Support NeoGAF

[Fenderputty]

Why is Israel still sending settlers there?

They're basically an apartheid state.

 

[GaimeGuy]

@ this thread.

 

[Dude Abides]

The situation over there seems to be going from bad to worse. The Palestinians are fractured and Israel has no interest in a consensual resolution. Wonder if we'll see a third intifada soon.

 

[Cheesecakebobby]

If there are invaders in your home, are you a terrorist for trying to kick them out? Maybe technically, that's it.

This does not mean I condone the attacks. Seems this needs to be clarified in every post.

Terrorism can be a tool, such as a means to kick out a perceived "invader". If you think a family with three kids driving along a road automatically qualifies as an invader then I don't know what to tell you, but yes it would still be an act of terror, one designed to change a policy.

Fury should be directed at those who set the policies. This family, as far as we know, was following the laws of its own country and were not combatants.

 

[Zaph]

Fury should be directed at those who set the policies. This family, as far as we know, was following the laws of its own country and were not combatants.

I don't agree with the attacks, but if tomorrow Mexico wrote a law saying Mexicans can take land/property in Texas, would Texans hold back against the "settlers" because they're not combatants?

 

[orthodoxy1095]

Fury should be directed at those who set the policies. This family, as far as we know, was following the laws of its own country and were not combatants.

I mean, I don't like the idea of shooting civilians, let alone a family with kids, but wasn't it a free choice they made to go to this settlement and live on stolen land? What does the "law of their own country" mean here exactly?

 

[Corronchilejano]

Terrorism can be a tool, such as a means to kick out a perceived "invader". If you think a family with three kids driving along a road automatically qualifies as an invader then I don't know what to tell you, but yes it would still be an act of terror, one designed to change a policy.

You're correct, terrorism.

Fury should be directed at those who set the policies. This family, as far as we know, was following the laws of its own country and were not combatants.

We all agree on that. Can we also agree that this will keep happening unless: a. Israel stops building settlements in palestinian territory or b. The Israeli army goes in and commits genocide on palestinians to avoid future attacks?

It doesn't matter if you focus your fury on the policies if you're still getting kicked of your own land, with prejudice.

 

[Catatafish]

Terrorism can be a tool, such as a means to kick out a perceived "invader". If you think a family with three kids driving along a road automatically qualifies as an invader then I don't know what to tell you, but yes it would still be an act of terror, one designed to change a policy.

Fury should be directed at those who set the policies. This family, as far as we know, was following the laws of its own country and were not combatants.

Except the so called "settlers", are military trained and equipped with automatic assault rifles. They are systematically displacing Palestinian families, stealing lands, burning crops, killing children all under the protection of the IDF. But that's all fine of course since they are following the law and not officially registered as combatants.

 

[mr2xxx]

Terrorism can be a tool, such as a means to kick out a perceived "invader". If you think a family with three kids driving along a road automatically qualifies as an invader then I don't know what to tell you, but yes it would still be an act of terror, one designed to change a policy.

Fury should be directed at those who set the policies. This family, as far as we know, was following the laws of its own country and were not combatants.

The family may be following the laws in their country but they understand that there is a risk.

 

[Cheesecakebobby]

Except the so called "settlers", are military trained and equipped with automatic assault rifles. They are systematically displacing Palestinian families, stealing lands, burning crops, killing children all under the protection of the IDF. But that's all fine of course since they are following the law and not officially registered as combatants.

You're right, some settlers have done that, and that is one of the reasons why it is crucial to Israel to devise a pullout plan (the main reason remains that the settlements are one of many barriers to peace).

However, you have no evidence that the dead did any of that. Of course it wouldn't have been terrorism if the attack had been self defense against settler arsonists or what have you, but it wasn't. It was an attack on a defenseless family for being Jews in a place Jews 'shouldn't be', and we should be able to condemn it unconditionally. Even if you hate settlers with every fiber of your being because of the actions of some of them, if you are in favour of peace then you should be able to speak against this without an addendum that they really only have themselves to blame because xyz.

P.s, going to sleep now, not dodging questions. Hope I don't wake to any worse developments.

 

[hendersonhank]

Some people here actually support the killing of innocent civilians just because they are living in settlements. You've reached a new low, GAF.

