Standing With Israel and Condemning Hamas

[fragment]

Originally Posted by erimir

So you have not proven your point.

By all means provide polling evidence for your assertion that public support for marriage equality around the time Obama came out in support was so different from public support for US taking a stronger line on Gaza ceasefire right now that comparing the two is not useful or appropriate.

Republicans also had a significant minority in favor, which you left out. Because the point was that gay marriage did not split Democrats more than it split Republicans.

Left out because I thought we were discussing potential Biden voters.

But the figures are:
Gay marriage supporting Repubs 2012: 24%
Gaza ceasefire supporting Repubs 2024: 56%

Looking across all the questions asked on Israel/Palestine, the Republican responses are surprisingly split. I would have expected much more unity than this poll has. Which may speak badly of the poll, but again, I'd rather look at evidence than assertions on that.

I'd guess ceasefire supporting Republicans are not very likely to vote Biden, or at least not vote, because of this issue though. But I'd guess the same for the marriage equality supporting ones in 2012.

[fragment]

Originally Posted by erimir

Aside from that, I think Biden has waited too long to rebuke Netanyahu. But I don't know what's going on with the negotiations behind the scenes.

I honestly find your faith in what you imagine about negotiations quite startling.

Negotiating with Netanyahu (and his Govt) is obviously like negotiating with Republicans on bipartisan immigration policies, or the debt ceiling, or whatever. He'll use negotiations as a tactic to delay and water down action then just withdraw from the agreement. He is as trustworthy and will act in as good faith as Putin, ffs.

[erimir]

Originally Posted by fragment

By all means provide polling evidence for your assertion that public support for marriage equality around the time Obama came out in support was so different from public support for US taking a stronger line on Gaza ceasefire right now that comparing the two is not useful or appropriate.

Left out because I thought we were discussing potential Biden voters.

But the figures are:
Gay marriage supporting Repubs 2012: 24%

Public opinion of same-sex marriage in the United States - Wikipedia

For example, CNN had a poll with splits:

Dems: 70-28
Indies: 60-37
Repubs: 23-72

Similar splits in the two parties, with a clear majority of indies. That doesn't look especially risky.

Gaza ceasefire supporting Repubs 2024: 56%

Looking across all the questions asked on Israel/Palestine, the Republican responses are surprisingly split. I would have expected much more unity than this poll has. Which may speak badly of the poll, but again, I'd rather look at evidence than assertions on that.

I'd guess ceasefire supporting Republicans are not very likely to vote Biden, or at least not vote, because of this issue though. But I'd guess the same for the marriage equality supporting ones in 2012.

I think the points I made about the conditions of the ceasefire significantly affecting support are relevant here.

There's no point in talking about what support for a ceasefire in the abstract is if the support for a ceasefire which leaves Hamas in control of Gaza and does not require them to release all hostages will have far lower support, which that poll supports thinking. If you're calling for an immediate ceasefire with no pre-conditions, that is your benchmark.

Most people are in favor of peace in the abstract, but without details of the agreement included in the discussion it's not very useful because there won't be a ceasefire in abstract, there will only be one with specific conditions.

And "calling for a ceasefire" is not the same as achieving one. Also not included in the poll is any "ceasefire... or what?" What do Americans support Biden doing if Israel and/or Hamas don't agree?

Regardless, I certainly agree that the politics are getting worse for Israel the longer this goes on and I never disagreed with that.

[fragment]

Originally Posted by erimir

For example, CNN had a poll with splits:

Dems: 70-28 net +42
Indies: 60-37 net +23
Repubs: 23-72 net -49

Similar splits in the two parties, with a clear majority of indies. That doesn't look especially risky.

(net figures added)

Let's compare with the "ceasefire right now" question i.e. without defeating Hamas or hostage release.

Dems: 63-22 net +41
Indies: 53-29 net +24
Repubs: 34-52 net -18

The net difference is near identical for each of these two polls for Dems and Indies. The Repubs are more split on ceasefire than they were on gay marriage. At least on this poll. Still open to other polling evidence, since this is actually quite surprising.

And "calling for a ceasefire" is not the same as achieving one.

I agree just calling for a ceasefire is a very weak action that nonetheless the Biden admin has not taken. In fact, they won't take the even weaker action of not vetoing a UNSC vote.

[erimir]

Originally Posted by fragment

(net figures added)

Let's compare with the "ceasefire right now" question i.e. without defeating Hamas or hostage release.

Dems: 63-22 net +41
Indies: 53-29 net +24
Repubs: 34-52 net -18

The net difference is near identical for each of these two polls for Dems and Indies. The Repubs are more split on ceasefire than they were on gay marriage. At least on this poll. Still open to other polling evidence, since this is actually quite surprising.

