news Israel-Palestine Conflict 2023/ 2024 Mega Thread

[FOCK]

Massive implications. 

[State of Grace.]

This argument that only the "current government" or "right-wing parties and their supporters" in Israel are oppressing and killing Palestinians is so ******* exhausting and in complete bad faith.

 

This is quite literally an Israeli "liberal" justifying killing children, just a few weeks before Oct 7th, and it's a very common belief among them:

 

Here's another centrist liberal doing the exact same thing:

 

And another one:

 

Israeli "liberals" might oppose Bibi for various other reasons, but they're still pro-military occupation, pro-settler colonialism, pro-ethnic cleansing, and pro-genocide of Palestinians. Almost all of the parties are in agreement when it comes to this. It is not exclusive to Bibi's government or the "right-wing". Their difference is whether Israel is a fascist, racist settler colony in democracy's clothing OR simply a naked one. Liberal Zionists are still...Zionists at the end of the day and Zionists are all genocidal freaks.

 

The one non-Arab political party in Israel that opposes occupation and genocide is Meretz, and they couldn't even garner enough votes to get a seat in the Knesset. So you are just being dense & delulu if you think a liberal government wouldn't have been murdering Gazans too.

Edited December 6, 2023 by State of Grace.

[ClashAndBurn]

41 minutes ago, State of Grace. said:

Israeli "liberals" might oppose Bibi for various other reasons, but they're still pro-military occupation, pro-settler colonialism, pro-ethnic cleansing, and pro-genocide of Palestinians. Almost all of the parties are in agreement when it comes to this. It is not exclusive to Bibi's government or the "right-wing". Their difference is whether Israel is a fascist, racist settler colony in democracy's clothing OR simply a naked one. Liberal Zionists are still...Zionists at the end of the day and Zionists are all genocidal freaks.

The same could be said about American liberals. They've been fine with helping facilitate Israel's apartheid state and indefinite occupation, but their biggest issue with Israel is that Netanyahu offended Barack Obama by accepting an invitation by Republicans to speak against Obama's nuclear deal with Iran on the floor of the US House of Representatives.

[Cloröx]

I'm back bish 

 

[welham]

7 hours ago, Harrier said:

Civillians having bad opinions at a particular time does not justify downplaying their civllian status and/or then doing displacement or murder, we have international law for a reason 

Except nowhere did I suggest that? What are you even trying to argue here. My point is that even if the right-wing government fell at this very moment or right after 7/10, the IDF's response would be the same. The atrocities and war crimes would be the same. Not a single major Israeli politician is opposing the IDF's strategy, they simply bicker over who gets to be on top of the chain command while the war is happening. Poll after poll shows the vast majority of Jewish Israelis either supporting/approving of the IDF's actions and strategy or thinking they're not doing enough. The war crimes and genocide would've all happened regardless of who was at the top of the Israeli government, that was my point. The left-center-right thinking of politics simply doesn't work when it comes to Israeli politics. 

 

And lmao @ "international law". If what's going on in Gaza right now has shown anything, it's that international and humanitarian is all bullshit.

[Kassi]

The stark irony in anti-Zionists decrying genocide while simultaneously advocating for the complete dismantlement and de-Judaization of the world's sole Jewish state is profoundly striking and deeply unsettling. 

 

This stance seems to overlook a harrowing historical narrative: wherever Jews have been a minority, their history has been marred by relentless persecution - massacres, expulsions, subjugation, and systemic discrimination. This dark legacy spans over two millennia, casting a long shadow over Jewish existence.

 

The establishment of Israel was a historical necessity, born out of the blood and tears of the Jewish diaspora. The relentless atrocities endured by Jews across centuries galvanized the international community to recognize the urgent need for a secure, permanent homeland for them. This was not just a response to the Holocaust but a culmination of a long history of suffering and displacement.

 

The establishment of which also envisioned, in parallel, the establishment of a Palestinian state — a state that, historically, had not existed before. To dismiss or undermine the legitimacy of Israel is to ignore the weight of history and the rights of both peoples to self-determination, especially those who have known nothing but persecution when stateless.

 

Interestingly, many Western anti-Zionists envision a secular, socialist single state with an Arab majority as a solution. A concept that does not align with the popular sentiments of either Israelis or Palestinians. Such proposals continue to disregard the complex realities on the ground and the deeply ingrained national identities and aspirations of both peoples.