They chose to invade someone else's country and set up homes on someone else's land. Not exactly "innocent" -- they knew exactly what they were doing when they moved there, and also knew how dangerous it was.

 

[Chariot]

The true enemy is not the family and not the terrorist, those are just symptoms. It's the state of Israel that is the problem. They push Palestine into a corner for years, directly leading to people moving to extreme measures to protect their land and families. Since the international community is just watching, they can either be slowly driven out of the country or fight for it. And while that happens they have to live as inferior humans under the rule of the aggressive state of Israel that sends it's people into areas not belonging to them to expand and play victim when the people of the land fight back.

 

[Corronchilejano]

However, you have no evidence that the dead did any of that. Of course it wouldn't have been terrorism if the attack had been self defence against settler arsonists or what have you, but it wasn't. It was an attack on a defenceless family for being Jews in a place Jews 'shouldn't be', and we should be able to condemn it unconditionally. Even if you hate settlers with every fiber of your being because of the actions of some of them, if you are in favour of peace then you should be able to speak against this without an addendum that they really only have themselves to blame because xyz.

If you're in favor of peace you're not in favor of killing civilians and building illegal settlements. This isn't an isolated case. Israel knew this would eventually happen to justify further military action in a region they're not supposed to be in.

EDIT: Also, you believe this is because they're jews? Fuck no, it's because they're invaders.

 

[Catatafish]

You're right, some settlers have done that, and that is one of the reasons why it is crucial to Israel to devise a pullout plan (the main reason remains that the settlements are one of many barriers to peace).

However, you have no evidence that the dead did any of that. Of course it wouldn't have been terrorism if the attack had been self defence against settler arsonists or what have you, but it wasn't. It was an attack on a defenceless family for being Jews in a place Jews 'shouldn't be', and we should be able to condemn it unconditionally. Even if you hate settlers with every fiber of your being because of the actions of some of them, if you are in favour of peace then you should be able to speak against this without an addendum that they really only have themselves to blame because xyz.

It's not about them being Jews you see. It's about them coming from a totally different place and stealing the land of the Palestinians. And of course I am against any killing, but I am also equally against displacing a whole nation for some biblical nonsense.

 

[freeofgreed]

Ok, well i find the number of posts that totally fail to condemn the killings disturbing, along with the immediate deflection (hey lets not forget that settlements are bad) which, if a similar remark was made by someone arguing for an Israeli viewpoint, would be shouted down as "whataboutery".

Also, while Israel's leaders and a shamefully large number of settlers are directly responsible for perpetuating the cycle of violence, the idea that these sorts of attacks are simply the inevitable consequence of Israeli policy is absurd. Violent Jihadism against Jews in the Middle-East did not begin in 1967.

I disagree. Given the context of this specific incident. It's clear that the killings were in retaliation to Israel's settlements. So it's perfectly fine in this case to attribute some of the blame there (obviously the bulk goes to murderers). That's not to say that all or even most acts of violence against Jews in the middle east are because of Israel or it's policies. But that is another thread all in itself.

Actually people in the thread are trying to justify the killings with a lot of "whataboutisms".

Like who? Nobody's justifying any killings. People are discussing why they are happening as a way to stop further killings from happening. Your rational is like the people who say talking about gun control after a mass shooting deflects from the victims. While yes the deaths of the victims are tragic and should be mourned what good would it do if we do not try to discuss the reasons behind the attacks so that futures ones won't occur?

 

[enewtabie]

Sad. Hopefully the terrorists are found. I always wonder what it would be like if Israel/Jordan had actually worked out that deal and turned over the WB as a part of the treaty.

 

[Jonm1010]

Why is it that certain posters only show up to threads on Israel where there is an angle they can use to defend their actions and put blame on Palestine? Where were these posters in the threads about the settler attacks on Palestinians that left an infant and their parents burnt to death? About Bibi's comments? About the expansion of illegal settlements in the West Bank again? The destruction of West Bank homes? About the hell Israel is putting gaza and the West Bank through economically?

They are always conveniently abscent until there is an oppurtunity to make this about blaming Palestine or attacking those who aren't lock step with Israel's account of things.

