CNN reporting on some interesting survey results from the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research in Ramallah. Seven hundred and fifty adults were interviewed face to face in the West Bank, and 481 were interviewed in Gaza, also in person. The Gaza data collection was done during the recent truce, when it was safer for researchers to move about.

  • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    10 months ago

    Surely this would wipe out all the violent bastards without hurting any Israeli civilians, nor would it lead to increased violence against Jews by idiots who can’t separate Jews from Israel. /s

    All you’d accomplish is changing the power dynamic, but nothing else. And while that might feel good at the time, 50 years from now we’ll have this conversation again, where the civilians caught in the middle of the conflict have been born into nothing but strife.

    There’s a reason why an ongoing moral in fiction is that revenge is bad. Violence begets violence. Unfortunately, I just don’t see how this conflict can reach a resolution without continued violence. Nonetheless, there’s no need to egg it on.

    • masquenox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      10 months ago

      Violence begets violence.

      The violence has already been “begat,” Clyde. And none of your liberal feelgood handwringing is “un-begatting” it.

      • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Indeed, when someone says “violence begets violence”, that usually means there has already been violence, hence the whole “violence begets” part. You’re literally agreeing with me.

        I also agree with you that handwringing does nothing either. My whole point is that violence accomplishes the same thing as handwringing – nothing. Violence is just bread and circus to distract from anything productive.

        By the way, do you actually have a definition of liberal you can refer to here? Or is it just a catch-all term for anyone you dislike and disagree with? Because it certainly seems like the latter, which makes it a very empty insult.

        • masquenox@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          You’re literally agreeing with me.

          No, we’re not, because…

          My whole point is that violence accomplishes the same thing as handwringing – nothing.

          Riiiiight… if we just sacrifice a million more to the mass-murderers they’ll grow tired off it and leave peacefully, is that it, Clyde? Is that your plan?

          Why don’t you lead by example and put yourself up for the chop?

          By the way, do you actually have a definition of liberal you can refer to here?

          The guiding principle of moderate, centrist and liberal politics is acquiescence to the status quo.

          It is, by default, the most cowardly, self-serving and privileged form of politics one could ascribe to.

          As MLK himself wrote:

          I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen’s Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to “order” than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice;

          So no, Clyde - I will not be providing you with a description of the politics you should have no problem recognizing yourself.