Summary
Trump’s nomination of Pete Hegseth, a Fox News presenter with minimal managerial experience, as defense secretary has stunned the Pentagon.
Hegseth has been a vocal critic of the military, calling for a purge of generals and questioning the appointment of Gen. Charles Brown as chair of the joint chiefs of staff.
Hegseth’s nomination is seen as a boost for the far right in Israel, as he has shown support for territorial expansion and suggested the construction of a new temple on the Temple Mount.
Someone from an Arab group was saying on the radio that they basically didn’t care if it meant more deaths in Gaza if they encouraged their members not to vote for Harris, they would blame the Democrats… That’s some twisted logic if I’ve ever seen it.
The same strategy is Hamas’s primary MO. If Israelis die, it’s good for Hamas. If Gazans die, it’s good for Hamas. On one hand, Israel should get a hell of a lot more blame than the Democrats. On the other, you can see how this powers Hamas strategy.
I remember just after all this kicked off last October there was an interview with an ex hamas guy (who is now an anti-extremism researcher) about what their plan was with all of this.
He mentioned how their plan had always been to force a reaction from Israel and then use social media to build support among specifically both the Muslim diaspora and progressive non-muslims in Europe/NA.
The worse it gets in Gaza, the better it is for Hamas. Their support in Gaza goes up, and they gain additional support abroad, while Israel loses support. Win/win/win
Exactly, and same for Israel in respect of settlers.
There’s a good reason Netanyahu chose to install hamas and usurp and kill Arafat.
States/ Nations are usually willing to sacrifice a fair number of their people for the benefit of those in power - I’m sure the benefits trickle down though.
No. This isn’t a thing you need to “both sides”. There is nuance.
It’s bad for Netanyahu if settlers die. It’s good for him if Israeli people are threatened. His appeal is that he’ll protect them (including through killing others). If he fails to do that too often, he loses.
Hamas is fine with people on their side dying. Israel is not. Israel is accomplishing their goals through genocide. Palestinians would love to genocide Israel, but they can’t. That doesn’t excuse Israel actually currently committing genocide.
And there’s no excuse for settling land in areas that will keep Israelis in danger. The first settlers are Zionists, later people living there won’t (necessarily) be Zionists.
That’s a pretty extraordinary claim, do you happen to remember any information about the group or radio show?
How’s you’re French these days?
https://ici.radio-canada.ca/ohdio/premiere/emissions/midi-info/episodes/947972/rattrapage-lundi-4-novembre-2024
He’s one of the founding members of the AAPAC and that’s an interview on the National broadcaster’s radio in Canada.
Bad, but I found this. It may be a translation issue, but it seems significantly less spiteful and more regretful than I how read your description.
I do get it, it’s like getting a limb caught in a bear trap and not chewing through it. Sure, we’d all hope we would do it and know that it’s the best chance of survival, but it’s not easy to do. I’m not confused, just sad, worried and tbh, a little angry at the democrats. They could have made this an easier choice for us, and they might have won. I’m also angry at people who didn’t vote for Harris, but I really can’t understand how difficult it is for people like Abed Hammoud, so I’m going to save my anger more for the people who voted for trump
I’m paraphrasing but what he says on the radio is “I know things might be the same or worse with Trump, but we’re taking a chance because a change in leadership is our only hope and if it’s Trump that gets elected then it will be the Democrats’ fault.”
I mean, yeah. He can’t gnaw through his own limb to save himself from the bear trap. And if the democrats were less supportive of Israel, it would be an easier choice. It’s natural for him to blame them fully, because he doesn’t want to blame himself. I don’t see this as crazy logic, he’s just in an incredibly difficult emotional state.
It’s a Sophie’s choice and he’s blaming the democrats for making their side of the choice unappealing. It’s a double standard, but that’s just because everyone expects republicans to be anti Muslim. He expected democrats to be on his side in a meaningful way and they weren’t.
It was as easy as can be, mate. It’s not the Democrats’ fault more than half or country are so fucking stupid.
It was not as easy as it could be, come on. Nobody wants to vote with Dick Cheney. They swung hard to the right and muddled it for people. It would be great if people were able to keep their eyes on the ball, but they couldn’t. Politicians should be generally aware of their potential supporters’ priorities, and there’s been a clear misstep here.