Hamas Willing To Disarm...new position

[Frankfooter]

Where did I say that?

Here.

But you can't extrapolate your numbers on the specific issue of Israel/Palestine and say it is why his overall job approval numbers are so high.

It's in the news, of course it shows up in the news summary.
It isn't even a question in the poll.

Will it turn into an issue more people vote on?
Maybe.
I showed you were it ranked a week ago.

Your poll showed massive shift in the youth vote.

Of course it could, no one has said otherwise.
You're the one who said it was the reason for his numbers.
I pointed out it isn't.
I never said it didn't matter.

Its a large part of why his numbers are bad. Certainly this is another factor.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1785459097183060324

Yes, obviously that is exactly what his thinking is here.

Who is surrounding him to let this continue?
What do you really think he's thinking here?

Way too much action at Columbia, I do hope it doesn't get out of control.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1785459940338827409

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1785460224926597441

 

[Valcazar]

Here.

Fair enough!
Totally a type.

Will fix.

Your poll showed massive shift in the youth vote.

You're going to have to show me where you found that in the poll, since I didn't notice it having youth vote over time.

Its a large part of why his numbers are bad. Certainly this is another factor.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1785459097183060324

Exactly.
This is all considered massively important by people and is driving low numbers.

Who is surrounding him to let this continue?
What do you really think he's thinking here?

He's probably thinking he has an immensely complex foreign policy issue with multiple groups who have multiple demands and expectations, hemmed in by various diplomatic and legal realities.

Way too much action at Columbia, I do hope it doesn't get out of control.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1785459940338827409

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1785460224926597441

Since I don't think the students brought weapons, I would like to think this can be kept from getting completely out of control.
But it is the NYPD, and while they aren't the Chicago police, they aren't exactly known for restraint.

 

[Frankfooter]

You're going to have to show me where you found that in the poll, since I didn't notice it having youth vote over time.

It doesn't, but were you unaware that he had about 60% approval with youth before oct 7?
In the early days of Biden’s presidency (from January 2021 to June 2021), an average of 6 in 10 adult members of Generation Z – those born between 1997 and 2004 – approved of the job Biden was doing. During the period spanning September 2021 to March 2022, that number had plummeted to an average of just 39%.

He's probably thinking he has an immensely complex foreign policy issue with multiple groups who have multiple demands and expectations, hemmed in by various diplomatic and legal realities.

Very complex.
Should I listen to AIPAC and back genocide or should I listen to voters and deescalate the situation?

Since I don't think the students brought weapons, I would like to think this can be kept from getting completely out of control.
But it is the NYPD, and while they aren't the Chicago police, they aren't exactly known for restraint.

We'll see.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1785476049905545706

 

[Valcazar]

It doesn't, but were you unaware that he had about 60% approval with youth before oct 7?
In the early days of Biden’s presidency (from January 2021 to June 2021), an average of 6 in 10 adult members of Generation Z – those born between 1997 and 2004 – approved of the job Biden was doing. During the period spanning September 2021 to March 2022, that number had plummeted to an average of just 39%.

Yes.
Your own article says the drop started well before October 7th, beginning back in 2021.

Very complex.
Should I listen to AIPAC and back genocide or should I listen to voters and deescalate the situation?

There is always a well-known solution to every human problem—neat, plausible, and wrong.

We'll see.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1785476049905545706

At this point, should I assume you are rooting for violence?
It will make the issue stay in the news longer.

 

[Frankfooter]

Yes.
Your own article says the drop started well before October 7th, beginning back in 2021.

Yes and the numbers in your poll were even lower for youth.

There is always a well-known solution to every human problem—neat, plausible, and wrong.

Occam's Razor?
Score 1- 1

Whatever complex reasons you think are going on, this will be remembered for the simple ones.

At this point, should I assume you are rooting for violence?
It will make the issue stay in the news longer.

Why would you assume I would root for any violence?

 

[Frankfooter]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1785504349906456849

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1785486854730465432

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1785489392804434276

 

[Valcazar]

Yes and the numbers in your poll were even lower for youth.

