https://spacenews.com/u-s-government-to-allow-sale-of-high-r...
SpaceX also got in a little bit of trouble when they launched the Tesla Roadster with Starman aboard. The unlicensed live camera above a certain altitude was a no-no.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_rocket_attacks_on_...
(Of course, that's one now 14-year-old assertion from one militant group among several, so that doesn't really show whether this is more or less prevalent over time -- and the U.S. legislation on satellite imagery discussed in the newer article is from 1997, so it wasn't responding to this specific practice.)
It tends to be from kilometres away, and you tend to target from above.
More "satellite view" than "street view".
It's more "if you launch a rocket at us we will flatten the militants and workstations of the organisation that fired it", which in my opinion is justifiable.
The alternative would be wildfire rockets in return, and you can be sure the body count would be much higher in that case - particularly given Hamas's tactic of firing from neutral territory (ie in 2018 when they repeatedly fired from the carparks of schools, and housed weaponry in the basements of UN hospitals), also known as "meatshield" defence.
But there clearly isn't. Those rockets rarely reach ANY target, and if this is part of the reason why, it makes Israel's behavior that much more repulsive; it's gruesome theater where a superpower allows a few desperate and over-proud men to lob firecrackers at them so that they can "justify" "responding" "in-kind" with indiscriminate force.
The alternative is and always has been retreating from its campaign of colonial expansion and working with Palestine as a partner rather than against it as an aggressor.
It is grotesque to claim that Israel should accept this without response, or only launch an equally sized rocket back (???).
Israel still drops blank rounds and pamphlets as warning, before striking buildings used by Hamas (if they also house civilians, which they usually do).
Israel takes steps to avoid any noncombatant deaths. Hamas actively aims for noncombatant deaths.
Edit: oh and I simply disagree that firing rockets at civilians is a legitimate tactic in response to land disputes.
Perhaps some of the Israeli settlements are unjustly resulting in eviction of Palestinians - this is rarely if ever actually proved instead of simply claimed by Hamas and its supporters - but even that doesn't justify bombing civilians in a different city, does it,
As to why we tolerate Israel having nukes while nearby nations face repercussions for even mentioning nukes, they are largely a US puppet state.
ETA: I’m not sure how this is controversial, over 700 rockets have been launched without any specific target in mind aside from “Israel” in the last day. Random ppl have been killed including an Israeli Arab family.
What was Israel’s response?
A bunch of targeted strikes that took out Hamas leadership and no one else and a few knock&demolish missions (basically if the IDF thinks a building is being used as a hamas HQ but it’s full of civilians they drop a blank on it to warn everyone to get out usually they also drop leaflets saying get out now then a few minutes later they drop the real bomb. So basically there’s enough time for everyone to get out and away but not really enough time for the hamas operatives to save anything. Also it sends a very clear message: don’t harbor terrorists in your midst as you might end up losing your office or home.)
> A bunch of targeted strikes that took out Hamas leadership and no one else
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/gaza-israel...
That's why what you're saying is controversial, it's factually incorrect. Israeli airstrikes this week have resulted in the death of at least 10 children. And considering all the recent violence started with Israeli actions ( expulsion and illegal resettlement, restrictions on religious gatherings around probably the holiest of Muslim religious times, and very violent responses by police when there were protests against those things), it's hard to accept your one-sided argument.
Hamas should stop indiscriminately targeting Israeli civilians, but it's not like they have much choice - what else could they possibly do? Nothing? Obviously that's not in their interests, and diplomacy has gotten them nowhere.
Israel should stop illegally occupying and settling Palestinian land, and they easily could do.
The whole situation is fucked and there's no solution in sight, the situation and leaders have to drastically change for there to be a chance of a peach long term solution.
You can't know that, there's only one source in Gaza that can give death numbers, and that's the Palestinian "government" ( iirc their health ministry). Maybe the numbers are inflated, maybe some of the deaths are due to Hamas actions and not Israeli. Maybe.
