Hacker News Reader

So criticism is hate? I'm Jewish does that mean I am hateful when I am critical of the actions of the Israeli government? Are you claiming none of the critism is legitimate and its all hate? Is criticism of Israel antisemetic? Because last I checked Israel is not a religion.

Just like in the US people will call you anti-American if you disagree with the policies of the government.

My other reply got flagged, please read it. But to add:

This specific article is not "criticism". The headline claims Israeli actions caused famine in Gaza. The title, and the article, completely ignores other actors like the government of Gaza (aka Hamas).

"How Israeli actions caused famine in Gaza, visualized" -> is basically a lie. The truth is that Israeli actions contributed to the food situation in the Gaza strip. The cause is obviously the war. The cause of the war is obviously Hamas. The entire article rests solely on a report by a UN organization. The UN is not unbiased. It is openly anti-Israel.

The reporting is completely one sided. It is not news. It is agenda. CNN's agenda is anti-Israel. There is no mention of the UN leaving food on the border to rot and not deliver it. There is little to no mention of the UN's refusal to cooperate with Israeli initiatives to distribute food (and generally refuse to cooperate with Israel on anything).

At best the authors don't understand the idea that correlation doesn't equal causation. I would say the authors and CNN's goal is simply to attack Israel for political reasons.

I think Israel's decision to block aid around the end of February was stupid and a mistake. It is far from clear that decision is a war crime. Israel claims there was plenty of food in Gaza that was delivered during the ceasefire and ofcourse also claims that Hamas has plenty of food in its tunnels. Egypt also at times contributed to the condition in the Gaza strip by blocking aid and preventing refugees from leaving. The actual responsibility for the well being of Palestinian citizens in Palestinian controlled areas (which Gaza city still is) is on their government. That government has a choice to stop the war, it has a choice to distribute the food it controls to its citizens. Ignoring that in any article basically tells us what we need to know. Israel does have responsibilities under international law but is being held to impossible standards that are not applied to any other country. The media intentionally creates an artificial separation between "Hamas" and "Palestinians" where in fact we are talking about combatants and non-combatants of the same non-state or state-like actor (Gaza). Israel is responsible, to the same degree any other country would be, to take steps to allow non-combatants to leave battle areas and to not target them. Israel has asked all non-combatant population to evict the Northern Gaza strip a long time ago. The food situation is worse in that area. So Israel arguably has done what international law requires it to do with respect to non-combatants. Is Israel perfect? no. Is it worse than most western countries? I don't think so, and there's plenty of comparisons we can make. Can we criticize Israel? Definitely!

In terms of contribution to antisemitism, there is a large number of people who will read the title as "How Jew actions caused famine in Gaza". That is literally the conversation on some social media. Just because you haven't seen that doesn't change it. This means there should be more sensitivity and better accuracy and context.

Being Jewish is also not a religion by the way. It's an ethnicity as well. I'm sure you know this but just to remind others. The Jewish people are also known as Israelites and the word Israel is sometimes used as a synonym for Jewish.

> The cause of the war is obviously Hamas

This is the biggest lie of all.

Israel started this war long before October 9, and Israel will never end it.

A Zionist Israel can not allow the Palestinian people to exist. Every member of every government that Israel ever had 100% believed this.

This war is part of Israel's DNA, and the total security Israel demands can never be achieved, so the war can never end.

Until significant portions of the political right in Israel are outlawed, and until the entire Jewish population of Israel undergoes deradicalization, we will keep fighting.

> what would you do if you're Israel?

Let in the food. Flood Gaza with food, actually, so it stops being a recruitment tool for militants.

in this case they divert more desirable goods that they sell and make aid agencies pay protection money for "securing shipments".

as example, there was a story on Israeli news a couple of months ago, about some NGO that setup a new aid distribution network. One day they got some of their people killed in Gaza and received a phone call demanding payment "or else"

> there was a story on Israeli news

Was it credible? Who made the phone call?

story credible. channel 12 news is very solid organization and their investigations resulted in a bunch of criminal cases.

essentially ngo established this summer (july/august) new aid distribution network, I think it was at south with it's own drivers, distribution points, etc. during the time when supposedly was impossible to bring aid in gaza, but in reality it was going in.

