Israel always has to meet standards that no other country will meet. When Jews are involved, they always look for culprits. How much hatred of Jews there is in the world. But Israel, with God's help, will win and be strong forever and not even Hamas will stop it❤
Re: Wanting peace. Israel had FIVE general elections over a three-year span. The fourth election produced the most diverse coalition government in Israeli history, including Mansour Abbas's Islamist party. Prime Minister Naphtali Bennett sought to implement Michah Goodman's proposal to "shrink the occupation" (look it up) in order to reduce radicalization among Palestinians and strengthen the Palestinian Authority. The first phase included a substantial increase in the number of Palestinian work permits, including for Gazans. Iran immediately responded by ordering their proxies in Gaza and, especially, the West Bank, to step up the number of terrorist attacks (stabbings, car-rammings) in an effort to tear apart the Israeli governing coalition. It succeeded, and Netanyahu was returned to power- this time with the support of a newly-united Ben Gvir/Smotrich faction. This is not an "Israeli-Palestinian" conflict. Until the Iranian regime is held to account for their interference (aka imperialism), the conflict will rage on. The Mullahs and their proxies are willing to fight Israel down to the last Palestinian.
That govt that was so diverse lasted like a year cause it was a completely bonkers coalition that couldn’t get along. Solely put together to kick out Netanyahu, now Israel is filled with extreme rightist and messianic parties
They are not listening to Hamas then. Hamas has been pretty straightforward on what they are about. And their record in Gaza has been clear. The mastermind of Oct 7th was held in Israeli prison (and saved from brain cancer while there) for the terror he perpetrated on Palestinians. They are no more freedom fighters than ISIS or the Nazis were. Just the next group of a-holes to try to impose their sick vision on the world
17:34 "(Clemenceau) once said that war is too important to be left to the generals. When he said that, 50 years ago, he may have been right...but now, war is too important to be left to the politicians. They have neither the time, the training, nor the inclination for strategic thought..." Col. Jack Ripper, commander of Burpleson AFB to Group Capt. Mandrake (Peter Sellers) in Dr. Strangelove This might the time he was actually correct.
Off course a born and bred Nazi from Deutschland will love these conversations as they now see how there crimes against Jews turned them into Nazis. It was a coincidence
48:00 to assert that there must be endless war even though Israel clearly wouldn’t want that, seems to be infantilising the Palestinians who are somehow incapable of stopping their hostility. In the case of imperialist Japan and Nazi Germany we can see that endless hostility wasn’t inevitable in the face of conquering force. So why should the Palestinians be different? Once they are purged of the genocidal Hamas doctrine, then presumably they wouldn’t be?
Noam did an excellent job exposing this guy’s half-arsed thinking. If he actually thought this way and acted accordingly while he was in charge of a country that was facing the same threat as Israel under the same conditions, it would be an absolute disaster for his own country.
How is there no mention of the hostages? When he asks when does this end , it’s ends when Israel retrieves their hostages, or Hamas surrenders the hostages.
It is impossible to reasonably point to Israel not achieving their war goals as an argument for not supporting Israel. The very fact that people are not supporting Israel undermines them achieving the goals.
Exactly they are tying their hands then screaming why aren't you fighting it's ludicrous. The message they are sending to radical islamists will come back to bite them in the a**
The goals are impossible. There is no military solution to a problem created by military solutions. You need diplomacy and political engagement. And the more powerful party must make the concessions, as painful or scary as it may be. You simply don’t have any other option. You cannot just kill and kill and kill forever.
@@Lurch685the problem isn't created by military solution, or occupation, or settlements, or border blockades. The problem is rampant, radical islamism and the hated and antisemitism that it engenders in islamist societies.
@@Lurch685 The problem was not created by military actions (on the part of israel). It was not created by settlements or occupation. The problem stems from radical islamism, period. Full stop. There is no argument that can be made against that. Hamas themselves are crystal clear about this. Their intention is the wholesale destruction of Israel and murder of every Jew, because they are ordained by Allah to cleanse the land of infidels and retake the land for the Caliphate. The ONLY solution to this kind of ideology is a military one... jihadists can not be reasoned with or handled diplomatically.
Theres always a bit truth in comedy/humour. And this sequence in 2:41 sums up all the conversations Noam had with his guests since Oct 7th. Phil: I always have strong opinions about things but I don’t necessarily assume that I’m right Noam: That’s where we differ. Haha
It’s a major major PR victory for Palestinians that the nature of the relationship between the US & Israel is now under the public’s microscope. Israel lost the PR battle completely.
@@comedycellarclips Well words are just words, cherish the 1st amendment. In addition, I think starvation is a slightly worse crime than personal insults but that’s just me.
This dude, I mean the host is such a snowflake when it comes to the murderous Israeli regime. He will create a thousand straw men to prove that the genocide Israel is committing is not so bad.
If your suggestion of "better" tactics yields half the civilian casualties but doesn't achieve the mission then 100% of those casualties are indefensible and fail the proportionality doctrine.
War is not about proportionality. Yet, The ratio is 1:1 civilians to militant deaths. The average is 9:1. This is the lowest civilian casualties in the history if warfare.
20:10 yes you do hand the scalpel to the drunk walking by. Because it's a malignant tumor. If a qualified surgeon walks by, that's a better option, but I have not heard this dude suggest any better options. And why did I just hear him say *some* of the responsibility is on hamas? He seems like every other anti-israel BS artist. Saying a lot of things that sound reasonable, but ultimately condemning the Israeli government without offering one shred of a reasonable suggestion how about what to do instead.
Thank you. I've been spending too much time on Twitter trying to find another soul who had this reaction. Honestly, these are my thoughts exactly. (And so I'm left bewildered on why people thought this was such a great interview--are standards so low that any conversation with a vague sense of give and take is considered the height of civilization?)
@@JLP4444 I think noam is in a position of needing to be charitable; he mentions in this interview that the guy interviewed last week won't reply to his emails now. And aside from the practical necessity of taking it easy on anti-israel people instead of just kicking the s*** out of them all the time, because that would make it hard to find debate partners, the other thing is he's jewish. I think if I was Jewish I would feel the need to be a lot more charitable talking to the other side, because I would want to make sure I'm staying objective and not being like tribal or whatever. The way Jewish people have to be so relenting about clueless critics of Israel... I feel like all of us who are not Jewish have an obligation to say it exactly the way it is: people blame Israel because it's easy. And they're lazy. Somebody on Reddit told me it's a numbers game. A quarter of the world's population is muslim, but only like one tenth of 1% are jewish. It's just so much easier for people to blame the jews. Especially if somebody taught them how to say the word "settler colonialism." Lol.. Well, everybody should buy a star of David t-shirt and wear it everyday.
The guest is not a serious person. The empty arguments from the guest have reduced noam to having to state the obvious instead of having a meaningful exchange. I'd really like to see a conversation between Noam and Robert wright, I love that dude, but he's very critical of Israel and it creates cognitive dissonance for me because I can't be furious with Robert Wright the way I am with other people who are a critical of israel! I think I might have undiagnosed autism...
@@dmoneythatbigdude lol awesome I think I even saw the episode and somehow didn't remember it, thanks, I'm going to go back to that and see what the hell they said. Life is hard.
I'm surprised you (accurately) found the interviewee delivering empty arguments but not Robert Wright. I've heard Wright engage in the same sort of emotional reasoning and scoffing claims of Israel just dropping too many bombs. (And then there was his incoherent hit piece on Bari Weiss that lacked basic journalistic integrity.)
