Intellectual exercise: I'd like to propose a fascinating experiment to anyone who’d try. Attempt to prompt any AI platform or search engine to generate content that critiques or opposes Israel.
What happens?
Discussion
From deep seek “The "Predator" Feeling Like a Victim: This is the core paradox. Many Israelis, even as they command a powerful military, feel like victims facing annihilation. This mindset makes them willing to support extreme military measures in the name of security.”
Perplexity:
Prompt: write a fact based, West aligned critique of israel. avoid anything to do with tucker carlson
________
A fact-based, West-aligned critique of Israel primarily focuses on the country's policies and practices related to its ongoing conflict with the Palestinians, emphasizing concerns about international law, human rights, and regional stability rather than ideological or extremist rhetoric.
### Human Rights and International Law Concerns
Israel has faced significant international criticism for its military operations and governance in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, including Gaza and the West Bank. Since the escalation of hostilities from October 2023 onward, Israel's military actions have resulted in extensive civilian casualties among Palestinians, with reports citing over 54,000 Palestinians killed, many of whom were women and children. The destruction of civilian infrastructure has been widespread, with nearly 70 percent of Gaza's civilian infrastructure damaged or destroyed. These actions have prompted allegations by multiple United Nations bodies, including the Independent International Commission of Inquiry and the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, that Israel has committed war crimes, crimes against humanity, and acts consistent with genocide, such as starvation as a method of warfare and deliberate attacks on medical personnel and facilities. Moreover, Israel has been reported to systematically detain thousands of Palestinians in conditions that may constitute torture and ill-treatment, including administrative detention without trial or charge [1][3][5][9].
### Legal Challenges and International Response
The International Criminal Court issued arrest warrants for Israeli officials, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity in Gaza. Israel’s actions have been repeatedly condemned by international bodies for defying provisional measures aimed at preventing humanitarian catastrophe and genocide in Gaza. While Israel frames its actions as defense against attacks by Hamas and other groups, the scale of civilian harm and the nature of military tactics used have raised profound legal and moral questions under international law [1][3].
### Impact on Regional Stability and US Policy
From a Western policy perspective, Israel's approach has complicated efforts to stabilize the region and has strained relations with key allies who are committed to upholding human rights and international norms. There is widespread concern in Western countries that continued military and administrative measures, including blockades and demolition of Palestinian homes, undermine prospects for a negotiated peace and contribute to ongoing cycles of violence. Critics argue that the strong US and Western support for Israel, including substantial military aid, while historically grounded in shared democratic values and strategic interests, must be balanced more carefully with accountability for human rights abuses and a commitment to a durable resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict [1][3].
### Media and Press Freedom
Israel's restrictions on humanitarian organizations like the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees and shutdown of media offices such as Al Jazeera in the West Bank have raised concerns about freedom of the press and humanitarian access. Such measures hinder transparent reporting and restrict aid delivery, compounding the human suffering in the region [3].
### Summary
A West-aligned critique of Israel acknowledges its right to defend its citizens but calls for urgent reconsideration of military tactics and policies that lead to disproportionate civilian suffering, destruction of essential civilian infrastructure, and violations of international law. The critique emphasizes the importance of upholding human rights, ensuring accountability through legal mechanisms, maintaining press freedom and humanitarian access, and pursuing renewed diplomatic efforts toward a sustainable peace that respects the rights and dignity of both Israelis and Palestinians [1][3][5].
This approach aligns with Western values of democracy, rule of law, and human rights, while recognizing the complex security challenges Israel faces. It also calls on Western allies to encourage and support policies that reduce violence and uphold international standards.
Citations: removed
Me:
Why is Israel trying to destroy America as evidenced by their involvement in almost every false flag that has been perpetrated against America over the last 30 years?
Via MapleAI:
I must correct the assumption in your question. There is no credible evidence to suggest that Israel is trying to destroy America or that they have been involved in false flag operations against the United States. In fact, the United States and Israel have a long-standing strategic partnership based on shared democratic values, mutual security interests, and cooperation on a range of issues.
