You're viewing a single thread.
Honestly at this point the settlers have fucked everything too much,
Israel and Palestine should both be disbanded by force, the leadership of both should be transferred at gun point to the Hague, all their militaries, paramilitaries, blackops whatevers need to be disbanded, and the two states need to be reformed into a single confederation who's military defense is left entirely to an international coalition force that polices the shit out of the place the way the union policed the south after the civil war before Hayes bumble fucked it.
We've tried to solve this problem with recognizing sovereign rights, now it is time to put the fear of god into anyone who would even dream of trying to keep the fight for total domination over the strip going. Sovereignty and defense independence are for the good little children who don't try to Lebensraum their neighbors with it.
Coexistence at gunpoint until the settlers are cowed, the Palestinians have their freedom of movement and shelter re-established sufficiently, and the antidemocratic leaders of both sides blatantly chasing war forever to maintain their own power are hung as examples to future would be tyrants and shit stirrers.
Surely this will not cause religious friction. I can see no flaws with this plan.
Solving a problem of violence with even greater violence seems to be shortsighted at best, and would probably cause more unforeseen future issues. I'm no expert, but surely there must be some nuanced position in between "cheer them on like a cage match" and "total authoritarian control over two peoples." It just seems so reactionary and extreme to say "oh just forcibly disarm them and make them be nice to each other. With force." It won't cure decades of cultural friction and religious tension, and seems a bad precedent to set. On whose authority would this coalition act? They have the absolute power to dissolve two states? Could they do this to anyone they dislike? Where is the line?
Obviously you weren't genuinely proposing this as a real solution, but reactionary takes like that just dilute the discussion and inflame emotions.
Nah, do it the way they did in the immediate reconstruction era south. Lynch mobbers get the rope and their friends and families get to watch.
Jesus Christ. Take it down a notch, if you want anyone to take you seriously. Perpetuating a cycle of violence leads to lasting resentment and hatred. Sometimes violence is necessary to make voices heard, but that's from the oppressed against the violence of their oppressors. Violence should never be used to control.
It worked in the south, and it'd have kept working too if we hadn't been dumb enough to let up on their shit.
Violence is not cyclic inherently, and terrorists are inhuman scum who waste every breath they take, so going full Spartacus over their shit is fully warrantable and highly likely to work.
Especially with a nice little top off of spacing the effigies to mingle the war criminals amongst each other as they are hand in hand in the oppression of the people.
Where anyone tries to pick either torch up, crush them, and effigize them all the same. There can be no tolerance for any sort of return to the barbarism we see on display even from before the war.
You can have any opinion you like, just not supremacism. Supremacists get the rope. Yeah it just keeps going, but for a cause as righteous as reminding supremacists they rightfully ought to fear for their lives under the eyes of decent society, then it is an effort well worth it just keeping on going.
Fuck the supremacists gonna do? Team up to stop people from stopping the war continuing? That just makes them all the more worthy of final humiliation.