The reasons behind these polarized emotions will differ based on who you ask and are too many to list. Both sides feel entitled to the land, I personally don't care what the place is called, I just want everyone living in it to have equal rights and for justice to exist in the land. But that requires persecution and killing to end – which I don't see happening in the foreseeable future as tragic as that is.

> I'm still not really sure why Isreal causes such polarised emotions.

Not to state the obvious but the largeest distinction between israel and every other country its that its a mostly jewish country.

> THe war intensified, but it was only when all the players started talking did something good happen

The bigger issue here is that while talks have been attempted many times, there is a sense on both sides of bad faith negotiations. In Ireland, bad as it was, there was a feeling the other side "would get too much" but not that they were outright lying about their aims.

> The problem here is that the number of parties that need to talk are quite high

There is also the problem of little value to human life. Religious fanatism, afterlife promises and even goverment sponsored programs such as martyr funds have devalued human life to a point where here is little basis on what to use as foundational goal for peace.

My US tax dollars don't generally go to other groups of terrorists while everyone gives a standing ovation to a terrorist leader.

American funding to Saudi Arabia permitted tons of funding for terrorists groups in the region. Saudi has also bombed 400k people in Yemen with American missiles and planes. 9/11 had Saudi pilots. Pakistan an ally for the US helped hide Osama Bin Laden. Mujahadeen had CIA funding and just recently Trump invited the Taliban to Camp David where allies of the US are honoured.

If you somehow think that Israel funding is unique, specially in that region, you are not paying attention.

Which again begs the question, why is Israel singularly called out.

The Saudis aren't getting my tax money. If they get weapons, it's because they are paying big money for them. I don't believe we should be selling them weapons from a moral perspective, but I do understand (though I don't agree with) the economic argument that they would buy from Russia instead which would boost Russian weapon production.

In contrast, Israel got 14.1B plus the usual 3.8B. This is the equivalent of an almost $200 stimulus check for every person in Israel. Personally, I'd rather spend that money on infrastructure or at least give it to the poorest Americans.

Answering most of your questions quickly: Aid to Pakistan was cut under Trump (though Biden is asking for aid again). Mujahideen funding to fight the USSR during the Cold War is materially different AND it blew up in our faces when we invaded Afghanistan. We invited the Russian Premier who presided the second half of the Korean War (killing way more Americans than the Taliban ever has) to Camp David too (refusing to deal with foreign leaders because they are unsavory or evil is pretty much always a recipe for even bigger problems).

You don't hear US politicians calling the Saudis or Pakistanis good people, but you DO hear this claim about Israel while the hypocrisy is blatant to anyone who researches with even the slightest bit of objectivity. This alone is a massive difference.

Also the most egregious thing: Israel knew about 911 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hdiQuU7upfw) and did not share that intel with the USA. There is more evidence of this but it gets harder to find as time passes and it gets taken down, perhaps no entity benefited more from 911 than Israel.

> The Saudis aren't getting my tax money.

They are the largest military buyer of the US, with a 60 billion order signed in 2010 and a 110 billion signed in 2017. Both of which include the US army training and providing support for the Saudi Military.

Are the army dudes training them not paid with taxes? Do you think the Saudi Royal family being the richest in the world after becoming allies with the US is a coincidence?

If you wanna ignore the reality of the situation because there is an explicit bill in congress that says "2 billions to Israel" and there is no bill in congress that says "vote in tandem with Saudi in the UN, help them in Kuwait, help them in destroying Yemen and keep local gas prices low at the expense of horrible human abuses far away while they buy our military equipment and we train them up to have a local partner if we ever wanna invade iraq again" then yeah your tax dollars aren't going to Saudi.

> I'd rather spend that money on infrastructure or at least give it to the poorest Americans.

That money IS going to americans. You do not understand how the aid is sent to Israel. America pays an american company, like Lockheed Martin to produce X amount of stuff and the surplus is then gifted to Israel essentially.

