Positions: Difference between revisions
(formatting israel palestine notes) |
(formatting israel palestine notes) |
||
Line 1,349: | Line 1,349: | ||
::*Israel seizes the Gaza Strip and the Sinai Peninsula (from Egypt), the West Bank of the Jordan River, | ::*Israel seizes the Gaza Strip and the Sinai Peninsula (from Egypt), the West Bank of the Jordan River, | ||
:::including East Jerusalem (from Jordan), and the Golan Heights (from Syria). | :::including East Jerusalem (from Jordan), and the Golan Heights (from Syria). | ||
:::*Casualties - ~850 Israelis killed, 4,500 wounded. | ;:::;*Casualties - ~850 Israelis killed, 4,500 wounded. | ||
::: | ;:::;10k-15k Egyptians killed, 4,300 capture. | ||
::: | ;:::;700 Jordanian soldiers killed, 2,500 wounded. | ||
::: | ;:::;Syrians lost between 1k-2.5k, and about 450 captured. | ||
::*1967 Palestinian exodus. | ::*1967 Palestinian exodus. | ||
::*280k-325k Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza, | ::*280k-325k Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza, | ||
Line 1,421: | Line 1,421: | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
Lead-up | ;Lead-up | ||
After the 1967 6-day war, the Israeli government voted to return captured territory to Syria and Egypt in exchange for peace and demilitarization, but these proposals were never proven to have been transmitted to either Arab state. | :*After the 1967 6-day war, the Israeli government voted to return captured territory to Syria and Egypt | ||
In the Khartoum Arab Summit, Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq, Algeria, Kuwait and Sudan all agreed to the "three no's," no peace, no recognition and no negotiation with Israel. | ::in exchange for peace and demilitarization, | ||
The War of Attrition takes place from 1967-1970, across the Egyptian and Jordanian borders, including both their militaries and the PLO, with Arafat coming to the head of the PLO in 1969. | ::but these proposals were never proven to have been transmitted to either Arab state. | ||
in December of 1970 in an article to the New York Times, Anwar Sadat agreed to recognize Israel as an independent state in exchange for a full withdrawal from the Sinai Peninsula along with other occupied Arab territories. | :*In the Khartoum Arab Summit, Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq, Algeria, Kuwait and Sudan | ||
Golda Meir put together a committee to examine the Egyptian peace proposal, but rejected said proposal feeling as though it would not ensure Israel's security, despite the committee unanimously concluding that Israel's interests would be served. | ::all agreed to the "three no's," no peace, no recognition and no negotiation with Israel. | ||
US was supplying Israel with military force since the 1960's and considered it an ally during the Cold War. | :*The War of Attrition takes place from 1967-1970, across the Egyptian and Jordanian borders, | ||
Resolution 242 called for Israel to abandon all of its 6-day war territorial gains and for every state in the region to have an official recognition of their boundaries and right to exist. | ::including both their militaries and the PLO, with Arafat coming to the head of the PLO in 1969. | ||
In October of 1972, facing mounting domestic pressure, Sadat declared his intention to go to war against Israel, even absent Soviet support. | :*in December of 1970 in an article to the New York Times, | ||
In February of 1973, Sadat made a final peace overture towards Israel via Kissinger, which Meir rejected, most likely with the understanding that war was invetiable. | ::Anwar Sadat agreed to recognize Israel as an independent state | ||
Israel did not think war was coming, despite multiple repeated credible warnings, including a warning from King Hussein himself. | ::in exchange for a full withdrawal from the Sinai Peninsula along with other occupied Arab territories. | ||
Israeli Preparation | :*Golda Meir put together a committee to examine the Egyptian peace proposal, | ||
Meir, the Chief of General Staff, opted not to attack Syria hours before the war began because he recognized the importance for not being blamed as starting any conflict in order to recruit American or other international assistance. | ::but rejected said proposal feeling as though it would not ensure Israel's security, | ||
Kissinger and Nixon warned Meir not to begin a pre-emptive war. | ::despite the committee unanimously concluding that Israel's interests would be served. | ||
Battle in the Sinai | :*US was supplying Israel with military force since the 1960's and considered it an ally during the Cold War. | ||
October 6th was the initial attacks from Egyptian aircraft. | :*[https://peacemaker.un.org/sites/peacemaker.un.org/files/SCRes242%281967%29.pdf Resolution 242] called for Israel to abandon all of its 6-day war territorial gains | ||
The US held back on supplies for Israel in order to encourage them to accept a ceasefire once hostilities began, but Sadat refused. The Soviets began supplying arms to Egypt and Syria while the US then resumed supplying arms to Israel. | ::and for every state in the region to have an official recognition of their boundaries and right to exist. | ||
Israel refrained from attacking economic and strategic infrastructure in response to Egyptian threats to fire Scud missiles onto Israeli cities. | :*In October of 1972, facing mounting domestic pressure, | ||
Israel managed to set up bridges and break through to the other end of the Suez canal, pushing into Egypt. | ::Sadat declared his intention to go to war against Israel, even absent Soviet support. | ||
Ceasefire | :*In February of 1973, Sadat made a final peace overture towards Israel via Kissinger, | ||
On October 22nd, 1973, the UNSC passed a 14-0 resolution calling for a ceasefire, negotiated mainly between the US and the USSR. | ::which Meir rejected, most likely with the understanding that war was invetiable. | ||
For the first time, three Scud Missiles were fired at Israeli targets by either Egyptian forces or Soviet personnel in Egypt, which was the first combat use of Scud Missiles. All three targets were in the Sinai. | :*Israel did not think war was coming, despite multiple repeated credible warnings, | ||
Ceasefire claims to have been broken by both sides during the night, and Israel capitalized on the ceasefire break to advance beyond the UNSC ceasefire lines. | ::including a warning from King Hussein himself. | ||
Egypt's Third Army | ;Israeli Preparation | ||
The US, seeing an opportunity to bring Egypt closer to its sphere of influence, exerted heavy pressure on Israel to refrain from destroying the trapped Third Army. | :*Meir, the Chief of General Staff, opted not to attack Syria hours before the war began | ||
Kissinger told the Israeli ambassador, Simcha Dinitz, that the destroying of the Egyptian Third Army "is an option that does not exist." | ::because he recognized the importance for not being blamed as starting any conflict | ||
Post-war Battles | ::in order to recruit American or other international assistance. | ||
The ceasefire wasn't followed closely by either side, with the fighting not stopping until January 18th, 1974. | :*Kissinger and Nixon warned Meir not to begin a pre-emptive war. | ||
The Israeli Army was 100 km from Cairo after their advancement from the west bank. | ;Battle in the Sinai | ||
Initial Syrian Attacks | :*October 6th was the initial attacks from Egyptian aircraft. | ||
The Syrians began their attacks with an airstrike against Israeli positions in the Golan Heights. | :*The US held back on supplies for Israel in order to encourage them to accept a ceasefire | ||
Syrians pushed Israeli military lines back to the Southern Golan Heights. | ::once hostilities began, but Sadat refused. | ||
Dayan discussed the possible arming of nuclear weapons in response to Syrian military gains. Meir rejected this option. Syrian mechanized brigades did not advance into Israel as they had feared an Israel nuclear response. | ::The Soviets began supplying arms to Egypt and Syria while the US then resumed supplying arms to Israel. | ||
Missiles from Syrian offensive lines struck civilian settlements in Israel, and in retaliation, seven Israeli F-4 Phantoms flew into Syria and attacked the Syrian General Staff Headquarters in Damascus. | :*Israel refrained from attacking economic and strategic infrastructure | ||
Israeli Advance towards Damascus | ::in response to Egyptian threats to fire Scud missiles onto Israeli cities. | ||
Israeli troops advanced towards Damascus and began shelling the outskirts of the city from 30km away. | :*Israel managed to set up bridges and break through to the other end of the Suez canal, pushing into Egypt. | ||
Arab Military Intervention | ;Ceasefire | ||
Syria and Iraq sent expeditionary forces into Syria to defend from further Israeli military advancement. | :*On October 22nd, 1973, the UNSC passed a 14-0 resolution calling for a ceasefire, | ||
Israel was able to launch strikes all across Syria, attacking power plants, petrol supplies, bridges and main roads. | ::negotiated mainly between the US and the USSR. | ||
Ceasefire | :*For the first time, three Scud Missiles were fired at Israeli targets | ||
On the 22nd of October, UNSC Resolution 338 called for a ceasefire. The war would finally come to a close on the 26th of October. | ::by either Egyptian forces or Soviet personnel in Egypt, | ||
Israel and Egypt signed a formal ceasefire on 11th of November, and the disengagement agreement happened on the 18th of January, 1974. | ::which was the first combat use of Scud Missiles. | ||