[Kassi]

6 hours ago, A.R.L said:

Israelis aren’t only white Europeans, they are also Arab Jews from countries such as Morocco, Yemen and Iraq, where they were forced to accept Islamic rules or fight to leave their own country in a Muslim-majority country.
 

Israelis don’t want to live their lives as second class citizens or as  dhimmis like Christians in Muslim-majority countries, they want their own state and have all the rights to do so.

 

So, as long as I condemn Israel for their war crimes. I also condemn other nations for not recognizing Israel simply based on an Islamic point of view that is based on the control of that entire region.

 

Some of those nations tried to fight Israel twice for the same reason (religious perspective) and lost terribly, so it's time to make love and peace.

 

The only solutions for long term peace are:

1- recognize the state of Israel

2- give the Jews Jerusalem since they were there first, but with guaranteed rights for the freedoms of religion for Christians and Muslims.

3- Get rid of the right-wing party in Israel

4- Get rid of corruption among Palestinian leaders, that would be quite difficult, since it’s s common in that entire region, not only in Palestine. Before some of you jump to tell me about the corruption of Israeli leaders, yes, that's true and they must be accountable for it, but let's be honest, Israel is more developed and people have access to better rights, including Muslim migrants.

Without these things, unfortunately this terrible situation would remain the same for both sides.

This is the way. 

[ClashAndBurn]

What’s profoundly striking and deeply unsettling is that there are American liberals who are content with supporting an ethnostate engaged in decades of occupation and apartheid driving an entire population into endless trauma and despair.

 

Incredibly naive to think that the West displaced millions of Arabs to set aside land for a Jewish state out of the inherent goodness of their hearts and a desire to atone for their centuries of persecution. Israel exists solely to grant the Western hegemonic power a military base in the Middle East disguised as a country. The subjugation of the Palestinian people through the Nakba and 75 years of torture since has been considered an acceptable outcome.

Edited December 6, 2023 by ClashAndBurn

[Kassi]

1 hour ago, ClashAndBurn said:

What’s profoundly striking and deeply unsettling is that there are American liberals who are content with supporting an ethnostate engaged in decades of occupation and apartheid driving an entire population into endless trauma and despair.

 

Incredibly naive to think that the West displaced millions of Arabs to set aside land for a Jewish state out of the inherent goodness of their hearts and a desire to atone for their centuries of persecution. Israel exists solely to grant the Western hegemonic power a military base in the Middle East disguised as a country. The subjugation of the Palestinian people through the Nakba and 75 years of torture since has been considered an acceptable outcome.

Israel is fundamentally a democratic nation-state with a distinctly Jewish character, as enshrined in its constitutional framework and reflected in its founding institutions. Its Declaration of Independence and Basic Laws, which collectively serve a constitutional role, explicitly lay out the country's dual identity:

• uphold democratic principles, including equal rights for all citizens (many of them Arabs)
• while establishing and preserving Israel's unique Jewish nature (reflected in national symbols, holidays, and language)

Suggestions to de-Judaize () Israel eerily echoes the dark chapters of Jewish history marked by genocides and pogroms.

 

--

 

In "Der Judenstaat" (The Jewish State), Hertzl, the father of political Zionism, outlined his vision for a Jewish state. His writings and advocacy were rooted in the idea of creating a safe haven for Jews, emphasizing self-determination and security rather than conquest or forced displacement.

 

Israel was partially chosen because it had a sizable and relatively tolerated Jewish population. It was assumed it would be peaceful. Jewish immigration to Ottoman/Mandate Palestine was about 75 years in by the time the Holocaust happened.

 

The violence was a direct result of Israel’s neighbors being unwilling to accept an independent state for the Jews they had just spent a century expelling (via Islamic colonialism). Constantine Zurayq, who coined the term "Nakba" to describe the Palestinian catastrophe in his 1948 book "Ma'na al-Nakba" (The Meaning of the Disaster), identified the Arab defeat in the 1948 Arab-Israeli War as a fundamental cause of Palestinian displacement.

[Communion]

35 minutes ago, Kassi said:

Israel is fundamentally a democratic nation-state with a distinctly Jewish character, as enshrined in its constitutional framework and reflected in its founding institutions. Its Declaration of Independence and Basic Laws, which collectively serve a constitutional role, explicitly lay out the country's dual identity:

• uphold democratic principles, including equal rights for all citizens (many of them Arabs)
• while establishing and preserving Israel's unique Jewish nature (reflected in national symbols, holidays, and language)

Suggestions to de-Judaize () Israel eerily echoes the dark chapters of Jewish history marked by genocides and pogroms.

