It’s not like Israel needs any more weapons against a rag-tag bunch of terrorists whose existence they - arguably indirectly - continue to foment.
Yes, I know Israel’s take on the matter is that the existence of Hamas is precisely why cruelty to Palestine is “necessary” rather than the other way around, but at this point does it matter whether the chicken or the egg came first? Those who say yes on both sides - even if they differ about which came first - are using it as a crutch at this point.
The whole thing now is a big kid stomping the ever-loving f**k out of a smaller kid because “he kicked my shin! he kicked my shin!” so that obviously makes whatever they do OK, and in fact, let’s have some other big kids (one wearing a stars and stripes shirt of all things?!) help out with the stomping.
And tomorrow, had this not suddenly escalated, the original big kid would have gone through the smaller kid’s pockets for lunch money, and maybe a house or two like usual.
(Please note that - goofy metaphors aside - I’m not happy about the civilian deaths that have occurred recently, regardless of what the dead might have believed while they were alive. In war, it’s almost always the wrong people who die.)
I 100% agree with all of that. I was just questioning the implication that the Israeli - Palestine conflict is because of lack of American arms. That doesn’t make any sense to me and I’ve never head that claim before.
It was meant to be sarcastic. The point is that sending more weapons in will not help the situation at all and if anything makes it worse. And that Israel has received so much military support already that it’s purely performative.
It’s not like Israel needs any more weapons against a rag-tag bunch of terrorists whose existence they - arguably indirectly - continue to foment.
Yes, I know Israel’s take on the matter is that the existence of Hamas is precisely why cruelty to Palestine is “necessary” rather than the other way around, but at this point does it matter whether the chicken or the egg came first? Those who say yes on both sides - even if they differ about which came first - are using it as a crutch at this point.
The whole thing now is a big kid stomping the ever-loving f**k out of a smaller kid because “he kicked my shin! he kicked my shin!” so that obviously makes whatever they do OK, and in fact, let’s have some other big kids (one wearing a stars and stripes shirt of all things?!) help out with the stomping.
And tomorrow, had this not suddenly escalated, the original big kid would have gone through the smaller kid’s pockets for lunch money, and maybe a house or two like usual.
(Please note that - goofy metaphors aside - I’m not happy about the civilian deaths that have occurred recently, regardless of what the dead might have believed while they were alive. In war, it’s almost always the wrong people who die.)
You calling Hamas terrorists?
I 100% agree with all of that. I was just questioning the implication that the Israeli - Palestine conflict is because of lack of American arms. That doesn’t make any sense to me and I’ve never head that claim before.
It was meant to be sarcastic. The point is that sending more weapons in will not help the situation at all and if anything makes it worse. And that Israel has received so much military support already that it’s purely performative.