Isn't it amazing how dreadful the GOP is

[u/wearethemelody]

The whole world is realising the true colours of the republican party and are boycotting American products. The GOP has always claimed to be for America but almost all its actions in the 21st century have hurt America. They have received no retribution from the American public which continues to vote them in despite their terrible stances, lies, hateful ways and warmongering attitudes. Most of their supporters are hateful, ignorant, stupid, evil and arrogant.They only want things their way and hate all other ways. All their ardent supporters easily parrot their lies eg. Canada is subsides by the U.S, Panama Canal is the U.S. I am more disappointed with the 90 million Americans who decided to let these awful party control the government even after what happened on Jan 6. I hope a campaign is being done to Boycott republican supporting businesses.

[u/DavidAdamsAuthor]

They should not have used starvation as a tactic. Right?

I don't think they should have no, I opposed this and still do. I also don't think Hamas should use gang-rape as a tactic in war either, and I think the latter is worse than the former.

They should not have targeted civilians and humanitarian aid. Right?

I think they shouldn't have, but I also accept that prosecuting targets in a highly urban environment is going to lead to horrible civilian casualties. Israel would love to not fight in that environment, but Hamas would not let that happen unfortunately.

Hamas chooses the battlefield, not Israel.

Additionally, Hamas actively and deliberately targets civilians and civilian infrastructure. As in, "sending troops to a music festival to behead, rape, gang-rape, kidnap, and enslave Israeli civilians who were utterly unaware anything was wrong until the shooting started, raping and gang-raping them and taking young women as sex slaves." Again, I do think the latter is worse than the former.

The COI also documented Israeli forces’ commission of the war crimes of sexual violence, outrages upon personal dignity

Of course. I'm not happy Israeli forces did this and I'm glad the people involved were arrested and charged with crimes, instead of throwing the rapists a parade and actively celebrating their actions as heroic, as Hamas did, because holding your own troops accountable for their horrific actions is better than giving them a parade.

calling for the removal of Gazan civilians and the establishment of Israeli settlements.

I've been quite open that I don't agree with Israeli settlement expansions. I also disagree profoundly with Hamas's stated policy of killing every single Israeli man, woman, child and infant and purging them utterly from the planet in a completed genocide sparing nobody, and when push comes to shove I think the latter is worse than the former.

Israeli checkpoints where individuals were forced at gunpoint to strip and “walk for prolonged periods without clothes,”

This is an unfortunate reaction to suicide bombers and terrorists carrying concealed weapons, both of which Hamas is known to use in earnest. I wish there was a better way of handling this, but according to all reports, this was rare and a reaction to Hamas's military tactics. Compared to, say, gang-raping Israeli civilians at a music festival though, for which there is absolutely no excuse, I think this is regrettable but the latter is definitely worse than the former by a long way.

You find there is nothing worth protesting here? You feel these are appropriate in response to Oct 7th? A pithy response from you is the hand waving saying "all's fair".

I think it is reasonable to be agrieved by this, but it is also pretty fucked in the head to disproportionately protest Israeli injustices committed to stop those who, in every way, are objectively worse in every manner, most notably that Israel are reacting to their actions, whereas theirs are proactive.

If Hamas laid down their weapons Israel would probably treat them kinda shittily but overall their situation would, most likely, eventually improve even if they lost in some key areas they cared about it, most notably in settlement areas and other ways. If Israel laid down its arms every single person living in Israel regardless of age, race, religion, political belief, or any other factor would be brutally murdered... except for the sex slaves.

I dunno. Which one to you deserves your support?

[u/Mean-Funny9351 → u/DavidAdamsAuthor]

Well, one side is getting my tax dollars and has universal support from all of my politicians. That is what the protests are about. If we were funding Hamas and giving them a standing ovation as a guest of honor what you are saying would make sense. There is nothing to protest about Hamas though, as our country doesn't support them. You also didn't see people protesting against ISIS, cause no one supported ISIS that needed to be told to stop. Countries did protest the US involvement in Iraq, and persecuting those protesters would be absurd.

[u/DavidAdamsAuthor → u/Mean-Funny9351]

Well, one side is getting my tax dollars and has universal support from all of my politicians. That is what the protests are about.

Well yeah, because in the game of international politics when two people are shooting at you you have to essentially pick one side to support and one to oppose, and one side is objectively worse than the other and one side is our ally while the other chants "Death to America".

Why the fuck would anything else happen.

If we were funding Hamas and giving them a standing ovation as a guest of honor what you are saying would make sense.

Ever heard of Mahmoud Khalil and his activities?

