"currently threatening" seems misleading.
Who has been furnishing weapons to Hamas for the last 20 years?
I think this part of my previous post addresses the above:
Yes, Iran supports Hamas. I don't see how that changes my point that Iran is militarily, politically, and economically weaker than Israel.
That Iran is hostile to Israel, and vice versa, doesn't change that Iran is the weaker party in multiple key ways.
Washing one's hands of an affair has a long, sordid history.
I don't know what you mean here. It's a fact that in almost every Arab country, the average citizen has little to no say in geopolitical decisions.
This ^^ was talking about your response, not the protestor's. YOU brought Douglas Murray and Sam Harris into the conversation.
You decided that the messenger was more important than the idea. That smacks of a weak argument in my book
I brought them into the conversation to underline that taking one's points from just a few sources is bound to give a lopsided and incomplete viewpoint, especially when those sources are as ideologically prejudiced as those two people are.
Yes, I understand your long standing stance and situation.
Then why did you ask me that question? Are people in the habit of supporting beliefs that regard them as capital criminals and promote killing them?
I would say that most of these late-to-the-party protestors are unwittingly acting as Islamist sympathizers. Hamas has been oppressing Palestinians for 20 years now. Why haven't we seen these kinds of protests for the last 20 years?
The scale and intensity of the IDF's killing of civilians and inflicting injury and starvation on them this time is unprecedented in the conflict. I think it makes a lot of sense that the atrocities would therefore attract more attention, including more condemnation and protests, than any past events in the conflict.