Karmadhi

Again Leo that is not the point of the thread. I dont know why you always go back into how bad Hamas is Point is that Israel also does not clear the moral development threashold of a "moral country" worthy of support, alliance and praise That is the point Just because Hamas is worse does not mean that Israel clears the threashold of a country worth supporting This is not a zero sum game, you can condemn both, sanction both and cut ties with both. Just because you sanction Israel does not mean you support Hamas. That is Israel bullshit propaganda that calls anyone that go against them as aider of Hamas. And unlike certain countries Israel does not have key natural resources so they can cut ties with them without much issue. It is not like Russia, Iran or Saudi where cutting ties has serious issues due to them having tons of necessary natural resources and therefore you need to be careful about how you deal with them. Why has not Germany, France, UK and USA cut ties with Israel for them doing ethnic cleansing is the point And also Israel at this point is going beyond ethnic cleansing to genocide territories with their blocade of aid. Serious discussions are going on about it. When Serbia tried to do something similar in Kosovo during the Kosovo war NATO intervened and bombed the hell out of Serbia for them to stop. "NATO's intervention was prompted by Yugoslavia's bloodshed and ethnic cleansing of Kosovar Albanians, which drove the Albanians into neighbouring countries and had the potential to destabilize the region. Yugoslavia's actions had already provoked condemnation by international organisations and agencies such as the UN, NATO, and various INGOs.[31][32] Yugoslavia's refusal to sign the Rambouillet Accords was initially offered as justification for NATO's use of force.[33] Because Russia and China could use their veto within the Security Council to not authorize an external intervention,[34] NATO launched its campaign without the UN's approval, stating that it was inter alia a humanitarian intervention.[35] The UN Charter prohibits the use of force except in the case of a decision by the Security Council under Article 42, under Article 51 or under Article 53.[36] Three days after the commencement of hostilities, on 26 March 1999, the Security Council rejected the demand of Russia, Belarus and India for the cessation of the use of force against Yugoslavia.[37]" See the contrast Here they do not even sanction, not even talking about bombing. https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2024/12/amnesty-international-concludes-israel-is-committing-genocide-against-palestinians-in-gaza/ https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2024/11/un-special-committee-finds-israels-warfare-methods-gaza-consistent-genocide https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/12/19/israels-crime-extermination-acts-genocide-gaza

By the West i mean the European Union (especially France and Germany which are the two most important actors in it), UK and USA The only big country government that has openly tried to take concrete actions is Spain and Ireland (they are smaller country but still) Rest are either indifferent or downright support it But doesnt USA get targeted by terrorists BECAUSE it supports Israel so much? If USA cut ties with Israel they would not even need to share intel because USA would stop being targeted so much by terrorists. Or is it too late for that?

Because the West calls Israel a moral army and country, supports it yet Israel does ethnic cleansing A developed moral country and army does not resort to such tactics The West says they respect international law and human rights yet they reward a country that does one of the most disgusting crimes that exists That is the problem Until the West sanctions and cuts ties with Israel, the point of the thread remains Why is it so hard to cut ties with a country that is doing such horrible crimes? What am i missing? This thread is not about Hamas, it is about Western support for Israel despite its horrible actions.

The whole point of the thread Leo is that the West sees Israel as a moral entity not engaged in ethnic cleansing but simply defending themselves. By what you write here you basically say Zionists want to do ethnic cleansing yet the West calls Israel a moral country, supports it and arms it. That is why we say humanity has failed in Gaza Because they are on the side of a bully. If Hamas is also awful, fine, then dont help either. Why is Hamas declared a terrorist organiztion and the IDF is not? If both sides want to do ethnic cleansing as you say Hamas is not supported yet Israel is. Where are the sanctions for Israel? Where is the cutting of relations with Israel? As far as i know ethnic cleansing is illegal and looked down upon as a wrong act in the side of 99% of the population in the West.

