This question is actually threefold:1Russia-Ukraine war, which side are you on?2.What do you think of Hamas's October 7 attack?3.What do you think of what Israel is doing in the Gaza Strip?In my opinion, the answers to these three should be in the same vein. My own answer is: support for Ukraine;Opposition to terrorist attacks by Hamas;Oppose the indiscriminate Israeli bombardment of the Gaza Strip;The actions of Russia and Israel meet the definition of war crimes under international law. I came to this conclusion without going through any thought process, and after confirming some basic facts, I naturally had that view. Of course, my views were scoffed at by quite a few people. For example, one of my college classmates was very unconvinced, and he commented under the article "My Basic Understanding of the Palestinian-Israeli Issue" in my circle of friends: "If you are a Han Chinese in Xinjiang, you know how holy you are, Our Lady of the." Professors of Jordanian origin, who have studied the Middle East all my life, do not dare to believe that you are telling the "truth". "This classmate is a professor in the United States, and I have the impression that he should have three PhDs: education, political science, and finance. I wanted to reply to him that there were professors of Israeli descent in the United States who agreed with the "facts" I said. Later, in order to avoid unnecessary debate, he couldn't help but reply. A person's information** is important, and so is the judgment of the information. Some information is judged without a very high IQ. For example, a traditional fuel car, JAC, 100,000 yuan, will you buy it?99.9% probability not. Now, it replaces the fuel engine with a battery, adds some software, and sells for more than 300,000 yuan, will you buy it?A lot of people will. The question is: will the frame, chassis, manufacturing process, safety, and comfort of JAC cars change a lot because of the replacement of the engine with a battery......On the other hand, the judgment of some information is not so simple. For example, the Washington Post and the Associated Press said there were thousands of people at the rallies in solidarity with Palestine, the New York Times said there were tens of thousands, and the NPR said at least tens of thousands. They are all world-class big**, which one do you choose to believe?It is indeed difficult for ordinary people to have the ability to make accurate judgments, including myself. Later someone online published the passage of time for this rally, which captured all the participants, according to an estimate of hundreds of thousands of people. Different audiences also have a profound impact on individual judgments. Tumoto, a well-known big V in China, was once a big bull in the investigative journalism industry, and was once known for its high quality articles and in-depth thinking. He recently commented on a material that said: "An expert at West Point, who specializes in urban warfare, commented that he did not see any violation of the international laws of war by the IDF. The concept of the public in Jian Zhong is completely unreasonable, and they have gone completely crazy. "A big bull like Tumoto, ** is the expert opinion of the famous West Point Military Academy, do you believe it?To be honest, a combination like Turmoto + West Point will definitely scare the average reader. If you don't have high-quality reading, you have nothing to do but believe. Mr. F, a popular science writer, was once very good friends with Tumoto (I guess not now, right?).He commented: "It is completely crazy to take the opinion of the American ** person, who has always favored Israel and is unlikely to openly turn the other cheek with Israel, as a final conclusion." Whether Israel has violated international law is a legal question, and the New York Times and the Washington Post today have reported that many experts on genocide believe that Israel has committed genocide in Gaza and is no more professional than a soldier who has been a soldier for 25 years and has only studied a master's degree in policy management"If you haven't read Mr. F's comments, you may need to spend a lot of time and effort checking to determine whether Tumoto's point of view is correct. Moreover, there will be some people, even if they spend time and energy to verify, the final conclusion may be that they are in favor of the earth and the motorcycle is getting deeper and deeper in the wrong direction. It is often assumed that only people with a relatively low level of education are misinformed. Those high-quality talents, who are often well-read and think independently, will not be so easily fooled?Actually, not necessarily. In many cases, high-quality talents will be precisely because there is too much information, and their inner prejudices have long been solidified, so they will constantly screen out the information that supports their own views, and lack enthusiasm for the truth, or although they have enthusiasm, because they stick to their prejudices, the more they strengthen their original prejudices. 