In any case, Israel is striking Gaza, and civilians, people, including children, are dying. Is that OK for you because Hamas disregards human life, including Palestinian lives?
And like i said, Hamas have nothing else they can do besides violence. Palestinian people, living in an open air prison or as second class citizens, and being expelled for Jewish settlers, can't do anything to stop any of that. Is it any wonder some, probably the majority, support Hamas? What's their alternative? Accept Israel has won and leave their own lands for illegal resettlement? Hardly a great choice
At no point has Hamas tried diplomacy. But you’ve just shown your true colors you’re ok with Hamas indiscriminately firing on civilians bec “what else can they do” but when Israel performs targeted strikes against Hamas, and Hamas intentionally puts children in harms way it’s somehow Israel’s fault.
There was nothing illegal about the resettlement, if you don’t have legal permission to live somewhere you’re gonna get evicted eventually.
How is it illegal to restrict gatherings? We’ve been doing that for the last year plus!
For the last three months I’ve seen daily reports of violent and sometimes deadly attacks against Jews just for walking around. It’s not like one dude punching another in the back of the head (like what’s happening in NY) it’s groups of Arabs seeking out a lone Jew and then attacking him/her. This has been happening multiple times a day for the last 3 months... you’re pretty screwed up if you think that’s ok and shouldn’t warrant a response.
If Hamas wants to fight with honor, nothing is stopping them. They instead choose the cowardly route, hiding behind their wives, elderly, and children. You also need to ask yourself, what is Hamas’s goal here: their charter very clearly spells it out: “total destruction of Israel.”
Considering the way they treated Fatah when Hamas won the election I don’t think it’s too far to say that if Hamas somehow was given power over any part of Israel there would immediately be a small scale genocide.
Additionally, that article is incredibly biased, acting as if the people in Gaza have no agency, this is a dangerous and false assumption, if they don’t want Hamas using their homes as military bases they can stop them, or better yet foment an insurrection and place in power people who want peace. But of course most in Gaza don’t want peace they like trying to kill Jews for sport and are entirely fine paying with their lives when it comes to it bec they believe in the cause. The article also entirely ignores the larger context around what’s happening and strongly implies that Israel started this and is acting unfairly, when as we’ve seen in all the other recent conflicts in other parts of the world, couldn’t be further from the truth. No other military spends as much time worrying about civilian casualties as the IDF, no one else bends over backwards to warn non-combatants of impending danger, so much so that they often end up warning the terrorists as well, your hatred for Jews is showing loud and clear here and you might want to consider the double standard you hold Jews to before you reply.
Hamas doesn’t have the technological and military prowess of China that makes it nearly impossible to overthrow them, in any given month there are as many as 10 different terrorist “gangs” operating in the region. It’s entirely plausible to suggest that if people really were dissatisfied with Hamas they could fairly easily get a change of leadership.
I should have said, Palestine got nowhere with diplomacy, Israel still refuses to not illegally occupy and resettle Palestinian land, so they ended up with Hamas who at least propose something to combat Israel's, again, illegal actions.
> There was nothing illegal about the resettlement, if you don’t have legal permission to live somewhere you’re gonna get evicted eventually.
I sure hope that happens to Israeli settlers in the West Bank. According to international law, the UN, and common fucking decency Israeli settlements in illegally occupied lands ( like the West Bank) is... well illegal.
> How is it illegal to restrict gatherings? We’ve been doing that for the last year plus!
Never said it was illegal, just that it was one of the things that add fuel to the fire. Jewish festivals were allowed ( and people were crushed, so obviously there were no restrictions), but Muslim ones weren't, while Muslims are getting evicted so that their lands can be resettled by Jews. Don't you see how that might be perceived as unfair by the people living as second class citizens and/or in an open air prison? And make them want to protest? And when those protests were met with extreme violence by police, everything went even more to shit.
> if Hamas wants to fight with honor, nothing is stopping them. They instead choose the cowardly route, hiding behind their wives, elderly, and children.