There was a secret agreement that Jordan and Israel would not heavily engage with each other. Hussein was pressured to enter the war to maintain his position of leadership and respect in the Arab world. | ::All three targets were in the Sinai. | ||
Naval Operations | :*Ceasefire claims to have been broken by both sides during the night, | ||
Egyptian missile boats bombarded Israeli positions on the Sinai coast on the first day of the war. Israeli missile boats decisively won these battles at sea. | ::and Israel capitalized on the ceasefire break to advance beyond the UNSC ceasefire lines. | ||
Two Egyptian destroyers enforced a blockade, preventing oil from Iran being shipped to Israel through the straights of Bab-el-Mandeb. | ;Egypt's Third Army | ||
Participation by other states | :*The US, seeing an opportunity to bring Egypt closer to its sphere of influence, | ||
The US intelligence community, including the CIA, failed to predict the Egyptian-Syrian attack on Israel. | ::exerted heavy pressure on Israel to refrain from destroying the trapped Third Army. | ||
Most officials in the Defense and Statement Departments opposed financing Israel, but Kissinger argued heavily in favor of supporting Israel so they would confirm to American views in postwar diplomacy. | ::*Kissinger told the Israeli ambassador, Simcha Dinitz, | ||
Meir authorized the assembly of thirteen 20-kiloton-TNT tactical nuclear weapons for Jericho missiles, done in an easily detectable way to signal to the United States. This was done on the 8-9th of October after previously rejecting this idea on the 7th. | :::that the destroying of the Egyptian Third Army "is an option that does not exist." | ||
On the 9th of October, after Kissinger learned of the nuclear alert, Nixon ordered the beginning of Operation Nickel Grass. | ;Post-war Battles | ||
The US, over 32 days, airlifted 22,325 tons of tanks, artillery and ammunition to Israel. | :*The ceasefire wasn't followed closely by either side, | ||
In later interviews, Kissinger, Schlesinger and William Quandt suggested that the nuclear aspect was not a major factor influencing re-supply. They cite Soviet re-supply efforts and Sadat's rejection of early ceasefires as being the primary motivators. | ::with the fighting not stopping until January 18th, 1974. | ||
The Soviet Union supplied around 80,000 tons of supplies, mainly to Syria, and also to Egypt. | :*The Israeli Army was 100 km from Cairo after their advancement from the west bank. | ||
Soviet advisors were reportedly involved in all areas of the war. 2,000 personnel in Syria, with 1,000 serving in Syrian air defense units. They also repaired damaged tanks, SAMs and radar equipment and assembled fighter jets. | ;Initial Syrian Attacks | ||
Soviet in advisors were reportedly present in all areas of Syrian command posts. | :*The Syrians began their attacks with an airstrike against Israeli positions in the Golan Heights. | ||
Israel may have captured and traded Soviet officers who were captured from the Syrian front, though Israel and the USSR denies this. | :*Syrians pushed Israeli military lines back to the Southern Golan Heights. | ||
In Syria, a Soviet cultural center in Damascus and a merchant ship, Ilya Mechnikov, was sunk by the Israeli Navy. | :*Dayan discussed the possible arming of nuclear weapons in response to Syrian military gains. | ||
This all occurred during the apex of the Watergate Scandal. Nixon was so agitated and discomposed that there were times with Kissinger and Haif didn't bother to wake him for consultation. | ::Meir rejected this option. | ||
Arab countries added up to 100,000 troops to Egypt and Syria's frontline ranks. | ::Syrian mechanized brigades did not advance into Israel as they had feared an Israel nuclear response. | ||
Algeria, East Germany, North Korean, Pakistan, Libya, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Morocco, Tunisia, Lebanon and Sudan all sent forces, ammo, tanks, pilots, etc... | :*Missiles from Syrian offensive lines struck civilian settlements in Israel, | ||
Response in Israel | ::and in retaliation, seven Israeli F-4 Phantoms flew into Syria | ||
Israel was shaken due to initial military difficulties and how unprepared they were in the beginning of the conflict. | ::and attacked the Syrian General Staff Headquarters in Damascus. | ||
Golda Meir resign along with her entire cabinet, including Dayan. | ;Israeli Advance towards Damascus | ||
Response in Egypt | :*Israeli troops advanced towards Damascus | ||
General Shazly angered Sadat for advocating the withdrawal of Egyptian forces from Sinai and was kicked out of the army, would go into political exile and then was placed under house arrest upon his return. | ::and began shelling the outskirts of the city from 30km away. | ||
The commanders of the Second and Third Armies, Khalil and Wasel, were also dismissed from the army. | ;Arab Military Intervention | ||
Response in Syria | :*Syria and Iraq sent expeditionary forces into Syria | ||
In Syria, Colonel Rafik Halawi, the Druze commander of an infantry brigade, was executed for his military performance. | ::to defend from further Israeli military advancement. | ||
Response from Soviet Union | :*Israel was able to launch strikes all across Syria, | ||
They mad, gave lots of stuff to the Arabs and were upset that they still lost. | ::attacking power plants, petrol supplies, bridges and main roads. | ||
Arab Oil Embargo | ;Ceasefire | ||
Saudi Arabia declared an embargo against the US, later joined by other oil exporters and extended against the Netherlands and other countries, causing the 1973 energy crisis. | :*On the 22nd of October, UNSC Resolution 338 called for a ceasefire. | ||
Casualties | ::The war would finally come to a close on the 26th of October. | ||
Israel - 2,521-2,800 KIA, 7,250-8,800 wounded, 293 captured | :*Israel and Egypt signed a formal ceasefire on 11th of November, | ||
Arab casualties - 8,000-18,500 killed, ~35,000 wounded? Official numbers never released. | ::and the disengagement agreement happened on the 18th of January, 1974. | ||
Syrian atrocities | :*There was a secret agreement that Jordan and Israel would not heavily engage with each other. | ||
Many Israeli POWs were tortured or killed. | ::Hussein was pressured to enter the war to maintain his position of leadership and respect in the Arab world. | ||
Syrian Defense Minster Mustafa Tlass addressed the National Assembly in 1973 stating that he had awarded one solder the Medal of the Republic for killing 28 Israeli prisoners with an axe, decapitating three of them and eating the flesh of one of his victims. (Did this actually happen???) | ;Naval Operations | ||
The original Jewish Telegraphic Agency article quotes and says the soldier from Aleppo killed 28 Israeli soldiers, 3 with an axe and devoured the flesh of one of them in hand to hand combat. | :*Egyptian missile boats bombarded Israeli positions on the Sinai coast on the first day of the war. | ||
A soldier from the Moroccan contingent fighting with Syrian forces was found to be carrying a sack filled with the body parts of Israeli soldiers which he intended to take home as souvenirs. | ::Israeli missile boats decisively won these battles at sea. | ||
Syrian soldiers removed dog tags from bodies. | :*Two Egyptian destroyers enforced a blockade, | ||
Syria did not even officially acknowledge holding any prisoners to the International Committee of the Red Cross. | ::preventing oil from Iran being shipped to Israel through the straights of Bab-el-Mandeb. | ||
Egyptian atrocities | ;Participation by other states | ||
Multiple Israeli claims of prisoners being shot and killed. | :*The US intelligence community, including the CIA, | ||
Photographic evidence of the torture/killings of Israeli POWs also exists. | ::failed to predict the Egyptian-Syrian attack on Israel. | ||
The order to kill Israeli prisoners came from General Shazly, who, in a pamphlet distributed to Egyptian soldiers immediately before the war, advised his troops to kill Israeli soldiers even if they surrendered. | :*Most officials in the Defense and Statement Departments opposed financing Israel, | ||
::but Kissinger argued heavily in favor of supporting Israel so they would confirm to American views in postwar diplomacy. | |||
:*Meir authorized the assembly of thirteen 20-kiloton-TNT tactical nuclear weapons for Jericho missiles, | |||
::done in an easily detectable way to signal to the United States. | |||
::This was done on the 8-9th of October after previously rejecting this idea on the 7th. | |||
:*On the 9th of October, after Kissinger learned of the nuclear alert, | |||
::Nixon ordered the beginning of Operation Nickel Grass. | |||
::*The US, over 32 days, airlifted 22,325 tons of tanks, artillery and ammunition to Israel. | |||
::*In later interviews, Kissinger, Schlesinger and William Quandt | |||
:::suggested that the nuclear aspect was not a major factor influencing re-supply. | |||
:::They cite Soviet re-supply efforts and Sadat's rejection of early ceasefires as being the primary motivators. | |||
:*The Soviet Union supplied around 80,000 tons of supplies, mainly to Syria, and also to Egypt. | |||
:*Soviet advisors were reportedly involved in all areas of the war. | |||
::2,000 personnel in Syria, with 1,000 serving in Syrian air defense units. | |||
::They also repaired damaged tanks, SAMs and radar equipment and assembled fighter jets. | |||
:*Soviet in advisors were reportedly present in all areas of Syrian command posts. | |||
:*Israel may have captured and traded Soviet officers who were captured from the Syrian front, | |||
::though Israel and the USSR denies this. | |||
:*In Syria, a Soviet cultural center in Damascus and a merchant ship, Ilya Mechnikov, was sunk by the Israeli Navy. | |||