The question only specifies "without defeating Hamas".

Hearing that question wording would not be taken by all respondents as meaning without a full hostage release or even, potentially, without any hostage release. And many wouldn't think about that aspect unless it was specified.

Basically, you cannot use that question to answer a different question. But I think it's reasonable to think that if support drops significantly if you specify the Israelis don't get a big ask (getting rid of Hamas altogether) that it would drop even more if you specify that the Israelis don't even get a much smaller concession (releasing the hostages).

And none of that really changes the fact that Republican voters are overwhelmingly more sympathetic to Israel than Palestine, while that is not the case in the Democratic party, which is why I said the "Israel-Palestine issue", not "calling for a ceasefire". That is why this whole thing has been a clusterfuck for the Democratic side, while Trump has almost no issues with being criticized by his side over the issue! (He did initially step in it because Bibi said some nice things about Biden, and that made him angry.)

Originally Posted by erimir

I'm not saying that IS the case, but the big dilemma for Democrats with the I/P issue right now is that it splits Democrats, but unites Republicans. A much larger majority of Republicans support Israel, whereas Democrats are split to a greater degree.

At any rate, as I've already said, things are changing. Also, I think it's clear that Biden is trying to achieve a ceasefire.

[erimir]

From Gallup's new poll.

This is what I'm talking about when I say this is a much more difficult issue for Democrats than it is for Republicans.



My a margin of 43-35, Democrats sympathize more with the Palestinians (before 2023 in Gallup's data, Democrats sympathized more with Israel, and by large margins before 2019). Republicans, on the other hand, almost monolithically sympathize with Israel, by a margin 80 to a mere 7%. Since Republicans are much more in agreement, it's easier to keep everyone happy. Indies are split, but like Israel more (and Democrats do probably need to win independents to win the election).

And a useful question to put it in perspective some of the other results you see:

"In order to resolve the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, do you think the United States should -- [ROTATED: put more pressure on the Palestinians to make the necessary compromises (or) put more pressure on the Israelis to make the necessary compromises]?"

The result for this is 39-36 that the pressure should be on Palestine (numbers are getting worse for Israel though). That's something to keep in mind when you see a question about whether there should be a ceasefire, because I'm guessing those numbers correlate with why those respondents think they haven't negotiated one yet.

There are undoubtedly people who would like to see a ceasefire, and would respond yes to those questions, but who think that the problem is that the Palestinians won't make a deal. Like I was saying, the terms of the ceasefire are important. Not everybody thinks that the problem is that Israel is intransigent. Some people think that the reason there isn't a ceasefire is that 1. Hamas broke the first ceasefire 2. Hamas won't release the hostages, or even information about the hostages 3. Hamas has unreasonable demands.

You can disagree, but it's still the case that someone who thinks those things could say "I'm in favor of a ceasefire" - so you can't just assume they support a ceasefire under the same terms you do.

This is a problem often with issue polling - because very different views can get conflated (e.g. "do you approve of Obamacare?" without differentiating between "I disapprove because it doesn't go far enough" and "I disapprove because it's COMMIE SOCIALISMSSMSMS!").

[erimir]

And Trump endorses Israel continuing the assault on Gaza. He says "You've got to finish the problem."

Presumably this means until Hamas is wiped out, rather than Gazans, but the phrasing does have some Hitler-y vibes.

[erimir]

Oh hey look, it's Trump's ambassador to Israel with a bold new peace plan: Israel annexes the West Bank but doesn't give Palestinians the right to vote!

It's time to make Judea and Samaria great again - opinion - The Jerusalem Post

I don't think this is what Trump would campaign on. But these are the type of people he's chosen before and will have his ear.

[viscousmemories]

Okay, I concede that a Trump admin would result in much worse Israel policy. You win.

Back to the topic of this thread, any thoughts about the genocide happening in Gaza?

[erimir]

From my POV, I think Biden should be putting more pressure on Israel because Netanyahu is not his friend or our friend. But I concede that I don't know what's going on behind the scenes.

I do think that Hamas refusing to entertain releasing all the hostages and refusing to even provide an update on the status of the hostages is not helping. (It's probably because a lot of them are already dead.) I think it would be good for the Palestinians if they just released them all, because it would significantly damage Israel's case for continuing in the eyes of the international community (and in particular, the US). But they won't, because Hamas thinks more Palestinian deaths are good for them.

I think it's good that Biden's going further to get aid into Gaza.

I'm not sure what can be done to get Netanyahu out of office, since I don't know enough about Israeli internal politics, but it strikes me that that is probably a pre-condition for getting Israel to agree to a reasonable deal.

