation who committed murder. Israel is a nation state who are currently committing murder. Asking if they will receive a similar responce seems fine, whilst not saying that they are the same, or as bad as each other.

 

[Welsh Exile]

It really isn't.
Christian Wade and Jo Marler both play rugby.
Are they the same thing as well?

ETA: Sorry, a better equivalence could be "Christian Wade is a rugby player, and Saracens are a rugby team - are they the same thing?"

IMO: Hamas are a terrorist organisation who committed murder. Israel is a nation state who are currently committing murder. Asking if they will receive a similar responce seems fine, whilst not saying that they are the same, or as bad as each other.

I reject your comparisons there as you are equivocating the response of a nation state to an act of war to a terrorist attack. Oranges and apples. @Bada-Bing! Can speak for himself but the implication is well if they're arresting these guys for a terrorist attack then they should also arrest these terrorists. I, as with the majority of the world including America, reject that equivocation because they aren't remotely similar.

 

[Welsh Exile]

Also, as with genocide, murder requires you to prove intent so I'd disagree with your wording as well.

 

[Which Tyler]

ETA: Sod it, I've made my point, and clarified, not going to waste more time on this. No point arguing with someone who disagrees on the fundamentals of the English language

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

I reject your comparisons there as you are equivocating the response of a nation state to an act of war to a terrorist attack. Oranges and apples. @Bada-Bing! Can speak for himself but the implication is well if they're arresting these guys for a terrorist attack then they should also arrest these terrorists. I, as with the majority of the world including America, reject that equivocation because they aren't remotely similar.

He is expressly not equivocating the two though? His entire post is that they're not the same thing.

 

[Welsh Exile]

ETA: Sod it, I've made my point, and clarified, not going to waste more time on this. No point arguing with someone who disagrees on the fundamentals of the English language

Not a very good attitude to have to someone who is good faith. It seems pointless though as the only person who can explain what they meant by their original response is @Bada-Bing! but maybe he was saying Isreal officials should be arrested because there's no similarity to what Hamas did in October 7th and he only mentioned it under an article referencing October 7th as a compete coincidence.

 

[Welsh Exile]

I could also say that someone who's surface level thinking includes

A kills people = bad
B kills people = bad

And who fundamentally does not understand what the word murder means is pretty pointless too.