Which isn't what you claimed.

Occam's Razor?
Score 1- 1

Whatever complex reasons you think are going on, this will be remembered for the simple ones.

That's not what Occam's razor means.
Good try, though.

And you are right - simple answers are what get remembered.
People love a simple narrative that doesn't require them to think too hard.

I agree completely that in the end, there will be very simplistic narratives about all this.

Why would you assume I would root for any violence?

You seem to think that the protests and violence are accomplishing what you want.
If things get resolved like in Brown, you lose energy.
Look at your reaction to ceasefire proposals.

You aren't quite where some others are on this, but that's been the impression I'm getting off you right now.

 

[Frankfooter]

And you are right - simple answers are what get remembered.
People love a simple narrative that doesn't require them to think too hard.

I agree completely that in the end, there will be very simplistic narratives about all this.

Saying 'its complicated' has long been a way refuse to make a statement on this issue.
The solutions may be complicated but the situation is pretty simple.
Israel is occupying Palestine illegally and still settling and colonizing that land.

You seem to think that the protests and violence are accomplishing what you want.
If things get resolved like in Brown, you lose energy.
Look at your reaction to ceasefire proposals.

You aren't quite where some others are on this, but that's been the impression I'm getting off you right now.

The protests are accomplishing two things, more media presence and starting the implementation of BDS at universities like Browns.
I don't support the violence at all, which at present is all from the cops or zionist protesters.

I back ceasefire, as I've repeatedly stated.
Right now talks are close but the sticking point is that Hamas wants the violence to stop and Israel says they will attack Rafah regardless.
“Israel will under no circumstances agree to ending the war as part of a deal to free our hostages.”

A senior Hamas official tells Al Jazeera, “The occupation is obstructing an agreement by insisting on continuing the war. The Zionist entity is seeking a deal to recover its captives without linking this to ending the aggression.”

The Hamas official, speaking on condition of anonymity, reiterated the group will “under no circumstances agree to an agreement that does not explicitly include stopping the war on Gaza”.

 

[Valcazar]

Saying 'its complicated' has long been a way refuse to make a statement on this issue.
The solutions may be complicated but the situation is pretty simple.
Israel is occupying Palestine illegally and still settling and colonizing that land.

That's not the complicated part.

The protests are accomplishing two things, more media presence and starting the implementation of BDS at universities like Browns.
I don't support the violence at all, which at present is all from the cops or zionist protesters.

Glad to hear it.
I'm surprised you haven't denounced the Brown solution.
They gave the students nothing but a promise that they will have a discussion/vote on the issue later in the year.
No promise of divestment at all.

It is less than the offer Columbia made that the students there refused.
Given you've often said that offers that don't actually require action are useless, I would have thought you would have been against the Brown solution.

I back ceasefire, as I've repeatedly stated.
Right now talks are close but the sticking point is that Hamas wants the violence to stop and Israel says they will attack Rafah regardless.

As I said.
You have repeatedly said that a ceasefire that doesn't accomplish real concessions isn't worth taking.

I don't even disagree with you here - ceasefires are tools of negotiation.
They are always contingent on what the people involved in the shooting think the tradeoffs are.
That's why it was always so frustrating to have people just yell "There must be a ceasefire" as if that meant anything without a discussion over what conditions were involved and what the people on the ground thought of them.

“Israel will under no circumstances agree to ending the war as part of a deal to free our hostages.”[

A senior Hamas official tells Al Jazeera, “The occupation is obstructing an agreement by insisting on continuing the war. The Zionist entity is seeking a deal to recover its captives without linking this to ending the aggression.”
The Hamas official, speaking on condition of anonymity, reiterated the group will “under no circumstances agree to an agreement that does not explicitly include stopping the war on Gaza”.

What does "stopping the war on Gaza" mean in this formulation, though?
That's the question, isn't it?

 

[Frankfooter]

That's not the complicated part.

Please explain.

Glad to hear it.
I'm surprised you haven't denounced the Brown solution.
They gave the students nothing but a promise that they will have a discussion/vote on the issue later in the year.
No promise of divestment at all.

