Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

As I do understand and empathize with your cause. And trust that I'm not looking for a political argument or the likes. The comment above is a painful cry out towards the absurdity of the situation in an attempt to shed some light on the colossal 'gap' between the worries of both sides..

Yes, the gap is certainly absurd (though I'm not sure about the validity of the numbers you quoted). But there are many absurdities about this conflict. This is what I posted here during the previous spat (exactly 600 days ago):

The mutual bloodshed is terrible, and, as a resident of Tel Aviv I'm personally affected, but there is one thing that has always perplexed me a bit, which is the perception of the actual ferocity of the conflict. Obviously, every death is a terrible loss, but this forum is fond of numbers, so while we're on the subject, here are some numbers:

The total number of deaths in the entire Israeli-Arab conflict over the past 70 years or so, is - according to Wikipedia - under 100,000. Out of which, about 25,000 are Israeli, a similar number are Palestinians, and the rest, I guess are casualties of all the other fighting arab countries combined, although the total seems to me a bit high. That's the total for the past 70 years.

By comparison, in the Libyan and Syrian civil wars, Wikipedia puts the number of deaths at about 30,000 in each country in the last year alone. And the Mexican drug war has claimed the lives of about 56,000 since 2006; some estimates go as high as 100,000.

So, not to compare suffering, but the entire Israeli-Arab conflict has claimed, over the last 70 years, more or less the same number of lives as the drug war in Mexico in the past 6.

In short, both sides are trying to recruit the world's support for what is, in reality, a very low-intensity conflict compared to just about any other violent conflict, anywhere else in the world.

a very low-intensity conflict compared to just about any other violent conflict, anywhere else in the world.

It's more medium-intensity than low-intensity. Yes, it's not open war. But neither is it as low-key as IRA bombings or Basque separatism. The Israeli-Arab conflict not only has a ton of money flowing in from other sources, it's also something of a proxy war from bigger players. The same can't be said of things like the Second Congo War - the most deadly war since WWII, but was geopolitically unimportant, and holds no benefit or kudos for the major players if they did get involved. The Israeli-Arab conflict also affects a lot of people and politics outside the Levant - both sides have a lot of prominent political and financial agitators. Compare to Cambodia's killing fields, an internal event with over a million dead... that had very little effect outside the country, and little in the way of agitators to draw attention.

So why do people harp on about the Israeli-Arab conflict? Because Israelis and Arabs keep on demanding the world's attention over the conflict, really.

And Wikipedia is a credible resource for providing accurate numbers? How about you spend a couple of hours tonight monitoring #GazaUnderAttack (https://twitter.com/search?q=%23gazaunderattack&src=typd) on Twitter, and let's both count the number of casualties (in the pictures) for the night. May I remind you these are human beings; children, women and young girls murdered, they're not soldiers @pron. Numbers are irrelevant in analyzing the situation or the conflict. Arab Leaders are to be damned for being so passive about all these atrocities (Libyan and Syrian civil wars included) and even contributing to some. That said, 'nothing' justifies 'Genocide'.

The irony of pointing out that Wikipedia lacks perfect credibility and then citing twitter posts as a source!

Those pictures under the #GazaUnderAttack are often fake (e.g. from other conflicts, such as Syria) as pointed out by the BBC [1] just yesterday.

Twitter posts are about as useful and hysterical (and in the literal meaning, not funny) as YouTube comments and for the large part do nothing to promote useful discussion or accurate reporting.

More to the point, why are you politicizing a discussion that so far has been thankfully apolitical?

[1]: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-28198622

I'm going to be as hand wavy as the BBC here: but in the past there has been fake Palestinian twitter accounts tweeting nonsense like this. It's a systemic way to discredit a source and deny the murders. I'm guessing, it's a form of electornic Mista'arvim http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mista%27arvim

@benjiz, because an apolitical discussion is the act of sharing soulless text without any particular depth. It's like focusing on a very narrow property/aspect of the discussion while neglecting context. Political discussions are not bad, they're great and conduce to sharing different perspectives of the same story. Extremism and non-balanced bias on the other hand are what this platform should avoid and have been avoided in this discussion (I hope).

Anyone whom can be bothered to read the Wikipedia "talk pages" can see for themselves that Wikipedia articles are edited to be thoroughly biased concerning Palestine/Israeli affairs.

I find it strange that you created an account less than 20 minutes ago to take part in the "political discussion" yourself, unless you're working professionally as part of the "hasbara" effort?!

If they hadn't posted that link (to the BBC), I would have.. and if I didn't already have an account, I would have made one, just for that one post. Someone had to point it out.

Well of course, "someone" has to post the propaganda, otherwise the public might find out the truth.

Which photos are the BBC referring to? They don't reference them so that calls into question the veracity of their claims.

Yes, children on both sides were killed in the last several days, and yes, the residents of Gaza are certainly worse off -- as they have been for the past many decades -- than most Israelis (mostly through no fault of Israel's). I really wish this conflict would end as soon as possible, and I'm actively trying, in my very modest civilian capacity, to advance a peaceful resolution. But let me assure you that no genocide is taking place.

I share the same hopes for peaceful resolution pron, and I personally, truly, appreciate your endeavors. If there's any way we can combine efforts to reach the same goals in balancing the odds, I'm more than willing to invest my time (among other resources) in that. I'm afraid, though, that deep geo-political agendas govern this conflict and any if not all civilian initiatives are dwarfed compared to these forces at play. I have witnessed, first-hand Israel's destruction, from the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in the 80's, Qana genocide in the 90's to the attacks on Lebanon in 2006 and I'm more than familiar with this entity's capacity of destruction; making it hard to believe that these are non civilian targeting attacks with the purpose of self-defense.

> reach the same goals in balancing the odds

Did you seriously just write that? As in you are trying to have more Israelis killed so there will be balance?

Tell me I misunderstood you.

Whatever those geopolitical forces are, unfortunately for the Arabs in the Middle East, Israel is the very least of their problems. There are far more destructive (and far, far more lethal) forces in the region, and the Arab-Israeli conflict is the least violent one in the Middle East by an order of magnitude.

FYI HN people don't line sarcasm or irony on the portal. I still try to figure it out why... Any time I see this, I kinda feel like:


Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact