Nivsch

The thing is that even when people heavily objectify the other side it also comes from vulnerability, the need to not stay 'behind', to accumulate experience and yes, to feel loved, seen and valued. It takes time until a person can relax enough to start seeing the other person as a whole and balance those two poles. Sometimes people even alternate between those poles in different stages of their lives. Seeing the other person from the physical filter is healthy and natural, when the question is about degree and not the trait itself.

You are welcome So what do you think is going to happen in the next 24hr? 😶‍🌫️

I post daily mainstream Israeli voices from journalists to politicians criticising their own side as well. You are welcome to check them out.

Part of acceptance is making peace with yourself as a biological being who is wired in a certain direction including always needing some social validation.

Ok, interesting. If you live there, you know. What issues are the sides in your country most conflicted about?

Every society is distributed along a bell curve. Focusing only on the extremes is whats dishonest, and constantly hiding behind emotionally loaded, contested and trendy labels like "Zionism" is dishonest too.

I added this article because it reflects what I personally feel when talking with people here from the pro government side and how I feel myself sometimes threatened or at least triggered by some of them. Even when I try to talk to the point, it isn't always easy. Tribalism is more pronounced here than in European countries I think.

Israeli voices 📺 April 20th

If any western country faced daily terror attacks on its border it would respond with force too. That doesn’t make civilian harm acceptable, but singling out Israel as unique in that sense ignores how conflicts like this tend to play out.

Eurofalsh in Tel Aviv, every Sunday. Magical Eurovision lip sync performances with a crazy talented band. I barely miss a night since I started going. From yesterday evening.

This technique is epistemically dishonest. You can take any country and paint its population or military in whatever color you want using this method. That doesn’t lead to truth but to a false sense of moral superiority.

@Schahin AlJazeera is funded by the Qatari government. The Qatari government has ties to hamas. This doesn’t mean everything they say is wrong, but since they are a significant side in the conflict, their framing should be approached with caution, just like IDF. I have my opinion about the difference between the sides but it is irrelevant since they are both sides in this.

Israeli voices 🐦 April 18th

The thing with Aljazeera is that it is a side in this conflict. In the same way you would say (rightfully) you can't rely solely on IDF reports about its actions in Gaza or Syria or the way it frames the conflict, the same applies to Aljazeera. This is what I think.

@Schahin Aren't you from Iran originally or I confused you with someone else? How are you doing in Berlin? How is your life there?

@Husseinisdoingfine Are you from Iran?

Our body is smarter than any medication and will reach tolerance sooner or later leaving the disorder more complicated than it was before the intervention. This is what happens when we try to teach our brain how it needs to behave (rather than connect with it deeper) and think we can get away with this.

Fear of monsters is irrational, but exists for rational reasons. Investigating it is already post-rational.

I edited it. You are right it was a bit blurred. It was to explain why I think improving the langauage can't solve nebulosity.

Cognition is reflected by neurology's complexity, and since it is close to infinite, no language can close this gap.

It is difficult for me to accept meds as the fundamental treatment to any mental condition. I am not speaking on acute phases when the person is overwhelmed, then sure, get help from meds. But overall I think meds have to be used as training wheels and rarely as the ultimate solution. Because how a person suppose to trust himself and be really connected to himself when he think he needs a chemical mediator for life? I fear this will not pass without breaking something inside the person self trust and self esteem, and I admit I have difficulty with this.