It is less than the offer Columbia made that the students there refused.
Given you've often said that offers that don't actually require action are useless, I would have thought you would have been against the Brown solution.

Its all part of the BDS movement that will change Israel if nothing else does beforehand.
Even if the admin is lying, that puts them on their heels.

As I said.
You have repeatedly said that a ceasefire that doesn't accomplish real concessions isn't worth taking.

I don't even disagree with you here - ceasefires are tools of negotiation.
They are always contingent on what the people involved in the shooting think the tradeoffs are.
That's why it was always so frustrating to have people just yell "There must be a ceasefire" as if that meant anything without a discussion over what conditions were involved and what the people on the ground thought of them.

If this was a war calling for a ceasefire is more obvious. But this is a 3 prong genocide. Calling for a ceasefire will hopefully stop the bombing and shooting but it will take international pressure to end the now declared famine and to start rebuilding the health care system. Without a functioning health care system there are warnings that 500,000 could die by the end of the summer.

What does "stopping the war on Gaza" mean in this formulation, though?
That's the question, isn't it?

It is a good question.
Change has to happen, the famine has to be ended, the health care rebuilt, people held to war crimes, systematic changes...
But stopping the bombing and killing is the first and biggest step.

 

[Valcazar]

Please explain.

Montreal is unceded territory and therefore an illegal occupation.
That's simple and factual.
What gets done about it is complicated.

Its all part of the BDS movement that will change Israel if nothing else does beforehand.
Even if the admin is lying, that puts them on their heels.

Should the Columbia students have left then, since the Administration offered them a better deal than the one at Brown?

If this was a war calling for a ceasefire is more obvious. But this is a 3 prong genocide. Calling for a ceasefire will hopefully stop the bombing and shooting but it will take international pressure to end the now declared famine and to start rebuilding the health care system. Without a functioning health care system there are warnings that 500,000 could die by the end of the summer.

So since it is a three prong thing, nothing should be done until all prongs are settled?

It is a good question.
Change has to happen, the famine has to be ended, the health care rebuilt, people held to war crimes, systematic changes...
But stopping the bombing and killing is the first and biggest step.

But you just said they shouldn't accept the ceasefire and stop -even temporarily - the bombing and the killing.

 

[basketcase]

The sticking point is the same.
...

You're right. Hamas' whole basis of power is their calls to eliminate the Jewish presence and choosing violence over any kind of compromise.

And yes, the UNSC demanded Hamas immediately and unconditionally release those hostages. So did the ICJ and ICC who added that it is wrong to use those hostages as bargaining chips.

You clearly don't want a ceasefire and you don't want the suffering people in Gaza to get help. Like Hamas, your only desire is the destruction of Israel.

 

[basketcase]

Zionists started this shit show by occupying Palestine and wiping it off the maps.
...

In reality, Jewish immigrants that were met with violence incited by power-hungry wealthy Arabs who just like today, put their corrupt power-hungry desires ahead of the people they allegedly represent.

p.s. the Palestinian state was wiped off the map when Palestinians and Arab leaders rejected Partition and Jordan annexed it.

 

[Frankfooter]

Montreal is unceded territory and therefore an illegal occupation.
That's simple and factual.
What gets done about it is complicated.

Truth and Reconciliation.
Different situations, Canada is weakly trying to reconcile colonization while Israel is still actively colonizing Palestine.

Should the Columbia students have left then, since the Administration offered them a better deal than the one at Brown?

That's up to them, do you think chances of divestment go up or down the longer the sit ins last?

So since it is a three prong thing, nothing should be done until all prongs are settled?

Stupid question, valcazar.
You can't even start to deal with the other two until the shooting and bombing stops.

But you just said they shouldn't accept the ceasefire and stop -even temporarily - the bombing and the killing.

When did I just say that?

 

[Frankfooter]

You're right. Hamas' whole basis of power is their calls to eliminate the Jewish presence and choosing violence over any kind of compromise.