Sure they can, and they'd get slaughtered. That would be very honourable of them, and then Israel can do even more whatever it wanted with Palestinian lands and people. Hamas are backed in to a corner and fighting against a much better force, and have to be asymmetric to have any chance of not failing miserably. Hamas obviously hates Israel, but seriously, remove the labels ( jew, Muslim, etc.) and think - how could they not? Did Native Americans in the US just accept for their lands to be resettled and them to be displaced and shoved in reservations? Did any other ethnic group?
I'm going to ignore your low-level ad hominem attacks. If you think anyone is the good guy in the Middle East, you either haven't being paying attention since before WWI, or are enormously biased.
Sure, there are a lot of evangelical Christians in America but they are not that stupid and naive?
Plus aligning the world's most powerful country's foreign policy with superstitions like the rapture is so ridiculous that it would not be plausible even as a plotline of a novel.
Are you european by any chance? US christians are much less secular than european christians. Also, opinion polling data (in the linked article) supports the claim.
1. Latent racism. Having minority groups set up a homeland and encouraging all of them to move there is a core tenant of some racist groups.
2. Natural support by US Jews, and the many many people who know them and believe having Israel be a country is good for the safety of the ethnic group.
3. Israel is a natural ally of the US, and cannot become a local leader no matter how much support is given to it. This makes for a fairly stable partnership. US gets to aid a power hostile to its enemies like Iran, etc. while making a pretense to neutrality since it’s not directly acting.
4. Progressive social groups like Israel. It’s the most westernized style nation in the Middle East, but it retains enough cultural heritage to be palatable to conservatives too.
5. The more mundane biblical stuff. Even lip service only Christians have heard of Jerusalem and Bethlehem, etc. being a part of Israel in historical times. Thus there is a tendency to support Israeli control of the area since from the US point of view, which never takes into account fine ethic differences, Jews are Jews thus even European Jews have a historic right to the land.
6. Supporting Israel, a country hated by the oil powers of the Middle East, makes US nationalists happy since it acts as proof that oil-powers do not hold America’s leash.
There isn’t really any one singular reason for support to Israel. It’s more of a perfect storm making it easy for activists of any stripe to thumbs up supporting Israel as a budget item. Remember support for Israel is a feel good measure. American lives aren’t at risk.
However, people would rather claim someone strongly supports Israel, even if he reasoning is irrational, than say many millions vaguely support Israel so long as it is limited to “safe” things like money, political speech and weapons sales.
Israel is a key ally in a very strategic location in the middle east and crucial to US foreign policy is the real answer.
Now that we have better relations with multiple middle eastern countries, what explains the special deference that the US gives to Israel? Why is Israel still our largest foreign aid recipient? Why do we still protect them at all costs, even while they perpetually antagonize their neighbors? The only other country that we regularly look the other way for is easy to explain: Saudi Arabia has the largest oil reserves in the world. What do we get from Israel that would explain our willingness to ignore the shit that Israel pulls?
The 1980's hot take that you lambast is still relevant. If it weren't for the support of Evangelicals that see it as some sort of prophecy, combined with a general hatred of everything muslim, the US would have no appetite for their shenanigans and would have dropped them like we dropped Syria and Turkey.
I can assure you the people receiving wealth and power to make the decisions that lead to this kind of policy, nor the people paying them care in the slightest about "the rapture" or what your imagined church going enemies in "bumfuck nowhere" care about.
>A 2017 LifeWay poll conducted in United States found that 80% of evangelical Christians believed that the creation of Israel in 1948 was a fulfillment of biblical prophecy that would bring about Christ's return and more than 50% of Evangelical Christians believed that they support Israel because it is important for fulfilling the prophecy.[100]
>According to the Pew Research survey in 2003, more than 60% of the Evangelical Christians and about 50% of Blacks agreed that the existence of Israel fulfilled biblical prophecy. About 55% of poll respondents said that the Bible was the biggest influence for supporting Israel which is 11 times the people who said church was the biggest influence.[100]
Those polls (we seem to be straying dangerously close to "the blacks and the jews" level of hateful conspiracy theory, by the way) are not evidence for the cause of the creation of this legislation, nor even attempt any semblance of cause and effect.