The person I mentioned in "My Basic Understanding of the Palestinian-Israeli Question" firmly believes that "the Central Gaza Hospital**, from any point of view, Israel has no motive to launch an attack", firmly believes that "** is about 100 people, and unfortunately no more than 20 people will be killed", and I responded that "you are fully qualified to be Israel's propaganda minister" My friend, I was impressed by the rigor of the logic of the battle against Chinese medicine fans in the alumni group, but I didn't expect that our views on the Palestinian-Israeli issue would be so different. Now, a few weeks have passed, the attitude of some countries has begun to turn, anti-Israel demonstrations around the world have intensified, Biden's strong support for Israel has made him lose the support of the Democratic Party, and the New York Times poll shows that Biden has fallen behind Trump in Nevada, Georgia, Arizona, Michigan, and Pennsylvania, which are five key states, and it is very likely that Trump will return to power in this way. The world situation has changed a lot from the beginning of its condemnation of Hamas's terrorist acts to the current condemnation of Israel's war crimes against civilians. But my friend was still stubbornly holding her way. Here are some of the discussions I had with this friend, I was a liberal arts student who entered in 2000, and he was an engineering student who entered in the 80s of the last century (Tsinghua University is known for its engineering majors), and the exchange between the two generations may reflect different ways of thinking and thinking angles from a certain aspect. I asked the friend curiously: Until now, so many new materials have come out, and you still insist that the hospital was bombed by Hamas?He said: It's not (Hamas), it's the Islamic Resistance (bombed). I asked: Until now, it is still insisted that no more than 20 people died?He said: You are too lax, I just estimated, did not say no more than 20 people, my expression is "unfortunately killed may not exceed 20". I asked again: Until now, you still think that the death data of the hospital's ** case is on the order of 20, right?He said yes, Hamas said that a few hundred is outrageous. Then he again used what he thought was very good evidence to prove to me why the death figures were on the order of 20 and why the fireworks case had nothing to do with Israel. I gave him the evidence that was internationally considered to be relevant to Israel, and he was unmoved, and used the information he had to refute what he considered "tight", such as the fact that the roof of the car in the parking lot was not damaged, and so on. He also criticized me and said: Look, I will respond to and refute all the evidence you present, but you don't read or respond to what I present, which is not the attitude that a debate should have. I said: I don't want to argue about this, the truth of this incident is not something we can debate, I am forwarding you that information just to let you know what the other side is saying, not to convince you. He felt that I had a single message, and said to me seriously: With all due respect, a person in a single source is really like a little pink at the bottom of a well. I replied: I admit that I am a single source because I don't have that much energy to gather information, but I think my source is more reliable. I don't have time to verify your information, and I don't need to. Just as you won't verify the information I forwarded. We all just sift through the information that supports our position, and there is no difference at this point. The difference is only: we just chose the exact opposite message, and that's it. I turn those **, not to believe you, but to let you know that there is such a source, a point of view, and those views are just the opposite of your point of view. If you're interested, check the sources, and it's okay if you're not interested. I chose not to look at some things at all, based on the premise that the knowledge I had accumulated in the early stage was enough to judge that those things were not worth seeing. For example, traditional Chinese medicine, such as Han Han, such as Rao Yi and Shi Yigong, and for example, "the death in the hospital is of the order of 20, and it was done by Hamas". 
He said: There needs to be a process of judging anything, and it requires the accumulation of evidence, and then it is necessary to use one's own experience and logical ability, and if you ignore any other source of information even at the stage of accumulating evidence, and only focus on a source that you have initially believed to be the truth, it will be self-evident what the result will be. There is no one in the world who is God, and there is no such thing as being right all the time. The magnitude of the hospital tragedy is 20 people, this is a speculation supported by a lot of logic and evidence, if you think it is wrong, you can completely debate it at the level of evidence, rather than relying on the conclusion of a great god and think that it is not right. I said, "Indeed, no one in this world is God, and of course you are not, right?"But now you're expecting me to treat you like a god, and you're expecting me to believe the idea that 20 hospital deaths are on the order of 20 and that Hamas did it, ignoring other arguments in the world that have more evidence and seem to be based on evidence. He was not convinced: When did I think I was God?I said: You expect me to treat you as a god, and expect me to believe the idea that "the hospital ** death is of the order of 20, it was Hamas's doing". When I believe in a different point of view, I firmly believe that I am wrong. He said: That's my point of view, I don't want to convince you, I just want to make my point of view clear at the level of evidence. Look at my original judgment, is there any"Possibly"Two words. I said, "I don't think you can tell you clearly, but I don't want to bother to prove what I believe, so I casually turned to the evidence cited by others." That's the biggest difference between me and you, you personally collect information and come to conclusions that you think are correct;I choose to trust sources that I think are reliable, and I also draw conclusions that I think are correct. This friend has always insisted that the Israeli army has not carried out indiscriminate attacks and deliberate attacks. For example, he said: a certain news **, next to a dense complex, around the collapsed ruins, an area of about 100 100 meters, if it is completely indiscriminate, all the civilians in these buildings will be reimbursed, conservatively estimated that there will be thousands of people, almost half of the death list (published by Hamas), but in fact, the attack was not completed at one time, and the number of people is far from reaching that number, which is a compromise between taking into account the civilian population and completely destroying the military underground facilities. What he wanted to convey was nothing more than to say: the number of deaths on the death list is not credible, and at the same time, the number of deaths caused by many attacks is not caused by one attack, so the deaths are not very many, so it is not indiscriminate bombing. I replied: I can't say that it only killed a few people, not