Analysis of the Israel-Palestine Conflict
When you have a disaster, and what happened on October
7th is a disaster,
one of the first things that happens is that
people begin to ask the question, "How did
this happen?" Right? "What's the root cause of this
problem? This is a disaster. We have to understand what
caused it so that we can work
to, uh, to make sure it doesn't happen again.
So we can work to shut it down and then make sure it doesn't happen
again."
Mm-hmm.
But once you start talking about the root causes, right, you end
up talking about how Israel was created, right?
And that means telling a story that is
not pretty about how the Zionists conquered Palestine.
Uh, and number two, it means talking about the
occupation, right? It, it, it's not like, uh,
Hamas attacked on October 7th because there were just a bunch
of anti-Semites who hated Jews and wanted to kill
Jews. This is not, you know, Nazi Germany, right?
This is directly related to the occupation and to what was
going on inside of Gaza, and it's not in
Israel's interest or the lobby's interest to have an open discourse
about what the Israelis have been doing to the Palestinians
since, I would say, roughly 1903 when the second Aliyah
came to Israel, uh, or came to what was then Palestine, right?
You wanna talk about that. And we don't wanna talk about,
from the lobby's point of view, the influence that the lobby has,
right? Uh, it's better from the lobby's point of view
if most
Americans think that, uh, American support of
Israel is just done for all the right moral and strategic reasons,
not because of the lobby. And when John Mearsheimer
and Steve Walt come along
and say, "You have to understand that this special relationship is
due in large part to the lobby's influence," that
is not an argument that, uh, people in the lobby want to hear.
People in the lobby understand that if you have an open discourse, Israel will
end up looking very bad, right? You don't wanna talk about the
occupation. You don't wanna talk about how Israel
was created, right?
I think what the Israelis are doing in
Gaza, uh, represents a massacre. I, I would use that
term given the number of civilians that they've killed and the fact
that they've been indiscriminate in terms of how they've been
bombing Gaza, and I believe that's to be condemned,
the killing
of civilians.
Uh, this is not legitimate collateral damage.
They're directly punishing the population.
So you're saying there's some degree of punishment, of collective end-
No, they're purposely killing civilians. It's-- this is the iron wall.
They're trying to beat the Palestinians into submission,
right?
There's no way you kill this many civilians,
um,
i-i-if you're trying to precisely take out Hamas
fighters.
And by the way, the Israeli spokesman, the IDF spokesman, has
explicitly said that we are not pursuing precision
bombing and that what we are doing is trying to, you know,
maximize the amount of destruction and damage, uh, that we can
inflict on the Palestinians. And, uh,
I, I, I think this is a major mistake o-on the part of
Israel. First of all, it ends up being a moral stain on your
reputation, number one. And number two, it doesn't work.
It doesn't work. The, the Palestinians are not gonna roll
over and submit to,
uh, Israeli domination of their life.
Um, so, you know, the whole concept of the iron
wall, uh, Jabotinsky's term, was misguided.
Um, and, and, and by the way, the iron-- if you look at what the Israelis are
doing, they're trying to do two things.
One is the iron wall, and that's where you punish the civilian
population in Gaza
and get them to submit. The other thing that they're trying to do
is get Hamas.
They wanna destroy Hamas, and the belief there is that
if they destroy
Hamas, they've solved the problem.
But as many Israelis know, including people on the hard right,
even if you destroy Hamas,
they are going to be replaced by another
group, another resistance group
End of transcript · 705 words