Israel/Palestine thread
Think this merits its own thread...
Discuss my fellow 2+2ers..
AM YISRAEL CHAI.
[QUOTE=Crossnerd]
It's also likely that the Rwanda massacres wouldn't have happened if it hadn't been a colony of the West.
Islamic fundamentalism probably doesn't exist in its current form without colonialism.
one of the things they did just a few hours ago was blow up a bunch of civilians so we can see a crying toddler alongside another child literally cut in half with just his chest and head sitting upright and various other body parts all over the rooftop. Europeans have been mass murders of indigenous children for centuries and now they have enlisted their Israeli proxies to con
I have to quibble with this a little. The Israelis are not really proxies. They are Europeans. Sure, there are Jews from other sources in Israel, but the ones running the show are mostly all Ashkenazim, Europeans. They lived in Europe, interbred with Europeans over centuries becoming fair skinned, learned their ways, and are in their element as mass murdering colonizers.
I always have to chuckle when I see blonde Israel military officers with red sun burnt skin referring to themselves as Semitic. It's like yeah, clearly you are a desert style bloke.
Are you so sure of that? Isn't Belgium supposed to be majority Muslim in the not so distant future?
Muslims emigrating to Belgium is a "conquest" in your worldview?
The ICJ or International Court of Justice found Israel guilty of genocide against the Palestinians.
No it didn't , it won't rule on that for years yet.
It provided an advisory opinion, and issued orders to *prevent a genocide* which the court thought *was at risk of happening* which is very different.
Not that the court has jurisdiction on the matter, and not that we should in general every care about any institution of which terrible countries are part of
It's also likely that the Rwanda massacres wouldn't have happened if it hadn't been a colony of the West.
you will never guess who armed and supported the Rwandan genocide...
So what? You realize the Hutus were the oppressed group and the Tutsi were akin to the Israelis, collaborators with the colonial forces right? Rwandan genocide is a cautionary tale for the same stance you are taking re: Palestinians.
Well conquest doesn't sound great, no.
Keep in mind Muslims were doing colonialism and chattel slavery of West Africans while Europe was still practicing feudalism. I mean we can say European colonialism never would have happened without Islamic colonialism first.
We can play chicken and egg forever. But at some point you have to hold people accountable for their own decisions. The West cant self flagellate forever and blame themselves for all the horrible behavior of the rest of the world.
And in the new multipolar world the West doesn't get to force other people to behave humanely either, as they did for the post WWII period. So expect things to get a lot worse.
And many Zionists would argue their emigration to Paletistine, where they legally bought land from the Ottoman Empire, was not a conquest either. And the "conquest," such as it was, was an unfortunate result of the Arabs attempting to genocide them.
And many Zionists would argue their emigration to Paletistine, where they legally bought land from the Ottoman Empire, was not a conquest either. And the "conquest," such as it was, was an unfortunate result of the Arabs attempting to genocide them.
The Zionists were not buying up land to form a community within an Arab state. There were clear, long-term goals of setting up a Jewish state. Recent immigration into Europe is not some master plan, it's just people wanting to get out of their **** hole, war torn countries.
The Zionists were not buying up land to form a community within an Arab state. There were clear, long-term goals of setting up a Jewish state. Recent immigration into Europe is not some master plan, it's just people wanting to get out of their **** hole, war torn countries.
There has never been an Arab state where Israel is now. The last time that part of the world was autonomous prior to this iteration of Israel was Israel version 1.0 two thousand (or whatever) years ago.
The original Zionist project was to buy up a bunch of empty land, cultivate it, and turn it into Israel. Which is basically what they did until the Arab world declared war on them in 1948 and promised to drive them out. And then they took advantage of the situation presented by the Arabs declaring war and being generally inept at modern warfare.
It is still pretty early. I dont think anyone really knows how all the 3rd world immigration into Europe is going to shake out.
Could end up as total conquest, permanent tribal sectarianism (a la Lebanon), real integration, or there could be a European populist right wing backlash and large scale evictions.
I think everything is on the table, and no one knows how things will shake out.
There has never been an Arab state where Israel is now. The last time that part of the world was autonomous prior to this iteration of Israel was Israel version 1.0 two thousand (or whatever) years ago.
What was the Jewish population of Palestine in the very late 1800's right before the Zionist project started? Like 2%? It may not have been an "Arab state" but is was populated by 98% Arabs. After the Ottoman empire was dismantled who do you think was eventually going to naturally form a state there minus mass immigration?
