I appreciate the clarification. I posted the same comment in another thread and got some good feedback there too. It was this thread.
I think “terrorist” is a loaded word and I wanted to understand the context because I’m very familiar with the US’s history of using the word “terrorist” as a cudgel.
And our history of inserting ourselves, refusing to work with the local democratically elected government, setting up our own candidate in the race and… uh sometimes assassinating the opposition if it looks like the plant isn’t going to win. (see Jacobo Arbenz, Mohammad Mosaddeq, Salvador Allende, if you want more listen to “same thing” by Flobots but make sure to verify things after)
But my goal isn’t to say Hamas good Israel bad (although I very much laid it all on Netanyahu). My goal was to see if I could absolve Hamas of the “terrorist” label from the US. Without that label it’s a lot easier to see the true story of Palestine.
But in the interest of staying focused on how this is a problem with Netanyahu and not the Israeli people I wanna say there were several peace talks brought to my attention (several or most involving Bibi) in the thread that I still need to dig into. And I do intend to keep reading so I can speak more accurately on the topic.
My goal was to see if I could absolve Hamas of the “terrorist” label from the US
Nope, you can’t. On the other side of things you can’t absolve Kahanites of the same label, Hamas and Kahanites both employ terrorism as a tactic, both are fascist, and both are genocidal. OTOH I wouldn’t go so far and extend those label to all of religious Zionism, in the same sense that there’s a rather large difference between Mormons and the Ku Klux Klan.
As to Netanyahu: I rather see him as what we call in Germany a stirrup holder: He’s right-wing, no doubt, but primarily he’s interested in power because it allows him to be corrupt without facing prison, if another approach would fulfil his goals he’d drop Otzma Yehudit without second thought. He’s basically a more coherent, more strategic, less impulse-driven, Trump, but as blind to the dangers of fascism and the ways they achieve power as too fucking many other people.
Maybe I’m explaining myself poorly, maybe you disagree. To clarify to anyone still reading I am not trying to absolve anyone of murder. Hamas did commit terrorism as defined in the dictionary.
But should the US be the entity in charge of making that distinction? Has the US ever used that designation inappropriately?
As an American I think Americans are particularly brainwashed about the term after the War on Terror and tying the word so heavily to racism. Terrorists are monsters but that rhetoric allowed us to dehumanize anyone accused of being a terrorist to horrific levels.
It is my belief that many of us realize we were manipulated by the rhetoric of War on Terror but find it a lot harder to look back before the War on Terror with the same clarity.
I appreciate the clarification.
I posted the same comment in another thread and got some good feedback there too.It was this thread.I think “terrorist” is a loaded word and I wanted to understand the context because I’m very familiar with the US’s history of using the word “terrorist” as a cudgel.
And our history of inserting ourselves, refusing to work with the local democratically elected government, setting up our own candidate in the race and… uh sometimes assassinating the opposition if it looks like the plant isn’t going to win. (see Jacobo Arbenz, Mohammad Mosaddeq, Salvador Allende, if you want more listen to “same thing” by Flobots but make sure to verify things after)
But my goal isn’t to say Hamas good Israel bad (although I very much laid it all on Netanyahu). My goal was to see if I could absolve Hamas of the “terrorist” label from the US. Without that label it’s a lot easier to see the true story of Palestine.
But in the interest of staying focused on how this is a problem with Netanyahu and not the Israeli people I wanna say there were several peace talks brought to my attention (several or most involving Bibi) in the thread that I still need to dig into. And I do intend to keep reading so I can speak more accurately on the topic.
Nope, you can’t. On the other side of things you can’t absolve Kahanites of the same label, Hamas and Kahanites both employ terrorism as a tactic, both are fascist, and both are genocidal. OTOH I wouldn’t go so far and extend those label to all of religious Zionism, in the same sense that there’s a rather large difference between Mormons and the Ku Klux Klan.
As to Netanyahu: I rather see him as what we call in Germany a stirrup holder: He’s right-wing, no doubt, but primarily he’s interested in power because it allows him to be corrupt without facing prison, if another approach would fulfil his goals he’d drop Otzma Yehudit without second thought. He’s basically a more coherent, more strategic, less impulse-driven, Trump, but as blind to the dangers of fascism and the ways they achieve power as too fucking many other people.
Maybe I’m explaining myself poorly, maybe you disagree. To clarify to anyone still reading I am not trying to absolve anyone of murder. Hamas did commit terrorism as defined in the dictionary.
But should the US be the entity in charge of making that distinction? Has the US ever used that designation inappropriately?
As an American I think Americans are particularly brainwashed about the term after the War on Terror and tying the word so heavily to racism. Terrorists are monsters but that rhetoric allowed us to dehumanize anyone accused of being a terrorist to horrific levels.
It is my belief that many of us realize we were manipulated by the rhetoric of War on Terror but find it a lot harder to look back before the War on Terror with the same clarity.