I don't understand why this keeps happening on this channel. Phil says the war is pretextual. Well, is it? Answer the question! And if you can't, don't write it! And (to preempt the finkelstein's of the world) no - saying that someone else said it is not itself a reason for you to say it. On and on I see this
Most people don't know what makes for good evidence. Critical thinking Should be a primary focus in all schools. It can be applied to anything and it should be applied to everything.
That's just doesn't describe reality and most people moral intuition. You don't get to punch someone and then claim you keep beating the guy up because they punched you back.
@@JustinOhren-iy2tu know you people don’t seem to understand Israel has had Gaza and West Bank under a brutal 60 year occupation. And even before the 7th they’ve killed thousands of them. Built 700,000 illegal settlements in the West Bank. And even make Palestinians destroy their own homes for illegal settlements. Because if the Israeli government destroys it for you, you pay for it. Seem you people don’t know history.
@@KryMoore You've been listening to too much Finkelstein. "Mowing the lawn" was never about killing innocents. It was about killing terrorists. Google it.
Thanks to you as well. I skipped over that part the first time and it's another example of the interviewee being sloppy and incoherent. Noam hit the nail on the head--it's purely an emotional claim. Interviewee has no measure of destructiveness and what was or wasn't reasonable given how dug in Hamas was (and that they use buildings to fire rockets from, store munitions, that the roads are mined, etc.)
He's arguing from personal incredulity and not giving due analysis. The "I can't see it at first glance, so it feels icky" position. Also, I fixed the ratio, so thanks for drawing my attention to it 🖖
The problem with good hearted Americans like Phil Klay is their understanding of reality is almost binary instead of understanding reality here in the Middle East (like in any place is much more takes place on a continuum/Spectrum). “Israel can’t kill the Idea of Hamas therefore it needs to let it live along side this threat…” while we, most Israelis (left, right and center), understand that who ever will role Gaza in the day after (hopefully not Israel!), know that a disperse threat is an easier threat to deal with than a terror army right on our border. I think that since you guys never experienced such a threat on your borders (and hopefully you’ll never will), it hard for some of you to comprehend.
Thanks guys, for a great discussion. Thanks to Noam for hearing out someone who challenges his values, and thanks to Phil for keeping his cool when Noam challenged his ideas. I'm a strong supporter of Israel in this dispute, but it's important to challenge our beliefs. If I were going to steelman Phil's argument, I'd put it like this: 1) Even if we think Israel is 100% justified in its effort to destroy Hamas, the war is only worth the suffering if it achieves a worthwhile objective. If at the end of the war, Hamas is still active in Gaza, or an equivalently threatening group is operating in Gaza with a different name, like Islamic Brotherhood or whatever, then it wasn't worth the civilian death or suffering. (The counterargument to this is that the best way to break Hamas's hold on Gaza is for people to believe it's beaten so rival factions and dissidents can begin operating openly without fear of execution from Hamas. The more we vasilate, the higher the chance is that Hamas survives. God knows which side is right, but the rest of us have to struggle through.) 2) It is true, in my opinion, that Bibi doesn't make it easy to support him by keeping far right extremists in his cabinet or by many of his other decisions. I can imagine *some point* at which any given US administration would say "Ok, if that's the way you want to play, we're out." But again, on the other hand, he's there and we're not, so I'm not confident our decisions are much better. I'm not sure what to think on that one.
One more crime of hamas to force Israel into such terrible choices. Hamas views WCNSF’s as convenient sized Israeli hostages and even more useful for propaganda when their own citizens. How many orphans did we create in Nazi Germany? Fighting ISIS in Mosul? War is terrible but Hamas is worse.
Phil conveniently forgot to mention that the civilian to terrorist dead ratio is nearly 1:1. The best of any major military conflict this century. But even that is not good enough for Phil. He's incurably dishonest.
The definition used by USA & Israel since war on middle east began again in 2001 is that EVERY MALE 13-70 is AUTOMATICALLY REDEFINED AS AN ENEMY COMBATANT or "enemy" or "errorist." Obama formalized this policy, that all 'military age males' are by default considered guilty unless rarely somehow proven beyond doubt to be non-combattant.
Great interviewer, not so coherent interviewee. E.g., his response to being asked why it was ok for US to obliterate Mosul 10,000 miles away to destroy ISIS, but not ok for Israel to do the same in Gaza, when the threat is so much more immediate. His answer presumed no agency for Gazans--it's totally up to Israel to provide a political solution to the conflict and he seemed to think any action against Hamas was illegitimate without that. (Overall, I got the vibe that he tries hard to project a reasonable, measured critique, but underneath it's the same often irrational bias you see from other Leftist critics of Israel (and often based on false premises, like the disputed claims of increasing settler violence.)
He seems to argue that there are better ways and more measured responses, but he can't articulate any, let alone convince anyone that those hypothetical measures would lead to the same desired outcomes.
It is chilling to see how quickly this presenter has lost his humanity in a frenzied attempt to defend the indefensible. Sometimes people are blind to see what is directly in front of them. Terrifying.
Bravo. You were far better prepared for this interview than with the Ha’aretz journalist. This guy should stick to reporting and leave the analysis to people who are capable of constructing a cogent argument and/or have some experience with international relations or warfare. His support of the attack on Mosul, but not Gaza is astounding hypocrisy. His inability to recognize the importance - at almost any cost - of making it clear that murdering civilians and then hiding among your own population is never acceptable or productive is incredibly simple-minded. Maybe he’s just not that bright. Why does he think Israel must ensure Hamas can never attack again in order to justify this war? If this war buys enough time to reeducate a single generation of Palestinians or gives rise to even one Palestinian leader committed to raising their standard of living, it will have been worth it. The harping on the U.S. arming Israel is palpably absurd. We arm EVERYONE. This interview was an embarrassment for this ‘journalist’ and the Atlantic as a whole. Bravo Noam. You should interview Dan Schueftan for a very different take on the focus on solutions.
@@joge2468 'Why does he think Israel must ensure Hamas can never attack again in order to justify this war?' He never said nor implied this. If you want to understand his position in full I'd recommend you read his article in the Atlantic if you can get around the paywall. Phil is an ex marine, very thoughtful, a Catholic and believes Israel had a pretext to wage a just war but doesn't believe the war Israel is waging in reality is just. This is an unbelievably difficult question and I think anyone who is certain that they have the answers is almost certainly deluding themselves.
@@le_rayon_vert I’ll see what I can do to get to the piece. I’m too lazy to rewatch and find the location, but I distinctly remember him questioning Israel’s tactic because they could not ensure Hamas never attacked again. If you’re less lazy than me, please tell me if I am wrong.
@@le_rayon_vert I read the piece and stand by most of my original comment. He does not actually say the pretense for the war is just; he is clearly ambivalent on that question. He devotes many paragraphs to the claim that Hamas will never be fully eradicated and this war will merely breed more of them, comparing this conflict to the U.S. war against ISIL. First, it took many years, but al Queda and ISIL are pretty much gone at this point. Second, Hamas is not a non-state actor. They are an elected government mostly confined to Gaza, which makes them more analogous to the Nazis than ISIL - notwithstanding the similarities in tactics. We have an opportunity here to de-radicalize and demilitarize Gaza. I think everyone agrees a long term solution to the Palestinian problem would be ideal. Western countries tend to want immediate answers. Middle Easterners take a longer view, looking generations ahead, so they’re far less inclined to figure something out *right now*. See if you can find the interview with Dan Schueften where the interviewer is off-screen. He does a great job of explaining how the Israeli perspective differs from western countries’. It’s really fascinating. All that is to say, I don’t think not having a solution has any bearing on the justness of this war. Phil has selected a statistic (54 civilian deaths per 100 bombs) that appears to show Israel is killing way more civilians than we did in Raqqah (1.7 deaths per 100 bombs). This is such a bizarre comparison. First of all, Raqqah is one battle in one city. Second, he ignores the combatant deaths as if those bombs only killed civilians. This is why military experts look at the ratio of combatants to civilians killed, which is less than 1:2 in this war. That is very low for urban warfare and extraordinary given Hamas is enmeshed with and hidden below the civilian population.
