Israel declares War - Destruction of Gaza / Growing conflict in Middle East

[osh kosh bosh]

Self immolation in a democratic country is insanely stupid.

And it's unbelievably sick to turn a person like that into a martyr.

You're simply encouraging other mentally troubled people to kill themselves.

For literally no good reason.

 

[Quincy McCall]

It might be just the timing of the interview to catch him while eating Ice Cream-- but something has to tell you to put the Ice Cream down while having a conversation of this magnitude.

And I haven't been paying attention to the tone of the White House up until this point-- but when exactly was the turning point of Ceasefire being ridiculous to being inevitable and soon?

 

[DripNick]

Shame on NYT

 

[DripNick]

Self immolation in a democratic country is insanely stupid.

And it's unbelievably sick to turn a person like that into a martyr.

You're simply encouraging other mentally troubled people to kill themselves.

For literally no good reason.

Kasher Quon - Fed Up 1:44

 

[gry60]

This is how the South African Apartheid ended. Countries were boycotting and they couldn't afford it anymore.

People misunderstand the history of how Mandela freed South Africa from apartheid.

Mandela on Trial

Nelson Mandela describes the ANC and PAC’s shift from non-violent resistance of apartheid to violent sabotage under the militant faction MK in his testimony during the Rivonia Trial.

www.facinghistory.org

We had no doubt that we had to continue the fight. Anything else would have been abject surrender. Our problem was not whether to fight, but was how to continue the fight. . . .


. . . I, and some colleagues, came to the conclusion that as violence in this country was inevitable, it would be unrealistic . . . to continue preaching peace and non-violence . . .


This conclusion was not easily arrived at. It was only when all else had failed, when all channels of peaceful protest had been barred to us, that the decision was made to embark on violent forms of political struggle . . . I can only say that I felt morally obliged to do what I did. . . .

Four forms of violence were possible. There is sabotage, there is guerrilla warfare, there is terrorism, and there is open revolution. We chose to adopt the first method . . . Sabotage did not involve loss of life, and it offered the best hope for future race relations. Bitterness would be kept to a minimum and, if the policy bore fruit, democratic government could become a reality. . . .

The initial plan was based on a careful analysis of the political and economic situation of our country. We believed that South Africa depended to a large extent on foreign capital and foreign trade. We felt that planned destruction of power plants, and interference with rail and telephone communications, would scare away capital from the country . . .thus compelling the voters of the country to reconsider their position. . . .

But we in Umkhonto weighed up the white response with anxiety. The lines were being drawn. The whites and blacks were moving into separate camps, and the prospects of avoiding a civil war were made less. The white newspapers carried reports that sabotage would be punished by death. If this was so, how could we continue to keep Africans away from terrorism? . . .



[The ANC’s] struggle is a truly national one. It is a struggle of the African people, inspired by their own suffering and their own experience. It is a struggle for the right to live.

During my lifetime I have dedicated myself to this struggle of the African people. I have fought against white domination, and I have fought against black domination. I have cherished the ideal of a democratic and free society in which all persons live together in harmony and with equal opportunities.It is an ideal which I hope to live for and to achieve. But if needs be, it is an ideal for which I am prepared to die.

Years later, while writing his autobiography in prison, Mandela reflected on the movement’s change in strategy to embrace violence as a tactical choice: “Nonviolent passive resistance is effective as long as your opposition adheres to the same rules as you do. But if peaceful protest is met with violence, its efficacy is at an end. For me, nonviolence was not a moral principle but a strategy; there is no moral goodness in using an ineffective weapon.”

And later on, he recommitted to non-violent resistance while in jail, because that was the right move to make.

The ANC dealt with the apartheid regime without isolating themselves or other black South Africans. They won with pragmatism because their leaders considered that the morality of their cause could only justify so much.

I don't think we can say the same thing about the Palestinian resistance movement.

This opinion piece is from 2021.

Boycotts and sanctions helped rid South Africa of apartheid – is Israel next in line?

The comparison rankles supporters of Israel but the growing Palestinian Boycott, Disinvestment and Sanctions movement draws on the struggle to isolate racist South Africa

www.theguardian.com

The Palestinian campaign, the boycott, divestment, sanctions (BDS) movement, is not led by political leaders but civil society, which does not have the same standing in the kind of international forums where the ANC had leverage

Palestinian leaders could've leaned on that, but they continued to support exclusively armed resistance, hostage taking, rocket attacks on civilian centers, etc...

Pro-Israel groups have worked hard to persuade US states to pass anti-boycott laws and to codify the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of antisemitism, with its ambiguous examples of when criticism of Israel is unacceptable.