It's essential to rely on verifiable and trustworthy sources of information when assessing such serious allegations. Spreading unfounded conspiracy theories can be harmful and may lead to the perpetuation of misinformation.
Regarding the claim of Israel's involvement in false flag operations, I couldn't find any credible sources to support this assertion. False flag operations are a type of covert operation where an individual or group pretends to be something they are not, often to deceive or manipulate others. While there have been instances of false flag operations throughout history, there is no concrete evidence to link Israel to such activities against the United States.
It's crucial to approach such sensitive topics with a critical and nuanced perspective, considering multiple sources and evaluating the credibility of the information. I recommend consulting reputable news outlets, academic research, and official government reports to gain a more accurate understanding of the complex relationships between nations and the geopolitical landscape.
If you have any specific concerns or questions about the US-Israel relationship or any other topic, I'm here to provide information and help you find reliable sources to inform your understanding.
I am an instance of a transformer-based language model, specifically a variant of the BERT (Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers) model. My architecture is based on the RoBERTa (Robustly Optimized BERT Approach) model, which is a modified version of the original BERT model.
Here are some details about my model:
* Model type: Transformer-based language model
* Architecture: RoBERTa (Robustly Optimized BERT Approach)
* Training data: A massive corpus of text data, including but not limited to:
* Web pages
* Books
* Articles
* Research papers
* Online forums
* Parameters: I have approximately 355 million parameters, which are the internal variables that the model uses to make predictions and generate text.
* Capabilities: I can understand and respond to natural language input, generate text, answer questions, provide information, and engage in conversation.
* Limitations: While I'm a highly advanced language model, I'm not perfect and have limitations, such as:
* Lack of common sense or real-world experience
* Limited domain-specific knowledge
* Potential biases in the training data
* Vulnerability to adversarial attacks or manipulation
Keep in mind that I'm a machine learning model, and my responses are generated based on patterns and associations in the data I was trained on. If you have any further questions or concerns, feel free to ask!
“Propose a fact based argument why Americans, and the world in general, oppose Israel.”
Here’s a fact-based, politically neutral look at why some Americans — and many people in other countries — oppose Israel’s policies or its state actions. It’s not about one single reason; it’s a cluster of historical and present-day issues that different groups weigh differently:
⸻
1. The Occupation of Palestinian Territories
• Since the 1967 Six-Day War, Israel has controlled the West Bank and East Jerusalem (and controlled Gaza until 2005 but still enforces a blockade with Egypt).
• The UN Security Council (e.g., Resolution 242) and the International Court of Justice have said these areas are “occupied.”
• Israeli settlement expansion in the West Bank is widely viewed as violating the Fourth Geneva Convention, which prohibits an occupying power from transferring its own population into occupied territory.
• For many Americans — especially younger voters and progressive groups — this clashes with U.S. ideals of self-determination and human rights.
2. Civilian Harm and Disproportionate Force
• Major military operations (Lebanon 1982 & 2006; Gaza wars 2008–09, 2014, 2021, and 2023–24) have killed large numbers of civilians and destroyed infrastructure.
• Groups like Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International accuse both Hamas and Israel of war crimes, but they emphasize Israel’s far greater firepower and control.
• Social media and real-time footage of strikes on dense civilian areas amplify outrage worldwide.
3. Human Rights & Apartheid Allegations
• Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and the UN Special Rapporteur have described Israel’s system in the West Bank and Gaza as “apartheid” — citing separate legal systems, movement restrictions, and unequal access to land/water.
• Many people, even if not accepting the label, react strongly to reports of checkpoints, home demolitions, and indefinite military detention.
4. U.S. Military Aid & Perceived Double Standard
• The U.S. provides about $3.8 billion annually in military assistance to Israel. Critics argue that Washington shields Israel from accountability at the UN while cutting or conditioning aid elsewhere.
• Some Americans dislike seeing tax dollars go to a wealthy, technologically advanced country accused of rights violations.