::This all occurred during the apex of the Watergate Scandal. | |||
::Nixon was so agitated and discomposed that there were times with Kissinger | |||
::and Haif didn't bother to wake him for consultation. | |||
:*Arab countries added up to 100,000 troops to Egypt and Syria's frontline ranks. | |||
::*Algeria, East Germany, North Korean, Pakistan, Libya, Saudi Arabia, | |||
:::Kuwait, Morocco, Tunisia, Lebanon and Sudan all sent forces, ammo, tanks, pilots, etc... | |||
;Response in Israel | |||
:*Israel was shaken due to initial military difficulties | |||
::and how unprepared they were in the beginning of the conflict. | |||
:*Golda Meir resign along with her entire cabinet, including Dayan. | |||
;Response in Egypt | |||
:*General Shazly angered Sadat for advocating the withdrawal of Egyptian forces from Sinai and was kicked out of the army, | |||
::would go into political exile and then was placed under house arrest upon his return. | |||
:*The commanders of the Second and Third Armies, Khalil and Wasel, were also dismissed from the army. | |||
;Response in Syria | |||
:*In Syria, Colonel Rafik Halawi, the Druze commander of an infantry brigade, was executed for his military performance. | |||
;Response from Soviet Union | |||
:*They mad, gave lots of stuff to the Arabs and were upset that they still lost. | |||
;Arab Oil Embargo | |||
:*Saudi Arabia declared an embargo against the US, | |||
::later joined by other oil exporters and extended against the Netherlands and other countries, | |||
::causing the 1973 energy crisis. | |||
;Casualties | |||
;Israel - 2,521-2,800 KIA, 7,250-8,800 wounded, 293 captured | |||
;Arab casualties - 8,000-18,500 killed, ~35,000 wounded? Official numbers never released. | |||
;Syrian atrocities | |||
:*Many Israeli POWs were tortured or killed. | |||
::*Syrian Defense Minster Mustafa Tlass addressed the National Assembly in 1973 | |||
:::stating that he had awarded one solder the Medal of the Republic | |||
:::for killing 28 Israeli prisoners with an axe, | |||
:::decapitating three of them and eating the flesh of one of his victims. (Did this actually happen???) | |||
:::*The original [http://pdfs.jta.org/1975/1975-07-25_142.pdf Jewish Telegraphic Agency] article quotes and says the soldier from Aleppo killed 28 Israeli soldiers, | |||
::::3 with an axe and devoured the flesh of one of them in hand to hand combat. | |||
:*A soldier from the Moroccan contingent fighting with Syrian forces | |||
::was found to be carrying a sack filled with the body parts of Israeli soldiers which he intended to take home as souvenirs. | |||
:*Syrian soldiers removed dog tags from bodies. | |||
:*Syria did not even officially acknowledge holding any prisoners to the International Committee of the Red Cross. | |||
;Egyptian atrocities | |||
:*Multiple Israeli claims of prisoners being shot and killed. | |||
:*Photographic evidence of the torture/killings of Israeli POWs also exists. | |||
:*The order to kill Israeli prisoners came from General Shazly, | |||
::who, in a pamphlet distributed to Egyptian soldiers immediately before the war, | |||
::advised his troops to kill Israeli soldiers even if they surrendered. | |||
|} | |} | ||
{| class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed wikitable" | {| class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed wikitable" | ||
Line 1,680: | Line 1,741: | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
Background | ;Background | ||
Violence continued on both sides after the Oslo accords were signed in 1993. | :*Violence continued on both sides after the Oslo accords were signed in 1993. | ||
Israel engaged in regimental level exercises that were in preparation for peace talks to fail, so it could conquer towns in Area C. | :*Israel engaged in regimental level exercises that were in preparation for peace talks to fail, | ||
The failure of the Camp David Summit lead to a significant fracturing of the PLO as many Fatah factions abandoned it to join Hamas and Islamic Jihad. | ::so it could conquer towns in Area C. | ||
Netanyahu's government pushed for the construction of a new neighborhood, Har Homa, in East Jerusalem, and continued construction within existing Israeli settlements. Construction in the years following the Oslo Accords was still significantly less than prior, however. | :*The failure of the Camp David Summit lead to a significant fracturing of the PLO | ||
Barak secured an agreement for the dismantling of 12 new outposts in 1998, but continued expansion was occurring in existing settlements in the West Bank. This continued to hurt the Palestinian peace process. | ::as many Fatah factions abandoned it to join Hamas and Islamic Jihad. | ||
Sharon visits the Temple Mount on September 28th, 2000. | :*Netanyahu's government pushed for the construction of a new neighborhood, Har Homa, in East Jerusalem, | ||
Sharon visits the Temple Mount, without stepping inside, but this still angers local Palestinians living in Jerusalem. | ::and continued construction within existing Israeli settlements. | ||
Multiple senior Palestinian officials encouraged Sharon not to visit. Sharon was determined to make a show of Israeli sovereignty over the Temple Mount. | ::Construction in the years following the Oslo Accords was still significantly less than prior, however. | ||
In 1982, the Kahan Commission found that Ariel Sharon was found to bear personal responsibility for the Sabra and Shatila massacre that occurred against Palestinians in the Lebanese Civil War. | :*Barak secured an agreement for the dismantling of 12 new outposts in 1998, | ||
Sharon's visit to the Temple Mount 10 days after the annual memorial day for said massacre is said to have been the inciting moment for the beginning of the Second Intifada. | ::but continued expansion was occurring in existing settlements in the West Bank. | ||
First days of the intifada | ::This continued to hurt the Palestinian peace process. | ||
Violence broke out heavily in the days following, with losses on the Palestinian side far outweighing Israeli losses. | ;Sharon visits the Temple Mount on September 28th, 2000. | ||
The broadcasted killing of Muhammad al-Durrah, caught by a French news crew, was initially assumed to be the responsibility of the IDF, which they promptly apologized for, though much controversy remains over who actually shot and killed the boy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUz55tLLXUg&t=1019s | :*Sharon visits the Temple Mount, without stepping inside, | ||
The October 2000 events | ::but this still angers local Palestinians living in Jerusalem. | ||
Several clashes occurred within Israel and the Gaza Strip, followed by a general strike, | ::Violence breaks out. | ||
The Ramallah lynching | :*Multiple senior Palestinian officials encouraged Sharon not to visit. | ||
The PA police arrested two Israeli reservists who had accidentally entered Ramallah, where a hundred Palestinians had been killed in the preceding weeks. | ::Sharon was determined to make a show of Israeli sovereignty over the Temple Mount. | ||
An Italian television crew captured and broadcasted the killings, where both soldiers were beaten, stabbed and disembowelled, with one body being set on fire. | ;In 1982, the Kahan Commission found that Ariel Sharon was found to bear personal responsibility for the Sabra | ||
November and December | ::and Shatila massacre that occurred against Palestinians in the Lebanese Civil War. | ||
Clashes continue. Israel settlements in Gilo come under Palestinian heavy machine gun fire from Beit Jala. | :*Sharon's visit to the Temple Mount 10 days after the annual memorial day for said massacre | ||
Palestinian deaths continue to outnumber Israeli deaths. | ::is said to have been the inciting moment for the beginning of the Second Intifada. | ||
2001 | ;First days of the intifada | ||
The Taba Summit failed to produce results by the end of January. | :*Violence broke out heavily in the days following, | ||
On January 17th, an Israeli teenager, Ofir Rahum, was murdered after being lured into Ramallah by a 24-year-old Palestinian, a member of Fatah's Tanzim, after an online relationship had sparked. | ::with losses on the Palestinian side far outweighing Israeli losses. | ||
After Sharon's election in 2001 over Barak, he refuses to meet with Yasser Arafat. | :*The broadcasted killing of Muhammad al-Durrah, caught by a French news crew, | ||
More violence occurs through March, with 8 Israelis and 26 Palestinians dying. In Hebron, a Palestinian sniper is reported by the IDF to have intentionally targeted and shot/killed a 10 month old Israeli baby. | ::was initially assumed to be the responsibility of the IDF, which they promptly apologized for, | ||
In May of 2001, the IDF captured a vessel carrying $10m of weapons from the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, which was destined for the Gaza coast. | ::though much controversy remains over who actually shot and killed the boy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUz55tLLXUg&t=1019s | ||
On June 1st a suicide bombing killing 21 Israeli civilians, most high schoolers, by the Islamic Jihad, hampered the American attempts to negotiate a cease-fire. | ;The October 2000 events | ||
2002 | :*Several clashes occurred within Israel and the Gaza Strip, followed by a general strike, | ||
The IDF captured Karine A, a freighter carrying weapons from Iran, believed to be intended for Palestinian militant use against Israel. It was claimed that top officials in the PA were involved in the smuggling. | ::more escalations with police, thousands of Jews participating in violent acts in Tel Aviv, | ||