 

--

 

In "Der Judenstaat" (The Jewish State), Hertzl, the father of political Zionism, outlined his vision for a Jewish state. His writings and advocacy were rooted in the idea of creating a safe haven for Jews, emphasizing self-determination and security rather than conquest or forced displacement.

 

Israel was partially chosen because it had a sizable and relatively tolerated Jewish population. It was assumed it would be peaceful. Jewish immigration to Ottoman/Mandate Palestine was about 75 years in by the time the Holocaust happened.

 

The violence was a direct result of Israel’s neighbors being unwilling to accept an independent state for the Jews they had just spent a century expelling (via Islamic colonialism). Constantine Zurayq, who coined the term "Nakba" to describe the Palestinian catastrophe in his 1948 book "Ma'na al-Nakba" (The Meaning of the Disaster), identified the Arab defeat in the 1948 Arab-Israeli War as a fundamental cause of Palestinian displacement.

I thought you were an Evangelical but now it's clear you just work for USAID. 

 

Literally nothing you've written here is accurate. Even something as a quick understanding of the Uganda Scheme shows your ideas of how the Zionist movement has gone are not rooted in reality. 

 

Let alone the red flag of seeing a Christian American use a term like "de-Judaization" that in itself is hardly used by Jewish people, let alone in the context of Israek. 

Edited December 6, 2023 by Communion

[Kassi]

42 minutes ago, Communion said:

I thought you were an Evangelical but now it's clear you just work for USAID. 

 

Literally nothing you've written here is accurate. Even something as a quick understanding of the Uganda Scheme shows your ideas of how the Zionist movement has gone are not rooted in reality. 

Everything I wrote is accurate and I cited my sources. 

 

The fact of the Uganda Proposal actually builds on my case in three key ways:

1. The very existence of the Uganda Proposal was an acknowledgment by a major world power, the British Empire, of the severe persecution Jews in Europe faced at the time. They just didn't want them in their country (see: Aliens Act 1905).
2. The mere consideration of the Uganda Proposal by the Zionist leadership demonstrated the desperation for an immediate safe haven for Jewish people.
3. The proposal preceding the Holocaust by forty (40) years serves as an early indicator of the impending crisis for European Jewry and the critical need for a Jewish homeland as a final refuge and a place of self-determination. As in, Zionists were right.

[Jjang]

Israel does not have the right to exist.  

 

[Jjang]

“de-Judaization” 

[Aethereal]

1 hour ago, Kassi said:

The violence was a direct result of Israel’s neighbors being unwilling to accept an independent state for the Jews they had just spent a century expelling (via Islamic colonialism). Constantine Zurayq, who coined the term "Nakba" to describe the Palestinian catastrophe in his 1948 book "Ma'na al-Nakba" (The Meaning of the Disaster), identified the Arab defeat in the 1948 Arab-Israeli War as a fundamental cause of Palestinian displacement.

Do you have evidence that Jews would not ethnic cleanse Palestinians in 1949 had the war not taken place?

 

If I recall Zionist wanted a homogenous Jewish state in Israel but they tolerate the 20% Arab minority that remain today. 

[Kassi]

16 minutes ago, Aristotle said:

Do you have evidence that Jews would not ethnic cleanse Palestinians in 1949 had the war not taken place?

 

If I recall Zionist wanted a homogenous Jewish state in Israel but they tolerate the 20% Arab minority that remain today. 

It's asking me to prove a negative. So, no, I can't definitively say that. But the best available evidence I have (on hand) is that the Jews accepted the UN Partition Plan in November 1947 (well before the war).

 

A plan that was predicated on the following demographic split:

 

Territory	Arab and other population	% Arab and other	Jewish population	% Jewish	Total population
Arab State	725,000	99%	10,000	1%	735,000
Jewish State	407,000	45%	498,000	55%	905,000
International	105,000	51%	100,000	49%	205,000
Total	1,237,000	67%	608,000	33%	1,845,000

 

Source: United Nations Special Committee of Palestine: 3 September 1947: CHAPTER 4: A COMMENTARY ON PARTITION

 

Additionally, the estimated ~200,000 Palestinians who remained within the newly found state of Israel were granted Israeli citizenship.