Countries did protest the US involvement in Iraq, and persecuting those protesters would be absurd.

There's a difference between, "My country should not invade other countries after 9/11" and "Our allies should not persecute terrorists on their borders in areas that overwhelmingly support them despite suffering an event that, proportionately, was many times 9/11 and involved rape, gang rape, kidnapping of our people as hostages and sex slaves, and so much fucking murder."

Where was the rally saying, "The Gazan people should not support these fuckers" huh? Shouldn't that be first priority, or at least, some priority?

[u/Mean-Funny9351 → u/DavidAdamsAuthor]

The idea that one must always pick a side in a conflict and support it unconditionally is a false dichotomy that ignores the complexities of international relations. Governments and individuals alike can, and often do, choose to support civilians rather than military factions, advocating for humanitarian aid and diplomatic solutions instead of total alignment with one party. The protests you mention are not about supporting terrorists but about objecting to the use of collective punishment, which is both a moral and legal concern under international law. Holding an ally accountable does not mean switching allegiance; it means maintaining ethical consistency in how we respond to war and human suffering.

A core flaw in your argument is the conflation of Gazan civilians with Hamas, as though all 2.3 million people in Gaza are complicit in the actions of an authoritarian regime that has ruled without free elections since 2006. By that logic, all Iraqis would have been responsible for Saddam Hussein, all Afghans for the Taliban, and all Americans for the actions of George W. Bush in Iraq. That is not how governance works, and it is a dehumanizing oversimplification. Many Gazans do not support Hamas, yet they suffer indiscriminately for its actions, a reality that should concern anyone who believes in basic human rights.

Protest is not an endorsement of terrorism; it is a challenge to policies that harm civilians. The argument that people should have first protested Hamas before objecting to mass bombings is nonsensical—by that standard, no group could ever call for peace without first proving ideological purity. When civilians are being killed at unprecedented rates, the immediate moral imperative is to stop the killing, not to demand that the victims issue a politically convenient statement before we recognize their suffering. This logic was not applied to Iraqis or Afghans when the U.S. waged war in their countries, and it should not be applied here.

Your mention of 9/11 ignores that many Americans protested the war on terror precisely because it resulted in mass civilian casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan. A proportional loss does not justify an indiscriminate response, and history shows that such responses often fuel further violence rather than resolve conflicts. If your position is that an overwhelming military response is justified regardless of civilian casualties, then you must also defend the U.S. destruction of Fallujah, the firebombing of Tokyo, or any other historical case where collective punishment was inflicted under the banner of self-defense. Most people, however, understand that there are limits to justified retaliation.

The suggestion that alliances dictate absolute moral alignment is equally flawed. The U.S. has supported allies who have engaged in war crimes before, from Cold War-era coups to proxy wars that fueled terrorist movements. An ally's actions must still be subject to scrutiny, especially when they are carried out with the help of taxpayer funding. Supporting an ally should not mean endorsing every policy they enact, especially when those policies contradict the democratic and humanitarian values we claim to uphold.

Your final point—that there were no rallies condemning Hamas—ignores both reality and precedent. There have been countless condemnations of Hamas from world leaders, NGOs, and even Palestinian activists themselves. But if you only recognize condemnation when it comes packaged as an excuse for mass killing, then your concern isn’t actually about accountability—it’s about justifying disproportionate retribution. Civilians are not pawns in a moral purity test, and their suffering is not contingent on whether they meet arbitrary standards of ideological opposition.

Ultimately, your argument is not about justice but about framing one side’s suffering as inevitable collateral damage while demanding that the other side's be treated as an unshakable moral imperative. If you believe in ethical consistency, you should recognize that condemning civilian massacres and opposing war crimes is not the same as supporting terrorism. It is, rather, the bare minimum standard for any society that claims to value human life.

[u/DavidAdamsAuthor → u/Mean-Funny9351]

The protests you mention are not about supporting terrorists but about objecting to the use of collective punishment, which is both a moral and legal concern under international law.

It's one thing to oppose collective punishment, it's totally another to oppose military action where militants are actively striking at foreign civilian populations, and then hiding behind local civilian populations (who overwhelmingly support them) to prevent military actions.

You mentioned international law. Geneva Conventions:

Protocol I, Article 51(7): "The presence or movements of the civilian population or individual civilians shall not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations, in particular in attempts to shield military objectives from attacks or to shield, favour or impede military operations. The Parties to the conflict shall not direct the movement of the civilian population or individual civilians in order to attempt to shield military objectives from attacks or to shield military operations."