On the 28th of March the Arab Peace Initiative, endorsed by Arafat, encourages a two state solution, with Israel withdrawing all troops to the pre 1967 borders, with a full Right of Return for every Arab Palestinian. | ::and a recommendation from the Or Commission to dismiss Shlomo Ben-Ami from Minister of Public Security. | ||
On the 29th of March, Operation Defensive Shield has the IDF making incursions throughout the West Bank. The UN estimates 497 Palestinians killed and 1,447 wounded, with 4,258 arrested. | ;The Ramallah lynching | ||
In April, the Battle of Jenin takes place. This was a huge battle seeing fierce urban combat by the IDF to clear out the refugee camp of the city of Jenin. | :*The PA police arrested two Israeli reservists who had accidentally entered Ramallah, | ||
2003 | ::where a hundred Palestinians had been killed in the preceding weeks. | ||
Israeli intelligence report claimed Arafat had paid $20,000 to the al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades. | :*An Italian television crew captured and broadcasted the killings, where both soldiers were beaten, | ||
US pressure caused the PA to appoint Mahmoud Abbas as the Palestinian prime minister. | ::stabbed and disembowelled, with one body being set on fire. | ||
Mahmoud Abbas has a thesis that the early Zionist leaders and Nazi leaders collaborated to encourage Jewish migration to Mandatory Palestine. | ;November and December | ||
On June of 2003, a temporary armistice was unilaterally declared by Fatah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad. Fighting continues. | :*Clashes continue. | ||
After an August 19th Hamas suicide bus attack, the IDF were ordered to kill or capture all Hamas leadership in Hebron and the Gaza Strip, with at least all of the bus suicide bombing plotters being captured or killed, and Hamas leadership in Hebron being badly damaged. | ::Israel settlements in Gilo come under Palestinian heavy machine gun fire from Beit Jala. | ||
In later 2003, the Israeli West Bank barrier is constructed. Israel claims its necessary to prevent terrorists from entering Israeli cities, while Palestinians claim it separates their communities and acts as a de facto annexation of their territory. | :*Palestinian deaths continue to outnumber Israeli deaths. | ||
2004 | ;2001 | ||
The IDF operates heavily in Rafah, to search and destroy smuggling tunnels used by militants to obtain a variety of weapons and supplies. Between 2000-2004, 90 tunnels connecting Egypt and the Gaza Strip were found and destroyed. | :*The Taba Summit failed to produce results by the end of January. | ||
16,000 Palestinians are displaced as the IDF demolishes what they are claim are empty or militant homes. | :*On January 17th, an Israeli teenager, Ofir Rahum, | ||
In February, Ariel Sharon announced a plan to withdraw all Jewish settlers from the Gaza Strip. | ::was murdered after being lured into Ramallah by a 24-year-old Palestinian, | ||
Yossi Beilin, a peace advocate and the architect of the Oslo Accords and the Geneva Accord, rejected the proposed withdrawal plan and claimed that without a peace agreement in place, it would reward terror. | ::a member of Fatah's Tanzim, after an online relationship had sparked. | ||
After announcing the declaration plan, two subsequent Hamas leaders, Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, | :*After Sharon's election in 2001 over Barak, he refuses to meet with Yasser Arafat. | ||
2005 | :*More violence occurs through March, with 8 Israelis and 26 Palestinians dying. | ||
Palestinian presidential elections were held on the 9th of January, with Mahmoud Abbas winning the election. | ::In Hebron, a Palestinian sniper is reported by the IDF | ||
Abbas was a platform of peaceful negotiation with Israel and non-violence to achieve Palestinian objectives. | ::to have intentionally targeted and shot/killed a 10 month old Israeli baby. | ||
Sharon froze all diplomatic and security contacts with the PNA until Abbas shows a real effort to stop the terror. | :*In May of 2001, the IDF captured a vessel carrying $10m of weapons from the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, | ||
Abbas ordered Palestinian police to deploy in northern Gaza to prevent Qassam rocket and mortar shelling over Israeli settlements. Attacks would decrease sharply soon after. | ::which was destined for the Gaza coast. | ||
On February 8th, Sharon and Abbas declared a mutual truce. | :*On June 1st a suicide bombing killing 21 Israeli civilians, most high schoolers, by the Islamic Jihad, | ||
Hamas and Islamic Jihad said the truce doesn't affect them. | ::hampered the American attempts to negotiate a cease-fire. | ||
25-50 Qassam rockets and mortar shells were fired into an Israeli Gaza settlement, Neve Dekalim. Abbas ordered the PA security forces to stop such attacks in the future, and fired senior commanders in the PA security apparatus. | ;2002 | ||
IDF forces arrested Maharan Omar Shucat Abu Hamis, a Palestinian resident of Nablus, who was about to launch a suicide bus attack in the French Hill in Jerusalem. | :*The IDF captured Karine A, a freighter carrying weapons from Iran, | ||
On February 13th, Abbas engages Islamic Jihad and Hamas in talks to respect the truce. | ::believed to be intended for Palestinian militant use against Israel. | ||
Ismail Haniyah, a senior leader of the group Hamas, | ::It was claimed that top officials in the PA were involved in the smuggling. | ||
Palestinian factions continued to attack settlements in Gaza and cities in Israel, until July 15th, when Israel resumed its targeted killing policy. | :*On the 28th of March the Arab Peace Initiative, endorsed by Arafat, | ||
Hamas militants are battling PA policemen in the streets. | ::encourages a two state solution, | ||
Aftermath | ::with Israel withdrawing all troops to the pre 1967 borders, | ||
On February 8th, 2005, Sharon and Abbas reach a truce, with Sharon releasing 900 Palestinian prisoners, withdrawing from West Bank towns, and finishing the Gaza withdrawal. | ::with a full Right of Return for every Arab Palestinian. | ||
Abbas reached an agreement 5 days later with Hamas and the PIJ to ensure the truce remains as long as Israeli violations did not happen. | :*On the 29th of March, Operation Defensive Shield has the IDF making incursions throughout the West Bank. | ||
A number of people from Hamas leadership and a former military commander of the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine all claim that Arafat had pre-planned the Second Intifada after realizing he would not get the concessions he wanted in the Camp David Accords. His widowed wife, Suha Arafat also claimed the same. | ::The UN estimates 497 Palestinians killed and 1,447 wounded, with 4,258 arrested. | ||
Israeli's unilateral pullout from Lebanon was seen by the PLO as "optimistic", and an "example for other Arabs seeking to regain their rights." | :*In April, the Battle of Jenin takes place. | ||
Israeli's military response in 2001 destroyed much infrastructure that was involved in the arming of Palestinian forces; some 90 paramilitary camps had been set up to train Palestinian youths in armed conflict. Some 40,000 armed and trained Palestinians existed in the occupied territories. | ::This was a huge battle seeing fierce urban combat by the IDF to clear out the refugee camp of the city of Jenin. | ||
Marwan Barghouti, the leader of the Fatah Tanzim, claimed he was attempting to instigate a second intifada leading up to the al-Aqsa visit by Sharon, contacting all Palestinian factions throughout Palestine. He also claimed that Israel's withdrawal from Lebanon was a factor which contributed to the Intifada. | ;2003 | ||
Casualties | :*Israeli intelligence report claimed Arafat had paid $20,000 to the al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades. | ||
1,053 Israelis were killed, 4,745 Palestinians were killed by the IDF, and 44 by Israeli civilians, and 577 by Palestinians. | ::*US pressure caused the PA to appoint Mahmoud Abbas as the Palestinian prime minister. | ||
69% of Israeli fatalities were male, while over 95% of Palestinian fatalities were male. | :::*Mahmoud Abbas has a thesis that the early Zionist leaders and Nazi leaders collaborated | ||
More Aftermath | ::::to encourage Jewish migration to Mandatory Palestine. | ||
On January 25th, 2006, Hamas won the Palestinian elections with an unexpected majority of 74 seats, compared to 45 for Fatah. | :*On June of 2003, a temporary armistice was unilaterally declared by Fatah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad. | ||
In the 2001 and 2002 Arab League Summits, the Arab states pledged support for the Second Intifada just as they had pledged support for the First Intifada in two consecutive summits in the late 1980s. | ::Fighting continues. | ||
Noteworthy things for modern conflict | :*After an August 19th Hamas suicide bus attack, | ||
History of huge employment of suicide bombers explicitly targeting civilians. | ::the IDF were ordered to kill or capture all Hamas leadership in Hebron and the Gaza Strip, | ||
History of shipments of weapons via ocean into Gaza Strip. | ::with at least all of the bus suicide bombing plotters being captured or killed, | ||
History of hiding militants inside "refugee" camps/cities. | ::and Hamas leadership in Hebron being badly damaged. | ||
History of one-sided military capability of Israel vs the Palestinians. | :*In later 2003, the Israeli West Bank barrier is constructed. | ||
History of Israel denying UN or Human Rights groups to investigate after battles. | ::Israel claims its necessary to prevent terrorists from entering Israeli cities, | ||