"local interests" in gaza didn't like it, as NGO wasn't paying protection fees so they killed some of people who helped ngo in gaza and made threatening calls to person who runs NGO demanding payments or that this person will be harmed and distribution will be stopped.

not sure how it all ended. my guess it was "public" ask from military or security services to get involved in some way

If it's the events that I'm thinking of, one of the drivers killed was a Bedouin from the Tarabin family. They literally gathered hundreds of family members to record a cellphone message to the perpetrators, who were mentioned by name. In the video, dozens of illegal weapons - mostly M-16 variants - were paraded and fired in the air. Tarabin is a well-known dangerous and hostile family, the Israeli police don't interfere with them (that's why they have all the illegal weapons).

I know of other Bedouins families that have rewards for the heads of other Hamas members.

not sure. channel 12 evening news month ago or so. they talked with some women who organized ngo.

If that solved the problem I would endorse it. I don't see how it does or how you do it.

How do you get food to all of Gaza while there is raging fighting? The biggest problem is in Gaza city where there is intense fighting. The southern areas have a lot more food. How do we flood Gaza city with food? Ceasefire? We had one. Then what?

Let's plan this in more detail. Who is going to distribute the food in Gaza? Who in Gaza has weapons and control? How is the hostage problem resolved? How do we get Hamas to not rule over Gaza any more?

> How do you get food to all of Gaza while there is raging fighting?

Berlin airdrop and pile it up at the borders from trucks for starters.

> southern areas have a lot more food

But not enough. Start there. Also, if you make food plentiful enough in the south, it will find its way north. The point, again, isn't just to starve the famine. It's also to reduce the value of food as a recruiting tool.

> How is the hostage problem resolved? How do we get Hamas to not rule over Gaza any more?

Not relevant to not starving people!

Israel has piled it up on the border many times during the conflict.

https://www.nbcnews.com/world/middle-east/gaza-food-starvati...

https://www.fdd.org/analysis/2025/07/24/un-refuses-to-cooper...

It's true that it's objectively hard to get the food from the border into e.g. Gaza city while a war is raging on. Israel has asked all civilians to evict Gaza city (basically for the entire duration of the war). Many people returned to Gaza city during the last ceasefire despite no green light from Israel. There is more food in the south and it's easier to get food into there.

There is an effort to get even more food into the south. For example World Central Kitchen is scaling up their operations there right now (with Israel's support). The GHF effort was also mostly focused on the south.

Air drops can't move in enough food. They're also dangerous.

> There is more food in the south and it's easier to get food into there

Yet there are still credible claims of famine in the south.

> Air drops can't move in enough food

This is nonsense. West Berlin had a civilian population of about 2.5mm [1]. Gaza is smaller. Our planes are better. We've solved this problem, but harder, before.

> They're also dangerous

What's the threat model? Initially, you'd literally air drop--no landings. Gaza isn't fielding air-defence systems.

Once you're reduced the desperation, you'd secure a couple airfields and make unsupervised drops. (This is cheaper.) You wouldn't even bother handling distribution. Again, the point is the flood the zone with so much food that it starts to become sort of worthless.

[1] https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/bomb-bl...

Feeding people is a good of its own. "We have to blockade food because distribution is logistically challenging" is ridiculous.

always with the emotional manipulation, and when that doesn’t work go Samson on people

your entire narrative screams “I’m the victim here, please validate my aggressions, abuses and violence”.

the state of Israel has not been respectful since day one of it’s inception (violating the defined borders) neither truly wants a two state solution.

this outcome is the product of what escalated from that.

at least you understand the correlation between a figure like Trump and the state of Israel, that’s exactly on point.

it’s ok when one side violates borders and even settles on foreign land but when reactionary action (you’ve helped shape) takes place, you’re now the victim…

The state of Israel offered Palestinians a two state solutions multiple times starting at its inception (and it also offered them a one state solution at its inception with them being equal citizens in a free democratic country). Maybe it wasn't the best the Palestinians were looking for but it wasn't unreasonable and it was very close to what everyone (other than the Palestinians) says when they say "two state solution". Where we are today is the result of them rejecting it and instead opting for the "one day we'll send all the Jews back to Europe" solution (despite more than half Israeli Jews being from the middle east and generally no place for Jews to go). This is still their plan today, they say it out loud, you just need to listen.