I didn’t really hear a good answer about how it can be said that Israel ‘wants peace’ with the Palestinians while simultaneously annexing huge swathes of the West Bank.
Israel is not interested in Peace. They are interested in annihilation of anything that is Palestinian. The peace that the Israelis are speaking about is a Palestinian free West Bank and Gaza.
And actually he talks from the "important opinnion"búnker. Always defending himself. Stop defending yourself and Open your eyes , You may pick somethimg before it ends. This guy Noam is just a discusting case of evermansplanning sh1t
The more I listen to this the more you can see how desperate Noam is to rationalize the slaughter. He ignores the reporting coming out of Israel of the kill zones, of the AI systems used to target infrastructure and Hummus fighters and the collateral damage, the countless reports of mass graves, the drone strikes on people walking. Forget all of that he just ignores the reality of the pictures themselves that show an apocalyptic wasteland. Noam's whole thesis is Israel is forced to be this brutal. He completely ignores the reality of the West Bank. This war is in response to the reality that Israel does not want to give Palestinians their own state. Also why did he turn off comments on his interview about aid? Noam still can't admit that aid is being deliberately blocked to starve people despite every NGO and human rights organization saying so and multiple people who have been in Gaza. They are all liars and the IDF is truthful. LOL.
I would point to two instances that show how Noam tries to muddy the water, and reveals his extreme bias: 1. He says Netyanahu had no choice but to fund Hamas. Because otherwise people would have blamed him for creating a humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza. This is extremely dishonest. The context here is the following: Netyanahu was trying to discredit the Palestinian Authority and bolster Hamas (Netyanahu admits it, he doesn't say he was trying to prevent a humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza, Noam has invented this reason). So, Netyanahu would not allow the Palestinian funds to reach people in Gaza who needed it (teachers, guards, government workers). Instead, he would let Qatari money enter Gaza, and go straight to Hamas. This would make Palestinians think that it was Hamas resistance that forced Israel's hands, not to mention the legitimisation of Hamas as the governing authority in Gaza. Abbas criticized such moves, and this is why people talk about Netyanahu funding Hamas (who himself admits it). 2. He says Arafat was scared of getting killed. True. But he was not scared of making peace: he was scared of losing the sovereignty over the Al Alsa mosque. The Arab states had made clear to him that it was not for him to give away to Israel. It is a holy place for all Muslims. Arafat was willing to give the Western Wall to Israel (arrangements could have been made). But Barak was not willing to give even the East Jerusalem as capital of the Palestinian state. He wanted them to have a village in East Jerusalem as the capital (which was a humiliation for Arafat).
So interesting how misinformation is at the root of so much. Here: www.timesofisrael.com/israel-agreed-to-give-up-sovereignty-in-part-of-jerusalem-old-city-in-2000-document/ Al Aqsa sovereignty Noth Bennett and Lapid had the same "carrot and stick" policy with Hamas, that was thought to have bought a kind of semi-peaceful modus vivendi. And he knows that harsher treatment of Hamas would have also led to accusations of Israeli inhumaneness. www.timesofisrael.com/with-elections-looming-lapids-gaza-gamble-seems-to-have-paid-off/ www.cnn.com/2023/12/11/middleeast/qatar-hamas-funds-israel-backing-intl/index.html carnegieendowment.org/sada/85717
@@comedycellarclips From your own source: "Shlomo Brom, a former deputy to Israel’s national security adviser, told the New York Times that an empowered Hamas helped Netanyahu avoid negotiating over a Palestinian state, saying the division of the Palestinians helped him make the case that he had no partner for peace in the Palestinians, thus avoiding pressure for peace talks that could lead to the establishment of an independent Palestinian State." All you have is some Israeli officials defending this (why would they not ?) and Netyanahu defending it in public. While you ignore the fact that Likud politicians themselves talked about how Netyanahu himself revealed to them it was his strategy to weaken the PA and keep Hamas and PA divided. Amazing how you are willing to digest plain denials by people who would of course deny this.
@@Yogesh-jq9jj Your views are misinformed, confused, and simplistic. The widely cited Netanyahu statement was not public and has never been quoted verbatim. My understanding is he in fact said something like, “Those who don’t want a Palestinian state should support funding Hamas because it prevents a unified drive for statehood.” This is very different from saying, “I support Hamas because it allows me to claim there is no one with whom to negotiate.” I see this all the time - a failure to distinguish the speaker’s intent or motivation from a reference to that of others. It’s not crazy to think Netanyahu’s stance toward Hamas was partially informed by such a view. Obviously, he had to appease his right flank in order to form a government. It is, however, crazy to think this was his only motivation. “Political calculus” is called such because there are many complex factors that go into political decisions. Clearly, Netanyahu was motivated, like others before him, by a desire to avoid all-out war with Hamas. He calculated - incorrectly it turns out - that Hamas had sufficient economic self-interest and was adequately deterred militarily to not attack Israel. The realization that they fundamentally misunderstood Hamas is why you see such a tectonic shift in Israel’s stance toward Hezbollah and Iran.
I am in AWE of Mr Noam's complete lack of humanity. Justifying everything with : "what ? Israel can't make mistakes ? especially with Hamas helping them." I cry for the TENS of THOUSANDS of innocents killed ... numbers are what they're becoming, nothing more Noam though, thinks that the wars US fought for last 25 years were a success...lots of innocent Arabs died, A LOT: i wonder what would you have thought if it were jews instead. I just HAVE TO ADD : Mr Noam saying you need to put yourself in other peoples shoes... is INSANE coming from him.
Your incoherent comment is a perfect example of the fact that haters of Israel are unintelligent and supporters of Israel are intelligent. Edit your comment. Make sense.
I've got some bad news for you my friend... the Jews have lived in the Holy Land for 4,000 years. They have been persecuted, exiled, murdered en masse, by literally dozens of empires. The Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, Greeks, Romans, Byzantines, Muslims, Christian Crusaders, Mongols, Egyptian Mamluks, Ottomans, and of course, the Nazis, all tried to exile or exterminate the Jews... and yet, they're still there in the Land of Israel. And they'll be there long after all these barbaric Islamists and terrorists are long gone.
Poor guy. He's completely reasonable, and forced to walk on the thinnest of eggshells, not realizing he's talking to one of the biggest apologists of Netanyahu's current lawnmowing episodes.
Except 90% of Israelis are rightly for going to the end as you don't put out 80% of a house fire.Sinewar comes out flashing a V everybody loses.If you have a way you can do it without human shields getting killed I am sure Israel will take your phone collect even
Walking on eggshells, why do you say that? I think you're right, he does seem tentative. He's getting called out for intellectual frivolity. And now so are you.
