@mattyglesias The point is that giving up on the peace process was understandable given the circumstances. Israel’s stopping articulating a political horizon and Israeli vision of peace (even if you knew the Palestinian national movement are not ready to accept that vision) was harmful
@mattyglesias Even if they claim to object to “how” Israel fights, they are saying Israel shouldn’t. They don’t use the normal framework (necessity, distinction, proportionality, precaution), they make up their own that only applies to Israel (casualty count, damage, individual deservingness)
@mattyglesias The backlash to Israel isn’t primarily because Israel gave up on the peace process. It’s because people object to Israeli military campaigns against terrorist organizations that attack Israel and the country that sponsors them.
@BriannaWu She liked dozens of posts celebrating the breach of the Gaza-Israeli boundary by terrorists who did so to shoot revelers at a music festival, shoot families point blank in their homes, and take 250 hostages. No innocent explanations. This was not an oversight. It wasn’t a one off
@StevenGWalker74@BriannaWu The context is someone thought that trying to kill Jewish children in Michigan is acceptable because of conflict 1000s of miles away that they have nothing to do with. No excuses. No innocent explanations.
@StevenGWalker74@BriannaWu Nope, the context is that a terrorist group in Lebanon, dedicated to the elimination of the state of Israel, is funded by Iran to attack Israel. Israel is conducting highly targeted strikes to counter that completely egregious and unacceptable threat.
@PeterBeinart So weird the Islamic Republic calls for Israel’s elimination, funds terrorist proxies, maintains a doomsday clock counting the minutes till Israel’s destruction, launches ballistic missiles at Israeli population centers, and is seeking nuclear weapons. But it’s not a threat.
@RubenGallego@mattyglesias It’s in America’s interest that America aid its allies when they face existential threat. It’s in America’s interest to not let long time enemy countries cross red lines. It’s in America’s interest to demonstrate resolve against enemies focused on our demise.
@RubenGallego@mattyglesias It’s in America’s interest to have Iran, a country that chants “Death to America”, not to have nuclear weapons or long range interballistic missile. It’s in America’s interest that Iran stops fund terror proxy groups that disrupt global shipping lanes and destabilize the region
@CupittMatthew@BriannaWu True. But it’s not only the tactics but the goal that needs to change. Toppling, delegitimizing, and dismantling a nation state is not an acceptable policy goal for a national movement. Independence is.
@BriannaWu And to the one staters, who think the Palestinian movement wants a single integrated single democracy, Palestinians could allow even a single Jew to attend their universities or live in cities under their control. They could support political factions calling for that. They don’t
@BriannaWu They could call their ideology Palestinian statism if they wanted to, instead of anti-Zionism to emphasize that they want to build a state, not destroy the neighboring state. Of course they don’t. These are choices.
@BriannaWu Of course if they wanted a state they could have had one ten times over. They could have spent the past century developing the institutions of that state. At rallies, they could be using the slogan, “We want a state. Get us our state!”