 

[Communion]

1 hour ago, Kassi said:

Everything I wrote is accurate and I cited my sources. 

 

The fact of the Uganda Proposal actually builds on my case in three key ways:

1. The very existence of the Uganda Proposal was an acknowledgment by a major world power, the British Empire, of the severe persecution Jews in Europe faced at the time. They just didn't want them in their country (see: Aliens Act 1905).
2. The mere consideration of the Uganda Proposal by the Zionist leadership demonstrated the desperation for an immediate safe haven for Jewish people.
3. The proposal preceding the Holocaust by forty (40) years serves as an early indicator of the impending crisis for European Jewry and the critical need for a Jewish homeland as a final refuge and a place of self-determination. As in, Zionists were right.

Except the *failure* of the Ugandan plan proves 1) that a Jewish state was not meaningfully recognized nor supported by the international community before that of the Holocaust (Britain couldn't even get its own people to want to agree to it) and 2) the hypocrisy given that white British settlers in Uganda explicitly did not become open to Jewish settlers because they as settlers themselves knew of the settler intention in Zionism and did not want to be out-settled out of their own settlement. 

 

Israel did not come into existence due to some heartaching international recognition of it as a Jewish homeland. You're suggesting the same nations who tried to pretend the Holocaust wasn't happening for as long as possible were staunch believers in Judaic religious prophecy of a divine homeland? It became a place for the West to shove Jewish populations they did not want themselves while using a peasantry farming population of Arabs as the perfect scapegoat until realizing those serfs couldn't just be bought out of moving into another country and would fight back. 

Edited December 6, 2023 by Communion

[Communion]

19 minutes ago, Kassi said:

It's asking me to prove a negative.

lol?

 

 

 

[Kassi]

1 hour ago, Communion said:

Except the *failure* of the Ugandan plan proves 1) that a Jewish state was not meaningfully recognized nor supported by the international community before that of the Holocaust (Britain couldn't even get its own people to want to agree to it) and 2) the hypocrisy given that white British settlers in Uganda explicitly did not become open to Jewish settlers because they as settlers themselves knew of the settler intention in Zionism and did not want to be out-settled out of their own settlement. 

 

Israel did not come into existence due to some heartaching international recognition of it as a Jewish homeland. You're suggesting the same nations who tried to pretend the Holocaust wasn't happening for as long as possible were staunch believers in Judaic religious prophecy of a divine homeland? It became a place for the West to shove Jewish populations they did not want themselves while using a peasantry farming population of Arabs as the perfect scapegoat until realizing those serfs couldn't just be bought out of moving into another country and would fight back. 

Uganda failed because Zionist Jews felt no historical, cultural, or religious affinity to the place. So the proposal fizzled out.

 

I've already stated that Israel came about as:

• a concession to the idea that an outside party, the British, could not obligate people to participate non-violently in plurinationalism... without becoming the Ottoman Empire.

By then, the British were exhausted from two World Wars and had started re-evaluating all of their imperial commitments (e.g. Indian Independence Act of 1947). The rising violence between Jewish and Arab communities in Palestine, along with international pressure to avoid a second Holocaust, led the British to refer the Palestine question to the United Nations in 1947, effectively signaling their inability to impose a solution and their unwillingness to step into a "direct rule" role similar to that of the Ottoman Empire.

 

All I wrote about Zionism is to explain how that small group of refuge-seeking Jewish* immigrants got to Palestine in the first place.

 

Maybe they were delusional about their storybook, as you and I both seem to agree that 3,000 year old ancestral claims to land are dubious. Maybe they were desperate from being routinely massacred. Maybe their iPhone GPS broke and they got lost on their way to Uganda. The point is that they were there, no different than the 11 million illegal immigrants currently in the US.

 

*Mind you, we're still talking about just 5% of the world's Jewry at the time.

[Kassi]

1 hour ago, Communion said:

lol?

 

 

 

Then, after 10 years of bullshit, everyone was tired.

 

Ben-Gurion said this specifically about the actual UN 1947 partition plan:

 

"When we agreed to the Partition Plan, we accepted it in all honesty. We did this not because the plan was good or just, but because a small area received through peaceful means was preferable to us than a large area won by fighting"

 

Source: Shalom, Zaki. David Ben-Gurion, the State of Israel and the Arab World, 1949-1956. Sussex Academic Press, 2002, p. 151.