@@newidealism3894 Hey good man, 15 of the 16 judges on the international court of justice have examined a charge leveled by post-colonial and post-apartheid south africa and ruled that there is a plausible case of genocide to be made against the state of Israel, warranting an indepth investigation, strongly indicating that the guest on this show is making some valid points, even though he's being a bit hesitant about making his argument forcefully, clearly mortified of getting smeared by the well-oiled lobby that has been smearing everyone that dared to state the obvious over the last decades. Did you think the casual mortarfire on kids playing soccer on Gaza beach, the casual sniperfire on the 'march of return' borderprotesters, the casual bullet in the head of Shireen Abu Akleh were good omens? Read all about it in B'Tselem reports if one day you wish to be informed about the real context in which october 7th happened, and why Yossi Verter wrote in Haaretz on october 8th that Netanyahu has brought war upon Israel: things Noam Dworman doesn't like to mention. I realize off course that you are the thought leader of a very succesful youtube channel, but i still reserve the right to be very (read: VERY!) unimpressived by you of all people calling me out.
“Hamas doesn’t even mention the settlements [as a reason for their actions]” yes they do. This is a clear example of the host not knowing what he’s talking about and why it makes it so infuriating watching these debates. Hamas clearly and plainly states its opposition to the expansion if West Bank settlements, that is one of their stated reasons for “justifying” the Oct 7 attack in their 16 page document released explaining their reasons for the attack. Its also really annoying that the atlantic writer didnt challenge this stupid ass point.
You know, you're right, I didn't know they mentioned it in their laundry list in that document. It also talks about ALL of Israel being occupied territory, as well as saying: "We reiterate that the Palestinian resistance was fully disciplined and committed to the Islamic values during the operation and that the Palestinian fighters only targeted the occupation soldiers and those who carried weapons against our people." So I'll take it for the PR document that it is. There was an article out today that you should read: www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2024-04-13/ty-article-magazine/.highlight/i-asked-sinwar-is-it-worth-10-000-gazans-dying-he-said-even-100-000-is-worth-it/0000018e-d40a-d5ed-adcf-f79af56c0000?lts=1713021614639 "Fatah talked about the 1967 borders, about the occupation, about the Palestinian people. To me, the Hamas inmates would say, "There's neither 1967 nor 1948. There are no borders and there is nothing to talk about. You are on Waqf land, Muslim sacred ground, and you have no place here." When I became an intelligence officer, I made use of the insight about Hamas and Fatah being from two different worlds. That wasn't understood on the outside until 2007." But having said all that, you're right, I didn't know about that document. I'll mention it next time the point comes up.
@@comedycellarclips it totally is just a PR/propaganda document, theres no denying that, and all their extreme rhetoric and obfuscations are ridiculous, but Im just saying it needs to be acknowledged that Hamas does care about the West Bank and the rapidly expanding illegal settlements displacing more and more Palestinians as well as those in the West Bank being murdered by settlers/IDF with little to no recourse. I cant read that paywalled article but I don’t really mind about the excerpts you have shared, of course rank and file Hamas inmates (I’m guessing the intelligence officer was interrogating them in prison?) are gonna have a whole range of opinions, what I think matters more is Hamas openly saying in recent years, even after the Oct 7 attack, that they will negotiate a two state solution on 1967 borders. Anyways its cool you actually replied. Most youtube debate vids dont see that kind of engagement from the hosts in the comments.
Do you ever acknowledge the fact that if Israel would’ve ended its occupation decades ago maybe none of this would be happening? They’d possibly be living peacefully for the most part by now.
Do u ever acknowledge that if the Palestinians/arabs had ever accepted a state since 1947 and stop trying to wipe out the Jewish state then none of this would happen. But I know you think brown people have no agency
No, because there is no occupation. The land didn't belong to Arab Muslims because they were the majority. LOL. All Jews did was increase their numbers there.
You're supposed to know what you are talking about first and then give an opinion. Are you talking about the occupation that started in 1967 as the result of aggression by three Arab nations? Or are you talking about the blockade used by both Egypt and Israel in response to a terrorist group getting elected in 2006? Go hide in the tunnels with the terrorists if you want to be one of them. Find a smart friend to give you advice.
@@hg_rebaseEnding the occupation means: 1) abolishing the right of return for Jews with no connection to the territory. 2) Reinstatement of right of return for Palestenians displaced by the occupation. 3) Abolish the IDF.
Many pro israelís are like this. They have to defend themselves at every moment. The lack of arguments is suplanted with emocional mambojambo shit. It's just such a good comedy chanel
R u saying israel can’t murder it’s way out of all its problems? 🤔 It’s just crazy to me that they won’t consider peace. The international community could help make that finally happen.
Israel always has to meet standards that no other country will meet. When Jews are involved, they always look for culprits. How much hatred of Jews there is in the world. But Israel, with God's help, will win and be strong forever and not even Hamas will stop it❤
This guy Phil is CLuuuuueLesss!!
Re: Wanting peace. Israel had FIVE general elections over a three-year span. The fourth election produced the most diverse coalition government in Israeli history, including Mansour Abbas's Islamist party. Prime Minister Naphtali Bennett sought to implement Michah Goodman's proposal to "shrink the occupation" (look it up) in order to reduce radicalization among Palestinians and strengthen the Palestinian Authority. The first phase included a substantial increase in the number of Palestinian work permits, including for Gazans. Iran immediately responded by ordering their proxies in Gaza and, especially, the West Bank, to step up the number of terrorist attacks (stabbings, car-rammings) in an effort to tear apart the Israeli governing coalition. It succeeded, and Netanyahu was returned to power- this time with the support of a newly-united Ben Gvir/Smotrich faction. This is not an "Israeli-Palestinian" conflict. Until the Iranian regime is held to account for their interference (aka imperialism), the conflict will rage on. The Mullahs and their proxies are willing to fight Israel down to the last Palestinian.
That govt that was so diverse lasted like a year cause it was a completely bonkers coalition that couldn’t get along. Solely put together to kick out Netanyahu, now Israel is filled with extreme rightist and messianic parties
27:57 no in fact many people do seem to dispute it - they think of Hamas as freedom fighters
They are not listening to Hamas then. Hamas has been pretty straightforward on what they are about. And their record in Gaza has been clear.
The mastermind of Oct 7th was held in Israeli prison (and saved from brain cancer while there) for the terror he perpetrated on Palestinians.
They are no more freedom fighters than ISIS or the Nazis were. Just the next group of a-holes to try to impose their sick vision on the world
17:34 "(Clemenceau) once said that war is too important to be left to the generals. When he said that, 50 years ago, he may have been right...but now, war is too important to be left to the politicians. They have neither the time, the training, nor the inclination for strategic thought..."
Col. Jack Ripper, commander of Burpleson AFB to Group Capt. Mandrake (Peter Sellers) in Dr. Strangelove
This might the time he was actually correct.
These cellar conversations are amazing! keep them coming, love the diversity of guests. Greetings from Germany
Off course a born and bred Nazi from Deutschland will love these conversations as they now see how there crimes against Jews turned them into Nazis. It was a coincidence
"Maximum murderousness" was macabre-ly funny... but macabre-ous.
excellent conversation . "answer the hard questions......" so important
Brilliant debate. I'm so glad I found this podcast.
I’m not sure this guy’s conclusions would be the same if he lived in Israel. To him, it’s all theoretical and game like.
