zlacker

[return to "The pro-Israel information war"]
1. jdross+15[view] [source] 2023-12-08 19:20:04
>>anigbr+(OP)
Pro-Palestinian views outrank Pro-Israeli online by around 36 to 1 on TikTok and 8 to 1 on other online platforms. https://twitter.com/antgoldbloom/status/1721561226151612602

If anything the skew within the platforms is to prioritize pro-palestinian views https://twitter.com/committeeonccp/status/173279243496103143...

It also seems like these platforms create (rather than support) anti-Israeli views: https://twitter.com/antgoldbloom/status/1730255552738201854

US views skew pro-israel, and GenZ is closer to 50/50, so if there's something going on online, it's not in favor of Israel.

It's probably relevant that there are 1 billion Muslims to 16 million Jews, and that the largest relevant population of pro-Israeli internationals is India and Indian Hindus, and they are not on TikTok (blocked in India).

◧◩
2. A1kmm+gP[view] [source] 2023-12-08 22:57:29
>>jdross+15
I think the fundamental assumption of the analysis that there are two mutually exclusive groups, 'pro-Israel' and 'pro-Palestine' is flawed. It is possible to simultaneously support the interests of Palestinian and Israeli civilians (and support a peaceful Israel within the 1967 boundaries), while condemning the massacre of civilians under the orders of Likud (and other far right parties) and Hamas.

I think it is currently about an order of magnitude more civilians deaths have resulted from the actions of Likud (Netanyahu etc..., who control the government and hence the IDF) than from the actions of Hamas. IDF is apparently disrupting civilian aid, destroying infrastructure including hospitals, and causing mass population movements into areas that cannot support them, so the risk of death from starvation and infectious disease at a massive scale as an indirect result is high. The Likud-controlled IDF are also apparently enforcing a 'lock down' of Palestinian civilians in the West Bank while allowing Israeli citizens to seize land by force and further expand the occupied territories.

So the scale of the atrocities seems to be much higher on the Likud side than the Hamas side, covers both the West Bank and Gaza, and it makes sense that the Palestinian victims of those atrocities would receive more support. That doesn't mean that all the people who care about the plight of the Palestinian population are anti-Israel (they are just not posting about it because they are likely prioritising issues).

◧◩◪
3. woodru+PR[view] [source] 2023-12-08 23:11:09
>>A1kmm+gP
I have nothing to add here, other than to thank you for expressing this so cogently.

It’s not always “right” to measure just action in terms of lives saved or lost, but it’s hard for me (and so many other American Jews) to see anything right or just about 10 dead Palestinians for every dead Israeli.

◧◩◪◨
4. Aunche+fo1[view] [source] 2023-12-09 02:53:02
>>woodru+PR
There has never been a war in history where one side stops because they killed enough people. War ends when the enemy surrenders.

The Japanese killed a few dozen civilians in Pearl Harbor. America killed 10,000x as many during their bombings of Japan. Had they not surrendered, they likely would have killed an order of magnitude more. The only alternative would have been for the US to completely blockade Japan indefinitely to prevent them from rebuilding their military. Actually, they wouldn't be able to do that either because that would make Japan an "open air prison."

◧◩◪◨⬒
5. woodru+Zu1[view] [source] 2023-12-09 04:01:40
>>Aunche+fo1
By most standards, what the US did to the civilian population of Japan was an atrocity.

I don’t have easy answers here. But I think we’ve lost an important piece of the plot here if we can’t look at one terrible human tragedy, and then another, and then ask ourselves whether the first had to beget the second.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. pxc+2L1[view] [source] 2023-12-09 07:12:33
>>woodru+Zu1
This has been a fairly common rhetorical move for defenders of disproportionate Israeli violence, inflicted primarily upon civilians, in recent months. I've seen it done with the nuclear bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki as well as the firebombing of Dresden.

On TV in English, which atrocity is used to justify the current and growing civilian death toll in Gaza seems to depend on who the audiences. US audiences are appealed to with comparison to Hiroshima and UK audiences, to Dresden.

It's easy to read it cynically when it's an Israeli official excusing one war crime with another on television. It's stranger and sadder to see it done by an ordinary stranger online.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. edanm+vR1[view] [source] 2023-12-09 08:19:55
>>pxc+2L1
You think it's cynical to change your argument to fit your audience? I don't understand this.

The basic argument is "If you think it was legitimate when X country did this, then what's different here?" I think it's very valid to find an X that the person you're speaking to will actually agree with.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
8. pxc+vS1[view] [source] 2023-12-09 08:31:40
>>edanm+vR1
I think politicians and government officials using an historic atrocity to justify an ongoing one is cynical.

The other details are mostly incidental.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣
9. edanm+OU1[view] [source] 2023-12-09 08:59:00
>>pxc+vS1
I don't think it's using an historic atrocity, it's using an analogy. And btw, the analogy isn't to Dresden, because Israel is at the very least claiming it isn't targeting civilians in that manner. The comparison is to ISIS/Iraq/Afghanistan/etc.

You can legitimately think that those wars weren't justified, or that no war is ever justified. Some people think that way. I think most people don't think that way.

I certainly don't, and I think a war against Hamas is incredibly justified. That doesn't mean I automatically agree with everything Israel does btw, nor should it.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣▦
10. defros+yV1[view] [source] 2023-12-09 09:09:58
>>edanm+OU1
There should be no real analogy to Dresden in any case; WWI night time bombing raids were carried from altitude above flak defenses over blacked out cities prior to GPS using dead reckoning and uncertain waypoint identification.

Dresden was defended as the justified bombing of a strategic target, a major rail transport and communication centre, housing 110 factories and 50,000 workers in support of the German war effort.

Had the technology of the time included GPS positioning and laser guided missiles there would not have been widespread bombing across the broader city area "just to be sure".

The issue here today is an incredibly high civilian to justified target ratio despite having centimeter precison targeting and high resolution overview of the region of interest.

Deeper issues go back into the history of strategies of minority groups with decision making powers on both sides that resulted in dragging a majority of civilians into this current situation.

[go to top]