The killings are absolutely wrong but there is a larger context for this that is conveniently being ignored by many either intentionally or through ignorance that has allowed them to give a perverted context to this situation.

 

[Kimawolf]

Jesus...this is like black people in America. If oppressed people never get justice and get continually oppressed and murdered, how long are they supposed to take it before reacting to their oppression with violence?

 

[megalowho]

I get that there's not a strong Israel defense on GAF, but was there even a thread for the attack itself where two parents were shot dead in front of their four children? Or is it just being discussed now that Israel is responding with force? The way a story is presented always influences the direction of discussion. Just interesting to see what people feel is worth posting and what isn't.

 

[Corronchilejano]

I get that there's not a strong Israel defense on GAF, but was there even a thread for the attack itself where two parents were shot dead in front of their four children? Or is it just being discussed now that Israel is responding with force? The way a story is presented always influences the direction of discussion. Just interesting to see what people feel is worth posting and what isn't.

It is very hard to defend the position of the big guy beating down the small one. Are we supposed to ignore context?

Also, killing parents in front of their children? Horrible.

 

[Chariot]

Why is it that certain posters only show up to threads on Israel where there is an angle they can use to defend their actions and put blame on Palestine? Where were these posters in the threads about the settler attacks on Palestinians that left an infant and their parents burnt to death? About Bibi's comments? About the expansion of illegal settlements in the West Bank again? The destruction of West Bank homes? About the hell Israel is putting gaza and the West Bank through economically?

They are always conveniently abscent until there is an oppurtunity to make this about blaming Palestine or attacking those who aren't lock step with Israel's account of things.

The killings are absolutely wrong but there is a larger context for this that is conveniently being ignored by many either intentionally or through ignorance that has allowed them to give a perverted context to this situation.

Incidentally all the major defenders of the state of Israel on this forum are Israeli themselves. Remember the ex-IDF guy who was banned after he kept defending his opinion that it's okay to have heavy collateral of palestini kids and that he would throw a grenade into them without a problem when there could be a terrorist among them.

 

[freeofgreed]

Jesus...this is like black people in America. If oppressed people never get justice and get continually oppressed and murdered, how long are they supposed to take it before reacting to their oppression with violence?

yup.

I get that there's not a strong Israel defense on GAF, but was there even a thread for the attack itself where two parents were shot dead in front of their four children? Or is it just being discussed now that Israel is responding with force? The way a story is presented always influences the direction of discussion. Just interesting to see what people feel is worth posting and what isn't.

And what stopped you from making such a thread?

 

[KimiNewt]

I get that there's not a strong Israel defense on GAF, but was there even a thread for the attack itself where two parents were shot dead in front of their four children? Or is it just being discussed now that Israel is responding with force? The way a story is presented always influences the direction of discussion. Just interesting to see what people feel is worth posting and what isn't.

I did not know about the retaliation myself, not really following the news closely. I did however hear about the attack a few days ago and saw there was no gaf thread about it.

I looked it up and posted the first reputable source I found. It had the extra details about the insertion of troops.

That sort of threads would just split into three sorts of comments: "that's horrid", "I hope any response is reasonable" or "that's what they get for their oppression". So having the retaliation in it brings in an extra angle.
Would have enjoyed reading the thread either way, though.

 

[AndyD]

Some people here actually support the killing of innocent civilians just because they are living in settlements. You've reached a new low, GAF.

People are arguing that by being settlers they are terrorizing the locals and are not innocent civilians. And so it's really a two way terror street.

I think there's valid arguments on both sides in general and realistically the first step that needs to be taken towards any reasonable reconciliation and long term peace is stopping expansion of settlements and roll back and eliminate many of them, while lifting a lot of the restrictions on Palestinians. Nothing short of that will work more than a temporary patch.

 

[Oersted]

And the circle continues. Tired of it.

 

[Chariot]

And the circle continues. Tired of it.

This isn't a circle of violence. The state of Israel would invade the West Bank regardless of the kind of response.

 

[Alabamaman]

What about the palestinian family that was burned alive in their sleep? Were troops sent to settlements to hunt the murderers?

Fuck these terrorists, but fuck Israel too for allowing this shit to happen.

