Israel Can’t Claim Self-Defense

You can’t claim self-defense when you’re committing acts of Genocide.

A Conversation

For context, I would like to point to a short conversation that took place in the commenting section of another article I wrote. The person attempting to argue is named Sydorov, and he ended the conversation hoping Hamas would come to get me in “a dark alley somewhere.” I’m not making this up.

“Do you believe that Israel has right to exist?” ~ Sydorov

I believe Jews have the right to exist. Nations are more complex, especially when they wield power in the worst ways.

^Note the distinction I made there. The fellow continued:

“What a great person you are! You believe that Jews have right to exist…What about tight to self defence? Should Jews be allowed to defend themselves from those who want them murdered? ~ Sydorov

This is a bit of a loaded question. If I asked you, “Should I be allowed to defend myself from those who want them murdered,” And you then say “sure,” that answer shouldn’t give me a license to beat the shit out of — or murder — a 5yr old kid.

Because the kid does not have the POWER to be an actual threat. That answer shouldn’t give me the license to commit genocide.

^As I’m a man who observes logical fallacies and rhetorical devices, I wasn’t falling for that one. I can tell a bullshit question when I see one. The guy didn’t like how I didn’t fall for his bullshit:

Answer, Sister! Answer! This is simple question. Yes or No will suffice. Then we can discuss the extend of self defense. ~ Sydorov

^I don’t know why he thinks I’m a woman, but it wasn’t anything big to correct on the spot. The bigger picture is how Sydorov got butthurt over how I ducked his loaded question. People who give bullshit, loaded questions love to suggest it’s a “yes or no” deal. They like to give complex issues little to no nuance. They like to throw an over-simplification trap onto people. Simply put, his question isn’t a yes or no deal, because committing genocide isn’t self-defense.

My U.S. Army Warrant Officer brother said it best when we were in his car: “You cannot claim self-defense when you are on the offensive.” And if you’re wondering, he has the same threat-analysis/strategy background I do.

My retort:

Complex matters, and complex people are not understood with mere simple questions. I said what I said, for an explicit reason as to not bullshit you, nor fall for any of your bullshit.

^I made my intent clear — I’m not here to bullshit anyone, nor will I fall for anyone’s bullshit. Including his. The conversation continued:

Refusal to answer a simple question is the answer. You do not believe that Israel has right to exist. Bad news for you — Israel is there to stay. And Jews will not be victims any more. ~ Sydorov

Israel — like any other nation-state — has NO right to commit Genocide.

Genocide is NOT self-defense.

You will burn in Hell in support of mass murder of innocents, especially thousands of children.

^As I said, of course he, as a bullshitting person, would continue to insist that his question is simple. One thing that’s certain, is that his intent is simple. He is simple. Maybe the question is simple. But the answer is complex. Just because you don’t like the answer, or how someone doesn’t fall for your bullshit, it doesn’t mean the question isn’t answered at all. His simple-minded position does not invalidate the complex answers given.

Let’s observe the guy’s last words:

And yet- you have not answered my question. I hope you one day meet those Hamas people in a dark alley somewhere. Enjoy it. ~ Sydorov

Conclusion

Based on the teachings from the U.S. Marine Corps War College, a threat is defined as intent + capabilities + vulnerabilities. For example, a “threat” to United States interests is defined by the adversary’s intent, plus the adversary’s capabilities, in addition to the United States vulnerabilities.

With this understanding, a threat to Israel’s interests is defined as their adversary’s intent plus their capabilities, in addition to Israel’s vulnerabilities.

And if Israel defines Hospitals in Gaza as a “threat” to their “interests,” then we as Americans should question what the hell Israel’s “interests” are, if not war crimes and mass genocide.

The truth: Palestinians are not a legitimate threat to Israel or Jews. As I stated before — Palestinian Jews exist. Palestinian Christians exist.

When I used the analogy of myself beating up (or murdering) a 5-year-old kid based on a perceived threat, I was pointing to the common sense fact of how a 5-year-old kid, while maybe having the intent on harming me, clearly cannot do so, for the child does not have the capability to do so. In addition to my lack of vulnerabilities, no the 5-year-old cannot hurt me. Therefore, I cannot claim self-defense in beating up that little kid.

This is the same point that flew over that guy’s head a Mach four. Israel cannot reasonably claim self-defense when Palestinians are not a legitimate threat to it.

Israel cannot claim self-defense when it is they who are on the offensive.

✪ I speak on power, protest, and politics. Subscribe. If you’re not a member, you can JOIN with my referral link. That way, you can support me directly and read other great thinkers! As I’m always in the streets documenting activism, so please consider my activism photography to augment your written work.