So, no real sense at all then? Or do you think that, as a white, English speaking American, I’m England’s “own people” and they have some special duty to me on that basis?
I think that if tomorrow the 50 states became 50 separate countries, and Momtana decided to invade and settle Idaho, that it would be incumbent on Washington, Oregon, and Nevada to take in displaced Idahoans instead of sealing their borders and leaving them there to rot for three generations while propagandizing about how one day they’d drive the Montanians into Canada.
I think people have a duty to help other people, regardless of their race, religion, or language. In your hypothetical, Canada does not have a lesser duty of care for refugees than Washington or Oregon. The idea that one state bears more responsibility to help than another, because the people needing help are “their kind,” seems fundamentally racist.
Ditto.
I like reading al Jazeera. Yes, they hate Israel. But their general reporting is solid, and they give me a very different perspective than the American media i mostly see. I will continue to read them.
Yeah, Netanyahu has been GOOD for Israel’s enemies. Why would they want to assassinate him?
Also possible for a very, very disgruntled Israeli to commit immoral acts to remove Netanyahu - he is extremely unpopular with some of his fellow citizens.
Ridiculous. Am I racist if I choose to help homeless people in my town instead of homeless people on the other side of the world? It’s not realistic to help everybody and I see nothing wrong with expecting those with the closest ties to people in need to take on the lion’s share of assistance to them.
What seems more questionable here is your apparent assumption that the Montanans bear no responsibility for helping the Idahoans whom they dispossessed and displaced when they invaded the place where the Idahoans were living.
You talk as though the invasion and settlement of Idaho by Montana is just some kind of natural phenomenon that instantly makes it “incumbent on” Idaho’s other neighbors to look after the refugees, while letting Montana (and, presumably, Montana’s allies) totally off the hook.
Let me go on the record as saying that I personally oppose the invasion, settlement, and ethnic cleansing of Idaho by Montana, but in the event that it happens, I wouldn’t expect the Montanans to be the ones doing the heavy lifting to assist the Idahoan refugees.
If anything, Israel is doing more to safeguard Gazan lives than I would expect of them. If Israel’s true goal was to kill off or forcibly remove the Gazans this war would have been over months ago.
It sort of is. There are very few square inches of land on this earth that weren’t acquired by conquest at some point. America was established by people of English descent taking the land from the Natives. And the English acquired England by taking it from the Saxons, who took it from the Celts, who took it from the Druids. Israel took land that was inhabited by Arabs, but they only got it by taking it from the Romans, who took it from the Greeks, who took it from the ancient Jews, who took it from the Canaanites. Conquest and resettlement has happened throughout human history and isn’t going to stop happening because the Nazis industrialized it.
Sure, nothing wrong with helping locally. But that’s not what you were advocating before, because last I checked, the nation physically closest to the Palestinians would be Israel. What you said is that people should help people who share the same race/religion/ethnicity, and that people who don’t share those qualities shouldn’t be expected to help. Which seems largely the same as being willing to help the homeless in your home town, but only the white homeless people.
The lowness of your expectations isn’t very complimentary to Israel, but is apparently justified by the outcomes so far.
I would modify that to “if Israel’s only and undisputed goal was to kill off or forcibly remove all the Gazans as expeditiously as possible, this war would have been over months ago.” Yes, that statement I’d agree with.
But I’m not convinced that the conduct of the war so far is incompatible with at least some Israeli factions having some degree of conscious intention to kill off or forcibly remove at least some large subset of the Gazan population. That’s certainly looking more achievable than some of Israel’s explicitly articulated goals, such as “eliminating Hamas”.
I’ve said before that Netenyahu is a Palpatine who’s cynically exploiting the war to stay in power, and he’s certainly enabled Israeli fascists who think everything between the Mediterranean and Damascus is their God-given right. Fortunately, not all Israelis share those views and Netenyahu can’t postpone the next election forever.
The homeless in my town are Americans regardless of their race or color or origin.
But the Palestinians are not Jordanians, Egyptians or Lebanese.
You can’t have it both ways. If you’re demanding that people help those closest to them based on shared citizenship, then the Arab countries are not uniquely or specially obligated to help Palestinians who are not their own citizens.
If, on the other hand, you’re demanding that people help those closest to them based on racial, cultural or linguistic kinship, then yeah, that seems potentially kind of ethnocratic, to put it as nicely as possible.
Hamas is a terrorist organization that opposes the existence of Israel. They are supported by Iran in a religious proxy war supporting the same dogma. Iran’s idea of a war is to use children as mine sweepers.
The Palestinians voted for Hamas which means they support Hamas’s position against Israel. There has been an ongoing conflict over the years that culminated with a mass killing and capture of hostages.
This war is what they voted for. And even now in the midst of ceasefire negotiations Hamas has attacked one of the entry points for supplies. It takes both sides to agree to a ceasefire and there is no indication that Hamas has any real interest in it.
The war will continue until Hamas is defeated.
Incorrect.
Palestinians in Gaza voted for Hamas in 2006 and they were not at all unanimous. The Palestinians in the West Bank or in Jordan or in various other nations across the world did not get a vote. Nor has anyone in Gaza since 2006 gotten a vote because Hamas has refused to allow and election - not that that would matter much at this point as they have simply executed all their political rivals in the meantime. That means roughly half the Palestinians in Gaza have never had an opportunity to vote on anything, but they ARE very clear that if they don’t give at least lip service to Hamas they could be thrown off a building or shot in the head.
But sure - you’re right, all Palestinians everywhere are exactly alike. 
I don’t see any indication the Israeli government has any real interest in it, either.
While I in no way excuse or justify Hamas attacks on civilians, I think it’s a double standard to denounce Hamas for opposing the existence of Israel while glossing over the fact that Israel opposes—and actively prevents—the existence of Palestine.
If it’s wrong for either party to oppose the other’s self-determination and sovereignty, it’s wrong for both of them.
100 years and some change ago all those groups would have been described as Ottoman. They are the same people just as much as Idahoans and Washingtonians would be the same people if the US ceased to exist, or just as Newfoundlanders did not cease to be Canadian from 1907 to 1949.
So would the Jews living in the Ottoman Empire, including those in what is now Israel. If shared Ottoman history is to be the basis of implying a duty of care to refugees, then ISTM Israel has that duty toward dispossessed Palestinians at least as much as neighboring Arab states do (even without taking the circumstances of their dispossession into account).
The war is in Gaza and no election is 100%.
I never said that. Clearly the war is directed at Gaza and Hamas.
Hamas’s previous demands were for total cessation and withdrawal. And again, they fired on a port of entry for relief supplies.
Shared history is one factor. So are ethnicity, language, religion, and culture, and the Egyptians, Lebanese, and Syrians have much more in common with the Gazans in those aspects than Israeli Jews (most of whom are not the descendents of Ottoman subjects) do. It therefore seems entirely reasonable to me that the Arab states should be shouldering the responsibility of their fellow peoples.
In a sane world, the Arab states would be offering citizenship, a home, and a job to any Palestinian who chooses to emigrate. It’d probably strengthen their countries in the long run. Unfortunately, for the most part the leaders of those countries are short-sighted and corrupt authoritarians who would rather spend their nations’ money on oppressing the people than helping them.