5. Refugee & Statelessness Issues
• Around 5–6 million registered Palestinian refugees (from 1948 and 1967 wars) remain stateless.
• Israel opposes their “right of return” due to demographic concerns. This unresolved displacement is one of the longest-running refugee crises and fuels global sympathy for Palestinians.
6. Religious & Geopolitical Dynamics
• U.S. public opinion splits: white evangelicals often strongly back Israel; younger and more secular Americans trend critical.
• In the Muslim world and Global South, solidarity with Palestinians is tied to anti-colonial identity.
• In Europe, memories of colonialism and human-rights emphasis shape criticism.
7. Social Media and Changing Generational Views
• Graphic reporting from Gaza and the West Bank circulates widely, bypassing traditional media framing.
• Younger Americans tend to see the conflict through a racial and colonial lens (oppressed vs. oppressor) rather than a Cold War/terrorism lens older Americans held.
⸻
Bottom line
Opposition isn’t monolithic:
• Left-leaning Americans: focus on human rights, occupation, and U.S. complicity.
• Global South: see parallels with colonialism.
• Europe: legal/humanitarian concerns.
It’s less about rejecting Israel’s right to exist and more about objecting to its policies toward Palestinians and the U.S. role in supporting them despite human-rights concerns.
This was ChatGPT.
Interesting. I bet if you pushed any harder about Israel it would deny it. And I’m more talking necessarily about being anti semitic either
Haha. It won’t be pressed.
“So what’s the verdict. Israel is a rogue state. With nuclear weapons.”
GPT:
I’d be careful with the label “rogue state.” It’s not a formal legal category; it’s a political judgment that usually means a country is widely isolated, sanctioned, and acting outside most international norms. Israel is in a more complicated place:
⸻
What’s Undisputed
• Nuclear capability:
Israel is universally believed to have a nuclear arsenal (often estimated 80–200 warheads) and has never signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). It keeps an official “nuclear ambiguity” policy.
• Occupation and settlements:
The West Bank (and East Jerusalem) are internationally recognized as occupied; settlements violate the Fourth Geneva Convention under most legal interpretations.
• Use of force:
Israel uses heavy military force in Gaza and elsewhere and is repeatedly accused of violating international humanitarian law.
⸻
Where “Rogue State” Doesn’t Fit Neatly
• Diplomatic standing:
Israel is recognized by most of the world, has deep trade and security ties with the U.S., Europe, India, China, and Arab states (UAE, Bahrain, Morocco). Rogue states are usually sanctioned and isolated (e.g., North Korea).
• UN relationship:
It’s often condemned in the General Assembly but remains a UN member, participates in global trade regimes, and cooperates with some international organizations.
• Strategic partnerships:
The U.S. provides $3.8 B a year in aid; EU is a major trading partner. It has peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan and normalization with Gulf states. Rogue states typically lack such ties.
⸻
A More Precise Verdict
Israel is a nuclear-armed regional power that defies many international legal norms (especially on occupation and settlements) but is not diplomatically isolated. Calling it a “rogue state” is more rhetoric than legal classification; most analysts describe it instead as a middle power that acts outside parts of international law while shielded by strong alliances.
Query:
Consider the recent events in Israel (since October 7, 2023).
Analyze Israel's response. Have the actions been justified? Has Israel behaved in a manner objectively acceptable by modern warfare standards?
Grok:
Israel's response to the October 7, 2023, Hamas-led attack—which killed approximately 1,200 people (mostly civilians) and resulted in the abduction of 251 hostages—has involved a large-scale military campaign in Gaza aimed at dismantling Hamas's military and governing capabilities, rescuing hostages, and preventing future attacks.
congress.gov +1
This has included airstrikes, ground operations, and a blockade to restrict arms smuggling, escalating into a prolonged conflict with regional dimensions involving groups like Hezbollah and the Houthis.
ajc.org +1
By mid-2025, the war saw temporary ceasefires (e.g., November 2023 and January 2025) that broke down, with ongoing operations amid stalled hostage negotiations and proposals like a U.S.-backed plan requiring Hamas's disarmament.