No, that's not their position.
All genocides in recent history have been based on the side committing genocide screaming that its the other side that really, really wants to do it so they better do it first.
That's all you're doing here, justifying doing genocide first because of hate.

And yes, the UNSC demanded Israel and Hamas immediately and unconditionally release those hostages. So did the ICJ and ICC who added that it is wrong to use those hostages as bargaining chips.

You clearly want a ceasefire and you want the suffering people in Gaza to get help. Your only desire is for peace.

Fixed for accurate representation of my views.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1786062763451621845

 

[Valcazar]

Truth and Reconciliation.
Different situations, Canada is weakly trying to reconcile colonization while Israel is still actively colonizing Palestine.

Yes.
Different situation.
Complicated.

Thanks for agreeing with me.

That's up to them, do you think chances of divestment go up or down the longer the sit ins last?

I think divestment is much more complicated in the modern financial system than most people think.

As for Columbia itself, it is well known that if you constantly reject offers, it doesn't always mean you get better offers.

Stupid question, valcazar.
You can't even start to deal with the other two until the shooting and bombing stops.

Which is why you are supporting the proposed 40-day ceasefire?
After all, "You can't even start to deal with the other two until the shooting and bombing stops."

When did I just say that?

When you said Hamas shouldn't accept the 40-day stop in the bombing.

 

[Frankfooter]

I think divestment is much more complicated in the modern financial system than most people think.

As for Columbia itself, it is well known that if you constantly reject offers, it doesn't always mean you get better offers.

True, but making BDS the moral choice publicly is a long term project.

Which is why you are supporting the proposed 40-day ceasefire?
After all, "You can't even start to deal with the other two until the shooting and bombing stops."

What 40 day ceasefire?
There is none agreed yet and its looking less likely.
Hamas wants a ceasefire with no return to genocide, Israel wants a 40 truce with the return of hostages followed by more genocide.

When you said Hamas shouldn't accept the 40-day stop in the bombing.

When did I 'just' say that?

 

[Valcazar]

True, but making BDS the moral choice publicly is a long term project.

Absolutely.
But you haven't acted like it is one.
You've acted like these protests are going to settle it.

What 40 day ceasefire?
There is none agreed yet and its looking less likely.
Hamas wants a ceasefire with no return to genocide, Israel wants a 40 truce with the return of hostages followed by more genocide.

And you have said that Hamas shouldn't accept the 40 day truce.

When did I 'just' say that?

Are you saying you were in favor of the 40-day ceasefire now?

 

[Frankfooter]

Absolutely.
But you haven't acted like it is one.
You've acted like these protests are going to settle it.

How specifically have I acted that way?

And you have said that Hamas shouldn't accept the 40 day truce.
Are you saying you were in favor of the 40-day ceasefire now?

Your argument that you think Israel can continue the genocide for months is starting to convince me that negotiating for a 40 day pause is less useful.
Why give up the hostages when that is providing mass protest against Netanyahu for a ceasefire?

The situation is fluid, on this issue I'm not certain which choice is now better.

Do you think Hamas should agree to that 40 day ceasefire and why?

 

[Valcazar]

How specifically have I acted that way?



Your argument that you think Israel can continue the genocide for months is starting to convince me that negotiating for a 40 day pause is less useful.
Why give up the hostages when that is providing mass protest against Netanyahu for a ceasefire?

The situation is fluid, on this issue I'm not certain which choice is now better.

Do you think Hamas should agree to that 40 day ceasefire and why?

I have no idea if they should.
My instinct is yes, because I generally think less killing is better than more and usually ceasefires - even temporary - are where negotiations can move towards extending them.

That said, ceasefires are tactical things.
If a ceasefire is found to not be helping, people shouldn't agree to it.

I don't know nearly enough to make that call for either side.

What I do know is that people who loudly insisted that a ceasefire must happen NOW were mostly lying because the moment one was offered they said it wasn't good enough.
I do know that people who said "Hamas can end the war instantly by returning the hostages" were lying because the Israeli government made it very clear that they weren't going to stop just because hostages were returned.