Israeli government explicit support for settler camps and refusal to remove them (Netenyahu and Sharon). | ::while Palestinians claim it separates their communities and acts as a de facto annexation of their territory. | ||
;2004 | |||
:*The IDF operates heavily in Rafah, | |||
::to search and destroy smuggling tunnels used by militants to obtain a variety of weapons and supplies. | |||
::Between 2000-2004, 90 tunnels connecting Egypt and the Gaza Strip were found and destroyed. | |||
::*16,000 Palestinians are displaced as the IDF demolishes what they are claim are empty or militant homes. | |||
:*In February, Ariel Sharon announced a plan to withdraw all Jewish settlers from the Gaza Strip. | |||
::*Yossi Beilin, a peace advocate and the architect of the Oslo Accords and the Geneva Accord, | |||
::rejected the proposed withdrawal plan and claimed that without a peace agreement in place, it would reward terror. | |||
:*After announcing the declaration plan, two subsequent Hamas leaders, Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, | |||
::and his successor, Abdel Aziz al-Rantissi were killed. | |||
;2005 | |||
:*Palestinian presidential elections were held on the 9th of January, | |||
::with Mahmoud Abbas winning the election. | |||
::*Abbas was a platform of peaceful negotiation with Israel and non-violence to achieve Palestinian objectives. | |||
::*Sharon froze all diplomatic and security contacts with the PNA | |||
:::until Abbas shows a real effort to stop the terror. | |||
::*Abbas ordered Palestinian police to deploy in northern Gaza | |||
:::to prevent Qassam rocket and mortar shelling over Israeli settlements. | |||
:::Attacks would decrease sharply soon after. | |||
:*On February 8th, Sharon and Abbas declared a mutual truce. | |||
::*Hamas and Islamic Jihad said the truce doesn't affect them. | |||
::*25-50 Qassam rockets and mortar shells were fired into an Israeli Gaza settlement, Neve Dekalim. | |||
:::Abbas ordered the PA security forces to stop such attacks in the future, | |||
:::and fired senior commanders in the PA security apparatus. | |||
::*IDF forces arrested Maharan Omar Shucat Abu Hamis, a Palestinian resident of Nablus, | |||
:::who was about to launch a suicide bus attack in the French Hill in Jerusalem. | |||
:*On February 13th, Abbas engages Islamic Jihad and Hamas in talks to respect the truce. | |||
::*Ismail Haniyah, a senior leader of the group Hamas, s | |||
::aid its position will remain unchanged and Israel will bear responsibility for any new violation of aggression. | |||
::*Palestinian factions continued to attack settlements in Gaza and cities in Israel, | |||
:::until July 15th, when Israel resumed its targeted killing policy. | |||
::*Hamas militants are battling PA policemen in the streets. | |||
;Aftermath | |||
:*On February 8th, 2005, Sharon and Abbas reach a truce, with Sharon releasing 900 Palestinian prisoners, | |||
::withdrawing from West Bank towns, and finishing the Gaza withdrawal. | |||
::*Abbas reached an agreement 5 days later with Hamas and the PIJ to ensure the truce remains as long as Israeli violations did not happen. | |||
:*A number of people from Hamas leadership and a former military commander of the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine | |||
::all claim that Arafat had pre-planned the Second Intifada | |||
::after realizing he would not get the concessions he wanted in the Camp David Accords. | |||
::His widowed wife, Suha Arafat also claimed the same. | |||
:*Israeli's unilateral pullout from Lebanon was seen by the PLO as "optimistic", | |||
::and an "example for other Arabs seeking to regain their rights." | |||
:*Israeli's military response in 2001 destroyed much infrastructure that was involved in the arming of Palestinian forces; | |||
::some 90 paramilitary camps had been set up to train Palestinian youths in armed conflict. | |||
::Some 40,000 armed and trained Palestinians existed in the occupied territories. | |||
:*Marwan Barghouti, the leader of the Fatah Tanzim, | |||
::claimed he was attempting to instigate a second intifada leading up to the al-Aqsa visit by Sharon, | |||
::contacting all Palestinian factions throughout Palestine. | |||
::He also claimed that Israel's withdrawal from Lebanon was a factor which contributed to the Intifada. | |||
;Casualties | |||
;1,053 Israelis were killed, | |||
;4,745 Palestinians were killed by the IDF, | |||
;and 44 by Israeli civilians, and 577 by Palestinians. | |||
;69% of Israeli fatalities were male, while over 95% of Palestinian fatalities were male. | |||
;More Aftermath | |||
::*On January 25th, 2006, Hamas won the Palestinian elections | |||
:::with an unexpected majority of 74 seats, compared to 45 for Fatah. | |||
;In the 2001 and 2002 Arab League Summits, the Arab states pledged support for the Second Intifada | |||
;just as they had pledged support for the First Intifada in two consecutive summits in the late 1980s. | |||
;Noteworthy things for modern conflict | |||
*History of huge employment of suicide bombers explicitly targeting civilians. | |||
*History of shipments of weapons via ocean into Gaza Strip. | |||
*History of hiding militants inside "refugee" camps/cities. | |||
*History of one-sided military capability of Israel vs the Palestinians. | |||
*History of Israel denying UN or Human Rights groups to investigate after battles. | |||
*Israeli government explicit support for settler camps and refusal to remove them (Netenyahu and Sharon). | |||
|} | |} | ||
|} | |} | ||
{| class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed wikitable" | {| class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed wikitable" | ||
|+ style=white-space:nowrap | History of Israel and Palestine... | |+ style=white-space:nowrap | History of Israel and Palestine... |
Revision as of 11:43, 29 December 2023
The Positions Page, previously positions.destiny.gg, was a sub-section of the Destiny.gg website used by Destiny to provide a written log of various aspects of his political positions, personal life, and interactions with others in the streaming space. Destiny's Blog functioned similarly to his positions page.
Currently Destiny uses Obsidian to consolidate his thoughts and outline debate points/questions.
The following sections are the archived contents of the Positions page and the currently published Obsidian notes
written by Destiny.
Positions Page Archive:
Who am I? | My name is Steven Bonnell and my online handle across Twitch, YouTube and Instagram is Destiny. I'm most well known for my political content online, but I started my career as a Starcraft 2 livestreamer. Today I livestream most aspects of my life, including gaming, online debates, and canvassing for political change. Throughout my life I have always tried to ensure the consistency of my beliefs, and to test my ideas I would argue with others. |
My political advocacy | Starting in November of 2020, I attempted to spin up an organization to mobilize youth into direct, local political action. Our first efforts were in Georgia, where we knocked on over 20,000 doors in support of Jon Ossoff and Reverend Warnock. For my next effort, I wanted to focus on my hometown of Omaha, Nebraska to see if we could mobilize enough volunteers to get a progressive candidate elected to office. Unfortunately because of how people and news organizations mischaracterized my actions, I was forced to stop campaigning for my mayor of choice. I've also interviewed a number of individuals (1,2,3,4)running for state and local offices while exposing fraud in other candidates. |
Why this page exists | Many things are said about who I am or what I believe in. Oftentimes, people make absurd claims about my beliefs, such as that I advocate for the indiscriminate killing of BLM protestors, that I'm a nazi, that I'm a communist, etc. This is partially my fault as I have a history of being hyperbolic in some circumstances, and I often engage with people who aren't really interested in good faith conversations. Part of this is also due to my huge backlog of content and the nature of the internet - I understand that sifting through thousands of hours of debates to find my fully fleshed-out views is not a practical demand to make of people.
As I've evolved both in my political and social views, and as I've continued to produce more hours of content, it is now possible that you could cherry pick almost any 30 seconds of me to claim I represent any given political or social viewpoint. As such, it is necessary to take preventative measures against this, as I have dealt with such behavior already. In 2021, I committed myself to a strategy of being more rhetorically effective, especially concerning how people represent me or my beliefs. As a part of this strategy, the following pages are my effort to "set the record straight" insofar as my actual beliefs, as opposed to what others claim them to be. I'll include within these pages a record of most of my political and philosophical positions, as well as any positions I have relating to current events. |
Breonna Taylor | It is stated that Breonna Taylor was killed in her bed or while asleep almost ubiquitously across social media (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9) despite this not being the truth. What happened to Breonna Taylor was wrong, and the police conduct that day deserves to be called into question. However, starting that discussion with an incorrect description of what happened weakens our arguments against those on the right that disagree with us. This is because we now have to begin by making concessions about lies or misrepresentations from people who purport to agree with us. Furthermore, it casts doubt about the truth of the rest of the argument for those in the middle who are unsure of where the fault lies.
