Hi Jeremy, thanks for your work, I’ve followed and enjoyed it for a while.
“What they did on 10/7 left Israel with two options: Retaliation or no retaliation”
- to be clear, these are the military response options, and a false dichotomy.
It doesn’t mention the possible geopolitical concessions Israel could’ve made to e.g retract settlements from occupied areas, or reforming the Gaza checkpoint systems.
This article seems written in a way where the status quo before 10/7 was just, stable (and preferable). Also would’ve been great to announce your journalistic biases in the main text instead of in the footnote (as you often say that acknowledging bias is important).
Personal bias: not well informed about the conflict or the situation in the Middle East compared to I’m sure what you and others are. I’ll acknowledge that freely, but that I think my point still stands even with limited information.
This is already incredible work. Can't wait to read the rest. Thank you.
Hi Jeremy, thanks for your work, I’ve followed and enjoyed it for a while.
“What they did on 10/7 left Israel with two options: Retaliation or no retaliation”
- to be clear, these are the military response options, and a false dichotomy.
It doesn’t mention the possible geopolitical concessions Israel could’ve made to e.g retract settlements from occupied areas, or reforming the Gaza checkpoint systems.
This article seems written in a way where the status quo before 10/7 was just, stable (and preferable). Also would’ve been great to announce your journalistic biases in the main text instead of in the footnote (as you often say that acknowledging bias is important).
Personal bias: not well informed about the conflict or the situation in the Middle East compared to I’m sure what you and others are. I’ll acknowledge that freely, but that I think my point still stands even with limited information.
Thanks!
Brilliantly set out and an enjoyable read as I've had the same questions mostly. Really looking forward to the rest!