The sad truth is that Russia is an adversary to the West and Israel is an ally Therefore when Russia does something bad it will magnified a lot and when Israel does something bad it will be diminished That is how biases work The West has an insane pro Israel anti Russian bias due to historical alliances and economic interests

So you finally agree to both sides being equally horrible Before you made it clear that Hamas was worse

Sad how low Israeli politicans have fallen They dont even seem like a democracy anymore Say one thing against the narrative and you get forcefully kicked out

Why do people do that? They see them all as the enemy or Israelis? I think many were not Israelis

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-X_9cLDaDY It aint a conspiracy Suprisingly the only prominent British politican who actually had a fair stance on this conflict, had the whole media against him, was framed wrongly and eventually left the party. His successor (Starmer) is 180 degrees different on this matter. These are 2 of many examples.

Alright

Imagine you were just a peaceful civilian living in Ukraine 3 years ago. You would hate the Ukranian government. Now matter how bad things were in Ukraine under Russian influence, they are way worse now. It is a mistake to provoke a more powerful and shameless opponent because they will take it out on your people. Thats what Russia did. Fair or unfair, it is how psychology and politics work. The bottom line is that when you are weak you are not in a position to dictate term and suicide alliances will not make your country better off. See how easy I can flip the script It is an analogy to Ukraine for going against Russia and siding with its enemies because they wanted to improve the living conditions for their own. Russia would have never attacked if Maidan didnt happen and they kept Yanakovic or someone similar to him. Although I support Ukraine (and Palestine too), I think that whole thing was a disaster and they would have been better off becoming another pro Russian state like Belarus, Kazakstan or Mongolia.

I am personally for two states with 1968 borders. Also to kick out all the illegal settlers and ideally some reparations for all the damage and human suffering. But a proper two state, no shady or sneaky deals like in the Oslo accords. Nor the "We gave Gaza a state in 2005" bullshit. And make sure that the state at first is aided by the Arabs so no Hamas 2.0 hijacks it. Most Arab countries dont support Hamas type groups so they can oversee that the state does not go towards radicalism. I think that would solve this issue for good

Sorry Leo but the world has put 0 pressure on Israel to stop their insane amount of international law violations The sad truth is that Israelis have an unproportionate amount of influence on the world medias, banks and governments which basically keep it immune to criticism other countries would have. They need to do 10x the carnage Russia does before they even get a basic condemntation, yet alone actual consequences The fundamental problem is Israeli's and Zionists interest groups hijacking most of the global power structures. Just see how powerful AIPAC is in USA if you want concerete proof. Obama has admitted he was heavily supressed in his policies towards the conflict because of the political cost it had. And Obama seemed relatively pro Palestine (unlike Biden for example). Murdoch the biggest media oligarch is a devoted Zionists Most of Blackrock owners too The list goes on Blaming all this inhuman indifference to 1 terrorist attack is not looking the situation seriously enough.

I have been following this war for a while now, and I feel like at this point Ukraine 's best option is to give in to Russia demands and make a permanent truce By that I mean, allow Russia to annex Crimea and the 4 oblasts they occupy forever, basically give them to Russia In return, they should get a good security guarantee from the West, ensuring that Russia will not invade them again to get more land (very crucial!) In return, Russia's sanctions will be lifted and Europe will return to how it was before the war I know it is not nice, but I feel like Ukraine can either do this or just continue fighting, loosing more land and more people With Trump in the White House I do not see Ukraine getting enough aid to kick Russians out and take back any of their territory They were struggling to stagnate with all Biden's help, I cannot imagine them even stagnating with the reduced Trump's aid and support Not to mention their over growing manpower issue Isnt it better to loose 20% of your land and be able to rebuild while your youth is still alive and able to work? I mean Ukraine is huge, they will be fine even if they loose some land Or is that specific land overly important that it is worth all this hassle? Not to mention most of it is Russian speaking and ethnic Russians so I wonder if those people even see themselves as proper Ukranians

https://www.aa.com.tr/en/americas/trump-cuts-ties-with-netanyahu-over-manipulation-concerns-report/3561726

How come Isarelis seem so ridiciously over concerned about 50 or so Israelis yet seem totally indifferent to tens of thousands of civilians killed in Gaza Even those that are mature enough to call them actual civilians (not counting the lunatics that say that everyone in Gaza is guilty) I find it quite staggering Of course you prioritze your own but they do not seem to care at all!!! For example a statement like "Let us end the war so both our hostages can go home and Gazan civilians can stop suffering from the war", a neutral comment like this. Even if they think all the civilian deaths are on Hamas, that statement would seem sensible to me. When USA bombed Hiroshima for example they said that they did this to save both American and Japnese lives (way more would have died from the invasion according to what they said) So even then, they had some sort of basic care for the civilians of their enemy And USA back then was far from being soft Could you explain please? I am very curious

