For the last 7 months, it’s been nonstop “Israel needs to destroy Hamas”, “Go into x and finish them”, “End Hamas!”

Putting aside the genocidal implications, the only response I can formulate to this is “And then what?” The whole world just watched you bomb civillians for half a year and then celebrate it. This isn’t going to end with one group being stamped out. What happens when the next Hamas pops up? And then the one after that? Then the one after that? Are they just buying time until they can properly declare war on Lebanon or something?

  • SpaceDogs@lemmygrad.ml
    23·
    6 months ago

    I thought the same thing, Hamas can never be defeated because even if every current member was eliminated a new one will emerge as they see their family murdered in front of them. The fact that people don’t realize this is incredibly frustrating. Some genuinely believe that Israel is sincere when they say their only goal is to eliminate Hamas and everything will be fine after that, how are people so easy to dupe?

      • Nakoichi [they/them]@hexbear.netEnglish
        141·
        6 months ago

        And yet there are still indigenous nations and peoples here fighting for their existence.

        This is borderline patsoc talking point btw.

        • TΛVΛR@lemmygrad.ml
          8·
          6 months ago

          This is borderline patsoc talking point btw.

          Can you elaborate? This got me thinking…

          Is it bc patsocs use fatalism regarding the struggle of indigenous nations as an “argument” to oppose it? Or is it that its reproducing fatalism regarding a just struggle that needs our solidarity and “pessimism” isn’t helping?

          (I hope I am not being insensitive. Pardon me if I don’t have the best read on this. I am not a USian and not super exposed to this and I know far too little about the topic)

          I obviously agree that its important to stand in solidarity with the struggle of indigenous nations in the land under US occupation! But I too would think that the Zionist regime would be happy to have their settler colony achieve US levels of “completion” of their genocide (which I also don’t see happening, but that’s besides the point)

          I don’t see a contradiction between both. It would simply mean that one deems the struggle against the US settler colony, the struggle for liberation, harder as of yet. Which seems to be an unfortunate but fair analysis or not?

            • TΛVΛR@lemmygrad.ml
              1·
              6 months ago

              You may be confusing me wthe other person. I just piggybacked onto the discussion.

              But yeah, my read was that settler colonial projects either manage to “complete” their genocide or end in liberation. But maybe there is an argument to be made that one shouldn’t view any settler colonial project as “finished” until it is liberated, that thought peaked my curiosity and prompted my question.

              At the same time it still seems to me that a part of the analysis must be, that the US/Canada/Australia/… are more stable settler colonies than Israel.

              Is your argument with the nuclear reactors about the stability? Or did I misinterpret that?

          • Nakoichi [they/them]@hexbear.netEnglish
            2·
            6 months ago

            Is it bc patsocs use fatalism regarding the struggle of indigenous nations as an “argument” to oppose it? Or is it that its reproducing fatalism regarding a just struggle that needs our solidarity and “pessimism” isn’t helping?

            Yeah basically both of those. And I wasn’t leveling it as an accusation but it is a very common argument of chauvinists like PatSocs and liberals alike.