A user in my community, "DaSkrubKing," provides a detailed breakdown of what happened the night of Breonna Taylor's death. The key takeaways for what happened are: 1.Louisville police were serving a "knock and announce" warrant at Breonna Taylor's apartment thinking she would be the only one present. Breonna Taylor was neither asleep nor was she in bed when she was killed by police officers. This does not excuse their actions or make her death any less tragic, but stating that she was killed while she was asleep in her bed is simply incorrect. The claims we should be making about Breonna Taylor's death, which are grounded in the reality of the situation, are as follows: •It seems obvious that insufficient notice was given before the door was broken in. Only one neighbor reported hearing anything at all before police broke in the door. |
The GameStop short squeeze | I've written extensively on my view of the wallstreetbets "fight" with Melvin Capital over the GameStop stock. The summary of my position is essentially the following:
There was never any reason to believe a massive short squeeze was coming. The big winners were not "little retail traders." Robinhood did not halt trading to "protect hedge funds." Most alternative media figures/outlets got many fundamental facts of the case wrong. For a longer and more formal write-up of my view on the GME situation, see my write-up here: BrainStop. I've also done a video review of said document on my YouTube channel. |
Kyle Rittenhouse ("mowing down protestors") | In general, I do not support vigilantism. I think Kyle Rittenhouse was clearly misguided in his attempts to cross state borders and should have stayed home. I also think there are steps he could have taken to minimize the risk of him needing to discharge a firearm.
Of a larger 20+ minute debate with someone, a short 16 second clip was cut to make it sound as though I support violence against Black Lives Matter protesters when this couldn't be further from the truth. I am incredibly heated in this clip, but I am clear when I state that my main frustration is with the few rioters burning down private businesses and the idea that Trump's only path to victory was with continued arson and destruction of privately owned businesses across the US (full conversation in August of 2020 with context part clipped). I have always defended the existence of BLM and its purpose, sometimes in front of live audiences as the only liberal member on a panel.
(Jesse Lee Peterson panel in October of 2020|Conversation with call-in defending the existence and effectiveness of BLM's protests|Panel debate in August of 2020|Support in November of 2018 of Kaepernick kneeling in the NFL|Attacking Dave Rubin's criticisms of Kaepernick's protests in September 2017) I have continually defended protesting, and even rioting against public institutions while condemning the rioting/looting of private businesses, as I believe the latter feeds into Republican tactics to draw attention away from the overwhelmingly positive protests. (Discussion about Minneapolis protesting/looting in May of 2020|Debate with conservative/Neo-Nazi(?) Ethan Ralph in June 2020|Discussion on my stream in September of 2020) My specific issue in this debate was that I didn't believe it was morally acceptable to defend rioters destroying private businesses, regardless of their legitimate grievances with the local police. When I think of rioters attacking and destroying private property, I generally support citizens' rights to defend that property. I think back to the Korean-Americans that were defending their property in the '92 LA Riots, the Black Panthers in California defending their communities, or the tragedy of the "Black Wall Street" Tulsa massacre in 1921. I was especially moved by the frustrated, black local business owner who was screaming out in frustration about looters and rioters destroying his business in the '92 LA Riots.
It's incredibly frustrating that people have intentionally and maliciously misconstrued a 16 second cut from a larger conversation to make it sound as though I don't support the BLM protests or somehow approve of racist white people indiscriminately killing protesters when this is an issue that I have been ruthlessly consistent on throughout the years. I unequivocally support BLM's right to both protest and riot against the public institutions that they view as oppressive. I have not changed or wavered on this stance in years. |
The State of Political Discourse | In 2016, as Donald Trump was rising as a contender in the Republican primary, I noticed the political discourse online was so far removed from reality, people weren't having conversations in the same universe. My main goal in entering politics was to bring reasonableness into online political conversations, or to at least ground the disagreements in fact so the conversations could be more productive. Unfortunately, most of my conversations have been unproductive and hardly qualify as "intellectual discourse."
I believe most content creators suffer from the following problems: •They tend to be uninformed about the ideas they are discussing (e.g.: many lefties don't know Labor Value Theory; many online Republicans don't know anything about immigration or sociology). •Give an informed opinion about, or bring in experts or expert material concerning, current events and interesting topics. |
Affirmative Action | I don't have a strong position on affirmative action. It can be a powerful tool, but only when implemented properly; it is a political lightning rod which makes it very hard to reasonably discuss.
Affirmative action tends to run into trouble in universities where huge mismatch problems occur — minority students who are given too much preferential treatment in admissions will massively under-perform their peers, causing them to dropout at disproportionately high rates. Though some argue (1,2) in favor of aggressive affirmative action for higher education, they often only look at the enrollment rates as indicators of success, rather than actual college achievement. Outside of universities, one can go too far in forcing integration as well, for example: California's "woman quota" for corporate boards. Affirmative action programs that incentivize students to take part in additional education opportunities to prepare them for a college environment would be more in-line with my view of effective policy rather than simply shoving them into classrooms with more qualified peers and expecting them to perform at competitive levels. Additional reading:
-The author tracks down many of the black students in Columbia's class of 1973, some of the first who were enrolled as "affirmative action" became a more important social issue for universities to focus on. |
Diversity | Diversity is a good thing, and has been shown time and time again to benefit both countries (1,2) and companies (1,2,3,4,5,6). Countries and companies that engage in high levels of diversity seem to outperform their less diverse counterparts, and it seems to be the case that having a more diverse representation across your population and workforce can be an advantage in and of itself.
Though it seems hard to imagine, just having a more diverse workplace can be predictive of your ability to outperform average returns in a given environment (1,2). There are modern examples of avoidable problems that boil down to a company simply lacking a diverse team. One well-known example is racial discrimination that occurs in face recognition technology. Another example is soap dispensers not recognizing black hands over white hands. |
Global Warming | Global warming is real and anthropogenic (i.e.: caused by humans).
It seems that the best approach to dealing with climate change is with the aggressive incentivization of greener energies and the implementation of carbon pricing policies. The former polls incredibly well with Americans and the latter is almost universally agreed upon by economists to be effective in moving markets to aggressively seek out more carbon-neutral ways of operating (1). |
The Green New Deal | I do not support the Green New Deal, a policy championed by the Justice Democrats.
While I support strong action being taken to curb the effects of climate change, I don't necessarily think it's appropriate to pair these changes with other, non-environmental policies, e.g. a federal jobs guarantee. I think that climate change is a serious issue that needs to be addressed both through policies that have been demonstrated to work (e.g. cap and trade) and through innovative policies and technologies. |
Immigration | Coming soon! |
Illegal Immigration | It's incredibly hard to precisely measure the impact of illegal immigration, although it does appear that undocumented workers have a negative impact on state and local budgets and can apply some downward pressure on native wages (1,2).
The most effective way of dealing with illegal immigration would likely be some form of amnesty, similar to the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) signed into law by Ronald Reagan in 1986. The IRCA conferred benefits unto the workers who were able to adjust their status as well as to the state and local governments who were able to more effectively levy taxes, though it also had a small, negative impact on competing native workers and future immigrants and caused an increase in government transfer to the newly legalized population (1). Any well-designed amnesty program would do well to pay attention to these benefits and drawbacks to ensure that we can appropriately capture the benefits of any such amnesty in order to benefit the population as a whole, without causing targeted harm to more vulnerable sections of the labor force. |
International Trade Agreements | I am highly in favor of international trade agreements, especially large binding agreements like the now-dead Trans-Pacific Partnership that Obama championed. This is mostly for two reasons:
1.International cooperation — International trade agreements lay the groundwork for even more international trade agreements. Ever-increasing cooperation is one of the only hopes we have at solving global warming. |
Reparations | After the civil war, former slaves were promised 40 acres and a mule by William T. Sherman. This was approved by President Lincoln. Later, the federal government reneged on this promise, which seems pretty unfair.
There are many different reasons for wanting reparations, but I think that the best one is purely for the purposes of finally repaying a debt that was promised. Logistically, implementing reparations would be difficult (Who exactly gets the money? How much money is equivalent to 40 acres, adjusted for inflation?). I acknowledge that reparations are probably not politically feasible. |
Social Justice | It is incredibly important to incorporate notions of equity into our view of the world when it comes to enacting policy or new laws. I think it is vital to recognize that many people have had disadvantages throughout US history and that the outcomes of those disadvantages are still noticeable today. Any policy we design should take these differences into account. |
Systemic Racism | Systemic racism is racism embedded into a system. The important thing to note about systemic racism is that no-one in the system is necessarily to blame. For example, say that the hypothetical police force of Oceania was systemically racist — it had a computer system programmed to assign more police patrols to black neighborhoods than white neighborhoods. In this system, it is possible that every single police officer in the force is a black-loving certified anti-racist, yet the police would still be functioning as a racist institution.
We have strong evidence that there are some lingering forms of systemic racism in the United States. For example, by looking at maps of where redlining was practiced, we can see that the effects of redlining still affect outcomes (in a statistical, on-average way). Just like in Oceania, this doesn't necessarily mean that ordinary people are to blame. Of course, there are probably racist people in the country somewhere still in charge of bank loans or city planning — but, for the most part, I think that we have that sorted out. We need to focus on the more complicated problems. I believe that systemic racism clearly exists in some forms. I don't have a strong opinion on the best policies to address it. |
Voting | Voting is important.
