This is the third time I've tried to start a response and twice attempted to PM you directly Mike. I wasn't sure how to respond to your non-bullet, bullet list with a single emoji, and once you posted about no comments and your lack of surprise at HC silence, even less so.
I don't pretend to understand the weight of all the historic injustices in play in the Levant or peoples from there (the Holocaust most obviously, but also Spanish & Portuguese Inquisitions, The Crusades, forced migrations, etc.). However not only one side here was affected by those, especially the last two, and I most certainly don't support protecting oneself at all costs. That applies to the US or any other state or people. Look at awful 9/11 AND the awful 9/11 response. When W. said "you're either with us or against us" I thought most understood that wasn't the best path forward.
I have to admit, probably my being naive, I can't remember during my life even having sympathy for innocents on both sides got you labeled as not supportive enough on one side. That feels different, though I know further back it was quite common.
I hope we all feel similarly against terrorism, minimizing collateral damage, long-term peace goals, democratic governments, etc. If that's the case, it's probably why it goes less spoken. We already agree.
But we all have additional lines too, and one of mine is cutting off food and water to an entire population. That's just waaay too far over the line on the at all costs yardstick and I can't believe people aren't starting every conversation with that fact. Not invalidating power structure or history or identity, etc. It's complicated history, but one side actively starving out the entire other side is the opposite of complicated.
So for what it's worth I've given $2,500 so far to try to help slightly there. Hopefully humanitarian channels will further open.