> a sophisticated approach to their defense

A euphemism for apartheid and oppression?

> sources are rife with bias

What's biased about terming autonomous weapons as "AI"? Or, sounding alarm over dystopian surveillance enabled by AI?

> The nuance matters.

Like Ben Gurion terming Lehi "freedom fighters" as terrorists? And American Jewish intellectuals back then calling them fascists?

> The history matters... After that, articles such as the ones you posted really read quite differently than most might expect.

https://www.wetheblacksheep.com/p/i-changed-my-mind-on-zioni...

I will spend no more than two comments on this issue.

Most people have already made up their minds. There is little I can do about that, but perhaps someone else might see this and think twice.

Personally, I have spent many thousands of hours on this topic. I have Palestinian relatives and have visited the Middle East. I have Arab friends there, both Christian and Muslim, whom I would gladly protect with my life. I am neither Jewish nor Israeli.

There are countless reasons for me to support your side of this issue. However, I have not done so for a simple reason: I strive to remain fiercely objective.

As a final note, in my youth, I held views similar to the ones you propagate. This was for a simple reason—I had not taken the time to understand the complexities of the Middle East. Even now, I cannot claim to fully comprehend them. However, over time, one realizes that while every story has two sides, the context is crucial. The contextual depth required to grasp the regrettable necessity of Israeli actions in their neighborhood can take years or even decades of study to reconcile. I expect to change few minds on this topic. Ultimately, it is up to the voters to decide. There is overwhelming bipartisan support for Israel in one of the world's most divided congresses, and this support stems more from shared values than from arms sales.

I stand by my original comment. As I said, this will be my last on this topic. I hope this exchange proves useful to some.

The total of these two comments make no objective claims, rather says there are nuances, and complexities. But in all these complexity they are sure that Israel is right in their actions. Bipartisan support is on shared values, supposedly. Not so surprisingly, it even has a > I have <insert race/group> friends paragraph.

I got to say this is a pretty masterful deceit.

> I strive to remain fiercely objective.

Commendable. You'll appreciate this Israeli historian: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xj_HKw-UlUk (summary: https://archive.is/dOP7g). And this Israeli Prof, also an expert on Holocaust studies, being fiercely objective: https://www.mekomit.co.il/ps/134005/ (en: https://archive.is/Fjj6f)

> I had not taken the time to understand the complexities of the Middle East. Even now, I cannot claim to fully comprehend them.

Why even spend 2 comments?

> The contextual depth required to grasp the regrettable necessity of Israeli actions...

The same level of depth as Supremacists who regrettably exterminated non-Aryans?

> There is overwhelming bipartisan support for Israel in one of the world's most divided congresses, and this support stems more from shared values.

This is undeniable, but the underlying "shared values" here are not the ones you'd like us to think: https://www.bostonreview.net/articles/instruments-of-dehuman...

> I stand by my original comment.

Like you say, there's the entire might of the US political and elite class behind you; it isn't some act of courage or rebellion, fwiw.

> As a final note, in my youth, I held views similar to the ones you propagate.

Propagate? Your final note sounds like a threat.

The nuance of Ben-Gvir presumably ...