People in America (and around the world) have problems right now that need to be solved. And that's best done by working within the current system, building coalitions with like-minded people, and voting for the best candidates (at both a local and a national level). |
Ideologies | |
---|---|
The Alt-Right | I do not support the alt-right, nor any of the prescriptions they make for society. I do believe it is important, however, to acknowledge some of the conditions that lead people to becoming radicalized (feeling disconnected from society, having no sense of purpose, feeling economically left behind, etc.) and how these beliefs translate into political action. I believe some on the alt-right are effective at identifying frustrations that one might have with our current economic or social system, but they offer no realistic solutions to any of these problems, and their explanations for said phenomena are often mired in anecdotes.
My debate with Erik Striker & James Allsup is emblematic of most discourse that I've had with alt-right figures; when confronted with challenges to their ideas, they retreat to anecdotes and offer no solutions. Most concerningly, the policy positions they offer for political change generally require some extreme amount of state-sponsored violence and are highly unrealistic in achieving any positive end. "Protecting our Demographics" Many on the far right express a great concern over protecting the demographic make-up of whatever community they reside in. They might allude to "western values," "white values," "euro-centric values" or some other type of "values" that they are trying to protect. Generally they state the reason to protect these values stems from both an earnest desire to preserve their culture as well as protecting their voting interests. I believe that this endeavor is futile for several reasons: •I reject the notion that there is a consistent and coherent definition of "American values." |
Capitalism | I consider myself to be a capitalist.
At a high-level, capitalism seems to be the best-known economic system to generate wealth. I believe the responsibility of any economic system should, first and foremost, be to allocate resources in an economy as efficiently as possible to create the largest possible base from which to draw taxes to redistribute to those who need it most. I recognize in many western countries, especially the United States, we seem to have a big problem with the "redistribution" part. There are different kinds of capitalism, ranging all the way from laissez-faire (e.g. free market) to state capitalism (e.g. China). Completely free-market systems have serious downsides (e.g. monopolies, unequal bargaining power) and don't properly account for negative externalities (e.g. pollution, global warming) without government intervention. Thus, I believe that capitalism should be tempered by a strong government that tries to correct for these problems, similar to how Nordic countries function. Not surprisingly, this is the economic model of nearly all advanced economies in the West. |
Libertarianism | Libertarianism is concerned with maximizing liberty and personal freedom. I viewed myself as a libertarian when I was a teenager and have read books by Ayn Rand.
I am still pro liberty and pro freedom, but my political views have evolved. Libertarianism does not seem to do a very good job at solving some major problems, like social inequality and global warming. The latter, in particular, seems likely only to be solved by regulation and governmental cooperation at a global level. |
"Omniliberalism" | In politics, it can be useful to know which particular ideology someone subscribes to. However, I do not fall perfectly in-line with any particular ideology. I describe myself as an Omni-Liberal, which is a made-up, tongue-in-cheek term to encapsulate the general position of:
•Having the core values of liberalism (e.g. freedom and equality). I don't feel dogmatically attached to any particular form of government or economic system. If it can be demonstrated that some economic system (socialism, capitalism, etc.) can consistently produce better economic and social outcomes for a given society, that would be the economic system I would advocate for. As of right now, I believe that free markets with strong social safety nets (see: Scandinavia) are the most effective way of achieving these ends. |
Populism | I do not support populism.
Populism is usually defined as "the people" versus "the elites." This happens on both the right (e.g. the alt-right & Donald Trump) and the left (e.g. Bernie-or-Busters). Populism is powerful because it feeds off negative emotions, but is often not based on facts. |
Socialism/Communism | -The Academic Arguments-
While exploring more socialist ideas I've come across a number of people attempting to defend their ideologies. I've had discussions with many people who identify as socialists, including Michael Albert (an economist, see this video), Ben Burgis (Jacobin columnist, see this video), and many, many more (Search YouTube for "destiny socialism").
•What level of violence is acceptable to attain a socialist state? •How do we decide which businesses are allowed to exist in a socialist society without allowing capital investment? •Is any form of investment whatsoever allowed in a socialist society? -How do businesses raise additional capital for expansion? If one wants to expand their business and open new stores, is it contingent upon them finding other workers willing to buy in and own part of one's new expansion of business? If that new expansion grows, is one diluting the ownership of one's current work force? Does one need to dilute every employee's ownership every time a new worker is brought in? How does that affect one's democratic leverage in the business? •How are labor markets determined in a socialist society? What if everyone wants to become a teacher? •How can we calculate which goods/services a nation needs if we do away with the commodity form?
While there are plenty of highly intelligent people who identify as socialists, my interactions with "online socialists" or "online lefties" from 2018 to 2020 have generally left me with a very low opinion of the community at large.
I don't believe anything is inherently wrong with co-ops, and I support them in the cases where they lead to greater economic productivity. Despite the slight increase in productivity, however, there doesn't seem to be any good way for co-ops to effectively raise capital. Also, I still question whether co-ops would retain their benefits if everyone in society were to join one, rather than the select few people that have the necessary capital and/or skills to join one of the few co-ops that exist today.
All government policies have pros and cons. As citizens, our best course of action is to debate these policies to determine which will be the most effective and to pressure our representatives to push those that are politically feasible. Inversely, most socialists that I talk to have no actual policy positions. They: •live in a land of fantasy where all capital is abolished |
Why Philosophy is Important | When doing online debate about politics, it is extremely important to have a philosophical foundation from which to draw practical conclusions. Politics is downstream from philosophy, and you could argue that it is simply the practice of applied philosophy on a societal level. While I have no formal education in philosophy, through the use of resources such as the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy and Wikipedia articles, I have taken pains to construct some sort of philosophical heuristic to solve policy issues. This has allowed me to more effectively understand my own and others' arguments through the underlying philosophical values and processes at play, as well as create a consistent set of rules to abide by when evaluating various political issues.
My applied political positions always follow from my moral system. I think the world would be a better place if people reflected more on their internal, fundamental values and used those as guiding principles to establish their political values, rather than blindly following an ideologue, or using inherited positions from their parents, religion, country, or party. A lot of political debate boils down to either having some differing, fundamental position, or a disagreement on some empirical claim. Instead of two people arguing at a surface level about an issue, it is sometimes more useful to dive down to try and figure out what the other person actually believes at a fundamental level. A great example of this is abortion — people will often debate back and forth about the legality of abortion while ignoring that they fundamentally disagree on whether or not a fetus should carry the same (or similar) moral consideration as an infant child. |
My Foundational Beliefs | I have a video where I break down how I construct my philosophical worldview, which I highly recommend watching for a fleshed-out understanding of my position. However, if you don't have the time to watch now, here is a short and incredibly basic summary of my philosophical foundations:
•Part I i.I exist. •Part II •Part III I don't believe that moral facts exist, or if they do, I don't believe they are perceivable to us. Therefor, I build all of my policy positions from this fundamental moral framework. I think about policy positions in a similar way that Rawls' veil of ignorance would demand of us — society should be constructed in a way that maximizes the experience of as many people possible. This means satisfying as many people's needs and desires as possible, so as to incentivize everyone's participation in our society. I view this as being similar to a sort of Pareto efficiency that could exist in how we reallocate goods and services with government policy. |
On Maximizing One's Experience | Within the statements of my foundational beliefs, I often talk about maximizing one's own experience and helping others maximize theirs. I often run into a problem where people assume the most naive construction of this idea possible. It is assumed, especially when words like "hedonism" and "egoism" get used, that I conceptualize a moral world to be one where everyone just does whatever they want, be it murdering, stealing, etc. because it makes them happy. It is also assumed that I make no distinction between "lower and higher" pleasures. This is obviously a ridiculous position to hold, and just a slightly fairer reading will get us to construct more reasonable interpretations of what it means to "maximize" one's experience.