" I’m going to tell you something that will upset you. A lot. https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1J7oSR2br8/ " No matter which political camp you belong to. But you have to hear this, internalize it, and understand it. Take a deep breath — this is a long post — but it’s probably the most important thing you’ll read today. I promise it will leave you with something to think about. The greatest illness of Israeli society today is not the Iranian threat, not Likud, not Bibi, not the Military Advocate General, not the left, and not the deep state. These are just painful symptoms of the disease. The biggest enemy of the State of Israel today — and the only one that could dismantle it from within and lead to another October 7 massacre, or to the destruction of a third temple — is: Tribalism. The tribalism that divides us into hostile, polarized, conflicted, fragmented groups that hate one another. A quick scroll through my feed (and yours, I’m sure) reveals countless posts and pieces of content written in a certain style, from which the following message emerges. “We are Camp X, and opposite us stands Camp Y. Camp Y is traitorous / Kaplanist / leftist / Bibist / messianic / racist / fascist. If Camp Y wins, it will be the end of the country. Anyone associated with Camp Y is a traitor / Kaplanist / leftist / Bibist / messianic / racist / fascist — and therefore everything they say, do, think, or predict is invalid. Even if it’s a good idea that advances the country. In fact, merely joining Camp Y — in any way — is betrayal. We, Camp X, are the only camp that can save the country. If you don’t vote for Camp X, the country will fall into the hands of traitors / Kaplanists / leftists / Bibists / messianics / racists / fascists.” This variation repeats itself countless times on every social network where political discussion takes place in Israel. This is the essence of Israeli tribalism. This tribalism is an autoimmune disease that Israeli society has contracted — and the disease is in an advanced stage, so advanced that urgent emergency surgery is needed to remove the cancerous tumor that is rapidly spreading. According to the left-wing mutation of the disease, the State of Israel is held captive by messianic forces, extreme right-wingers, fascists, racists, and anti-democratic actors who seek to turn Israel into a religious, unfree, chauvinistic, authoritarian, racist, and dark state that serves Torah scholars, annexes the West Bank, leads to a bi-national state, and slides into shining international isolation. According to the right-wing mutation of the disease, the State of Israel is threatened by progressive and deep-state forces in the form of the Military Advocate General, the Attorney General, left-wing organizations, the High Court, Brothers in Arms, Kaplanists, and various “left-in-disguise” actors trying to seize power centers. All of these (according to the right-wing mutation) seek to weaken Israel, cause it to lose the war, topple the government at any cost to return the left to power, and turn Israel into a secular, atheist “state of all its citizens” with no Jewish identity or tradition. (I’m intentionally exaggerating the narratives to make the point — but you get what I mean.) Both camps are very right about certain parts (!) of their worldview. Both camps are very wrong about other parts (!) of it. Both camps cling dogmatically to the story they tell themselves, while developing a striking blindness to the story of the other side. Both camps don’t trust each other at all. Zero trust. Every move by one camp is interpreted as a chess maneuver to kill the queen, or position for it in a few moves. Both camps think in a “winner takes all — loser loses all” mindset, which leaves no room for flexibility, compromise, or decision-making. This leads to intellectual paralysis, and to every reform or change being made by force, violence, coercion, and a lot of blood, sweat, and tears. Every small change in this country takes years, and is not made by broad agreement — but by a narrow, aggressive coalition pulling the rope by force. Both camps barely engage with each other’s arguments, ideas, and worldviews — everything is ad hominem (“You joined the other camp? You’re a traitor, end of story”). Both camps show very little empathy or understanding toward one another (or even try to understand each other’s fears, what keeps them up at night). Both camps see the opposing leaders as existential threats to the state (Bennett for the right is like Bibi for the left). Both camps clash with an intensity reminiscent of totalitarian states fighting total wars against