A pro-Palestinian rally Sunday in Times Square endorsed by the city chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America ensnared prominent party members amid widespread condemnation of the event.
Gov. Kathy Hochul and other leading Democrats blasted the rally as “abhorrent and morally repugnant” and drew a dividing line with far-left members of the party — including New York Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Jamaal Bowman, who denounced the attacks and called for a ceasefire but didn’t take a stand on the rally.
“I condemn Hamas’ attack in the strongest possible terms,” Ocasio-Cortez said in a statement. “No child and family should ever endure this kind of violence and fear, and this violence will not solve the ongoing oppression and occupation in the region. An immediate ceasefire and de-escalation is urgently needed to save lives.”
I mean they're the same. Israel created a situation where the only way to struggle against oppression is to mass-murder civilians, so naturally civilians are being mass-murdered.
Edit: Obligatory I don't support the mass-murder of civilians.
Yeah, I mean killing Jewish civilians is the only way! Palestinians have been doing it for decades, and it hasn't ever worked, but it's the only way!
They've tried nothing else, but this is the only way!
Tell me you know nothing about Palestine without telling me you know nothing about Palestine.
You might wanna look up the Oslo peace process (which, by the way, came after the first intifada).
I mean Israel funded Hamas specifically to weaken the PLO; they've proven time and time again that they don't want peace.
The Oslo peace Accords that Palestinians walked away from and immediately started a famously cruel wave of terrorist attacks? Those Oslo Accords?
Yes, the Oslo Accords where Israel refused to even let Palestinians have a military.
Truly, shocking. I wonder why they wouldn't have been comfortable with that. It just confounds the mind.
And?
The Allies wouldn't let post-wwii Germany have a military either.
You don't let the people who tried to kill you build an army in peace time only to grow powerful enough to kill you.
The Palestinian refugees only exist because the countries that they used to belong to try to invade and destroy Israel.
deleted by creator
See, that's what I was talking about. Israel doesn't want Palestinians to have an actual, functional state. They proved that time and time again.
What was in the Oslo peace process that Gaza doesn't have?
No no, the peace process failed. What Gaza has now (which isn't a lot considering… y'know) is a result of the Second Intifada that came after.
What they have is because of a good faith effort by Israeli's left wing parties to broker a "prove-it" peace deal in Gaza. In Gaza, they gave up every single demand that Palestine had for the West Bank as a whole as a way to prove domestically that such an outcome would lead to peace.
So tell me, what did Palestine demand in the Oslo Accords that they didn't get in the Gaza deal?
So first, I can't actually find anything about that deal. Also one of Palestine's demands was sovereignty over the entire West Bank and Gaza strip, which is obviously not what's happening now, off the top of my head.
What do you mean you can't find anything about that deal! Did you Google it, the info is easily findable.
They got it over the Gaza strip!
The 2004 deal was orchestrated by the left wing coalition I'm Israel. They said if we go down the path of the Oslo Accords, down a 2 state solution path, there will be peace. Gaza was their way to prove it.
The second infintada was an objective failure for Gaza. It's what caused their border with Egypt to be closed, and the Blockade to be put in place. It stopped millions of cross border employees from the West Bank and Gaza which further impoverished the Palestinian people. It's led to a whole generation of Israeli school children with PTSD from constant rocket attacks who will likely never support Pro-Palestinian policies. It's also marked the turning point in US polling where the majority of Americans. Additionally, because both Democrat Bill Clinton (Oslo Accords, that Palestine pulled out of) and Republican George Bush (Gaza Strip Deal) had invested significant political capital on pushing Israel to accept concessions in return for peace it also marked the beginning of an era in American politics where no Palestinian leader could be seen as trustworthy, and since then no President or party has made peace between Israel and Palestine a focus of their administrations.
Oh you're talking about the disengagement? If so I can't find any info about a deal; it was a unilateral Israeli decision, and I suggest you read about the reason it was proposed because it's… Not because they discovered a sudden love for peace and democracy.
Is that accurate in Gaza? Gaza has the 1967 borders, broad fiscal and in kind aid built in. Political autonomy, a foreign, non-Israeli border and zero settlements with existing settlers being forced at gunpoint to leave almost 20 years ago.
Gaza could easily "struggle" by building an actual democratic society, wealthy enough to fund a legitimate war against Israel. Instead it chooses to fund it's multimillionaire leaders and their foreign mansions and spend whatever it can on weapons of war and enslaving it's neighbors.
They're also subjected to a blockade that's turning the country into an open-air prison.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blockade_of_the_Gaza_Strip#Limitation_of_basic_goods
There's more reasons for Gazans to fight Israel, but the elephant in the room is the blockade. It's legitimately impossible to build a functional state under these conditions no matter how much democracy you have (though the lack of democracy probably isn't helping).
And now you see why. With the aid that did get through instead of improving the lives of it's citizens, Hamas choose to invest in a strike force and rockets to attack and enslaved Israelis.
They also have a border with Egypt that's closed, not by Israel but by Egypt because of their countries actions.
Hamas isn't meeting Israel on an open field or even targeting military and logistical sites (roads, bridges, airports etc…) in a guerilla campaign. Their raiding Israel for slaves, and raping and killing the captives like it's 2000 years ago.
Nothing I can imagine, Hamas could have chosen to do could justify the blockade and Israel's past actions more than what they did.
I mean they're not exactly getting money that can be invested; they're getting resources. I don't know what rockets are made of so I don't know if it's coming from foreign aid, but given that Israel bans any and all "double-use" aid I don't see that being possible.
Yeah that's just indefensible.
Metal and/or PVC pipes and concrete or cement with a variety of common construction explosives or common chemicals used as rocket fuel. A.K.A the supplies needed to build homes add baisc plumbing and build irrigation networks for desert farming.
Read through this thread, it's being defended.
AFAIK these things aren't entering through the blockade anyway.
Those are probably the communists so I guess they'll defend anything.
Not right now, but they were largely being let in after inspection before. A few years ago Hamas started policing internal terrorists that would independently launch rockets at Israel. In exchange Israel loosened the rules to allow more goods in quicker through the blockade. At the time it was seen as a sign that maybe Moderates had gained power in Hamas and peace could be possible.