Dave Smith frequently rails against Israeli military actions and U.S. support for them, often framing the conflict in Gaza as a one-sided humanitarian catastrophe. But his take consistently minimizes or outright avoids addressing the ideological fanaticism of Hamas and the real-world consequences of Israeli withdrawal.
Which leads to the question he never seems to answer:
What happens if Israel does pull out of Gaza—and Hamas regroups and launches another October 7-style massacre?
Is that just more “blowback”? Would he still insist Israel has no right to intervene militarily? Or does he consider that scenario too far-fetched to warrant serious consideration?
This kind of moral absolutism—where military action is always wrong and everything bad is chalked up to past Western meddling—feels less like analysis and more like reflex. At some point, there needs to be a clear answer:
How does a nation protect itself from a group openly committed to murdering civilians—without being condemned for trying to do so?
I’d welcome a response that doesn’t dance around that question.
Tracy, that’s not an answer. You deflected. The question was clear: What happens if Israel pulls out and Hamas commits another massacre?
Calling Zionism the "real fanaticism" doesn’t justify or address the threat of jihadist violence. So again—if Hamas attacks civilians after a withdrawal, do you support Israel’s right to respond? Or do you think mass murder is just “blowback” to be tolerated?
There is no army in Gaza. They are ALL civilians. Israel has been attacking GAZANS for 3/4 century. If you were a Gazan you'd do the same. Israel should have never been manufactured. The entire project is gross.
Where's the Dave Smith and Alex Berenson debate??
tomorrow 7pm Eastern on my YT/Rumble channels
Dave Smith frequently rails against Israeli military actions and U.S. support for them, often framing the conflict in Gaza as a one-sided humanitarian catastrophe. But his take consistently minimizes or outright avoids addressing the ideological fanaticism of Hamas and the real-world consequences of Israeli withdrawal.
Which leads to the question he never seems to answer:
What happens if Israel does pull out of Gaza—and Hamas regroups and launches another October 7-style massacre?
Is that just more “blowback”? Would he still insist Israel has no right to intervene militarily? Or does he consider that scenario too far-fetched to warrant serious consideration?
This kind of moral absolutism—where military action is always wrong and everything bad is chalked up to past Western meddling—feels less like analysis and more like reflex. At some point, there needs to be a clear answer:
How does a nation protect itself from a group openly committed to murdering civilians—without being condemned for trying to do so?
I’d welcome a response that doesn’t dance around that question.
The real " ideological fanaticism" is Zionism
Tracy, that’s not an answer. You deflected. The question was clear: What happens if Israel pulls out and Hamas commits another massacre?
Calling Zionism the "real fanaticism" doesn’t justify or address the threat of jihadist violence. So again—if Hamas attacks civilians after a withdrawal, do you support Israel’s right to respond? Or do you think mass murder is just “blowback” to be tolerated?
There is no army in Gaza. They are ALL civilians. Israel has been attacking GAZANS for 3/4 century. If you were a Gazan you'd do the same. Israel should have never been manufactured. The entire project is gross.
Dave Smith is a preposterous uneducated clown. I stayed even after Dr Jay left, now I know why he did. Unsubscribing.