Hello I have noticed that many peopel are pretty clear about Iran not getting nuclear weapons. Normally I can agree that the less nuclear armed states the better because they are very dangerous and destructive However, they do not say anything about Israel having ILLEGALLY nuclear weapons and never even admitting to having them I understand the logic that (they are our allies meanwhile Iran is our enemy) but I am talking purely from an objective unbiased perspective.

Which one are you?

Just to be clear, I totally understand why Iran having a nuke is a bad idea Issue I have is why Israel can have a nuke while Iran cannot$ You can argue that Israel has bombed its neighbors far more than Iran has, has expanded (Lebanon and Syria which are soverign countries) and does have a religious component to its whole society structure (especially these days with the far right being in power). So, I do not think Iran would be much less mature about its nuke than Israel has been. Keep in mind Iran is an old civilization with a long history of statehood. They are not some African tribe.

Most of the world did not support Nazi Germany but was disturbed by it. The only ones who did were countries with the same ideology like Italy or Spain. Meanwhile most of the "Western developed countries" including green countries support Zionism. How come? How does Zionism fuel the survival agendas of Orange/Green countries? Look how France, Germany, UK, Netherlands etc which are Orange/Green countries kiss the ass of Israel to the point where some of them said they will not arrest Bibi from the ICC warrant if he goes to those places although they are signatory to the ICC (outragous violation of international law).

I was having a discussion with a friend of mine about Russia attacking its neighbors like Ukraine and Georgia in the past and the argument he gave me was: "As long as you do not mess with Russia nothing happens. You only get attacked when you are unfriendly to Russia. The solution is easy, be nice and diplomatic to them". How would your respond to this?

It depends on the guest I think. Some are indeed very biased but some although slightly biased are still respected scholars and famous in their line. Jeffery Sachs and John Mearsheimer have good analysis on the Gaza conflict to me. I have not noticed much bias on that personally. When it comes to Ukraine I do notice bias but still within reason. Especially with Mearsheimer. With Sachs I see more bias when it comes to Ukraine war. Keep in mind the pro Ukranians are biased too as well. They are in denial about how corrupt Ukraine is for example or that many people do not want to fight the war and are forced against their will. What is ironic is that Ukraine stepped up their corruption fighting only when the war started and the world started calling them corrupt. From what I researched there was little to no difference between Yanakovic and Timoshenko. Both were corrupt oligarchs. Only difference is that Yanakovic was pro Russian and Timoshenko was Pro Western. If you see the corruption index of Ukraine between 2014-2020 it was not much better than Russia. What helped Ukraine when it comes to corruption and oligarchy was the start of their EU process in 2022 after the war, not kicking out Yanakovic. I think Ukraine is on the right path to become a democratic liberal not corrupt democracy and join the EU eventually but I think it was Russia invading it which kickstarted the whole process in full force. Because people now hate Russia so much and want to become the opposite of Russia. Quite ironic in a way. And i do listen to many channels and sources anyway.

Leo you literally shared with us on your forum "Judge Napolitano" channel which included people like Jeffery Sachs and Mearsheimer, praising it and now you tell us they are biased and bad? Who do you consider objective on this matter? And regarding Ukraine fighting the war, I notice it is usually people that are not fighting that want the war to continue. If people were so in favor of the war they would not try to escape the country or live in their house out of fear of being snatched from the street and put against their will to the front. Ukraine reminds me of Germany in early 1945 where they were desperate for men and would do anything. A truly motivated country has the recruitment stations lined with men, no need to snatch from the street. I support Ukraine but I feel like that war needs to end asap for their own good. Better loose 20% of your land than all your youth which does not even want to fight.

Keep in mind Russia wants all of Novorussia which is 40% of Ukraine, currently they have around 20%. If Russia settles only for what it has it is indeed a compromise. They want Odessa, Kharkiv etc.

And the paid courses? I am looking forward to them