each other (like Germany and the USSR in World War II). These two camps are leading Israel toward the abyss, in a destructive spiral where two clumsy people kick and roll each other down the stairs until they hit the bottom. Both camps operate well-oiled machines of poison against each other — two-sided, mutual — tearing Israeli society apart like a sword that wounds whoever tries to stab the other with it. Tribalism is the number one enemy of Israeli society today. Israelis tend to forget too quickly: We live in a violent, deadly environment, surrounded by complex challenges (some strategic, some existential) that no other country in the world faces. None — check me. Tribalism quickly devolves into polarization, division, hatred, fragmentation — and then we lose social resilience, fall asleep on guard duty, and get attacked. That’s exactly what happened in 2023. The Middle East is a jungle. We don’t have the privilege of conducting destructive socio-political experiments like extreme tribalism, which leads to both sides breaking all the rules. So what’s the solution? How do we get out of this destructive loop? The same way you quit drugs: Look reality in the eyes, stop labeling each other with absurd tags, and start truly listening. When you put aside prejudice, hatred, and judgment, you discover: The other side is usually more rational and logical than you think. The other side is driven by deep pain that hasn’t been addressed (for secular people — religious coercion; for the right — a judicial system that accumulated too much power). The other side brings ideas, arguments, and a coherent worldview that has logic, something to learn from, and even things worth implementing. It starts with genuine listening and empathy, continues with building mutual understanding, and leads to social healing and a functioning government that works for everyone — not just its voters. And here’s something that will really blow your mind (maybe): Do you know the most realistic scenario for the 2026 elections? Deadlock and repeat elections. Then a third round — no coalition. Then a fourth round — no coalition. Just like the nightmare years 2019–2021. Only this time, instead of COVID and vaccines, the background will be: An ongoing Iranian ballistic threat, Hezbollah not defeated, Hamas rebuilding for the next massacre, Turkey arming jihadist forces, loss of governance in the Negev and Galilee, Wild West-style anarchy in parts of the West Bank, and unprecedented global opinion decline regarding Israel. Explain to me: How can we deal with these threats alongside endless election cycles? How will politicians build national strategy, security doctrine, economic growth, infrastructure, recovery, policing, governance — while running nonstop election campaigns 24/7? Does that sound logical? And I haven’t even mentioned the insane lag Israel is creating in the global AI race — a transformative technology that, if missed, could cost Israel a key strategic advantage. (To make it happen, politicians must agree to invest — which requires political stability.) This is a slippery slope that could easily lead to loss of control — and another massacre. How do we prevent this nightmare? Stop boycotting. Stop seeing each other as enemies. Sit down and talk until agreements are reached. Let me be blunt: Bibists, anti-Bibists, Smotrich supporters, Ben-Gvir supporters, Bennett supporters, Yair Golan supporters — all of you need to sit in one room and talk until smoke comes out. Lock the door if needed until agreements are reached. That’s probably the only way out of this mess. No matter your camp: There are 1–1.5 million Israelis who think differently than you. They are just as Zionist, just as much part of the people, and they will keep voting. You must respect that — even if you try to persuade them. Respect means: no disqualification, no boycotts — learn to work together. [...continues in same spirit...] In summary: The opposite of tribalism is unity. Not unity of identical thinking — but unity of disagreement with cooperation. Unity is not a luxury — it’s a condition for survival. And that’s exactly what Israel needs now: national unity. We must demand it from politicians. Sit in one room, reach broad agreements, form a broad unity government, and implement widely agreed policies. Israel doesn’t need a band-aid — it needs deep root treatment for tribalism. A treatment that heals us, stops the bleeding, and allows us to begin a new chapter after this long, difficult war — the defining event of our generation. It’s time to heal. And if you connected to the message — you know what to do: like, comment, and share 🙏 "

