Maybe Israel shouldn’t fund Hamas over secular orgs to manufacture the pretext for the genocide they’re now committing in order to create an ethnostate.
Funding might be true. But do we have real evidence that it was done precisely for what you described? Did someone specific decided “let’s give them money, so they would build rockets to bomb us, then invade to kill our citizens in an attack we’ll be unprepared for and then have all the right to obliterate them and nobody would stop us”?
Incredibly loaded framing aside, what’s your explanation for Israel backing a Jihadist group, and helping them displace moderate, secular alternatives while consistently using genocidal language and displacing Palestinians?
I’d say it’s not loaded framing on my side, but convoluted assumptions (and possibly clairvoyance) on the other.
I may not have the explanation of why “Israel funded hamas”, but I know that half the world funded Palestine for years, and that most of that help naturally must’ve went through hamas.
Simply put, it doesn’t seem like Israel could avoid funding Palestine. Hamas could’ve put that money in improving lives of citizens.
Israel put a terrorist org that’s hostile to them in neighbouring territories they’re trying to ethnically cleanse via genocide and you can’t figure it why? I suppose critical thought was never fascists’ strong suit.
International funding went to Palestinians via aid orgs - not Hamas. That said, anything that did go to Hamas was because Israel put them in power - you don’t get to put terrorists in power, commit war crimes, then whine when the international community sends aid to the people you’re genociding. Israel is also a recipient of $3.8 billion dollars every year in US military support alone - that’s comparable to the total amount of internal aid sent to Palestine between 2014 and 2020.
The problem isn’t Israel funding Palestine - it’s with them funding a terrorist group to put them in power, removing the secular moderates that were in place already… You know - so they could justify the genocide they’ve been loudly telegraphing they want to commit.
You don’t get to play the victim on this one, Jitler.
it’s with them funding a terrorist group to put them in power
And I thought it was Palestinians who chose hamas during elections. The other candidate was also a terrorist group if I’m not mistaken though, so really don’t see how complicated the plan of Israel should’ve been for everything to play out exactly as it had.
so they could justify the genocide they’ve been loudly telegraphing they want to commit.
So basically the plan was “Kill us, so we could kill you” all along, huh? This is some flat earth level conspiracy.
Hamas is a terrorist org that Israel backed to replace the secular moderates - this isn’t half as complex as the narrative knots you idiots tie yourselves in to defend the genocide - in not sure why you’re finding this difficult.
So basically the plan was “Kill us, so we could kill you” all along, huh? This is some flat earth level conspiracy.
They’ve been signalling genocidal intent for years, but can’t just do it without losing the US backing they need to not get obliterated by their neighbours. Why else did they help the hostile jihadists over the secular moderates? Again, really straightforward stuff.
Meanwhile, you use Nazi-tier logic to defend Nazi-tier actions.
Ok so you’re against Israel providing work permits to Palestinians?
Hamas was also included in discussions about increasing the number of work permits Israel granted to Gazan laborers, which kept money flowing into Gaza, meaning food for families and the ability to purchase basic products.
From one of your articles, they’re literally complaining that Israel allows Palestinians to have jobs in Israel and saying that this practice of not totally starving out Palestine is proping up Hamas.
Since Netanyahu returned to power in January 2023, the number of work permits has soared to nearly 20,000.
The article is angry at him for something you almost certainly use the opposite of as a reason to call it an apartheid state or open air prison or whatever, this is something you surely think should happen right? Palestinians should be able to work in Israel, right?
They go on to talk about how he shouldn’t be letting aid money into Gaza, etc
And do you agree with this from the article?
One thing is clear: The concept of indirectly strengthening Hamas — while tolerating sporadic attacks and minor military operations every few years — went up in smoke Saturday.
They argue that anything less than total military destruction of Hamas is equivalent to support, they want a boodier and more brutal war which is why they’re saying the claim in the headline - surely you don’t agree with that? Surely you don’t think that Israel shouldn’t let aid into Gaza and should attack more violently? Therefore surely you don’t agree with the claim in the title.
You’re parroting headlines without reading the article, probably because you’ve heard the claim repeated by so many people who also didn’t bother to read the article and just assumed it validated their existing view.
Ok so you’re against Israel providing work permits to Palestinians?
I’m against apartheid states that requires people of ‘undesirable’ ethnicity get work permits.
And do you agree with this from the article?
Yes - Israel has done away with sporadic attacks and launched into a more rapid genocidal approach.
Imagine defending an apartheid state committing a genocide, pointing to the apartheid to say there’s not apartheid, and rapid escalation in indiscriminate killing to say there’s not genocide.
You’ve purposely tried to redirect the topic to avoid the very clear fact that the conspiracy theory claim you made is based on them doing things that you think they should be doing.
You just spoke about the current conflict as worse than what was happening previously, the article you used up back up your conspiracy theory that Israel created Hamas is based on the argument they should have had a similar reaction sooner and that it should be more extreme.
You say genocide which I presume you count as starting before this current conflict and is based on the flimsy arguement they don’t let enough aid though, etc but you also want to use the flimsy arguement that they’re letting too much aid through which is propping up a terrorist organisation.
The reality that you don’t rely know or care about what you’re talking about is very clear, you’re throwing around buzzwords and meme talking points you haven’t even thought about and have no idea of how they relate to the wider situation. You’ve decided your team thinks Israel is bad and you’re on a quest to amplify that because you feel it will make you look like a passionate and intellectual person - unfortunately these hamfisted and empty arguments you’re making just make you look like a gullible blowhard.
The genocide that Israel is talking about pretty transparently as they indiscriminately bomb the shit out of civilians is a conspiracy - you got it, Jitler.