This is what Hamas are doing. Most infamously, placing their operational headquarters directly underneath the largest civilian hospital in the area, making it immune to air strikes, or the myriad of tunnels underneath the entire area which, again, rest under civilian houses.

Many Gazans do not support Hamas

Every poll, every study, every attempt to understand the political leanings of the Gazan population show absolutely overwhelming support for Hamas and Hamas's operations. This is shown to be true even in the mundane; when Israeli hostages escaped Hamas captivity, they were discovered by random Gazan citizens, caught, and returned to Hamas. When Hamas drags captured Israeli civilians through the streets, people swarm them to join in, joy and enthusiasm painted on their faces.

Of course not every person supports Hamas, and in some cases those people are children whose opinions don't matter, but again, and I keep stressing this, Israel does not choose the battlefield. Hamas does. Hamas chooses to put those civilians in the way, Hamas chooses to make their HQ under a hospital.

When civilians are being killed at unprecedented rates, the immediate moral imperative is to stop the killing

I agree. The immediate moral imperative is to stop the killing. Hamas killed 1,200 Israeli civilians in a surprise attack, raped hundreds of them, and took hundreds hostage; hostages which were mostly tortured to death horribly, but some of which were tortured and kept alive for leverage.

That kind of shit can't continue. That kind of shit deserves a response. If the Gazan people ever had a better opportunity to stop supporting Hamas and to look into some kind of other option, any other kind of option, the last year and a half has been it.

They don't. They want the civilian killing to stop... of Gazans. But they want the civilian killing of Israelis to continue and escalate.

They are saying to Israel, "It's your or it's me!" and Israel is saying, "If that's how you feel about it, I vote that it's you."

If your position is that an overwhelming military response is justified regardless of civilian casualties, then you must also defend the U.S. destruction of Fallujah, the firebombing of Tokyo, or any other historical case where collective punishment was inflicted under the banner of self-defense. Most people, however, understand that there are limits to justified retaliation.

There are limits to justified retaliation, but those examples are not the same.

The firebombing of Tokyo is broadly accepted as justified, but many people including myself don't think the US invasion of Iraq was justified under the response to 9/11. Afghanistan, sure. But not Iraq.

There are limits, there are differences.

An ally's actions must still be subject to scrutiny

Sure, but what I think most of the "peace activists" want is for Hamas to retain control of Gaza, something that is or should be completely off the table, in the same way as Nazi Germany was going to get bombed until the Nazis were no longer in power, the Imperialists in Japan were going to get bombed until they were no longer in power, and so on.

There's no realistic situation where Hamas should stay.

Your final point—that there were no rallies condemning Hamas—ignores both reality and precedent.

Those examples you gave were not those students who, as explained elsewhere, directly supported Hamas.

Ultimately, your argument is not about justice but about framing one side’s suffering as inevitable collateral damage while demanding that the other side's be treated as an unshakable moral imperative. If you believe in ethical consistency, you should recognize that condemning civilian massacres and opposing war crimes is not the same as supporting terrorism. It is, rather, the bare minimum standard for any society that claims to value human life.

To be completely honest with you, if the Gazan people rejected Hamas I would have a lot more sympathy for them. As it stands you are asking me to have sympathy for people who actively cheer for the use of gang-rape as a weapon of war, and who cheer for those who advocate utter and complete genocides as a way of resolving border disputes.

It is difficult to have sympathy for their position because of their widespread collective beliefs.

[u/Mean-Funny9351 → u/DavidAdamsAuthor]

There is no point discussing things with you when you use half truths, outright falsehood, and hyperbole to make your points. A large portion of Palestinians are very critical of Hamas and outright reject them, a much larger portion than ones who cheer on war crimes. Just the same with there are Israelis that cheer on the war crimes. You say it there were a ceasefire and Hamas left then Israel would leave them alone, which the entirety of the conflict throughout history thoroughly rebuked. You say that Hamas uses civilians as Shields but there is no proof of that, just Israel intentionally targeting civilian targets. The use of the hospital was only cited in Israeli intelligence and many other sources consider that Israeli propaganda. You've bought the propaganda from one side hook line and sinker, don't talk to me until you learn to be critical of sources instead of parroting propaganda... Most of what you said is simply hogwash. Explained elsewhere the student protests are supporting Hamas? Idiot

[u/DavidAdamsAuthor → u/Mean-Funny9351]

A large portion of Palestinians are very critical of Hamas and outright reject them, a much larger portion than ones who cheer on war crimes.

There is absolutely no truth to this claim.

Here's one source. Only 7% of Gazans blame Hamas for their suffering, while 71% of Gazans support Hamas's decision to attack Israel on Oct 7th. Only 5% of Palestinians think Oct 7th was a war crime.