And Oct 7th gave pro-Israeli groups all the arguments they needed to push such bills forward.

75 years of armed resistance that have only resulted in negative territorial gains, reduced international support, and less leverage at the negotiating table should be a clue that they can't win this way.

 

[DLF]

It might be just the timing of the interview to catch him while eating Ice Cream-- but something has to tell you to put the Ice Cream down while having a conversation of this magnitude.

And I haven't been paying attention to the tone of the White House up until this point-- but when exactly was the turning point of Ceasefire being ridiculous to being inevitable and soon?

It’s all a political game for these psychopaths.

 

[gry60]

And I haven't been paying attention to the tone of the White House up until this point-- but when exactly was the turning point of Ceasefire being ridiculous to being inevitable and soon?

Public statements don't always reflect what's really happening in the background. If you're surprised about talks of ceasefire, you probably minimized the real problem that Netanyahu and his current government represents for American diplomacy.

Blinken recently condemned the decision to increase new construction in WB settlements, and the UK signaled that they are willing to stop the sale of certain weapons to Israel if the IDF invades Rafah; that suggests Bibi is getting close to a US/UK red line. What no western government was going to do is prevent the Israeli government from responding to Hamas.

UK to consider suspending arms exports to Israel if Rafah offensive goes ahead

As situation in Gaza worsens, diplomatic pressure is mounting on UK to follow other countries and suspend arms sales to Israel

www.theguardian.com

And the kicker is, both Hamas and Israeli spokespeople have declared that they don't know where Biden's optimism is coming from. Do they sound like people who are tired of fighting?

 

[Belgium]

Probably.
Hopefully in the long run, history books might mention him though.

The idea that he would even be a footnote anywhere at all is delusional. 99,999999999% will have forgotten about it within minutes of reading about it, if they heard about it at all.
Just a mentally ill man who was unfortunately driven to suicide under the delusion that doing so would have any impact whatsoever.
These kinds of actions should not be glorified in any way.

 

[DripNick]

The idea that he would even be a footnote anywhere at all is delusional. 99,999999999% will have forgotten about it within minutes of reading about it, if they heard about it at all.
Just a mentally ill man who was unfortunately driven to suicide under the delusion that doing so would have any impact whatsoever.
These kinds of actions should not be glorified in any way.

 

[DLF]

As I said about Jon Stewart

 

[DLF]

Protests are dumb.

Don’t protest. Just comply with the government. They know what’s best for us.

That’s my motto

 

[Belgium]

Here's an idea, why don't these people go to talk to this poor man's family and friends and glorify his pointless suicide to them. Or does that not come into equation anywhere?
There is no reality in any multiverse where his suicide would have any impact whatsoever, that's not how the world works.

If anything, now we'll have braindead losers twiddling their thumbs on Twitter actively glorifying and therefore incentivizing suicide as some sort of protest.
What a fantastic idea.

Protests are dumb.

Don’t protest. Just comply with the government. They know what’s best for us.

That’s my motto

Well why don't you go kill yourself then? If it's such a glorious form of protest. I'll make sure to send a note to your loved ones that you really stuck it to the government, who couldn't care less, and that your loved ones should be thankful you killed yourself.
Just to be clear, obviously the above suggestion is strictly to point out how delusional and harmful this view is. Please do not self-harm and seek help.

Here are the possible positive outcomes of this suicide:
Zero


And here are the negatives:
- Traumatizing his family and friends
- Deluded losers continually re-traumatizing the family and friends by glorifying and incentivizing this
- More people may kill themselves, egged on by these losers living in a fantasy land acting like their government would even care, much less change policy

Did you even know this was already the second 'protest suicide' at a US embassy? I'm guessing that's a no.

 

[DripNick]

Here's an idea, why don't these people go to talk to this poor man's family and friends and glorify his pointless suicide to them. Or does that not come into equation anywhere?
There is no reality in any multiverse where his suicide would have any impact whatsoever, that's not how the world works.

If anything, now we'll have losers twiddling their thumbs on Twitter actively glorifying and therefore incentivizing suicide as some sort of protest.
What a fantastic idea.


Well why don't you go kill yourself then? If it's such a glorious form of protest. I'll make sure to send a note to your loved ones that you really stuck it to the government and that they should be thankful.
Just to be clear, obviously the above suggestion is strictly to point out how delusional and harmful this view is.