This guy can't defend his position, seems that he thought through this maybe 2 minutes
18:10 THANK YOU
The guy interviewing Phil is annoying to listen to shout over anyone else
absolutely irritating, plus hopeless argument
These conversations are why you’re the shit💪💯
48:00 to assert that there must be endless war even though Israel clearly wouldn’t want that, seems to be infantilising the Palestinians who are somehow incapable of stopping their hostility. In the case of imperialist Japan and Nazi Germany we can see that endless hostility wasn’t inevitable in the face of conquering force. So why should the Palestinians be different? Once they are purged of the genocidal Hamas doctrine, then presumably they wouldn’t be?
Noam did an excellent job exposing this guy’s half-arsed thinking. If he actually thought this way and acted accordingly while he was in charge of a country that was facing the same threat as Israel under the same conditions, it would be an absolute disaster for his own country.
Someone should tell him about Algeria
Noam, this guy comes off a hopelessly naive.
The way this guest (Phil) is behaving and talking, seems like someone has a gun to his head.
(The frequent scoffing gives the game away--he's struggling between his desire to seem reasonable and his raw hatred.)
Noam. An ideological gun!!!!
And also a contact-job-relation Big jpro-israeli-"jewish" gun
1:03:17 I told my friend at the beginning of this that Israel is now faced with a real-life "trolley problem."
❤
This guy (the guest) is truly insufferable. No answers. Just repeats himself. Embarrassing!
How is there no mention of the hostages? When he asks when does this end , it’s ends when Israel retrieves their hostages, or Hamas surrenders the hostages.
Oh, my apologies to the female co-host. I hadn’t watched it through when I made my comment.
It is impossible to reasonably point to Israel not achieving their war goals as an argument for not supporting Israel. The very fact that people are not supporting Israel undermines them achieving the goals.
Exactly they are tying their hands then screaming why aren't you fighting it's ludicrous. The message they are sending to radical islamists will come back to bite them in the a**
The goals are impossible. There is no military solution to a problem created by military solutions. You need diplomacy and political engagement. And the more powerful party must make the concessions, as painful or scary as it may be. You simply don’t have any other option. You cannot just kill and kill and kill forever.
@@Lurch685the problem isn't created by military solution, or occupation, or settlements, or border blockades.
The problem is rampant, radical islamism and the hated and antisemitism that it engenders in islamist societies.
@@Lurch685 The problem was not created by military actions (on the part of israel). It was not created by settlements or occupation. The problem stems from radical islamism, period. Full stop. There is no argument that can be made against that. Hamas themselves are crystal clear about this. Their intention is the wholesale destruction of Israel and murder of every Jew, because they are ordained by Allah to cleanse the land of infidels and retake the land for the Caliphate.
The ONLY solution to this kind of ideology is a military one... jihadists can not be reasoned with or handled diplomatically.
No, you got things upside down. It is the continued support for Israeli that will ultimately doom them.
Theres always a bit truth in comedy/humour. And this sequence in 2:41 sums up all the conversations Noam had with his guests since Oct 7th.
Phil: I always have strong opinions about things but I don’t necessarily assume that I’m right
Noam: That’s where we differ. Haha
It’s a major major PR victory for Palestinians that the nature of the relationship between the US & Israel is now under the public’s microscope. Israel lost the PR battle completely.
Too bad for y'all social media PR ain't gonna help in the real life!
Thos college kids are making real change though.
True, due to misinformation.
@@KryMooreThey are certainly proving their ignorance.
@@randscott4676 As are you.
Manifesto! is a very good podcast. You guys have to have Jake on too
Every time you spoke facts this guy just squirmed in his seat and even laughed
The laugh was disgusting
100% - dudes fumbling trying to explain why Mosul/Isis was necessary but not Gaza/Hamas.
Fantastic job holding his feet to the fire Norm.
They were both atrocities and the United States and United Kingdom and Israel are the new Axis of Evil
He is a true moron
@@hg_rebaseMosul isn’t a concentration camp. Gaza is.
This is the problem, they want another piece...🪖🤳
Why did you block people from commenting on your new video about weaponizing aid by Israel? I thought you were an advocate for free speech?????
Because the comments have become so ugly and personally insulting to the guests... And I expected them to be even worse for such a difficult topic.
@@comedycellarclips Well words are just words, cherish the 1st amendment. In addition, I think starvation is a slightly worse crime than personal insults but that’s just me.
This dude, I mean the host is such a snowflake when it comes to the murderous Israeli regime. He will create a thousand straw men to prove that the genocide Israel is committing is not so bad.
Israel created Hamas by the way the treated and murdered Palestinians. What do you expect a people to do? Sit back and do nothing?
This guy was insufferable.
A moron too
Noam? Yes. Constant apologia for evil levels of violence.
Now, you were awesome. The best podcast ever. Masterpiece ❤
Thank you!
39:07 😮
If your suggestion of "better" tactics yields half the civilian casualties but doesn't achieve the mission then 100% of those casualties are indefensible and fail the proportionality doctrine.
War is not about proportionality. Yet, The ratio is 1:1 civilians to militant deaths. The average is 9:1. This is the lowest civilian casualties in the history if warfare.
I would love to see Joe Rogan (who I see as at the same general level as Klay) held to account in the same manner.
@31:00 this clip needs to go viral. Someone with social reach plz
20:10 yes you do hand the scalpel to the drunk walking by. Because it's a malignant tumor. If a qualified surgeon walks by, that's a better option, but I have not heard this dude suggest any better options.
And why did I just hear him say *some* of the responsibility is on hamas?
He seems like every other anti-israel BS artist. Saying a lot of things that sound reasonable, but ultimately condemning the Israeli government without offering one shred of a reasonable suggestion how about what to do instead.
Thank you. I've been spending too much time on Twitter trying to find another soul who had this reaction. Honestly, these are my thoughts exactly.
(And so I'm left bewildered on why people thought this was such a great interview--are standards so low that any conversation with a vague sense of give and take is considered the height of civilization?)
@@JLP4444 I think noam is in a position of needing to be charitable; he mentions in this interview that the guy interviewed last week won't reply to his emails now.
And aside from the practical necessity of taking it easy on anti-israel people instead of just kicking the s*** out of them all the time, because that would make it hard to find debate partners, the other thing is he's jewish.
I think if I was Jewish I would feel the need to be a lot more charitable talking to the other side, because I would want to make sure I'm staying objective and not being like tribal or whatever.
The way Jewish people have to be so relenting about clueless critics of Israel... I feel like all of us who are not Jewish have an obligation to say it exactly the way it is: people blame Israel because it's easy. And they're lazy. Somebody on Reddit told me it's a numbers game. A quarter of the world's population is muslim, but only like one tenth of 1% are jewish. It's just so much easier for people to blame the jews. Especially if somebody taught them how to say the word "settler colonialism." Lol..
Well, everybody should buy a star of David t-shirt and wear it everyday.
Ummm this is very much one sided
They are so so delusional it’s insane.
The guest is not a serious person.
The empty arguments from the guest have reduced noam to having to state the obvious instead of having a meaningful exchange.
I'd really like to see a conversation between Noam and Robert wright, I love that dude, but he's very critical of Israel and it creates cognitive dissonance for me because I can't be furious with Robert Wright the way I am with other people who are a critical of israel! I think I might have undiagnosed autism...
He did have Robert Wright on like a month ago
@@dmoneythatbigdude lol awesome I think I even saw the episode and somehow didn't remember it, thanks, I'm going to go back to that and see what the hell they said. Life is hard.