It might also help you get some perspective to keep in mind that those in actual positions of power (that's not Bob the unemployed coal miner from West Virginia who didn't finish highschool and goes to church once a week), spend considerable resources curating and influencing public opinion to their end. Consider, for example how many people were deluded into believing the baseless conspiracy theory that there existed ample evidence which proved Trump colluded with Putin to hack the election.
and a laughable response from you. I presented my evidence. You failed to do so and decide to fall back on "common sense and simple observation".
>Those polls (we seem to be straying dangerously close to "the blacks and the jews" level of hateful conspiracy theory, by the way) are not evidence for the cause of the creation of this legislation, nor even attempt any semblance of cause and effect.
Your best response to the survey data is dismiss it saying it's tantamount to racism?
>It might also help you get some perspective to keep in mind that those in actual positions of power (that's not Bob the unemployed coal miner from West Virginia who didn't finish highschool and goes to church once a week), spend considerable resources curating and influencing public opinion to their end.
We literally still have "in god we trust" on our bills, added back in the 50s, despite being a secular country. Several states pushed creationism to be taught in schools as an alternative to creationism. I think you're underestimating how much impact evangelicals have.
>Consider, for example how many people were deluded into believing the baseless conspiracy theory that there existed ample evidence which proved Trump colluded with Putin to hack the election.
"hacked"? maybe not. Interfered? definitely.
>The FBI's work was taken over in May 2017 by former FBI director Robert Mueller, who led a Special Counsel investigation until March 2019.[3] Mueller concluded that Russian interference was "sweeping and systematic" and "violated U.S. criminal law", and he indicted twenty-six Russian citizens and three Russian organizations. [...] The Republican-led Senate Intelligence Committee submitted the first in their five-volume 1,313-page report in July 2019 in which they concluded that the January 2017 intelligence community assessment alleging Russian interference was "coherent and well-constructed". The first volume also concluded that the assessment was "proper", learning from analysts that there was "no politically motivated pressure to reach specific conclusions".
> We literally still have "in god we trust" on our bills,
You seem hatefully fixated on things which really don't matter all that much.
Why do you have to construct these vast strange conspiracy theories about the religious beliefs of some segment of the population? So you can have an excuse to hate them?
Supporting Israel (note: that does not equate to the spontaneous creation of any laws) honestly doesn't seem like the world's biggest problem. America recently sponsored wars, genocides, toppling of governments in Syria, Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan which seems a bit more problematic. Or do you blame the blacks and the Jews for those as well?
> "hacked"? maybe not. Interfered? definitely.
Wrong. There was no evidence ever produced indicating that Trump colluded with Putin to hack or interfere with the election, and the Mueller report quite explicitly stated that none was found. Another baseless conspiracy theory you have been deluded into believing.
1. We're discussing why a democratically elected government is behaving in a certain way. Citing polling data is a perfectly reasonable way to determine that, considering such governments are supposed to serve their voters' interests
2. You resorting to name caling (ie. "conspiracy", " deranged" is disrespectful and against site guidelines. If you can't refrain from that I'm going to have to disengage with you.
>You seem hatefully fixated on things which really don't matter all that much.
Banning high res satellite pictures matters even less
>Why do you have to construct these vast strange conspiracy theories about the religious beliefs of some segment of the population? So you can have an excuse to hate them?
>Supporting Israel (note: that does not equate to the spontaneous creation of any laws) honestly doesn't seem like the world's biggest problem. America recently sponsored wars, genocides, toppling of governments in Syria, Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan which seems a bit more problematic. Or do you blame the blacks and the Jews for those as well?
Not really a conspiracy when they admit that to pollsters. Also I have not expressed any hate at evangelicals or jews. That seems to be something that you're dreaming up.