EDIT: I'd also challenge you to tell me why these two states weren't created when Egypt ruled over Gaza and Jordan over the West Bank and Jerusalem up till 1967 (the six day war) when Israel took those areas. Where were all those supporters of the two state solution then? Why didn't they recognize the state of Palestine then over those territories that Israel didn't control?

Before 1948 the Palestinians were peasants living under foreign rule. But at least they were alive. When Zionist interests moved in, backed by English and American militancy to enforce land purchase contracts, the Palestinians were not a centrally organized collective. You cannot “offer” to people who are not organized, and that’s what Israel has exploited. Jews went on a 2,000 year holiday in Europe, then came back and expected they could relive the glory days of a kingdom from over 2,000 years ago. The issue has been the presumption that you can “offer” to people who have occupied the land consistently for thousands of years. Their lack of central government as peasants does not negate their humanity. Except in the Israeli government’s expansionist eyes.

I would never be in Israel's position because I don't believe in genocide or land theft, thus would not have created this fake state in the first place.

> So what would you do if you're Israel? Suck it up? Leave the hostages to rot in Gaza?

What they're doing doesn't seem to be working, so maybe something else.

This is just armchair military philosophizing, but after the October attack, go ahead and do some big disproportionate response stuff for 30-90 days, then a ceasefire and prisoner exchange (this happened). But if the ceasefire doesn't work out, you can't go back to disproportionate response on the October attack; that doesn't look reasonable. Cat and mouse strikes on leadership until the hostages are released (edit: but not while leaders are gathered for peace negotiations!). You can still do proportionate response for any tit-for-tat kind of attacks in the occupied zone.

A war of occupation is a PR thing. You need to convince outside observers you're occupation is reasonable --- two years of disproportionate response doesn't do that. You also want to convince the occupied people not to support armed resistance; disproportionate response can work for that, but IMHO not over a long period of time; in the short term, it can get people to demand a stop to fighting, but after two years, again IMHO it just breeds more desire to fight.

You also need some sort of plan for after the hostilities end. How do you set the conditions so this is less likely to happen in the future. Really, the best way to have peaceful coexistence between Israel and Palestine as two states is for Israel and Palestine to both be prosperous; Israel needs to help make that happen, because it's in Israel's interests --- even if maybe it doesn't feel like it; a prosperous Palestine will be incentivized to be peaceful because prosperity is tenuous; a destitute Palestine has no need to be peaceful, because it has nothing to lose.

There's a lot of talk about ending Hamas; maybe that would do it, but if Hamas disbands today, you need something to replace the government services they provide. What's the plan for that? What would the interim system look like between now and that; can you enforce the interim system now as a way to push Hamas out?

Alternately, big problems require big solutions. Forcibly return Gaza to Egyptian control, as it was before the Six Day War, and encourage Egypt to deal with Hamas through diplomacy and response to future attacks from within Gaza as if they were from Egypt.

Perhaps return the West Bank to Jordan ... maybe do the return of the West Bank first as a show of 'if y'all give us the hostages, we'll end the occupation' Returning the West Bank is hard, because you've got to figure out what to do with the settlers, which is probably a lot of tricky negotiations over which settlements can be kept with a land swap and which have to be abandoned, so it probably can't be done super fast.

> Alternately, big problems require big solutions. Forcibly return Gaza to Egyptian control, as it was before the Six Day War, and encourage Egypt to deal with Hamas through diplomacy and response to future attacks from within Gaza as if they were from Egypt.

This sounds kind of like the proposed peace plan, no? They’re supposedly going to put an Arab force in charge of Gaza.

I don't know what the proposed peace plan is? I saw a lot of articles declaring there was one, but I couldn't find it published anywhere?

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c70155nked7o

Egypt doesn't want Gaza and Jordan doesn't want the West Bank. That's a total non starter.

So after 90 days we have the bulk of hostages still in Gaza. Hamas in total control of all of Gaza. Hamas doesn't want to exchange all the hostages, we've been there after the first ceasefire (24 November 2023 to 30 November 2023).