I'm surprised you (accurately) found the interviewee delivering empty arguments but not Robert Wright. I've heard Wright engage in the same sort of emotional reasoning and scoffing claims of Israel just dropping too many bombs. (And then there was his incoherent hit piece on Bari Weiss that lacked basic journalistic integrity.)
I don't understand why this keeps happening on this channel. Phil says the war is pretextual. Well, is it? Answer the question! And if you can't, don't write it! And (to preempt the finkelstein's of the world) no - saying that someone else said it is not itself a reason for you to say it. On and on I see this
Most people don't know what makes for good evidence. Critical thinking Should be a primary focus in all schools. It can be applied to anything and it should be applied to everything.
What Noam doesn’t seem to understand is that the Palestinians and Lebanese are entitled to defend themselves FROM ISRAEL.
That's just doesn't describe reality and most people moral intuition. You don't get to punch someone and then claim you keep beating the guy up because they punched you back.
Israel didn't attack them. Israel goal isn't to wipe them out as is theirs. War isn't pretty people have forgotten.
@@JustinOhren-iy2tu know you people don’t seem to understand Israel has had Gaza and West Bank under a brutal 60 year occupation. And even before the 7th they’ve killed thousands of them. Built 700,000 illegal settlements in the West Bank. And even make Palestinians destroy their own homes for illegal settlements. Because if the Israeli government destroys it for you, you pay for it. Seem you people don’t know history.
Israel calls it mowing the lawn.......
@@KryMoore You've been listening to too much Finkelstein. "Mowing the lawn" was never about killing innocents. It was about killing terrorists. Google it.
Noam dropping the truth bomb with relentless force. Making Phil stare into reality and start stuttering was a magnificent moment.
Destiny’s brother
58:34 get a piece of chalk. Draw Gaza so that 1 in = 10 miles. Get 30 inches of string to represent the tunnels. Try to arrange the string.
Thanks to you as well. I skipped over that part the first time and it's another example of the interviewee being sloppy and incoherent. Noam hit the nail on the head--it's purely an emotional claim. Interviewee has no measure of destructiveness and what was or wasn't reasonable given how dug in Hamas was (and that they use buildings to fire rockets from, store munitions, that the roads are mined, etc.)
He's arguing from personal incredulity and not giving due analysis. The "I can't see it at first glance, so it feels icky" position.
Also, I fixed the ratio, so thanks for drawing my attention to it 🖖
The problem with good hearted Americans like Phil Klay is their understanding of reality is almost binary instead of understanding reality here in the Middle East (like in any place is much more takes place on a continuum/Spectrum).
“Israel can’t kill the Idea of Hamas therefore it needs to let it live along side this threat…” while we, most Israelis (left, right and center), understand that who ever will role Gaza in the day after (hopefully not Israel!), know that a disperse threat is an easier threat to deal with than a terror army right on our border.
I think that since you guys never experienced such a threat on your borders (and hopefully you’ll never will), it hard for some of you to comprehend.
I agree with this.
Thanks guys, for a great discussion. Thanks to Noam for hearing out someone who challenges his values, and thanks to Phil for keeping his cool when Noam challenged his ideas.
I'm a strong supporter of Israel in this dispute, but it's important to challenge our beliefs. If I were going to steelman Phil's argument, I'd put it like this:
1) Even if we think Israel is 100% justified in its effort to destroy Hamas, the war is only worth the suffering if it achieves a worthwhile objective. If at the end of the war, Hamas is still active in Gaza, or an equivalently threatening group is operating in Gaza with a different name, like Islamic Brotherhood or whatever, then it wasn't worth the civilian death or suffering.
(The counterargument to this is that the best way to break Hamas's hold on Gaza is for people to believe it's beaten so rival factions and dissidents can begin operating openly without fear of execution from Hamas. The more we vasilate, the higher the chance is that Hamas survives. God knows which side is right, but the rest of us have to struggle through.)
2) It is true, in my opinion, that Bibi doesn't make it easy to support him by keeping far right extremists in his cabinet or by many of his other decisions. I can imagine *some point* at which any given US administration would say "Ok, if that's the way you want to play, we're out." But again, on the other hand, he's there and we're not, so I'm not confident our decisions are much better. I'm not sure what to think on that one.
Do you know what this means W.C.N.S.F? Wounded Child No Surviving Family.
Where’s your humanity?
One more crime of hamas to force Israel into such terrible choices. Hamas views WCNSF’s as convenient sized Israeli hostages and even more useful for propaganda when their own citizens.
How many orphans did we create in Nazi Germany? Fighting ISIS in Mosul?
War is terrible but Hamas is worse.
Phil conveniently forgot to mention that the civilian to terrorist dead ratio is nearly 1:1. The best of any major military conflict this century. But even that is not good enough for Phil. He's incurably dishonest.
The definition used by USA & Israel since war on middle east began again in 2001 is that EVERY MALE 13-70 is AUTOMATICALLY REDEFINED AS AN ENEMY COMBATANT or "enemy" or "errorist."
Obama formalized this policy, that all 'military age males' are by default considered guilty unless rarely somehow proven beyond doubt to be non-combattant.
Not even the IDF claims that
LOL
6 months too late
New thinking entails that we value every single human life equally
Great interviewer, not so coherent interviewee. E.g., his response to being asked why it was ok for US to obliterate Mosul 10,000 miles away to destroy ISIS, but not ok for Israel to do the same in Gaza, when the threat is so much more immediate. His answer presumed no agency for Gazans--it's totally up to Israel to provide a political solution to the conflict and he seemed to think any action against Hamas was illegitimate without that.
(Overall, I got the vibe that he tries hard to project a reasonable, measured critique, but underneath it's the same often irrational bias you see from other Leftist critics of Israel (and often based on false premises, like the disputed claims of increasing settler violence.)
He seems to argue that there are better ways and more measured responses, but he can't articulate any, let alone convince anyone that those hypothetical measures would lead to the same desired outcomes.
56:13 you're morally weak
It is chilling to see how quickly this presenter has lost his humanity in a frenzied attempt to defend the indefensible. Sometimes people are blind to see what is directly in front of them. Terrifying.
You are the one defending the barbarians Hamas and their Nazi ideology.
The guest makes zero sense he can't back up any of his arguments
Bravo. You were far better prepared for this interview than with the Ha’aretz journalist. This guy should stick to reporting and leave the analysis to people who are capable of constructing a cogent argument and/or have some experience with international relations or warfare. His support of the attack on Mosul, but not Gaza is astounding hypocrisy. His inability to recognize the importance - at almost any cost - of making it clear that murdering civilians and then hiding among your own population is never acceptable or productive is incredibly simple-minded. Maybe he’s just not that bright.
Why does he think Israel must ensure Hamas can never attack again in order to justify this war? If this war buys enough time to reeducate a single generation of Palestinians or gives rise to even one Palestinian leader committed to raising their standard of living, it will have been worth it. The harping on the U.S. arming Israel is palpably absurd. We arm EVERYONE. This interview was an embarrassment for this ‘journalist’ and the Atlantic as a whole. Bravo Noam.
You should interview Dan Schueftan for a very different take on the focus on solutions.
You've completely misunderstood and misrempresented what Phil actually wrote and said.
@@le_rayon_vert How so? I’m genuinely interested.
@@joge2468 'Why does he think Israel must ensure Hamas can never attack again in order to justify this war?' He never said nor implied this. If you want to understand his position in full I'd recommend you read his article in the Atlantic if you can get around the paywall. Phil is an ex marine, very thoughtful, a Catholic and believes Israel had a pretext to wage a just war but doesn't believe the war Israel is waging in reality is just. This is an unbelievably difficult question and I think anyone who is certain that they have the answers is almost certainly deluding themselves.
