@Murray_N

I barely had the time to do the deepdive on that last one. But I agree it was largely a circus.. i mean just some guy saying some shit like "everyone lies about israel" without really a hard look at facts to justify it. The vast nmajority of what was said was just wasted air and I couldnt really even comment on it meaningfully if i wanted to. Now the parts he did say something meaningful, mostly specific jabs at palestine I can address, but they were far and few between for how much hot air was spewed.

@realcaseyrollins

@freemo @Murray_N I think both #DaveSmith and #DouglasMurray were wrong in different ways, but #DouglasMurray could have absolutely pinned #DaveSmith to the wall several times but didn't do it.

My problem with #DaveSmith's position is that it would allow #Hamas to flourish so long as they hide behind human shields. According to him, collateral damage is unacceptable (more or less, I wish #DouglasMurray made him clarify his position on collateral damage). /1

@freemo @Murray_N So, what happens if #Hamas attacks #Israel, while in civilian installations? Should the #IDF attack, or wait for them to go outside? I don't think #DaveSmith could have given a palatable answer to that question without forsaking his principles. /2

@freemo @Murray_N Also I do want to be fair to #DaveSmith, I think he did say that #Hamas is bad and has his faults. He views both #Hamas and the #IDF as evil entities, because they both engage in war, and also because when they do engage in war they sometimes break #InternationalLaw. /3

@realcaseyrollins @Murray_N

Wait maybe i confused who dave smith was here... Is Dave Smith the guy who has the british accent and sounds like a wanker relying mostly on appeals to authority? The pro Israel guy? Cause he is who i was talking about.

That other dude that was largely negative about both Israel and Palestine, him I found to be reasonable and agreed with in general however felt his argument was, as often is the case, focusing on the wrong things. Who is doing evil things now is only relevant if we look at the context of the things done to get here.

The most impiortant aspect of my stance is, Israel used the worst imaginable form of terrorism, a form that Palestine has to this day not used (biological warfare). They used it to win, get the upper hand, and trap the palestinians in a horrific state. Only once they used those tactics, and won, and completely suppressed the other side did they even try to pretend to be the good guys (and still fail at even that). It is not the least bit surprising that the underdog would use terrorist tactics that are more mild than the terrorist tactics used against them, now that they are on the loosing side.

If you just ignore the 100 some years of what was done against them and try to play it like just the last year is all that existed you make a very poor and dishonest argument, and its what a lot of people defending palestine keep getting goated into.