Look at Hamas' calculus. Surviving in any shape and form while holding hostages is a clear win. Increasing Israel's isolation is a win. Anything else is mostly a don't care. They have no intention of giving up control in Gaza or in ceasing future hostilities against Israel. They would love nothing more than to go back to the tit for tat where they make and fire rockets and mortars at Israel all day and Israel has some limited retaliation.

Ask Sri Lanka and the Tamil Tigers about whether force works or not. Or the Turkish and the Kurds. Or anyone who thought they could go against China. That's not to say that should be the default or the preferred solution, but more force works in situations where you have the power and the other side won't yield.

There is a somewhat stupid/joke saying in Hebrew. What doesn't work with force will work with more force. That's sort of where Israel is right now. Many Israelis don't think this can solve the problem but the government does. I think pretty much everyone would prefer a better/easier way out of this that includes security guarantees and the release of the hostages. There just doesn't seem to be one. It's a problem when fighting an enemy where their loss is their win. There's no leverage. Though in theory Hezbollah was also like that, until it surrendered. The difference in Lebanon/Hezbollah is no hostages and less mix of combatants and civilians.

"What we have seen throughout this is not criticism. It is hate. It is often directed at Jews, not just at the Israeli government. Not 100% but a large percentage."

This is exactly the blackpill. I live in a Muslim-majority country. Jews and Muslims have been allies since the start of Islamic history. Yes, there was some hate for Jews 20 years ago, but it has been gradually displaced into Zionist hate.

The recent analogy is Imperial Japan. The Japanese killed, raped, starved our people. But it was specifically the Imperial Japanese, not the citizens. Firebombing citizens didn't make anything better and it only slowed the process of post-war healing. We have great relationships with Germans and Japanese today despite their past. Moving on is an option.

Some of it is because we see the same pattern. Nationalist politics will always say, "Everyone hates you. We are the only ones who will protect you." For the former British territories, it was the playbook.

I do believe the only way to break from this cycle is to break this hold. Internally: don't keep genocidal leaders in power. Externally: avoid all this racist shit that gives fascists their power base.

well put.

but that takes a level of humanism, and effort, abusive leaders don’t have and unfortunately people are too brainwashed to see (and lack the knowledge to understand?).

I'm not sure where you get "Jews and Muslims have been allies since the start of Islamic history" and then you pivot to hate for Jews 20 years ago.

Antisemitism is alive and kicking. Hate to Jews has not been "displaced into Zionist hate". It's just s/Jews/Zionists/ the hate is the same hate. The blood libels are the same blood libels. The stereotypes the same stereotypes.

If you are talking about how Jews have been treated in Muslim countries it ranged between second rate citizens (dhimmi) to outright massacre. Yes, there have been a handful of examples, in a handful of countries, where Jews managed to thrive despite the discrimination but it was the exception that proved the rule.

I would love to see Israel's government gone and the Palestinian government of Hamas gone. I'm not seeing any analogy to Japan.

That's not true; I have seen many members in the Satmar community here in NYC that join pro palestinian protests, and are met with absolute love. They're spat on by the Israeli side at said protests. I think people here at least separate the two very well and it's not a s/Jews/Zionists/g at all.

This is the equivalent of "some of my best friends are Jews".

So the Satmar anti-Zionist Jews are ok? But the other Jews? Also met with love? Do you love the Jews that have opinions that differ than yours on this conflict? Why do Palestinian protests where I live (Canada) target Synagogues, Jewish owned businesses, Jewish neighborhoods?

Do Zionists control the US? The Media? Not Jews... nono. "Zionists".

I'm not necessarily talking about you specifically. But it is a fact that antisemites use this technique and this is being normalized. Why does it matter than you have a token Jewish person in your protest at all? Who cares if someone in your protest is a Satmar Jew or an Iranian Bhaii?

As a jew, I have never felt more targeted by anti-semitism than I have following israel's genocide of Palestinians. israel is making jews like me look bad by association, even though that association is false.

The worst part is, most of that antisemitism comes from zionists. Zealots making posts not unlike yours, frequently accuse me and my kind of being 'self-hating jews' for being insufficiently zionist. It really sucks.