Why would I go and talk to that "poor man's family"? He decided than his "fight" was more important. Would his death have been more important, impactful or glorious had it been on the battlefield in Mosul?
When it comes to soldiers and war, violence is often glorified and romanticized. American Sniper comes to mind (as well as countless movies/tv shows) where it has been admitted that that war was declared and fought on the basis of a lie.
I, for one, am glad that an American soldier used his body/life for a cause he deemed meaningful rather than for the deception and evil manipulation of draft dodging wealthy and safe politicians.

 

[Brownstone]

Why would I go and talk to that "poor man's family"? He decided than his "fight" was more important. Would his death have been more important, impactful or glorious had it been on the battlefield in Mosul?
When it comes to soldiers and war, violence is often glorified and romanticized. American Sniper comes to mind (as well as countless movies/tv shows) where it has been admitted that that war was declared and fought on the basis of a lie.
I, for one, am glad that an American soldier used his body/life for a cause he deemed meaningful rather than for the deception and evil manipulation of draft dodging wealthy and safe politicians.

Agreed,

Much rather this than a mentally troubled kid kill others senselessly in another mass shooting

Question, was the Vietnamese monk who did this 60 years ago mentally ill? Or righteous?

 

[Belgium]

Why would I go and talk to that "poor man's family"? He decided than his "fight" was more important. Would his death have been more important, impactful or glorious had it been on the battlefield in Mosul?
When it comes to soldiers and war, violence is often glorified and romanticized. American Sniper comes to mind (as well as countless movies/tv shows) where it has been admitted that that war was declared and fought on the basis of a lie.
I, for one, am glad that an American soldier used his body/life for a cause he deemed meaningful rather than for the deception and evil manipulation of draft dodging wealthy and safe politicians.

It would've been just as pointless in Mosul or any other circumstance where the military should've never been in the first place.

Bushnell wasn't "fighting", he was shadowboxing against a government that couldn't care less. Immediately afterwards, the Pentagon stated their "support for Israel's right to defend itself remains ironclad."
He could've used his position in the military to raise funds for humanitary aid to the Palestinians, ...
There are many ways to protest, but he was unfortunately misguided in picking a completely non-productive method that does not and never will result in anything productive.

I, for one, think it's sad that he was driven to this by the government's position and the failure of the mental health system to intercede. Since this is the second suicide infront of a US embassy, it's also possible he was influenced by that prior case. In that case I strongly believe the people glorifying this deserve a piece of the blame as well.

 

[Belgium]

Agreed,

Much rather this than a mentally troubled kid kill others senselessly in another mass shooting

Question, was the Vietnamese monk who did this 60 years ago mentally ill? Or righteous?

You act like those two answers can't coexist. Mentally ill doesn't inherently carry a negative connotation.
That particular monk, whose self-immolation incentivized some of his fellow monks to follow in his example btw, of course did so with righteous intent. As did Bushnell. There is nothing to suggest Bushnell did not also believe he was doing this for a noble reason.
An act being done for a righteous reason also does not magically make it productive.

The nature of the conflict in Vietnam was much different, and ironically his suicide (more specifically the pictures of it) did result in more international pressure from the US and others.
Ultimately the regime didn't follow through on the reforms and I assume we all know what happened next. Hint: It involves the CIA and an assassination.

Today is a different world, with different players at the table and entirely different geopolitical factors.
Answer me this then, do you seriously think these 2 suicides at the US embassy are going to somehow impact the US government's stance? Feel free to make it a hypothetical pile of 100 corpses infront of the US embassy if you must, I don't think that changes the question.

 

[Brownstone]

You act like those two answers can't coexist. Mentally ill doesn't inherently carry a negative connotation.
That particular monk, whose self-immolation incentivized some of his fellow monks to follow in his example btw, of course did so with righteous intent. As did Bushnell. There is nothing to suggest Bushnell did not also believe he was doing this for a noble reason.
An act being done for a righteous reason also does not magically make it productive.

The nature of the conflict in Vietnam was much different, and ironically his suicide (more specifically the pictures of it) did result in more international pressure from the US and others.
Ultimately the regime didn't follow through on the reforms and I assume we all know what happened next. Hint: It involves the CIA and an assassination.

Today is a different world, with different players at the table and entirely different geopolitical factors.
Answer me this then, do you seriously think these 2 suicides at the US embassy are going to somehow impact the US government's stance? Feel free to make it a hypothetical pile of 100 corpses infront of the US embassy if you must, I don't think that changes the question.

I don't think either changes anything tbh. My argument, if there is one I guess is that in this sense, it does carry a negative connotation. The assumption being a mentally stable person would not do this. Of course the scenarios are not a 1 to 1 comparison but I don't think they are all that dissimilar.