2. You are the one peddling hateful conspiracy theories. Fairly sure that goes against the site guidelines.
> Banning high res satellite pictures matters even less
Matters so little that it was the masterstroke of the evil black-Jewish-Christian cabal from your imagination? Hilarious.
> Not really a conspiracy when they admit that to pollsters.
Admit what?
> Also I have not expressed any hate at evangelicals or jews. That seems to be something that you're dreaming up.
Sure, of course you haven't. Dog whistles are great like that aren't they?
> evangelical christians think that jews occupying israel is a prerequisite for the rapture, so they want to defend israel to ensure that happens. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Zionism
Such a categorical statement doesn't seem to pass the smell test, since a quick google found this survey which seems to show that a large fraction of American Evangelical leaders likely don't believe in the rapture at all (I say likely, because it doesn't give that number explicitly, but it seems safe to say it's more than a third).
https://www.pewforum.org/2011/06/22/global-survey-beliefs/:
> Among leaders from the Global South, 73% say they believe in the Rapture, compared with 44% of Global North leaders. But majorities of those surveyed from all regions except Europe believe in the rapture of the Church; evangelical leaders from sub-Saharan Africa are especially likely to believe in the Rapture (82%).
I think the real reason for Israel's special treatment is Cold War and post-Cold War politics. much of Israel's population had ties to Europe, many of its neighbors were Soviet allies, and similar Islamic militant groups have caused headaches to both countries.
Arabs were moved out from what is now (and much earlier) Israel. Jews were moved out from neighboring Arab countries.
Also, maybe even more importantly: Much of the world felt guilty after what happened to the Jews during the Nazi regime.
Read about Hamas "freedom fighters", they control Gaza now https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Palestinian_suicide_at...
https://www.hrw.org/report/2021/04/27/threshold-crossed/isra...
Also, you completely ignored the part about Lebanon also being a democracy. We need to stop spreading this old bit of misinformation that Israel is the only democracy.
when these "poor victims" bombard Israeli cities with rockets, or murder civilians in suicide attacks in the name of islamic jihad, you can't just let someone into your home who is carrying a knife and has blood on their hands.
As for Lebanon they support Hezbollah, an islamic militant group which was created by Ayatollah Khomeini and sees eradication of Israel as their holy Jihad. They are largely controlled by Syria which is dreaming of "throwing the Jews into the sea", and is as far from democracy as you can possible get.
It's safe to say that both Israel and Palestine are terrorist states. Israel is just more successful at it.
Israel is trying very hard to avoid civilian casualties but they are fighting against cowards who hide they weapons (and their militant leaders) in hospitals, schools, kindergardens and mosques.
I hate to link to WaPo but this is an exception
What does "Lebanon is not a free democracy" even mean? You can say the same about Israel. They have many laws and restrictions that are based around religion, and religious groups are very powerful. They enact apartheid, which is about as opposite of democracy as possible. Even if Lebanon has a troubled democracy, it's definitely better than what is happening in Israel. This trope needs to be retired.
Lebanon is a democracy:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics_of_Lebanon
Israel is a theocratic apartheid state:
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/israel-adopts-divisive-la...
https://www.hrw.org/report/2021/04/27/threshold-crossed/isra...
> [The reason] is Congress. In 1997, Congress passed the National Defense Authorization Act, one section of which is titled, “Prohibition on collection and release of detailed satellite imagery relating to Israel.” The amendment, known as the Kyl-Bingaman Amendment, calls for a federal agency, the NOAA’s Commercial Remote Sensing Regulatory Affairs, to regulate the dissemination of zoomed-in images of Israel.
> The amendment prohibits US satellite imagery companies from selling pictures that are “more detailed or precise than satellite imagery of Israel that is available from commercial sources.”
> In practice, “commercial sources” has been interpreted to mean companies outside of the US that up until recently were not major players in the multi-billion dollar space industry.