 

Unfortunately, by February 1948 the fighting had broken out on account of Arab's rejection of the plan.

[FOCK]

…

 

 

 

[Communion]

28 minutes ago, Kassi said:

Uganda failed because Zionist Jews felt no historical, cultural, or religious affinity to the place. So the proposal fizzled out.

This is not true. The plan didn't "fizzle out". It was rejected. British settlers in Uganda told the British government and the Zionists it advocated for no. 

 

If you want something, and I tell you "no", you didn't "decide" to not have it - you were denied it despite wanting it. Zionists getting their 1st choice years later, as opposed to the 4th or 5th, *explicitly* due to the drastically changing circumstances doesn't change the point you're for some reason trying to deny.

 

 

Israel would not have come into existence if it were not for the realities of the Holocaust. I'm not even sure why you try to deny this when most support for Israel across the globe is tied to the Holocaust and the horrors Jewish people faced during it. It's literally a lack of self-awareness that you think trying to deny this will end the image in most people's minds of Zionism as an explicitly *Ashkenazi* movement from *Europe*. The reality of Jewish suffering is more compelling than blood and soil skull measuring. 

 

Such arguments are likely made by Zionists today because the argument has changed from "the world's Jewish population needs a home due to what they've been through" to "what Israeli is having to do to those Muslim terrorist mongrels is nothing compared to what the Jewish people have been through!!". Maybe phrenology is a more compelling argument to land ownership than moral suffering when said group begins inflicting immeasurable suffering onto others themselves?

 

39 minutes ago, Kassi said:

The point is that they were there, no different than the 11 million illegal immigrants currently in the US.

This is an obscene and tone-deaf comparison to make, let alone the horrific implications. Where are Latin Americans in the US demanding the partitioning of the entire South?

[Communion]

46 minutes ago, Kassi said:

the actual UN 1947 partition plan

David Ben-Gurion, December 1947, arguing that the UN partition plan would not satisfy the needs of a Jewish state:

 

 

[Karla Cabello]

 

[DAP]

Is that right? 

 

[Kassi]

1 hour ago, Communion said:

This is not true. The plan didn't "fizzle out". It was rejected. British settlers in Uganda told the British government and the Zionists it advocated for no. 

 

If you want something, and I tell you "no", you didn't "decide" to not have it - you were denied it despite wanting it. Zionists getting their 1st choice years later, as opposed to the 4th or 5th, *explicitly* due to the drastically changing circumstances doesn't change the point you're for some reason trying to deny.

 

[tweets]

 

Israel would not have come into existence if it were not for the realities of the Holocaust. I'm not even sure why you try to deny this when most support for Israel across the globe is tied to the Holocaust and the horrors Jewish people faced during it. It's literally a lack of self-awareness that you think trying to deny this will end the image in most people's minds of Zionism as an explicitly *Ashkenazi* movement from *Europe*. The reality of Jewish suffering is more compelling than blood and soil skull measuring. 

 

Such arguments are likely made by Zionists today because the argument has changed from "the world's Jewish population needs a home due to what they've been through" to "what Israeli is having to do to those Muslim terrorist mongrels is nothing compared to what the Jewish people have been through!!". Maybe phrenology is a more compelling argument to land ownership than moral suffering when said group begins inflicting immeasurable suffering onto others themselves?

Let's grant that you're 100% correct, whether it was Uganda or any of the other regions in that list being considered, it's the "Why?" that matters. And that why is simply: to avoid being murdered.

 

As such, I have never denied that the Holocaust played a part in Israel's existence.

 

Like I said:

 

8 hours ago, Kassi said:

The establishment of Israel was a historical necessity, born out of the blood and tears of the Jewish diaspora. The relentless atrocities endured by Jews across centuries galvanized the international community to recognize the urgent need for a secure, permanent homeland for them. This was not just a response to the Holocaust but a culmination of a long history of suffering and displacement.

 

-----

 

1 hour ago, Communion said:

This is an obscene and tone-deaf comparison to make, let alone the horrific implications. Where are Latin Americans in the US demanding the partitioning of the entire South?

The paths of Jewish refugees, diverging towards destinations like the United States, the United Kingdom, or Palestine, were all traced from a similar origin - a coerced departure from their homes (Poland, Germany, Russia, etc) under the same external oppressive forces.

 

Unless you can definitively say that US Jews in the early 1900s were not immigrants, then the comparison is apt.