@@le_rayon_vert I’ll see what I can do to get to the piece. I’m too lazy to rewatch and find the location, but I distinctly remember him questioning Israel’s tactic because they could not ensure Hamas never attacked again. If you’re less lazy than me, please tell me if I am wrong.
@@le_rayon_vert I read the piece and stand by most of my original comment. He does not actually say the pretense for the war is just; he is clearly ambivalent on that question.
He devotes many paragraphs to the claim that Hamas will never be fully eradicated and this war will merely breed more of them, comparing this conflict to the U.S. war against ISIL. First, it took many years, but al Queda and ISIL are pretty much gone at this point. Second, Hamas is not a non-state actor. They are an elected government mostly confined to Gaza, which makes them more analogous to the Nazis than ISIL - notwithstanding the similarities in tactics. We have an opportunity here to de-radicalize and demilitarize Gaza.
I think everyone agrees a long term solution to the Palestinian problem would be ideal. Western countries tend to want immediate answers. Middle Easterners take a longer view, looking generations ahead, so they’re far less inclined to figure something out *right now*. See if you can find the interview with Dan Schueften where the interviewer is off-screen. He does a great job of explaining how the Israeli perspective differs from western countries’. It’s really fascinating. All that is to say, I don’t think not having a solution has any bearing on the justness of this war.
Phil has selected a statistic (54 civilian deaths per 100 bombs) that appears to show Israel is killing way more civilians than we did in Raqqah (1.7 deaths per 100 bombs). This is such a bizarre comparison. First of all, Raqqah is one battle in one city. Second, he ignores the combatant deaths as if those bombs only killed civilians. This is why military experts look at the ratio of combatants to civilians killed, which is less than 1:2 in this war. That is very low for urban warfare and extraordinary given Hamas is enmeshed with and hidden below the civilian population.
I didn’t really hear a good answer about how it can be said that Israel ‘wants peace’ with the Palestinians while simultaneously annexing huge swathes of the West Bank.
Israel is not interested in Peace. They are interested in annihilation of anything that is Palestinian. The peace that the Israelis are speaking about is a Palestinian free West Bank and Gaza.
Bro talking more than the guy you’re interviewing…….
This seems more like a conversation than a traditional interview. A discussion if you will.
And actually he talks from the "important opinnion"búnker. Always defending himself.
Stop defending yourself and Open your eyes , You may pick somethimg before it ends.
This guy Noam is just a discusting case of evermansplanning sh1t
These are 2 Americans talking about a foreign country as if it were our own. Our founding fathers would be weeping.
The more I listen to this the more you can see how desperate Noam is to rationalize the slaughter. He ignores the reporting coming out of Israel of the kill zones, of the AI systems used to target infrastructure and Hummus fighters and the collateral damage, the countless reports of mass graves, the drone strikes on people walking. Forget all of that he just ignores the reality of the pictures themselves that show an apocalyptic wasteland. Noam's whole thesis is Israel is forced to be this brutal. He completely ignores the reality of the West Bank. This war is in response to the reality that Israel does not want to give Palestinians their own state. Also why did he turn off comments on his interview about aid? Noam still can't admit that aid is being deliberately blocked to starve people despite every NGO and human rights organization saying so and multiple people who have been in Gaza. They are all liars and the IDF is truthful. LOL.
I would point to two instances that show how Noam tries to muddy the water, and reveals his extreme bias:
1. He says Netyanahu had no choice but to fund Hamas. Because otherwise people would have blamed him for creating a humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza.
This is extremely dishonest. The context here is the following: Netyanahu was trying to discredit the Palestinian Authority and bolster Hamas (Netyanahu admits it, he doesn't say he was trying to prevent a humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza, Noam has invented this reason). So, Netyanahu would not allow the Palestinian funds to reach people in Gaza who needed it (teachers, guards, government workers). Instead, he would let Qatari money enter Gaza, and go straight to Hamas. This would make Palestinians think that it was Hamas resistance that forced Israel's hands, not to mention the legitimisation of Hamas as the governing authority in Gaza. Abbas criticized such moves, and this is why people talk about Netyanahu funding Hamas (who himself admits it).
2. He says Arafat was scared of getting killed. True. But he was not scared of making peace: he was scared of losing the sovereignty over the Al Alsa mosque. The Arab states had made clear to him that it was not for him to give away to Israel. It is a holy place for all Muslims. Arafat was willing to give the Western Wall to Israel (arrangements could have been made). But Barak was not willing to give even the East Jerusalem as capital of the Palestinian state. He wanted them to have a village in East Jerusalem as the capital (which was a humiliation for Arafat).
So interesting how misinformation is at the root of so much.
Here: www.timesofisrael.com/israel-agreed-to-give-up-sovereignty-in-part-of-jerusalem-old-city-in-2000-document/ Al Aqsa sovereignty
Noth Bennett and Lapid had the same "carrot and stick" policy with Hamas, that was thought to have bought a kind of semi-peaceful modus vivendi. And he knows that harsher treatment of Hamas would have also led to accusations of Israeli inhumaneness.
www.timesofisrael.com/with-elections-looming-lapids-gaza-gamble-seems-to-have-paid-off/
www.cnn.com/2023/12/11/middleeast/qatar-hamas-funds-israel-backing-intl/index.html
carnegieendowment.org/sada/85717
@@comedycellarclips From your own source: "Shlomo Brom, a former deputy to Israel’s national security adviser, told the New York Times that an empowered Hamas helped Netanyahu avoid negotiating over a Palestinian state, saying the division of the Palestinians helped him make the case that he had no partner for peace in the Palestinians, thus avoiding pressure for peace talks that could lead to the establishment of an independent Palestinian State."
All you have is some Israeli officials defending this (why would they not ?) and Netyanahu defending it in public.
While you ignore the fact that Likud politicians themselves talked about how Netyanahu himself revealed to them it was his strategy to weaken the PA and keep Hamas and PA divided.
Amazing how you are willing to digest plain denials by people who would of course deny this.
Yes. But it was not unique to Netanyahu. It was the policy of all PMs
@@mannyshouse3708 Does that make it better ?
@@Yogesh-jq9jj Your views are misinformed, confused, and simplistic. The widely cited Netanyahu statement was not public and has never been quoted verbatim. My understanding is he in fact said something like, “Those who don’t want a Palestinian state should support funding Hamas because it prevents a unified drive for statehood.” This is very different from saying, “I support Hamas because it allows me to claim there is no one with whom to negotiate.” I see this all the time - a failure to distinguish the speaker’s intent or motivation from a reference to that of others.
It’s not crazy to think Netanyahu’s stance toward Hamas was partially informed by such a view. Obviously, he had to appease his right flank in order to form a government. It is, however, crazy to think this was his only motivation. “Political calculus” is called such because there are many complex factors that go into political decisions. Clearly, Netanyahu was motivated, like others before him, by a desire to avoid all-out war with Hamas. He calculated - incorrectly it turns out - that Hamas had sufficient economic self-interest and was adequately deterred militarily to not attack Israel. The realization that they fundamentally misunderstood Hamas is why you see such a tectonic shift in Israel’s stance toward Hezbollah and Iran.
Please never get out of the cellar, while us adults try to solve this geopolitical mess..
no one is solving shyt.