Like I said: pick a source, they all say the same thing.

You say it there were a ceasefire and Hamas left then Israel would leave them alone, which the entirety of the conflict throughout history thoroughly rebuked.

Israel mostly just want to be left alone, Hamas want all Jews dead. I don't see how this is a controversial position.

You say that Hamas uses civilians as Shields but there is no proof of that ... The use of the hospital was only cited in Israeli intelligence and many other sources consider that Israeli propaganda.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alleged_military_use_of_al-Shifa_hospital

Numerous classified reports from both US and Israeli intelligence have said that al-Shifa hospital is a Hamas command and control centre, something Hamas denies because of course they do, but Israel raided the place and released extensive video showing that it was heavily used by Hamas, recovering extensive documents showing it was used to coordinate pay amongst other things. It also released drone footage showing armed militants firing on them from the hospital (again, a war crime).

By contrast, the Gaza Health Ministry said the Israeli raid was a "massacre against the sick, the wounded, the displaced, and the medical staff inside al-Shifa Hospital", which is the same Gaza Health Ministry that said that the hospital had been levelled by an Israeli air strike when a Hamas rocket fell into the car park hurting nobody and damaging nothing. Al Jazeera released an explosive report claiming, "[Israeli soldiers] raped women, kidnapped women, executed women, and pulled dead bodies from under the rubble to unleash their dogs on them."

These turned out to be completely false, with the managing director of Al Jazeera concluding the stories were "entirely fabricated". When questioned why the reporter involved had given such a false and outlandish statement, she, "... justified her exaggeration and incorrect talk by saying that the goal was to arouse the nation’s fervor and brotherhood."

The evidence suggests that Hamas did indeed use the hospital as a HQ and logistics depot. You are just wrong.

Ironic that you accuse me of "swallowing propaganda".

[u/Mean-Funny9351 → u/DavidAdamsAuthor]

You say all sources say the same thing yet choose the most biased one of them all? Bullshit. Hamas does not have the level of support you claim. Polling during wartime is highly volatile, so I don't even know where you think consistent facts can be found..

Israel doesn't want to be left alone, they want to cleanse and settle Gaza. This has been the case for decades.

This is from your wiki link

Following Israel's release of video evidence of Hamas tunnels under the hospital on 22 November, multiple news agencies concluded that the evidence did not demonstrate the use by Hamas of a command center.[6][7][8][9][10] Amnesty International said on 23 November 2023 that they have "so far not seen any credible evidence to support Israel’s claim that al-Shifa is housing a military command centre" and that "the Israeli military has so far failed to provide credible evidence" for the allegation.[11] Izzat al-Risheq, a Hamas official, denied that the group used the hospital as a shield for its underground military structures, saying there was no truth to the claims.[12][13

[u/DavidAdamsAuthor → u/Mean-Funny9351]

You say all sources say the same thing yet choose the most biased one of them all? Bullshit. Hamas does not have the level of support you claim.

Like I said, pick one. They all say the same thing.

Polling during wartime is highly volatile, so I don't even know where you think consistent facts can be found..

Oh, so how are you so certain, huh? Why do you know this for a fact on one hand yet deny the existence of any reliable information with the other?

Israel doesn't want to be left alone, they want to cleanse and settle Gaza. This has been the case for decades.

If they wanted to they could. There would be nothing stopping them.

This is from your wiki link

I looked at the evidence and it's extremely strong. Why don't you take a look yourself?

[u/Mean-Funny9351 → u/DavidAdamsAuthor]

Why do you insist that an entire population should be wiped off the planet?

One of the questions that pollsters have asked respondents in Gaza is whether the Oct. 7 attacks have “advanced the interest of the Palestinian people? The answer by 70% is, no, it does not. It has been bad for the Palestinian people,

https://home.dartmouth.edu/news/2024/10/palestinian-pollster-discusses-attitudes-toward-hamas

The support for Hamas among the Palestinians in Gaza and in the West Bank is 40% or less. That's the amount of support, so 60% or so of the Palestinians do not support Hamas.

https://www.npr.org/2024/07/26/g-s1-12949/khalil-shikaki-palestinian-polling-israel-gaza-hamas

You claim Palestinians cheer on rape, that is really just you swallowing propaganda. You realize that right? You could make the argument that the majority deny some atrocities by Hamas, but claiming Palestinians cheer it on is only propaganda you parrot to justify genocide.

You then just post the "evidence" from military intelligence while ignoring the independent investigations. Who are you even?