This works in two ways. One is that it keeps war production pipelines running, countries that dismantle their weapon shops and then try to run them again have lots of trouble (see russia), however america does not need yearly the amount it produces and the jobs in certain industries are expensive. Engineers and union factory workers make good money in those companies so your tax dollars pay for those jobs, and Israel essentially takes the extra missiles (of the 3B yearly 2 are for the Iron Dome which has no offensive capability). No israeli is getting 200$, but some dude in an american factory makes 125k and has weekends off thanks to that 14B bill

> Answering most of your questions quickly

thats not an answer, thats a rationalisation and a poor one at that. You said america does not fund terrorism, and then you said "oh but it blew up in our faces" that is not lack of funding that is just what you get when you fund terrorism.

> This alone is a massive difference.

You have Trump meeting Bin Salman calling him a good friend in April of this year. So clearly you in the rhetoric department there is no massive difference. we have people in goverment like Bernie Sanders that criticise Israel and people who criticise Saudi, and both get your tax dollars.

The Saudi fund also has more money in lobbying, more money in US universities, has more overt corrupt deals like a 2 billion investment in the son in law of Trump or renting the entire top floor of Trump tower without anyone staying there. And at the same time they have killed 400k people in Yemen, funded the genocide of the Tigray in Sudan. And there has been 0 backlash.

I do not think it is outrageous to claim that the disproportionate attention on Israel might have reasons beyond the moral or the economic for its magnitude.

The Saudis are handing over their own money rather than using US taxpayer money. That's a very different situation. Likewise, most of the maintenance and training is done by ex-military working as contractors.

You don't understand the broken window fallacy.

Further, that stuff isn't actually surplus. Russia had way more "surplus" than we do, but the Ukraine war showed just how quickly that equipment gets used.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_broken_window

Fact is that this pager attack is something like the second or third largest terrorist attack in modern history by number of casualties.

Everything else here is trying to eliminate all nuance and create a bunch of whataboutism to defend terrorism.

> The Saudis are handing over their own money rather than using US taxpayer money

Sure if you pretend billateral multi decade trade agreements that have made the country insanely rich are in no way benefited from american taxpayer dollars specially in military then yeah, they get none of your tax dollars.

> most of the maintenance and training is done by ex-military working as contractors.

That is easily verifibly untrue. Part of the 110 billion dollar buy in 2018 was using american corps for training. That is part of what they bought.

> You don't understand the broken window fallacy.

I do, but this is not a case of broken windows. Its the case of the american industrial military complex needing to be active even during non war times. Countries cannot stop and start the military industry, similar to a big furnace. Its expensive to get going, its not cheap to mantain but it is impossible to stop and start it at a whim. Therefore a on going level of fire is needed, for america that is military spending, and military aid for partners. In the case of Saudi that is military orders in exchange for many many benefits. In the case of Israel is repleneshing the Iron Dome which america has access to the technology for. Seeing them as distinct things is rhetoric, when the material effect is the same. American jobs are paid, military companies produce goods and america holds bilateral benefitial relationships with right wing countries in the middle east.

Pretending they are extremely different based on payment method is looking for an excuse to morally only condemn one relationship.

> Fact is that this pager attack is something like the second or third largest terrorist attack in modern history by number of casualties.

How is it terrorism? Terrorism is using fear for political goals. Disrupting enemy comms is a military goal, not a political one. And its effect, making the enemy unable to talk, plus potentially hurting people who use those comms is not intended to cause fear but actual damage.

I grew up around terrorism think Ireland in the 80s. The effects of terrosim are fear, are people unable to say certain things, are people being killed for pushing political ideas.

Bombing a military radio tower in Russia is not terrorism, neither is destroying walkie talkies from Hezbollah members. The fact it was a crazy operation does not make it more terrorism than Russia launching a 400kg payload against a Ukrainian data center

> other country its that its a mostly jewish country.

I mean yeah that was a thing, but I would suggest that its less of a unique part as it once was.

> Religious fanatism, afterlife promises

I mean that's a strong motivator, but sectarianism isn't new or unique to this conflict. Moreover its only part of the story. People are fighting because someone they knew has been injured, killed or suffered from this war. Yes there are people who are also into making a new eden or some shit, but they are often only a small but tediously vocal minority.