I don't have your confidence that Biden can easily change the internal politics in Israel to eliminate Netanyahu's incentive to continue what he's doing.

The one thing I could say for cutting off military aid and sales, if Biden could do that, is that it might make Netanyahu's position untenable and force him out. But this would probably require implicitly (or explicitly, behind the scenes) the understanding that aid would come back once Netanyahu is gone, which you would probably disapprove of. But cutting off Israel, rather than cutting off Netanyahu, might not result in the desired reaction.

[viscousmemories]

Here is a quote from the aggressively pro-Israel The New Republic

We may have achieved minor gains on humanitarian issues but at what cost? Nearly 30,000 Palestinians are dead. More will die if a ground operation in Rafah is launched, as appears to be imminent. Tens of thousands are at risk of starvation or disease. Israel’s abuses in Gaza are among the worst we have seen in recent history—far worse in terms of civilian toll than even Russia’s war crimes in Ukraine. And all of this is, undeniably, uncomfortably and, indeed, shamefully, being enabled by the United States. - source

Further on the differences between Trump and Biden on future Israel policy for anyone not yet convinced.

It’s worth watching the whole interview with historian Rashid Khalidi, author of The Hundred Year’s War on Palestine, on The Majority Report:

Hundred Years' War On Palestine w/ Rashid Khalidi...

We're not seeing a war of the Israeli Army alone on Gaza. Every shell fired by Israeli Amat tanks is a 120 millimeter artillery shell that the United States is providing. Every 155 millimeter artillery shell is provided by the United States. Every Hellfire missile, every war plane in the Israeli Arsenal is an American War plane, every helicopter, Apache helicopter, is an American Helicopter. The United States is providing these things in my view in violation of US law. They have to be used for defensive purposes, they can't be used in ways that contravene International humanitarian law or human rights, and so this blank check is in effect makes this an American-Israeli War; this is Biden's War, not just Netanyahu's war. - Rashid Khalidi

I have become a big John Mearsheimer fanboy lately and watch every interview and lecture I can find on YouTube, in addition to having bought four of his books. I’m more than halfway through The Israel Lobby and it is a masterpiece. It was published almost 15 years ago and won him predictable accusations of antisemitism, but fortunately there’s a whole chapter on how and why the lobby has weaponized that accusation. Something he said in a recent interview was that he wasn’t convinced there was a genocide going on in Gaza until after the 5-day truce in November, but the gusto with which Israel resumed its offensive following the truce convinced him.

Here’s a little information about how US military aid is helping support the genocide, and why I believe the Biden administration is complicit. (via the AM Quickie)

U.S. Has Sent More Than 100 Weapons Shipments to Israel Since Oct. 7, But Disclosed Only 2*"'That's an extraordinary number of [arms] sales over the course of a pretty short amount of time, which really strongly suggests that*the Israeli campaign*would not be sustainable without this level of*U.S. support,' said Jeremy Konyndyk, a former senior Biden administration official and current president of Refugees International." via*the Washington Post*and*the Guardian.

This was reiterated by Josh Paul, the guy whose job for the past decade was to approve arms transfers for the State Department, during a webinar I watched on Thursday night. He resigned two weeks into Israel’s assault on Gaza not simply because the US continued to transfer arms, but because (in his words) there was an unprecedented intolerance for any debate or dissent on the issue from the outset.

I also thought this exchange was interesting. Of course the subject is Palestinian opinion, not specifically Palestinian-American opinion, but I think the essence of it is relevant to my earlier claims that for some, probably many, what is happening now is a bridge too far.

Ali Abunimah: “We see a lot of arguments about this going backwards and forwards, and saying well you know, Biden is terrible but Trump would be an even bigger disaster. I can tell you from the perspective of Palestinians, there's nothing worse than genocide, genocide is as bad as it gets, and it's the worst case scenario now. Does it matter who people vote for when it comes to these questions?

Prof. Mearsheimer: “From a Palestinian perspective, no. It’s Tweedledee and Tweedledum. The President will provide unconditional support for Israel whether he or she is a Democrat or a Republican, so I just don't think it matters.” - source

[mickthinks]

A guy called Avi Lewis. Worth a watch. Worth a share.
https://www.instagram.com/reel/C4L8tNJRp9z/

(I’d embed it properly if only I knew how)

[erimir]

The Biden administration is attempting to overthrow Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government, a senior Israeli political official said on Tuesday night.

By: @tovahlazaroffhttps://t.co/V2BjDxTHbn

— The Jerusalem Post (@Jerusalem_Post) March 12, 2024

[viscousmemories]

I have to admit this is one regime change I wouldn't begrudge the CIA orchestrating. It might even undo some of the decades of shit-sandwich that came from their removal of Mossadegh from Iran in '53.