Oh yep he is handsome lol
I am in AWE of Mr Noam's complete lack of humanity.
Justifying everything with : "what ? Israel can't make mistakes ? especially with Hamas helping them."
I cry for the TENS of THOUSANDS of innocents killed ... numbers are what they're becoming, nothing more
Noam though, thinks that the wars US fought for last 25 years were a success...lots of innocent Arabs died, A LOT: i wonder what would you have thought if it were jews instead.
I just HAVE TO ADD : Mr Noam saying you need to put yourself in other peoples shoes... is INSANE coming from him.
Your incoherent comment is a perfect example of the fact that haters of Israel are unintelligent and supporters of Israel are intelligent. Edit your comment. Make sense.
Noam is so biased and fully supports Israel but pretends to be impartial and clueless. He's the type of guy you can never trust. Slimy
The guy hosting is so disingenuous. Its actually painful to watch.
Noam is going to want these tapes when Zionism falls. Yikes.
You're probably one of the people cheering when you found out kids got murdered at a music festival.
@@newidealism3894 You're probably the type of person that roots for the Empire over the resistance in Star Wars.
I've got some bad news for you my friend... the Jews have lived in the Holy Land for 4,000 years. They have been persecuted, exiled, murdered en masse, by literally dozens of empires. The Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, Greeks, Romans, Byzantines, Muslims, Christian Crusaders, Mongols, Egyptian Mamluks, Ottomans, and of course, the Nazis, all tried to exile or exterminate the Jews... and yet, they're still there in the Land of Israel. And they'll be there long after all these barbaric Islamists and terrorists are long gone.
Poor guy. He's completely reasonable, and forced to walk on the thinnest of eggshells, not realizing he's talking to one of the biggest apologists of Netanyahu's current lawnmowing episodes.
❤❤
Except 90% of Israelis are rightly for going to the end as you don't put out 80% of a house fire.Sinewar comes out flashing a V everybody loses.If you have a way you can do it without human shields getting killed I am sure Israel will take your phone collect even
Walking on eggshells, why do you say that? I think you're right, he does seem tentative. He's getting called out for intellectual frivolity. And now so are you.
@@newidealism3894 Hey good man, 15 of the 16 judges on the international court of justice have examined a charge leveled by post-colonial and post-apartheid south africa and ruled that there is a plausible case of genocide to be made against the state of Israel, warranting an indepth investigation, strongly indicating that the guest on this show is making some valid points, even though he's being a bit hesitant about making his argument forcefully, clearly mortified of getting smeared by the well-oiled lobby that has been smearing everyone that dared to state the obvious over the last decades. Did you think the casual mortarfire on kids playing soccer on Gaza beach, the casual sniperfire on the 'march of return' borderprotesters, the casual bullet in the head of Shireen Abu Akleh were good omens? Read all about it in B'Tselem reports if one day you wish to be informed about the real context in which october 7th happened, and why Yossi Verter wrote in Haaretz on october 8th that Netanyahu has brought war upon Israel: things Noam Dworman doesn't like to mention. I realize off course that you are the thought leader of a very succesful youtube channel, but i still reserve the right to be very (read: VERY!) unimpressived by you of all people calling me out.
“Hamas doesn’t even mention the settlements [as a reason for their actions]” yes they do. This is a clear example of the host not knowing what he’s talking about and why it makes it so infuriating watching these debates. Hamas clearly and plainly states its opposition to the expansion if West Bank settlements, that is one of their stated reasons for “justifying” the Oct 7 attack in their 16 page document released explaining their reasons for the attack.
Its also really annoying that the atlantic writer didnt challenge this stupid ass point.
You know, you're right, I didn't know they mentioned it in their laundry list in that document. It also talks about ALL of Israel being occupied territory, as well as saying: "We reiterate that the Palestinian resistance was fully disciplined and committed to the Islamic values during the operation and that the Palestinian fighters only targeted the occupation soldiers and those who carried weapons against our people."
So I'll take it for the PR document that it is. There was an article out today that you should read: www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2024-04-13/ty-article-magazine/.highlight/i-asked-sinwar-is-it-worth-10-000-gazans-dying-he-said-even-100-000-is-worth-it/0000018e-d40a-d5ed-adcf-f79af56c0000?lts=1713021614639
"Fatah talked about the 1967 borders, about the occupation, about the Palestinian people. To me, the Hamas inmates would say, "There's neither 1967 nor 1948. There are no borders and there is nothing to talk about. You are on Waqf land, Muslim sacred ground, and you have no place here." When I became an intelligence officer, I made use of the insight about Hamas and Fatah being from two different worlds. That wasn't understood on the outside until 2007."
But having said all that, you're right, I didn't know about that document. I'll mention it next time the point comes up.
@@comedycellarclips it totally is just a PR/propaganda document, theres no denying that, and all their extreme rhetoric and obfuscations are ridiculous, but Im just saying it needs to be acknowledged that Hamas does care about the West Bank and the rapidly expanding illegal settlements displacing more and more Palestinians as well as those in the West Bank being murdered by settlers/IDF with little to no recourse. I cant read that paywalled article but I don’t really mind about the excerpts you have shared, of course rank and file Hamas inmates (I’m guessing the intelligence officer was interrogating them in prison?) are gonna have a whole range of opinions, what I think matters more is Hamas openly saying in recent years, even after the Oct 7 attack, that they will negotiate a two state solution on 1967 borders. Anyways its cool you actually replied. Most youtube debate vids dont see that kind of engagement from the hosts in the comments.
@@comedycellarclips did you delete my reply?
Do you ever acknowledge the fact that if Israel would’ve ended its occupation decades ago maybe none of this would be happening? They’d possibly be living peacefully for the most part by now.
Do u ever acknowledge that if the Palestinians/arabs had ever accepted a state since 1947 and stop trying to wipe out the Jewish state then none of this would happen. But I know you think brown people have no agency
No, because there is no occupation. The land didn't belong to Arab Muslims because they were the majority. LOL. All Jews did was increase their numbers there.
Except "ending the occupation" means all of Israel to the other side of that equation.
You're supposed to know what you are talking about first and then give an opinion. Are you talking about the occupation that started in 1967 as the result of aggression by three Arab nations? Or are you talking about the blockade used by both Egypt and Israel in response to a terrorist group getting elected in 2006? Go hide in the tunnels with the terrorists if you want to be one of them. Find a smart friend to give you advice.
@@hg_rebaseEnding the occupation means:
1) abolishing the right of return for Jews with no connection to the territory.
2) Reinstatement of right of return for Palestenians displaced by the occupation.
3) Abolish the IDF.
This is unwatchable. The host won’t stop talking! The guest can’t get a word in!
Many pro israelís are like this. They have to defend themselves at every moment. The lack of arguments is suplanted with emocional mambojambo shit. It's just such a good comedy chanel
You say Hamas wants people to die only to remove fault from Israel. It’s disgusting.
But they do. They admit it. It's literally one of their military strategies that they openly admit to.
"So we need Israeli occupation...Nothing leads to peace"
Noam is vile
R u saying israel can’t murder it’s way out of all its problems? 🤔 It’s just crazy to me that they won’t consider peace. The international community could help make that finally happen.
This is so funny. Noahm just doesnt know that he doesnt know.
Being a troll without knowing it. So funny. Whatch out he.had eaten tons of.propaganda
For example?
@@comedycellarclips Justo listen to the guy. He's basically repeating all the israeli propaganda in sutil ways. It is discusting
apologist for Israeli OCCUPATION!!!