A thought experiment I often use is the following: You and four friends enter a room with five candy bars. You can either eat all of the candy bars because it would "maximize your experience," or you could share the candy equally. The naive construction of my belief would entail the former, but let's think about the consequences of this. My friends are now unhappy, they might not want to be friends with me anymore, next time they won't share with me, and really the outcome is in the long run (and potentially even immediately) I have certainly NOT maximized my experience. My friends being sad would make me sad, them not being friends with me anymore would be upsetting, you can imagine the rest. It's clear then, when I say "maximizing experience," that we have to take a more intelligent, long-term, holistic view towards what this actually means. If I start with 0 utils, and I can get 100 now or 25 every year for the rest of my life, in four years I have already surpassed the experience maximization potential of the first option. If I do something that makes me happy at the detriment of those around me which makes my experience at the end a net negative anyway, clearly I haven't maximized my experience. I would hope that this is straightforward and obvious to understand, however it appears to be a tripping point either due to lack of thought or bad faith on the part of many people I interact with. |
Violence | I am generally opposed to violence as I don't believe it is an effective way to accomplish political change, at least not at this point in time in the United States. That being said, I believe there are plenty of groups of people who could, at points, justify the use of violence in self-defense, even if I don't believe it would be a pragmatic or politically effective thing to do. |
Defense of Property | I believe that people have a right to defend their property insofar as three important criteria are met:
1.You possess the property in a way that your state and community recognizes your possession. -For example, if someone wants to destroy your local business or your house, then you have a right to defend your property by all means necessary. Many disagreements over whether or not defense of personal property is justified sometimes appear to boil down to a difference of underlying values. The value in question is whether "property can be valued over human life", or some statement to that effect. In my experience, middle-class and well-off people may underestimate the personal sacrifice and the years of time invested into obtaining a business, a car, or even something as simple as a stereo system or a school instrument. As such, they will argue that no matter the value and sacrifice associated with some property, even in the case of people living in poverty, the life of the thief always outweighs said value. This is a conclusion I take issue with. |
Protesting & Rioting | I ardently believe in a people's right to protest and I will always support the right to protest, even if I don't necessarily agree with positions being advocated for by any particular protest. For example, I would support the right of a pro-life group protesting the right to an abortion, but I wouldn't agree with the message of the pro-life group: that abortion is immoral, or should be outlawed.
Rioting is a slightly more complicated matter. When I speak about rioting, I am more precisely talking about protest that have some level of violence involved, namely that of property destruction. I do not support riots which seek to harm individuals in the United States at this point in time. I only support rioting against institutions that represent some oppressive force in society, so I generally only support rioting against public institutions, e.g. a police department, city hall, etc. It's not inconceivable that I would support a riot against a private institution, but only if that private institution was acting in an illegal manner.
MLK is commonly cited as opposition to my position on riots, however, I believe this is due to misunderstanding selective quotes from MLK. I believe a broader understanding of his speeches reveals to us that he was opposed to violent riots throughout his life, even as he condemned the conditions bringing them about. September 1966 talk with Mike Wallace MIKE WALLACE: There's an increasingly vocal minority who disagree totally with your tactics, Dr. King. KING: There's no doubt about that. I will agree that there is a group in the Negro community advocating violence now. I happen to feel that this group represents a numerical minority. Surveys have revealed this. The vast majority of Negroes still feel that the best way to deal with the dilemma that we face in this country is through non-violent resistance, and I don't think this vocal group will be able to make a real dent in the Negro community in terms of swaying 22 million Negroes to this particular point of view. And I contend that the cry of "black power" is, at bottom, a reaction to the reluctance of white power to make the kind of changes necessary to make justice a reality for the Negro. I think that we've got to see that a riot is the language of the unheard. And, what is it that America has failed to hear? It has failed to hear that the economic plight of the Negro poor has worsened over the last few years. April 1967 speech to Stanford University -But at the same time, it is as necessary for me to be as vigorous in condemning the conditions which cause persons to feel that they must engage in riotous activities as it is for me to condemn riots. I think America must see that riots do not develop out of thin air. Certain conditions continue to exist in our society which must be condemned as vigorously as we condemn riots. But in the final analysis, a riot is the language of the unheard. And what is it that America has failed to hear? It has failed to hear that the plight of the Negro poor has worsened over the last few years. 1967 lecture "Nonviolence and Social Change" March 1968 speech at Grosse Pointe High School, "The Other America" |
Public vs Private Humor | I enjoy all types of comedy, even if it's dark or offensive. Regardless of how I feel, there is a wide chasm between the types of humor that I enjoy privately and the types of humor I believe are responsibly enjoyed publicly. I believe that public figures have to be more careful when engaging with potentially problematic types of humor because one cannot control the audience that may engage with particular types of humor. As public figures, we should avoid empowering groups of people who have ideologies rooted in values contradicting our own, even in speech/actions where we do not intend to do so but it still has that effect.
An example of a type of "edgy joke" might be the way I engage with a close friend relating to gender/sexuality/race. It might be an "inside joke" in private where my friend and I have cleared with each other that it's okay to joke about certain topics (e.g., my friend joking about me being Cuban, me joking about them being black, etc.). If we were to engage in these types of humor publicly without a large number of disclaimers, it's entirely possible that people could take these jokes the wrong way and engage with them problematically, e.g. "I heard Destiny make fun of xyz for being gay, now I'm going to make fun of other gay people because it was funny!" Because of certain people obsessively trying to get "optics victories" over me, this entire argument becomes reframed by them as "Destiny wants to say the n-word in private." I don't regularly use any hateful language in private, especially because I just don't know many jokes involving hateful language. However, that's not to say that that there aren't any examples of such jokes. |
Incest | "Incest" as a topic has been explored quite extensively on my stream as a way to illustrate the concept of "moral dumbfounding", i.e. you have a feeling that something is immoral or "wrong," but find you're unable to explain exactly why you feel that way. It seems hard, when pressed, to explain exactly why an incestuous relationship is wrong without appealing to other arguments that aren't intrinsic to these kinds of relationships. For example: parent/child (these are wrong due to power differences or underage parties, not necessarily the fact that they are incestuous), or situations involving reproduction (these may be "wrong" due to the potential for offspring with increased risk of birth defects being created, though this could have logical implications for other kinds of eugenics).
I've used this topic several times on stream to see if someone is capable of actually engaging with the topic, though it generally devolves into people screaming at me while claiming I want "fathers fucking daughters" or something similarly absurd. It is a useful measure of someone's ability to engage with arguments in good faith, question their own worldview, and engage with the logic of ethical matters. While I usually frame the argument from a position of moral neutrality, I have previously made clear that I am not in favour of incestual relationships and provided what I believe to be logical arguments for this. |
Child Pornography | I do not support child pornography and I ardently argue against all forms of adult-child sexual relationships (pedophilia).
During a longer discussion I had arguing in favor of age-of-consent laws with Amos Yee, there is a small section where Amos Yee questioned whether child pornography could ever be used in a positive manner. I'd been made familiar with some research indicating it was possible that this could be the case (1,2,3,4,5,6,7), though there would obviously be significant hurdles doing this in an ethical manner. It would be essential to ensure that no new pornography abusing minors would be created and that anything being used as part of any therapy was obtained in an ethical manner, though it's hard to imagine how this would even be possible. In entertaining this scenario, many who argue against me online are quick to claim that I "advocate for ethical child pornography" or some other reductive statement, though none of these claims are true. |
Kaceytron | Coming soon! |
Jack Allison | Jack Allison is an internet podcaster/ex-Jimmy Kimmel writer who is definitely not mad and who is currently banned from using Twitter by his wife originalbackup.
Despite his time-out from social media, Jack still finds time to obsess over what I do both on and off stream. After I took a step back from my canvassing efforts in Omaha, Jack took it upon himself to email me to celebrate. Unsatisfied with the lack of attention he received for his wacky antics, he created a fake reddit account to further our interactions by impersonating a photographer of WOWT, a local media station in Omaha. My web dev, Cake, pulled some information from our back-end to confirm this dastardly ploy. Jack — I mean, Brandon, flexes his prior media training and asks me what appears to be several thoughtful questions regarding my canvassing experiment in Omaha. I do my best to respond in good faith (these are the linked "off the record" logs), but little did I know...it was all a ruse! After thoroughly owning me, Jack takes to Reddit on his account to expose me for my crimes, though he unfortunately doesn't have the required karma to post on his new account. Since he can't seem to make progress on Reddit, he decides to create a fake Twitter (backup from the now deleted account) to tweet about his fake Reddit account's fake email that he sent to me to a whole bunch of people on Twitter, himself included. Unfortunately for Jack, he accidentally leaks on his stream that he's logged in to the very Reddit account he was masquerading under. Unlucky! And definitely not mad. |
College | I attended the University of Nebraska at Omaha and majored in woodwind performance but eventually dropped out due to conflict with work at the time.
In general, I do not think that people need to have a college degree in order to have good opinions or to know what they are talking about. Over the past several years of debate and conversation my respect for college-educated individuals has significantly dropped. That being said, a formal education certainly doesn't hurt. I think laymen should generally defer to the consensus of experts. A good example of this can be found in my discussion with Vegan Gains. |
My Family | I have a son called Nathaniel with my ex-girlfriend, Rachel. My ex-girlfriend and I broke up a long time ago due to our toxic relationship, but we are on good terms today and get along well with each other. I have an ex-wife as well, but she is not the mother of my child. |
My Relationship | Melina is my wife. We met in New Zealand when she was 20 years old and I was 30 years old.
Melina and I are currently in an open/poly relationship. We treat each other as primary partners, though we may pursue other sexual/romantic relationships as well. |
YouTube |
Rumble |
Kick |
Reddit' |
Wikipedia |
|
|
|
|
|
General notes
Three Sources of International Law
Annex Cuba Roosevelt??? |
|