> I would suggest that its less of a unique part as it once was.

I would argue its more relevant than ever. Anti semitism is on the rise globally. Multiple groups like Russia and Iran have made it the corner stone of some of its geopolitical strategy. The whole Soros is behind every disaster in the West is a russian psy op. Covid vaccines are jewish experiments on people is blood libel and also russian funded. Trans people and immigration waves are jewish plots to destabilise the west, another russian op. Half the right wing influencer peddle in antisemitism or related conspiracies left right and centre. Jordan peterson neo marxism, stephen miller (Trumps advisor) great replacement theory etc

With that amount of misinformation spreading without control in social media, a uniquely jewish country is a perfect target for the misdirected anger.

See a genocide in Sudan getting 0 attention while the first week after Oct 7th, before any large Israel counter offensive there were already groups organising anti war protests and marches.

> sectarianism isn't new or unique to this conflict

Sectarianism is less of a problem. Its the religious aspect. If I think there is no afterlife I would protect my children, if I believe death at war is the most holy thing there is you end up with figures like Mother of martyrs,Umm Nidal, who was the first woman elected in Gaza in the election Hamas won. She was a viral figure because of a video telling her 17 year old boy to go and kill jews and not come home, he went to a university and shot 5 people and injured 23 before being shot down during the second intifada.

No other conflict has mothers begging their underage kids to go kill civilians. You will not see videos in Ukraine of mother asking babies to fight. Because that is an insane thing to do and really makes political compromise really difficult when human life's value is rendered worthless.

There is also the issue of Israel not caring about Palestinian lives, that has less to do with religion but the constant state of threat the entire country is under has given the military a shoot first ask later approach that again really devalues life.

> People are fighting because someone they knew has been injured, killed or suffered from this war.

Revenge does not explain a conflict that has been going on for a century or more. There was unrest from the late 1800s in the region with the first waves of Jewish immigration. No one knew somoene injured back then.

From a current stand point, after losing in 1946,1947, 1956, 1967, 1983,2002 and 2014 you would at some point just concede, set peace terms and then use diplomacy for compromise post war talks. Kinda what Ireland did, they lost, gave up the terrorism and fought in the courts and internationally for rights and governance over the region. Northern ireland being part of Ireland was closer during brexit than at any point during the IRA.

Palestine really has no more fight and still rejects every 2 state solution due to disagreeing on terms. Which I get that losing parts of east jerusalmen and the settlement locations are insulting to them, but they had those in 1947 and still turned it down which makes it hard to know what they would actually agree to.

So I think we are closer in opinion than you might think.

> No one knew somoene injured back then.

No, but thats the point its an active war. Ireland's conflict has been going on in ebbs and flows since 1919, but it's roots were set way back. Someone you know has been injured by the "other side" in every generation. Its a generational conflict, sadly.

> Ireland's conflict has been going on in ebbs and flows since 1919

But the big difference in this conflict is that Ireland was colonised prior to 1919. They were always the underdog, and still are.

In 1880 when the first waves of refugees arrived, Palestine was part of the Ottoman empire, mostly Muslim and there was economic and ethnic mayority of arabs. And the first pogroms already happened then.

The original partiton the british proposed was, in part, because they considered the arab violence against the jewish population to be a big issue. There were other terrible reasons like the british who designed the plan was an antisemite and thought Israel would be enticing for european jews to leave. But the reality of the origins of the fight was that a bunch of refugees arrived, built their own insular communities and they got attacked to the point the UN decided them having their own country would be safer.

If Ireland became 1 country, even if they mistreated the british people in northern Ireland later you could hardly say they have always been the aggresor because we know thats not true. Somehow Israel story has been flipped where instead of the underdog, now becoming dominant, they are seen as always the one on top. Other historical inaccuracies like America's allyship with Israel is considered eternal when in reality it started in 1960s when Egypt tried to take over the Suez Canal. America only cares about free trade and boat routes. In 1947 they sided with the Arab league, due to access to oil, who said they would exterminate the jews in the UN floor and no one stopped them despite military analysis in Uk, france and USA agreeing they would win against Israel.