Israel/Palestine thread

Yes this is a list of the college protests against Hamas organized immediately after the horrific events of 10 7:

Parroting hugely racist anti-Arab tropes doesn't help matters.

"Might makes right" is a decent undertitle for much of the USA's post-war foreign policy.

You forgot the list?

This appeal to authority is a weak look.

How would you describe genocide minimisers?

if you think so, please tell me why we didn't keep the totality of the oil revenue of all Arab states.

why are the Sauds and emirs in general living in exceptional luxury, while Americans pay for military bases, instead of the same militaries governing those countries as colonies while we keep oil revenue and only give crumbs to the people, bombing anyone who complains or genociding them (extremely easily with tactical nuclear ) if they complain too much?

I don't think you realize what america could have done if it approached power the way almost all societies in human history did before them

It doesn't follow that because the US didn't take full control of foreign countries it didn't benefit greatly from the invasions, does it?

Luciom, you're on here all waking hours. Do you work?

it follows because they didn't take full control. why not, if might is right? they had the power to genocide the uncivilized desert inhabitants with minimal losses on the american side and take all the oil.

every time you can genocide some group and gain massively from it and you don't, that's showing a lot of restraint, and is very unusual.

You're asking why a contemporary country doesn't behave the same as a 19th century country, not putting forward an argument that the US, which murdered millions in SE Asia where people are still being blown up by bombs dropped by USA#1 50 years ago, has been a model of restraint.

what happened in Vietnam could have happened everywhere. and in Vietnam they didn't even go after resources.

in the 20th century you have plenty of Colonial genocides, from the holodomor to the Italian genocides in the horn of Africa to the Indian genocide by the British and so on.

the USA did far less than them while being the most powerful country in world history (by a very large margin), which if they just followed what everyone else always did, would have meant doing more genocides than anyone before, for resources.

if you don't see restraint, a unique unprecedented one in history (with possibly the only exception of the Romans , which america took inspiration from) in not genociding everyone you can gain from genociding even if you can because it's "the 20th century" I don't know what to say

You're parroting the neo-Con line of the US being the new Roman Empire as if it was some virtuous, altruistic regime, while ignoring Roman dependence on slavery. Great restaint!

Where do you get the stuff you're reciting from? Can you link?

Yes, I misread your post. Is the list the same for protests against Israel on college campuses immediately after 10/7?
Wouldn't surprise me if there were anti war rallies immediately after but not directly anti Israel.

slavery was everywhere in Roman times and orthogonal to the restraint.

can you just counter what I said? don't you see how many times americans could have used more might to achieve more results for their citizens, if they just completely disregarded the lives on non citizens, like most countries in world history did?

America is actually one of the most moral group of human beings that ever existed and you can see that from their restraint.

until you do have the power to genocide others for your gain, you can't be judged on that. which is why some people on your side think "peaceful" farmers or hunter gatherers in some remote areas are the best people, just because they didn't have a chance to genocide anyone because they were powerless.

basically almost every human being alive today owes it to american benevolence. they could have killed everyone else and taken the planet for them. Or any part of it they wanted.

not only they didn't, they actually helped many places grow and reach their potential.

and after this, instead of eternal gratitude, what do they get? endless whining.

this doesn't spell good for the world, because the next super power will know this is what happens when you are more moral than anyone before you, and might take the easiest well walked path of simply destroying anyone who opposes them and the first sign

man the invasion started October 27th, 2023.

I gave you a +360% increase in antisemitism by October 23rd.

immediately after the invasion the antisemitic protests started. they never had anti terrorist protests.

what else do they have to do? chant "death to Israel" in Farsi? Oh wait they do that as well.

It's obvious that post WW2 Western world has been about building coalitions instead of trying to invade other countries to plunder their wealth, because the UK's (and others) colonial experiences turned very sour and they were forced to allow independence.

And the US got a taste for how unmanageable running an empire might have been - ffs they couldn't even control Vietnam.

This bit is particularly stupid. What would the point be in going to the great expense of taking control of foreign land if there's no labour left on it to produce wealth for you?

River to the sea and 10/7 was justified signs were out in large numbers in New Haven and NYC by Sunday and then even larger numbers on Monday.

You’re just wrong. The outpouring of support for Israel was always accompanied by morons (antisemites effectively, wittingly or not) marching to defend Hamas.

Al-Jalfrezi…go **** yourself.

quick google search yields no pics of signs saying

it is obvious ex post *because that's what the USA decided*

After WW2 it was a political consensus across the West.

oil and other natural resources require very little labor to be extracted, and it can be your own labor same as offshore oil field are today, or mines in the middle of nowhere in australia, but around the planet.

Moreover, there is a lot of oil in canada and mexico, why didn't the USA just take it? why is canada independent if not because of exceptional american restraint? or at a minimum why aren't americans just telling canadians "send a significant tribute every year or we nuclear bomb your canadian asses"? again, do you realize that's what normal countries did in history when they were much more powerful than neighbors with resources? greek cities did literally that, ask for tributes or we come, kill all men, and rape all women.

You must really pine for the days of yore that you've read about.

Imagine being able to put thousands to death at a stroke without international condemnation or domestic dissent.

after ww2 the west was a beggar with its hands waiting for help out willing to do anything the USA would have told it.

and the USA told them: you know what? we give you a lot of money, we lend you more at favourable rates, we defend you against aggression with our militaries, go on and prosper.

They even did it to their former tyrant oppressor! you realize the magnitude of that? perhaps not.

Now the grandchildren of those people whose entire livelihood depended on american blood, treasure, and exceptional benevolence, that are living better than animals only thanks to americans, those spoiled brats act against american interests, insult america every chance they have, call america the very one thing america is not (genocidal monsters, unlike every other strong nation in history) , and ally with enemies of america.

What's the lesson? that you crush people at the first sign of disloyalty