 

[smedroc]

Good to know we have some staunch mental health advocates in the thread.

 

[Belgium]

Self immolation in a democratic country is insanely stupid.

And it's unbelievably sick to turn a person like that into a martyr.

You're simply encouraging other mentally troubled people to kill themselves.

For literally no good reason.

Notice how virtually none of the people doing so even bother looking at this from the perspective of these people's loved ones.
Now those loved ones, who hypothetically could be just as anti-genocide, have to live with a bunch of losers constantly re-traumatizing them by cheering on the pointless suicide of their son, husband, friend, whatever.

DripNick DLF
As part of my volunteer work with a close friend I met while we were both volunteering for a mental health non-profit, we raise funds for humanitary aid by selling various graphic designs (stickers, prints etc) around the Ghent university area. To be clear, this isn't to toot my own horn but to illustrate a hypothetical scenario. The blacked out part in the image is my friend's IG, as she's the one making the graphic designs. If it was to toot my own horn, I could've posted the same thing months ago while arguing against DLF's nonsense strawman arguments where he paints me as pro-genocide.

Anyway, I'm only using it here because I have a strong view against the deluded cheering on of pointless suicide.
In a hypothetical scenario, let's say my friend becomes deluded into thinking setting herself on fire would accomplish something.
She ends up following through with it and kills herself like Bushnell did. In this scenario, what was gained?
Absolutely nothing. Now her surroundings, myself included, would be constantly confronted with bottom of the barrel losers mindlessly glorifying and cheering on her suicide without even the slightest consideration for her family and friends.

 

[mplsdunk]

The opinion in the us has already been changing. It went from “back the war or you hate democracy” or whatever the guys who cry if you criticize Biden say to Beto O’rourke telling people to protest on the primary.

 

[DLF]

The opinion in the us has already been changing. It went from “back the war or you hate democracy” or whatever the guys who cry if you criticize Biden say to Beto O’rourke telling people to protest on the primary.

Theres only so much we can take.

The famine is getting to me as if it’s early October. At least death by bombs is a quick death. Starving children, nursing babies and pregnant women. Hurts our souls not just hearts.

 

[mplsdunk]

The cope you see from people on this is insane.

 

[ntplayboy]

This won't change anything, people are already hardened into their stances on this. No different if someone burned themselves in support of Israel. The only thing he accomplished was devastating his family and becoming a Scorpion fatality meme. Sad

 

[me love nutella]

People misunderstand the history of how Mandela freed South Africa from apartheid.

Mandela on Trial

Nelson Mandela describes the ANC and PAC’s shift from non-violent resistance of apartheid to violent sabotage under the militant faction MK in his testimony during the Rivonia Trial.

www.facinghistory.org

And later on, he recommitted to non-violent resistance while in jail, because that was the right move to make.

The ANC dealt with the apartheid regime without isolating themselves or other black South Africans. They won with pragmatism because their leaders considered that the morality of their cause could only justify so much.

I don't think we can say the same thing about the Palestinian resistance movement.

This opinion piece is from 2021.

Boycotts and sanctions helped rid South Africa of apartheid – is Israel next in line?

The comparison rankles supporters of Israel but the growing Palestinian Boycott, Disinvestment and Sanctions movement draws on the struggle to isolate racist South Africa

www.theguardian.com

Palestinian leaders could've leaned on that, but they continued to support exclusively armed resistance, hostage taking, rocket attacks on civilian centers, etc...


And Oct 7th gave pro-Israeli groups all the arguments they needed to push such bills forward.

75 years of armed resistance that have only resulted in negative territorial gains, reduced international support, and less leverage at the negotiating table should be a clue that they can't win this way.

The Palestinians did not isolate themselves. The Arab despots are bought out. The foundations of their governments are to act as an arm to continue to serve geopolitical interests of the the Western powers as 'independent' states. If you move from the status quo, there will be regime change or you'll be assassinated.

For example, the al-Saud clan ruling Saudi were basically propped up to by the British to rule the kingdom of Saudi Arabia (they supported Ibn Saud over the Hashemites in some districts of modern Saudi). Yet, the monarchy of Jordan were from the Hashemite clan from Saudi Arabia and had always had pacts with the Brits and the Israelis to screw over the Palestinians. You need to look no further than the Kings who were trained under the British. However, there are some Arab states that subsequently changed regimes which took down Western puppets. But, for many Arab states, they were pushed to normalize or were always still very much under the dependence and dominance of Western imperial powers.

Also, in fact, I would argue that Arafat and the PLO sold the Palestinians out because agreeing to the peace process is what screwed them over.

 

[DLF]