So your original claim? You’ve forgotten about that and your not going to respond to anything I’ve said but will continue to throw out emotive but meaningless statements?
Maybe Israel shouldn’t fund Hamas over secular orgs to manufacture the pretext for the genocide they’re now committing in order to create an ethnostate.
Funding might be true. But do we have real evidence that it was done precisely for what you described? Did someone specific decided “let’s give them money, so they would build rockets to bomb us, then invade to kill our citizens in an attack we’ll be unprepared for and then have all the right to obliterate them and nobody would stop us”?
Incredibly loaded framing aside, what’s your explanation for Israel backing a Jihadist group, and helping them displace moderate, secular alternatives while consistently using genocidal language and displacing Palestinians?
I’d say it’s not loaded framing on my side, but convoluted assumptions (and possibly clairvoyance) on the other.
I may not have the explanation of why “Israel funded hamas”, but I know that half the world funded Palestine for years, and that most of that help naturally must’ve went through hamas.
Simply put, it doesn’t seem like Israel could avoid funding Palestine. Hamas could’ve put that money in improving lives of citizens.
Israel put a terrorist org that’s hostile to them in neighbouring territories they’re trying to ethnically cleanse via genocide and you can’t figure it why? I suppose critical thought was never fascists’ strong suit.
International funding went to Palestinians via aid orgs - not Hamas. That said, anything that did go to Hamas was because Israel put them in power - you don’t get to put terrorists in power, commit war crimes, then whine when the international community sends aid to the people you’re genociding. Israel is also a recipient of $3.8 billion dollars every year in US military support alone - that’s comparable to the total amount of internal aid sent to Palestine between 2014 and 2020.
The problem isn’t Israel funding Palestine - it’s with them funding a terrorist group to put them in power, removing the secular moderates that were in place already… You know - so they could justify the genocide they’ve been loudly telegraphing they want to commit.
You don’t get to play the victim on this one, Jitler.
What?
And I thought it was Palestinians who chose hamas during elections. The other candidate was also a terrorist group if I’m not mistaken though, so really don’t see how complicated the plan of Israel should’ve been for everything to play out exactly as it had.
So basically the plan was “Kill us, so we could kill you” all along, huh? This is some flat earth level conspiracy.
Hamas is a terrorist org that Israel backed to replace the secular moderates - this isn’t half as complex as the narrative knots you idiots tie yourselves in to defend the genocide - in not sure why you’re finding this difficult.
They’ve been signalling genocidal intent for years, but can’t just do it without losing the US backing they need to not get obliterated by their neighbours. Why else did they help the hostile jihadists over the secular moderates? Again, really straightforward stuff.
Meanwhile, you use Nazi-tier logic to defend Nazi-tier actions.
Do you know that’s a baseless conspiracy you’re pedaling?
Yeah - nah.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2014/07/30/how-israel-helped-create-hamas/
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/10/world/middleeast/israel-qatar-money-prop-up-hamas.html
https://www.timesofisrael.com/for-years-netanyahu-propped-up-hamas-now-its-blown-up-in-our-faces/
Plenty of credible news outlets are reporting that one. It’s not a remotely controversial statement.
Ok so you’re against Israel providing work permits to Palestinians?
From one of your articles, they’re literally complaining that Israel allows Palestinians to have jobs in Israel and saying that this practice of not totally starving out Palestine is proping up Hamas.
The article is angry at him for something you almost certainly use the opposite of as a reason to call it an apartheid state or open air prison or whatever, this is something you surely think should happen right? Palestinians should be able to work in Israel, right?
They go on to talk about how he shouldn’t be letting aid money into Gaza, etc
And do you agree with this from the article?
They argue that anything less than total military destruction of Hamas is equivalent to support, they want a boodier and more brutal war which is why they’re saying the claim in the headline - surely you don’t agree with that? Surely you don’t think that Israel shouldn’t let aid into Gaza and should attack more violently? Therefore surely you don’t agree with the claim in the title.
You’re parroting headlines without reading the article, probably because you’ve heard the claim repeated by so many people who also didn’t bother to read the article and just assumed it validated their existing view.
I’m against apartheid states that requires people of ‘undesirable’ ethnicity get work permits.
Yes - Israel has done away with sporadic attacks and launched into a more rapid genocidal approach.
Imagine defending an apartheid state committing a genocide, pointing to the apartheid to say there’s not apartheid, and rapid escalation in indiscriminate killing to say there’s not genocide.
You’ve purposely tried to redirect the topic to avoid the very clear fact that the conspiracy theory claim you made is based on them doing things that you think they should be doing.
You just spoke about the current conflict as worse than what was happening previously, the article you used up back up your conspiracy theory that Israel created Hamas is based on the argument they should have had a similar reaction sooner and that it should be more extreme.
You say genocide which I presume you count as starting before this current conflict and is based on the flimsy arguement they don’t let enough aid though, etc but you also want to use the flimsy arguement that they’re letting too much aid through which is propping up a terrorist organisation.
The reality that you don’t rely know or care about what you’re talking about is very clear, you’re throwing around buzzwords and meme talking points you haven’t even thought about and have no idea of how they relate to the wider situation. You’ve decided your team thinks Israel is bad and you’re on a quest to amplify that because you feel it will make you look like a passionate and intellectual person - unfortunately these hamfisted and empty arguments you’re making just make you look like a gullible blowhard.
The genocide that Israel is talking about pretty transparently as they indiscriminately bomb the shit out of civilians is a conspiracy - you got it, Jitler.
So your original claim? You’ve forgotten about that and your not going to respond to anything I’ve said but will continue to throw out emotive but meaningless statements?