 

[megalowho]

And what stopped you from making such a thread?

You can count the amount of threads I've posted on GAF in 6+ years on two fingers. Just not something I'm interested in. But I browse Off Topic enough to see that plenty of news gets posted, often of far less significance than the initial act. Again, just interesting considering the way these conversations usually go. And nothing against you OP - I didn't mean to suggest you were attempting to shape the conversation by sharing the story.

 

[Jag]

People are arguing that by being settlers they are terrorizing the locals and are not innocent civilians. And so it's really a two way terror street.

I think there's valid arguments on both sides in general and realistically the first step that needs to be taken towards any reasonable reconciliation and long term peace is stopping expansion of settlements and roll back and eliminate many of them, while lifting a lot of the restrictions on Palestinians. Nothing short of that will work more than a temporary patch.

Murdering parents in front of their kids because you disagree with them is not a valid argument.

 

[Chariot]

Murdering parents in front of their kids because you disagree with them is not a valid argument.

"Disagreeing"? What a nice word for invading, abusing and stealing. Of course they shouldn't be killed in front of their kids or otherwise. But there is a big history of bullshit and the settlers are part of it.

 

[orthodoxy1095]

Murdering parents in front of their kids because you disagree with them is not a valid argument.

It's a HELL of an oversimplification to say that this is a result of "disagreement." It's the result of the systematic disruption and destruction of Palestinian lives.

Doesn't justify it, but come the hell on.

 

[Mr. Giggles]

Wow, a drive by shooting and they send in 4 fucking battalions.

Also, this counts as terrorism but the ridiculous years of oppression from Israel to the Palestinian people is totally justified...smh

 

[freeofgreed]

You can count the amount of threads I've posted on GAF in 6+ years on two fingers. Just not something I'm interested in. But I browse Off Topic enough to see that plenty of news gets posted, often of far less significance than the initial act. Again, just interesting considering the way these conversations usually go. And nothing against you OP - I didn't mean to suggest you were attempting to shape the conversation by sharing the story.

See here's the thing I dislike about the whole "X happened why wasn't there a thread for that?" The reason I assume we didn't have a thread when the killings happened is because most people probably didn't even know about it. There's so much information out, that it's ridiculous to assume that people are omnipresent and know everything that's happening in the world. People make threads based off their interests or topics that are relevant to them. If you feel a story deserves a thread, then you make a thread for it yourself. It's nobodies responsibility to make threads for you. You said you don't like making threads and that's fine, but don't come in here implying that there's a fucking narrative going on just because a thread about an incident most people weren't even aware wasn't made.

 

[SliceSabre]

"Disagreeing"? What a nice word for invading, abusing and stealing. Of course they shouldn't be killed in front of their kids or otherwise. But there is a big history of bullshit and the settlers are part of it.

Regardless, killing innocent people is not the answer.

There is no addendum: You do not kill innocent people. Period. End of story.

 

[Corronchilejano]

Regardless killing innocent people is not the answer.

There is no addendum: You do not kill innocent people. Period. End of story.

That's oversimplifying the problem. When you're pushed to the brink you end up doing some stupid shit. Those killings did not occur in a vaccum.

 

[Poodlestrike]

No one is saying the act itself is okay. Is it unreasonable to expect the offended party to at the very least question why it happened?

Take this into context and you get a very different picture.

Yes they are.

 

[SliceSabre]

That's oversimplifying the problem. When you're pushed to the brink you end up doing some stupid shit. Those killings did not occur in a vaccum.

And the addendums people are putting on it give the killings a veneer of justification where is is none at all.

 

[Chariot]

Regardless, killing innocent people is not the answer.

There is no addendum: You do not kill innocent people. Period. End of story.

That's what I said. But simplifying it as "disagreement" is just silly. You are always on your toes when it comes to oppression of black people in America. Feel with the people who have it even worse currently.

 

[mr2xxx]

Yes they are.

They are not, they just understand that this incident is part of a larger issue.

 

[Jag]

Regardless killing innocent people is not the answer.

There is no addendum: You do not kill innocent people. Period. End of story.

Agreed. The settlers are wrong and part of the problem, but they don't deserve to be murdered for it.