Yes (: If you need to, I may try to help. It surely be much easier for you than for people from America or Europe.

https://x.com/avner_vilan/status/2044015526209294518?s=20 " In recent days I’ve been hearing that people are starting to “move the goalposts” and change the definition of what a nuclear Iran actually is. All kinds of nonsense like “the danger is only in an operational weapon, not in a desert test,” or “they’ve always had the ability to enrich to 90%.” So let’s put things in order. I promise it will be simple—but we have to look reality in the eye and not make excuses for ourselves. There are several levels of risk when it comes to a nuclear Iran: Control of enrichment and weapons technology → fissile material → a “nuclear device” explosion → operational weapon → nuclear arsenal → use of weapons against us. Control of enrichment and weapons technology: They’ve basically had this since the mid-2000s. We’ve already passed that stage. Fissile material:This is the core issue. Under the JCPOA, they were about a year away from obtaining fissile material for a first bomb. They were allowed to accumulate no more than 400 kg enriched to ~3%, with any excess removed from the country, under strict international monitoring by the IAEA. After the U.S. withdrew from the deal, two major things happened: First, Iran expanded enrichment facilities in Natanz and Fordow and began enriching material at an industrial scale. By June 2025, they had accumulated about 450 kg of uranium enriched to 60%—which is 99% of the way to enough material for 11 nuclear bombs. In addition, there are about 130 kg at 20%, enough for another bomb and a bit more. Most enrichment work since the U.S. withdrawal in 2018 went into building this stockpile. 450 kg may not sound like much, but producing that amount requires significant industrial infrastructure and years of continuously feeding uranium into thousands of centrifuges. Second, beyond monitoring uranium and facilities, the deal imposed stricter oversight on Iran than on a “normal” country, due to lack of trust. Monitoring extended even to centrifuge component production. After the U.S. withdrawal, this oversight stopped, and the West lost the ability to track centrifuge production. That means hundreds, if not thousands, of centrifuges are now unaccounted for—and could be used to build a small clandestine enrichment site. Bottom line: On the eve of “Am K’Lavi” (operation), Iran was days away from obtaining fissile material for a first bomb, and weeks away from enough for an arsenal of 12 bombs. It had fortified enrichment facilities to do so. “Am K’Lavi” prevented an immediate breakout by disabling industrial enrichment sites—but left Iran with enriched material, hundreds or thousands of centrifuges, the knowledge, and most importantly the motivation. As long as Iran has enriched uranium, it doesn’t need large industrial sites like Natanz or Fordow. It can build a small covert facility with 2–3 cascades—something that could fit in half a sports hall. Building such a facility might take about six months. With 200–300 advanced centrifuges, they could enrich enough material for a bomb in about a month. If they had to start from scratch, it would take about two years per bomb—but that’s less realistic. Assuming we would detect such a facility is very dangerous. Intelligence coverage is excellent—but not airtight. We might even see indications and not understand them, as happened with Fordow. In other words, when we say it would take six months to build such a facility, no one says that those six months didn’t already start a year or two ago. Therefore, the main goal must be: Remove all enriched uranium from Iran. Not part of it. Every gram. Every 40 kg of uranium enriched to 60% equals roughly one nuclear bomb. Another key point: nuclear material leaves physical traces and cannot be hidden. Even years later, inspectors can detect residues—as happened with secret Iranian sites from the early 2000s. That’s why the red line has always been obtaining fissile material. I’m starting to hear defeatist voices saying Iran already effectively has the capability to reach 90%, and it can’t be stopped. Accepting that is a massive failure. Nuclear Device Explosion A “nuclear device” is the minimum needed to turn fissile material into an explosion—either a desert test or a basic bomb deliverable by aircraft or transport. Iran was already preparing for such tests in 2003. It wouldn’t be surprising if they try again in 2026. Turning enriched material into a bomb involves chemical and engineering processes—not trivial, but not extremely complex either. With enough margin for error, it could take 6–12 months, even starting from scratch. Claims that killing scientists erased Iranian knowledge are unrealistic. Iran has enough capable physicists. Tracking such activity is very difficult—few clear indicators, easy to miss without intelligence leads. Also, much of the preparation can be done before having highly enriched uranium. Once 90% material exists, a test explosion could be ready within weeks. Some will say: “But that’s not an operational weapon.” I say: bullshit. The day Iran conducts a nuclear test, no U.S. president will risk attacking it. Look at North Korea. That same day, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, UAE, and Turkey will accelerate nuclear programs—turning the Middle East into a nuclear region within years. And delivery doesn’t have to be a missile. A bomb could be smuggled via sea or land—in a container, truck, or yacht. Operational Weapon Next stage: a reliable warhead mounted on a missile. This is harder. Eliminating scientists may delay it—from about a year to 2.5–3 years—but we don’t know when the clock started. A covert team might already be working. Or Iran could even buy weapons from North Korea. And it can escalate further—arsenals, delivery systems, deterrence, second-strike capability—but that’s a place we don’t want to reach. Most of the consequences will already be felt once Iran conducts a nuclear test—not only when it has dozens of warheads. Conclusion We can debate policy—but first agree on facts: As long as enriched uranium remains in Iran, the regime is dangerously close to a bomb—and could achieve it without us knowing. Relying on intelligence alone is a dangerous gamble. We must not let people downplay the threat by saying “they don’t yet have an operational weapon.” The immediate goal: remove all enriched uranium. And equally important—acknowledge that past policy led us here. After leaving the nuclear deal in 2018 and failing to act meaningfully until 2025, Iran advanced significantly. We canceled an agreement that limited enrichment—but didn’t stop their progress while it was still manageable. Even if recent action came just in time, we must ask how we got so close—and admit the danger hasn’t passed. Today, fully dismantling their capabilities militarily would require a complex ground operation with a very high cost. The real question: Can we translate military achievements into a political outcome—removing the material and preventing enrichment for years? Eyes on the ball "

Israeli voices 🐦 April 14th