As a side note, please stop repeatedly, unsuccessfully trying to conflate jews with zionists. We are not the same thing, and it is hurtful to hear you insult jews like that. It is somewhat akin to conflating all South Africans with apartheid supporters, or all Germans with nazis, except you are stereotyping based on religion, rather than national origin.

That conflation was made by antisemites first, many decades ago. That is simply historical fact, whether people know it or not. In that time and place antizionism was a barely concealed excuse for straight antisemitism; it didn't actually matter what their targets believed.

And yet, you are the one making the antisemitic conflation here and now. The fact that you're repeating the words of people you believe to be antisemetic should be a clue that the words you're repeating are antisemetic. Just because an antisemite says something doesn't mean you should agree and reshare their post.

So maybe don't? Next time you see an antisemite saying that, rather than parroting their talking points to others, you can tell them the same thing: zionists and jews aren't the same thing, and many jews are members of the global consensus in opposing the ongoing israeli genocide of Palestinians. Or don't, maybe it won't make a difference, and it's your choice.

In the meantime, please stop repeating hurtful antisemetic tropes by conflating us jews with zionists. We are not the same. Criticism of zionism and the israeli genocide of Palestinians is totally legitimate. Propagating antisemetic language is antisemetic. That means smarmy posts I've seen around saying things to the effect of, 'zionists... you mean jews??? [*wink wink*]'

Then why is it that self-proclaimed "anti-zionists" use the exact same talking point as those antisemites back then? It is difficult to ever unsee that what you call "the global consensus" was invented decades ago in the halls of the Kremlin.

I simply informed you of the historical precedent; why do you immediately include me in those you say are conflating the two?

If criticism of Israel sounded more like the criticism of America's War on Terror instead of a Kremlin anti-West propaganda manual, then maybe it would be worth thinking about.

Why are you still defending your antisemetic language? Repeating that you think your antisemetic language is ok if other antisemites said it first?

Just don't say it. I'm not even asking you for an apology for your hurtful, antisemetic words. Just recognize that your spreading of antisemitic tropes is bad, and please stop. Are you seriously so dead-set on repeating antisemetic tropes that you refuse to do even that?

I start talking about historical Kremlin propaganda campaigns, and you accuse me of antisemitic language. Interesting. Did you have anything to say on the actual points I raised?

I explicitly ignored the weird distraction about the kremlin or whatever, because the kremlin didn't force you to repeat antisemitic tropes. You chose to repeat antisemitic tropes, and still haven't even been able to acknowledge that your repetition of antisemitic tropes was bad.

Remember, the topic isn't bibi's fellow war criminals, it is antisemitism, with you, yes YOU, contributing to it. This is what I meant when I said that most antisemitism I've seen and felt as a jew lately, is coming from zionists.

So, back on topic: Do you have anything to say on the actual points I raised even earlier?:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45461783

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45463604

For a century, Israel has been telling the world that they represented Jews, and Nakba was what the Jews wanted and it was their right. So for a century, the world hated Jews because of this narrative. And only recently people are learning the truth.

There's a lot to unpack in the last 1400 years, but basically everyone cherry picks what they want to see.

Medina, the first actual Islamic state, was established on an alliance between the Muslims and Jewish tribes. When the Muslims took Jerusalem, they welcomed the Jewish back. There's a few of these right up until Ottoman times. Dhimmi literally meant "protected person" - they can't be attacked or looted by Muslims and were not conscripted. Alliances aren't necessarily friendships, and a lot of these were built on mutual protection vs a common enemy rather than brotherhood.

Even in recent times, there's common grounds, especially in terms of religion. It's a kind of cousinhood. Notably all kosher food is halal, though not vice versa. In countries with both, it's popular to have a Jewish/Muslim district and Muslims often join Jewish student accommodations.

Of course there's plenty of bad history, but I find that the people who are pro-genocide will bring up massacres by Muslims. The people who advocate for treating Israeli Arabs as second-rate citizens will bring up dhimmis.

In the end, we pick the history we want to repeat.

  > Jews and Muslims have been allies since the start of Islamic history.

Only when the Jews were Dhimis - in fact as I understand it the term literally means to protect. But we are not interested in being Dhimis any longer - no more taxes to Muslims, and we want to hold prestigious jobs and own land and participate in government.