Religion Mid East Religious War, Now with added USA Involvement!

This is not an internet gotcha.
It is an example of false narratives being cemented to people minds, and then afterwards it is plain impossible to change the core belief..
My point is - the claim of 'how many will be left there' - is a claim that has a purpose. An ideation purpose.
While in reality - it actually does not.
So you can choose to look at slogans and narratives fed by Al jazeera, or we can meet again when the dust of war settles and actually witness the reality on the ground.

 

So thousands of innocent lives haven't been taken?

 

BTW, I think we can all witness the discussion here is actually not beneficial.
All that actually happens here is that both parties are trying harder to prove they are right - rendering a movement to more and more 'extreme' content..

So instead of promoting dialogue and mutual understanding, each side finds themselves trying to prove their own point harder..
Will this lead to global peace? Not so sure..
What will?

 

where's the mutual understanding in genocide? asking for a friend

 

Your original claim insenuates of Genocide and population being removed from the land. My reply was that by the end of the war - Gaza will still have 2 millions Palestinians in Gaza - begining a brighter future.

The fact people died in this war is indeed a fact. Thousands. Fact. I am with you on it.
Make it stop - yesterday and before.
Release all hostages. End the war.
Allow Gazan people to live side by side with Israel. (Not from the river to the sea - because that means I am genocided).

 

Genocide requires proof of intent to destroy a group as such — not just killing, not just devastation.

As of now, no international legal body has ruled that Israel is committing genocide.

The ICJ is investigating, but its statements so far are preliminary, not a legal determination.

So no.. Genocide is just an opinion right now.
An opinion that stems from Al Jazeera and other media/personal people with Agendas to push this narrative.

Facts are - no international legal body has ruled that Israel is committing genocide.

So you can discard this fact, or ask yourself why that is.

 

Anybody who thought "defund the police" meant people wanted the police to be abolished was a fucking idiot.

The whole point was to cut funding for things that turn police into military occupiers (tanks, assault gear, etc).

Police should be peace officers, who are there to serve and protect.

Rather than funding them to be cowboys who run around fucking the sheep and lying for each other to keep the game going.

 

Abundance would lead to global peace.

People like Bibi and Trump and the corporations who support them want artificial scarcity. This prevents peace.

 

Your answer here and the way you felt explaining this is probably the exact feeling I get when I try to explain my side of things..

There are people who side with something and are 'fucking idiot'.. (mostly extreme people on both sides of an argument).
But once you get into the complexities and see no side as 'pure' right or wrong - than dialogue and improvment can happen..

 

This is a whole different ball game and topic. And I like it.

How will abundance lead to global peace?

Logically speaking, this claim if I understand it correctly - would mean that i lf all nations/countries/human societies would live in an abundant planet in which there is no famine or scarcity then all people would live together in Harmony and peacfully. Globally.
Is that the notion? And if so - why do you reckon so?

 

Scarcity creates desperation. Desperate people make desperate decisions.

This is why Europe and Scandinavian and Nordic countries have lower violent crime and murder rates than the US and Russia.

Similar theoretical access to necessities except US and Russia have policies which artificially restrict that access to their populations.

This is (one reason) why you see war so much in resource starved places.

 

I would disagree to the logic behind the first statement of:
Scarcity creates desperation.

I argue that is not a true statement.

There are many human societies living today in scarcity and that are not desperate at all.

BTW, if I am not mistaken, the ratio of depression and suicide among the nordic counties is of the highest in the world.
So perhaps less violent - but much more depressed.

I would argue that not abundance or lack of leads to war.
I would argue that social constructs (i.e cultures, religions, intellect, tribal hirearchies etc) - that have yet to adapt to a new world are the reason for wars and conflict.

 

Scarcity combined with inequality. Communities where everyone is poor and works together have solidarity. But people who are poor and see rich flaunting and saying let them eat cake, different story.

 

Scarcity (combined with inequality, thanks @crandc) (which is basically the gini coefficient I've mentioned in the past) leads to cultural, religious, intellectual, tribal, and hierarchical conflict.

It all comes from greed and jealousy. Societies with abundance find the wealthy creating artificial scarcity. See California water rights, US limits on medical students, the foolishness with diamonds, etc.

 

Hamas keeps trying to relinquish power but Israel and U.S. keeps saying no.

Huh. Wonder why that is?

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/11/magazine/benjamin-netanyahu-gaza-war.html

Detailed analysis by New York Times, who can do actual journalism when they want to, describes how plan for truce and hostage release was read to go six months into war. But far right elements of Netanyahu coalition opposed it. Without their backing, new elections would be called and he would likely lose. He had a choice, end the war or stay in power. He chose to stay in power.

 

1. The article is not accesible. Can you copy text from it and sources so I can review it as well?

2. Without reading the article - the idea that Bibi has his own personal agenda is not new, nor not valid. Probably is the case - to an extent. How much? That is the real debate here.

3. IMO - If Israel agreed to stop the war 6 months in the reality would look like this:
A. Hizballa and Naserrallha still in Power and capable of storming northern Israel by foot.
B. Sinwar alive and leading Hamas organizatiln as a powerful 'liberator' - giving Hamas momentum to go at it again and again once recovered.
C. Iran continues to fund terror proxies in the area and threaten Israel with actual rockets capability attack that would devestate Israel entirly (barrage of 1000 rockets, not 50-100).

So all in all, regardless to Bibi's personal Agenda (which I personally can't stand him and always vote against him),
I am very pleased with the fact the war did not end at the 6 months mark.

However - you know what could have happened that would most likely have lead to stopping the war immidiately and despite Bibi's personal intrests?
Thats right, the complete unconditional release of all hostages, dead and alive..
(USA and Biden would have easily shut down Israel if that was the developing reality)..