[But]

Originally Posted by viscousmemories

Ah, remember the good ole’ days when that seemed like it might be an exaggeration?

More like wishful thinking, based on the silly assumption that the doddering numbskull would actually do that. My bad.

[erimir]

Beating a dead horse here, but remember when people credulously believed Trump when he said he would be "neutral" between Israel and Palestine, and then he put this guy in charge of his "Middle East peace plan"?

Jared Kushner says Gaza's "waterfront property could be very valuable" | The Guardian

Originally Posted by Guardian

“Gaza’s waterfront property could be very valuable … if people would focus on building up livelihoods,” Kushner told his interviewer, Harvard’s Middle East Initiative faculty chair, Prof Tarek Masoud. Kushner also lamented “all the money” that had gone into the territory’s tunnel network and munitions instead of education and innovation.

“It’s a little bit of an unfortunate situation there, but from Israel’s perspective I would do my best to move the people out and then clean it up,” Kushner said. “But I don’t think that Israel has stated that they don’t want the people to move back there afterwards.”

Masoud replied that there was “a lot to talk about there”.

Kushner also said he thinks Israel should move civilians from Gaza to the Negev desert in southern Israel.

He said that if he were in charge of Israel his number one priority would be getting civilians out of the southern city of Rafah, and that “with diplomacy” it could be possible to get them into Egypt.

“But in addition to that, I would just bulldoze something in the Negev, I would try to move people in there,” he said. “I think that’s a better option, so you can go in and finish the job.”
[...]
Asked by Masoud about fears on the part of Arabs in the region that the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, would not allow Palestinians who flee Gaza to return, Kushner paused and then said: “Maybe.”

He went on to say: “I am not sure there is much left of Gaza at this point. If you think about even the construct, Gaza was not really a historical precedent [sic]. It was the result of a war. You had tribes in different places and then Gaza became a thing. Egypt used to run it and then over time different governments came in.”

Responding to a question about whether the Palestinians should have their own state, Kushner described the proposal as “a super bad idea” that “would essentially be rewarding an act of terror”.

Meanwhile,

Asked what his message to Netanyahu would be, Trump says, “I think you have to finish it up, and do it quickly and get back to the world of peace.”

This is for some reason being reported as if he's suggesting that Netanyahu should make peace quickly, rather than finish off Hamas quickly, which have very different implications for civilians.

Given Trump's own lack of concern for civilian casualties from US operations (ending the reporting of drone strike casualties, for example), we can pretty much figure what level of care he thinks that finishing Hamas up quickly should entail.

[viscousmemories]

Yeah, I saw that Kushner piece and my stomach turned. I also heard the audio of Trump (who I've heard called "the front runner") being interviewed by Seb Gorka, in which Trump said Shumer and the Democrats "hate Israel" because they've finally started to mew about maybe asking Netanyahu to please kill fewer children and consider taking steps to avert a famine. These next few years are certainly going to be interesting times.

[Stephen Maturin]

Asked what his message to Netanyahu would be, Trump says, “I think you have to finish it up, and do it quickly and get back to the world of peace.”

For a drug-addled rapist, PAB certainly is a piece of shit. Not sure what this "world of peace" we need to get back to is, but let us not forget:

Peace is good for business.

~ Ferengi Rule of Acquisition No. 35

Also:

War is good for business.

~ Ferengi Rule of Acquisition No. 34

[-FX-]

https://x.com/TheMossadIL/status/1775966371202949126

[erimir]

I did see some twits saying that Trump understands, unlike Biden, that what Israel's doing looks bad on TV, and therefore Trump might put more pressure on Israel than Biden has been (which hasn't been enough, although at least he's moving in the right direction, however slowly).

The problem such twittery always has is that it assumes that Trump has a normal mind, which would think "destroying neighborhoods looks bad on TV, therefore Israel should stop doing that." Sure, Trump can be concerned with the appearance of bad behavior - but he's only concerned with the appearance of bad behavior, the bad behavior itself doesn't bother him. You should never say something so stupid without first remembering this is a guy who praises the Tiananmen Square massacre as being strong and smart. So, Trump's mind instead goes "therefore Israel shouldn't let video of that be released."

Donald Trump's position is that Israel is being too cautious in Gaza and needs to "finish what they started, and they’ve got to finish it fast," while also winning "the PR war" by not releasing "horrible tapes of buildings falling down." https://t.co/U9Hc2cdHja pic.twitter.com/FPvameEtCC

— Matthew Gertz (@MattGertz) April 4, 2024

I think you can probably guess whether Trump therefore thinks it's horrible or "smart" for Israel to kill journalists given that line of thinking.