Mr Protas, I did not misperceive anything. I wondered why you couldn't see what seemed obvious to me, and I simply wondered if you were a hard right winger. You're not. Neither am I.
I, like you, held my nose the last three elections.
I have mostly agreed with you, although you seem to want to argue with me. The only thing I have suggested…
Mr Protas, I did not misperceive anything. I wondered why you couldn't see what seemed obvious to me, and I simply wondered if you were a hard right winger. You're not. Neither am I.
I, like you, held my nose the last three elections.
I have mostly agreed with you, although you seem to want to argue with me. The only thing I have suggested to you, since you describe yourself as more knowledgeable than most about this topic, is that moving the US Embassy had a destabilizing effect that enabled Netanyahu to accelerate the already ongoing assaults on Palestinians, and which in turn eventually resulted in Oct 7 as a reaction. You are welcome to say you gave my suggestion some thought, and decided you don't agree. Do you have some other way to understand why the Embassy was moved, apart from the provocative and Israeli-backing effect? It had been as it was for a long time. Why change it?
I did not pick any fight. I'm trying to have a conversation with you. You choose to read Drop Site News, but your version of the "truth" is what's mindlessly prevalent on Fox News. If you think Trump is a "lowlife POS," why aren't you more skeptical about what he does and why he does it?
OK, I'm done. You choose to see"moving the US Embassy" as the proximate cause of Oct 7. I believe that view to be narrow and a serious misreading of the history of Palestine. Peace be upon you!
Mr Protas, you are almost strategically missing my point. Israel has been assaulting the West Bank and the Gaza Strip more or less from the beginning. There are illegal settlements, settlers attacking Palestinians, arrests for nothing. No Israeli government has confronted any of this, and no American government has failed to continue to support Israel. But a dramatic and uncharacteristic move was made a few years ago, involving the US Embassy. In my opinion, that dramatic and uncharacteristic move sent a message to the Israelis, that we were even more supportive than ever before of their ongoing efforts to conquer Palestinian territory. We "gave" them Jerusalem in a symbolic way. (After WWII, Palestine was divided into the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, which were set aside for the Palestinians, and Israel was created for the Jews. Jerusalem was held out as an international city that wasn't owned by anyone.) Statistics show increased hostile activity by the Israelis to the Palestinians in recent years, and I would argue that Oct 7 was not simply a hostile impulse by the Palestinians' protectors: Hamas. You are welcome to disagree with me. Then, you can tell me what you think stimulated October 7.
I should also tell you that I take a very dim view of people, especially if I have any reason to think they're chronological adults, who make a statement, then say they're done with the conversation. The part of what you typed the started with "you choose to see..." needed to be omitted, or expanded. If it was omitted, then that was the end of the conversation. And thanks for wishing me peace. If it was expanded, then we weren't done with the conversation.
Mr Protas, I did not misperceive anything. I wondered why you couldn't see what seemed obvious to me, and I simply wondered if you were a hard right winger. You're not. Neither am I.
I, like you, held my nose the last three elections.
I have mostly agreed with you, although you seem to want to argue with me. The only thing I have suggested to you, since you describe yourself as more knowledgeable than most about this topic, is that moving the US Embassy had a destabilizing effect that enabled Netanyahu to accelerate the already ongoing assaults on Palestinians, and which in turn eventually resulted in Oct 7 as a reaction. You are welcome to say you gave my suggestion some thought, and decided you don't agree. Do you have some other way to understand why the Embassy was moved, apart from the provocative and Israeli-backing effect? It had been as it was for a long time. Why change it?
I did not pick any fight. I'm trying to have a conversation with you. You choose to read Drop Site News, but your version of the "truth" is what's mindlessly prevalent on Fox News. If you think Trump is a "lowlife POS," why aren't you more skeptical about what he does and why he does it?
OK, I'm done. You choose to see"moving the US Embassy" as the proximate cause of Oct 7. I believe that view to be narrow and a serious misreading of the history of Palestine. Peace be upon you!
Mr Protas, you are almost strategically missing my point. Israel has been assaulting the West Bank and the Gaza Strip more or less from the beginning. There are illegal settlements, settlers attacking Palestinians, arrests for nothing. No Israeli government has confronted any of this, and no American government has failed to continue to support Israel. But a dramatic and uncharacteristic move was made a few years ago, involving the US Embassy. In my opinion, that dramatic and uncharacteristic move sent a message to the Israelis, that we were even more supportive than ever before of their ongoing efforts to conquer Palestinian territory. We "gave" them Jerusalem in a symbolic way. (After WWII, Palestine was divided into the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, which were set aside for the Palestinians, and Israel was created for the Jews. Jerusalem was held out as an international city that wasn't owned by anyone.) Statistics show increased hostile activity by the Israelis to the Palestinians in recent years, and I would argue that Oct 7 was not simply a hostile impulse by the Palestinians' protectors: Hamas. You are welcome to disagree with me. Then, you can tell me what you think stimulated October 7.
I should also tell you that I take a very dim view of people, especially if I have any reason to think they're chronological adults, who make a statement, then say they're done with the conversation. The part of what you typed the started with "you choose to see..." needed to be omitted, or expanded. If it was omitted, then that was the end of the conversation. And thanks for wishing me peace. If it was expanded, then we weren't done with the conversation.