dead, so it was not indiscriminate bombing. He said: In those years, the British army and the US military carried out indiscriminate bombing of Tokyo in Japan, and the number of deaths far exceeded that of the atomic bomb. You go to the Internet to search, the bombing of Dresden and the bombing of Tokyo, and see the tragedy of the indiscriminate bombing of those years. I said: It's also tragic now, it's just that you don't watch the news or **. He was not convinced: How do you know that I don't watch?Because I have military common sense, I know that these are not indiscriminate attacks. I said: Actually, you only have to analyze this, and I will know your point: "Israel has announced that it has dropped 6,000 bombs on the Gaza Strip, which covers a total area of 365 square kilometers, in less than a week. The United States dropped 7,000 bombs a year at the height of the war in Afghanistan. In total, NATO dropped 7,600 bombs and missiles throughout the Libyan war. In the 2014-2019 war against ISIS, the US-led coalition dropped a total of 2,000 to 5,000 bombs. He said: Fighting a war is mathematics. You can't just look at the input and not look at the output and conclude that the attacker is brutal. Most of the ammunition dropped in the early stage is small-diameter bombs, which is one of the compromises to avoid being too large, and after dispersing the people, they can destroy underground facilities with larger pounds of ammunition, so only the number of bombs is used for comparison, and the strength cannot be reflected. Take 10,000 steps back, for Israel, if it is determined to attack and fight indiscriminately, and to completely exterminate the race, why should the Palestinians move south, why should they use small-diameter bombs?Why allow 2 million Palestinians to integrate into Israel as their own citizens?With the shrewdness of a Jew, would they do such a stupid thing that only a pig would do?It can be seen that he still emphasizes that the Israeli army is already very humane and caring. I said, "You still stick to that point of view: it only killed a few people, not yet, and it also notified civilians to move south, so it wasn't indiscriminate bombing." He said: I did not say that it is only because others are not dead that this is proved, this is your imagination, and it is also evidence that you are full of emotions. I said, "Of course, I am exaggerating to say that there is no death." What you mean is that the number of people who have died at the moment is very normal, and the bombing in the process of moving south was also carried out by Hamas, and the bombing of hospitals, schools, journalists, and rescue facilities is also necessary"Normal", civilians ** is always a sad thing. The data is much lower than the number of people who attack indiscriminately. If you do not have background materials and sufficient evidence (such as who did it, and whether the Israeli army's intelligence is wrong or misled), it is very unscrupulous to conclude that the Israeli army is deliberately based on various news and tragic scenes. For example, if a journalist is attacked, there will be a reporter at most of the fighting scenes, and a recent report said that the reporter has a big press behind him, how can he still be bombed?This is also a manifestation of a lack of military common sense. There have been many reports of the bombing of the reporter, and this friend felt that because the reporter had obvious signs, it was impossible to be bombed, saying that the bombing was due to a lack of military common sense. He said: It is by no means a very simple thing to clean up the people who are afraid of the people, and the reality is: the elimination will inevitably produce innocent ** and collateral damage. Of course, indiscriminate attacks are not morally acceptable, and I have been observing this on an ongoing basis. At least so far, I have not seen any direct evidence of indiscriminate attacks and extermination. He didn't look at the evidence I forwarded to him or didn't believe it, so of course he didn't see it. I asked rhetorically: Is it necessary to bomb hospitals, schools, journalists, refugee camps, rescue facilities?In contrast, it is normal to drop so many bombs?The Israeli army bombed schools, hospitals, churches, refugee camps, etc., and you think it was all because Hamas fired rockets there?"Mostly, of course, there will be a lot of intelligence errors and execution errors," he said. There is no evidence in the specific case, but I suspect that it is, because there is evidence that the hamas not only used mosques, children's activity centers, private houses, and hospitals as cover, but also used ambulances as cover to transport people and equipment. I ask: Israel has been bombing Gaza for a month, killing 10,022 people, including 4,104 children, killing and wounding 25,408 people, and 163 people and wounding 2,100 people in the occupied West Bank. - Do you think the data is all fake?He said: I don't see the original text, if there is, what does it (these data) refer to?There's an indiscriminate bombing statistic, the Leston Bombing. Looking at the number of people and the number of bombs dropped, you can compare Gaza. As long as he is still a rational person, whether he is bombarded indiscriminately or not, he will know in his heart. Obviously, at a time when Israel has been bombing for a month and civilian death data is constantly being updated**, this friend still firmly believes that there are still not enough people dead compared to the Leston bombing, so it is not indiscriminate bombing, and believes that this is a "rational" conclusion. Over the years, I have been emphasizing the idea that for ordinary people, if the accumulation of knowledge is insufficient, it is better to read more articles by recognized authors than to "think for themselves". It's just that it is really difficult for ordinary people to screen out the real "level recognition". Is Professor Qin Hui considered to be recognized by the level?Ordinary people will think that this question is quite naïve: the top professor of the top university in China, the highly respected and thunderous figure in the circle, who else is not recognized?To be honest, I also admired Qin Hui very much when I was around the year, and when I saw his article in Strategy and Management, I was as excited as a poor man discovering gold. Later, the amount of reading gradually increased, and his horizons gradually broadened, and he realized some of Qin Hui's problems. Recently, I saw that someone wrote an article "On Some Basic Historical Mistakes of Professors Zhang Ping and Qin Hui on the Palestinian-Israeli Issue", which I think is well written, but this author is estimated to be scolded as a dog by Professor Qin's fans, because I used to write "Why did I remove Qin Hui and Sun Liping from the reading object?".I was also scolded. The author cautiously states in the article: "As a junior, the author is not qualified to make other comments on the two respected scholars......I could feel the author's caution, so I left a message of encouragement: "University scholars also make mistakes, especially domestic scholars, which is not uncommon. In the author's verifying spirit, he is fully qualified to criticize them boldly, and there is no need to first compliment them as "respectable."）”