Supposedly Fatah is taking responsibility for the murders (not yet confirmed) which, if true, Israel will use as justification for military action against them. The spiral continues.

 

[SliceSabre]

That's what I said. But simplifying it as "disagreement" is just silly. You are always on your toes when it comes to oppression of black people in America. Feel with the people who have it even worse currently.

True I am, but whenever a cop is killed randomly while putting gas in his cruiser or other times I'm not in threads going:

"That killing is wrong but maybe they should stop oppressing and murdering my people so much."

 

[orthodoxy1095]

Regardless, killing innocent people is not the answer.

There is no addendum: You do not kill innocent people. Period. End of story.

And herein lies the real question, the question of innocence. The kids, sure. Parents? Debatable.

Doesn't mean the killings were a good idea or even remotely justified. But treating these people as if they were some poor innocents is a vast oversimplification. There's plenty of blame to be shared by all sides. It's what always happens with the Israeli-Palestine debate: it devolves into two sides wherein one says Israel=good, Palestine=bad or the other saying Palestine=good, Israel=bad!

True I am, but whenever a cop is killed randomly while putting gas in his cruiser I'm not in threads going:

"That killing is wrong but maybe they should stop oppressing and murdering my people so much."

Even with cop killings we can stop to engage in some more intense scrutiny to think about why they killings are occurring and trying to understand what is driving them.

 

[Poodlestrike]

They are not, they just understand that this incident is part of a larger issue.

No, they do not.

Or rather, they understand that it's part of a larger issue, but the larger issue they see is a tiny part of the actual problems. "Oh, well, yeah sure, killing people is wrong (I guess), but it's really the Israeli family's fault for living there in the first place" is 100% condoning the attack.

Fucking disgusting.

 

[Crosseyes]

True I am, but whenever a cop is killed randomly while putting gas in his cruiser or other times I'm not in threads going:

"That killing is wrong but maybe they should stop oppressing and murdering my people so much."

You would have every right to though. Understanding and empathizing with the violently oppressed when they turn to violence in kind is important when talking about a single incident in a larger conflict.

 

[AllIsOneIsNone]

No, they do not.

Or rather, they understand that it's part of a larger issue, but the larger issue they see is a tiny part of the actual problems. "Oh, well, yeah sure, killing people is wrong (I guess), but it's really the Israeli family's fault for living there in the first place" is 100% condoning the attack.

Fucking disgusting.

Agree.

 

[mr2xxx]

No, they do not.

Or rather, they understand that it's part of a larger issue, but the larger issue they see is a tiny part of the actual problems. "Oh, well, yeah sure, killing people is wrong (I guess), but it's really the Israeli family's fault for living there in the first place" is 100% condoning the attack.

Fucking disgusting.

Which specific posts make you feel like that?

 

[Corronchilejano]

No, they do not.

Or rather, they understand that it's part of a larger issue, but the larger issue they see is a tiny part of the actual problems. "Oh, well, yeah sure, killing people is wrong (I guess), but it's really the Israeli family's fault for living there in the first place" is 100% condoning the attack.

Fucking disgusting.

Only one person has said the settlers are hardly innocent. One.

 

[Miles Quaritch]

Regardless, killing innocent people is not the answer.

There is no addendum: You do not kill innocent people. Period. End of story.

While I'm not arguing one way or the other, it's interesting to label them as innocent.

They are the occupiers after all, they are actively stealing land and making the natives homeless and second class citizens in their own piece of land. Some of them are even burning the natives alive...

 

[Aaronology]

No, they do not.

Or rather, they understand that it's part of a larger issue, but the larger issue they see is a tiny part of the actual problems. "Oh, well, yeah sure, killing people is wrong (I guess), but it's really the Israeli family's fault for living there in the first place" is 100% condoning the attack.

Fucking disgusting.

How?

 

[Chariot]

True I am, but whenever a cop is killed randomly while putting gas in his cruiser or other times I'm not in threads going:

"That killing is wrong but maybe they should stop oppressing and murdering my people so much."

Then we seem to have a disagreement here. Because I would say something like that. When the problem is systematic without change it's difficult to condemn an action without mentioning the bigger problem. Because it needs to be solved.