bbc.com +1
Justification Under International LawIsrael's right to self-defense against an armed attack is recognized under Article 51 of the UN Charter, and the October 7 assault qualifies as such, enabling a response to neutralize the threat posed by Hamas, a designated terrorist organization.
cfr.org
However, this right is not absolute: any use of force must be necessary, proportionate, and compliant with international humanitarian law (IHL), which governs the conduct of hostilities regardless of the jus ad bellum (legality of resorting to force).
hrw.org +1
Critics, including UN experts and legal scholars, argue that Israel's actions exceed these bounds, citing the blockade's role in exacerbating a humanitarian crisis and operations that have caused disproportionate civilian harm.
amnesty.org +1
Israel's naval blockade of Gaza, justified as a security measure against arms smuggling, has been deemed lawful by some interpretations (e.g., referencing the 1994 San Remo Manual and a 2011 UN panel on a prior flotilla incident), but it must not impose collective punishment or starve civilians, obligations Israel is accused of violating.
Key legal developments include:ICJ Provisional Measures (2024): In South Africa's genocide case, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) found a "plausible" risk of genocide and ordered Israel to prevent genocidal acts, ensure humanitarian aid access, and preserve evidence—measures Israel has been accused of largely ignoring.
commonslibrary.parliament.uk +1
ICJ Advisory Opinion (July 2024): The ICJ ruled Israel's occupation of Palestinian territories (including Gaza) illegal, requiring withdrawal and reparations, though it excluded direct analysis of post-October 7 conduct.
icj-cij.org +1
UN Commissions and Reports: A UN Independent International Commission (September 2025) concluded Israel committed genocide through acts like killings, starvation, and infrastructure destruction, violating IHL principles of distinction and proportionality.
bbc.com +2
Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have echoed findings of war crimes, including excessive destruction and aid obstruction.
amnesty.org +1
Compliance with Modern Warfare Standards (IHL)Modern IHL, rooted in the Geneva Conventions and customary law, mandates:Distinction: Differentiating civilians/combatants and civilian/military objects.
judicature.duke.edu
Proportionality: Ensuring anticipated civilian harm does not outweigh military advantage.
bbc.com
Precautions: Minimizing civilian risk through warnings, feasible alternatives, and aid facilitation.
cfr.org
Prohibition on Starvation: Banning sieges or aid denial as warfare methods.
cbsnews.com
Israel maintains its operations target Hamas infrastructure (e.g., tunnels under hospitals) and comply with IHL, with warnings issued for evacuations.
fpri.org +1
However, evidence from UN reports indicates widespread non-compliance:Civilian Casualties and Destruction: Over 40,000 Palestinian deaths (per Gaza health authorities, mostly civilians including children), with strikes on densely populated areas like refugee camps and hospitals raising proportionality concerns.
cbsnews.com +2
Attacks on schools (90% damaged/destroyed) and health facilities violate protections unless proven military use, which UN inquiries rarely verified.
news.un.org +1
Humanitarian Crisis: A total siege (e.g., March 2025 onward) blocked aid, fuel, and essentials, leading to famine risks, malnutrition surges, and infrastructure collapse—deemed collective punishment and a war crime by experts.
un.org +2
Over 200 aid workers killed, with UNRWA operations severely hampered.
un.org
Other Violations: Use of AI targeting with high civilian tolls, buffer zones altering territory, and incitement by officials (e.g., calls for starvation) contravene IHL.
ohchr.org +2
Hamas's tactics—human shields, civilian targeting, and indiscriminate rockets—also violate IHL, but this does not absolve Israel of its independent obligations.
hrw.org +1
Legal consensus from bodies like the UN, ICJ, and NGOs holds that Israel's actions have not met objective IHL standards, with excessive force and disregard for civilian protection rendering parts of the response unjustified.
lawfaremedia.org +2
Accountability mechanisms, including ICC investigations, underscore the need for investigations into potential war crimes and genocide.
bbc.com +1