Taleb and Macaes

I admire both Nassim Taleb and Bruno Macaes quite a bit, so I listen when they offer strident criticism of Israel right now. But I can't help but notice strange themes in their commentary--

1) They seem to think the Israelis have boxed themselves into a stupid/immoral position. Which may be the case. But I find it odd they think the Israelis should be able to play 12 dimensional chess while the bar for the Palestinians is to "try your best not let your representatives commit mass murder."

2) Taleb points out there are 2 billion Muslims in the world. Okay. As if this is an argument to not fight Hamas. Why is this stat always referenced with respect to Muslims. How many white people there are in the world? How many Christians? To what degree does this matter?

3) I find it strange for all these "Pro-Palestinian" folks become rabidly passionate about their condition 5 minutes AFTER Hamas slaughtered all those Israelis. Wasn't the time to be passionate advocates BEFORE the rampage? Don't you think it might've played a bit better?

4) Best line I've heard about a "ceasefire" was from Hillary Clinton: "there was a ceasefire on October 6th."

5) A lot of anti-Israeli people say "Israel is falling into a Hamas trap." Maybe. Is it not equally accurate to say Hamas fell into an "Israeli settler trap?" After all, at the end of this Israel is going to rule Gaza and the West Bank. Who is going to stop the settlers now?

6) A lot of Western liberals say they are Pro Palestinian, not pro Hamas. If that were the case, wouldn't the logical position be to march in favor of a Hamas surrender? And to advocate for 3rd party (non-Israeli rule). Wouldn't that save the most Palestinian lives at this point? But no...they march against Israel and accuse them of war crimes before the war started. They won't say a word against Hamas. Interesting strategy - it would be my approach if I didn't give a shit about the Palestinians at all. 

7) General thought: a strategy that would encourage war crimes and racism by the powerful over the weak: how about accusing the powerful of war crimes and racism regardless if they've committed them or not? To put it in perspective - imagine a wife who accuses/treats a husband as if he were cheating regardless if actually was. Doesn't that incentivize the husband to actually cheat? Because you've taken away any repercussions to it. Are we not edging toward that situation in general? Think about generals. In the past, we treated Robert E Lee with respect because he behaved gallantly in war, despite being on the "wrong side of history." If I were Lee today, I'd look at the landscape and say "fuck it." What incentive do I have to behave gallantly? They're going to melt my statue down either which way.

8) So far my big takeaway is that social media has made people more arrogant about their stupidity and more bloodthirsty.

9) In real life, I've yet to meet someone who is vocally pro-Hamas/Palestinian in this conflict. Social media / AI amplifies this bullshit and/or I have a great social filter. All said, I get the impression if Charles Manson was doing his thing right now, he'd have 10s of thousands of supporters in the streets following him.