The original Zionist project was to buy up a bunch of empty land, cultivate it, and turn it into Israel. Which is basically what they did until the Arab world declared war on them in 1948 and promised to drive them out. And then they took advantage of the situation presented by the Arabs declaring war and being generally inept at modern warfare.
All the easily arable land was already being cultivated in Palestine for literally generations in a peasant/landowner situation. The Arabs working that land didn't sell to the Zionists, the land owners in Beirut, Damascus, etc... sold the land to the monied European Zionists for a nice profit. The Jewish National Fund that bought a lot of land had a strict policy that the land could only be sold again to other Jews and only worked by Jews. So Arab families were kicked off their land even if it was to sit barren until some immigrants from Europe showed up to work it.
My main contention to your post is that Zionists were just minding their own business working their land and being unfairly attacked by the locals. There was a clear strategy in place from the beginning. Like Rafiki has said in the thread previously, it's one of the great comeback stories of all time, depending on how you look at it. The Jews were sick of being pogromed up and down Europe for the last 1,000 years and came back "home" to create a state. I mean the place was called Judea for like forever. But they fought ferociously for it, kept their culture alive for millennia where most would have just assimilated to their surroundings and brought a dead language back to life but it came at a cost of displacing indigenous people and it was only 80 years ago. So you can't blame those for still being a nuisance even if to their own detriment.
It is still pretty early. I dont think anyone really knows how all the 3rd world immigration into Europe is going to shake out.Could end up as total conquest, permanent tribal sectarianism (a la Lebanon), real integration, or there could be a European populist right wing backlash and large scale evictions. I think everything is on the table, and no one knows how things will s
Well "conquest" isn't a great word for this case. If you're living in Libya or Syria, who wouldn't jump at the chance to move to Europe. I don't think it's some planned thing by those countries to take over Europe regardless of the final outcome.
What was the Jewish population of Palestine in the very late 1800's right before the Zionist project started? Like 2%? It may not have been an "Arab state" but is was populated by 98% Arabs. After the Ottoman empire was dismantled who do you think was eventually going to naturally form a state there minus mass immigration?
At that point there hadn't been anything you would call an Arab state in the last 1000 years. I dont think it was obvious circa 1890 (or whatever) there would be a bunch of Arab states forming in the next 50 years.
When the Ottomans fell there was a small movement among the ethnic Greek diaspora around the region to organize and try to retake Istanbul/Constantinople. There wasn't all that much interest though, and the movement kind of died. And then the Turks killed or drove out most of the people in the area that weren't Turks, and that kind of settled things.
If not for happenings in Europe which kind of forced a large migration of Jews to Israel, probably the history of "Palestine" is something similar. Even by the late 1800s there were a lot of pogroms against the small Jewish population. Without a bunch of Jews emigrating so they had the numbers to fight back (and win) eventually the Arabs would have organized enough to completely kill and/or kick out all the Jews, and that would have been that. But we of course have the luxury of hindsight. I dont think it was obvious to anyone at the time how anything was going to play out.
No it didn't , it won't rule on that for years yet.
It provided an advisory opinion, and issued orders to *prevent a genocide* which the court thought *was at risk of happening* which is very different.
Not that the court has jurisdiction on the matter, and not that we should in general every care about any institution of which terrible countries are part of
I'll call it a ruling. The court said genocide was plausible. That means it happened. You don't counter the consensus opinion among world elites on an issue of genocide unless it happened.
The really damning part is all the quotes we have of prominent Israelis in government giving voluntary statements to the effect that they were intending to commit genocide. Then they killed 10s of thousands of innocent people.
If you say you're going to do something and then so it, if that something is a crime then you are guilty. That's why there are arrest warrants for Netanyahoo. That's why many human rights groups have called Israel's mass killings of Palestinians a genocide - because it is.
I'll call it a ruling. The court said genocide was plausible. That means it happened. You don't counter the consensus opinion among world elites on an issue of genocide unless it happened. The really damning part is all the quotes we have of prominent Israelis in government giving voluntary statements to the effect that they were intending to commit genocide. Then they killed 1
no, the court said the risk of genocide happening in the future was plausible.
At that point there hadn't been anything you would call an Arab state in the last 1000 years. I dont think it was obvious circa 1890 (or whatever) there would be a bunch of Arab states forming in the next 50 years. When the Ottomans fell there was a small movement among the ethnic Greek diaspora around the region to organize and try to retake Istanbul/Constantinople. There
Like I said, the main issue I had with the post was framing the Zionists as innocent farmers but can't blame them for not wanting to sit around Europe waiting for the next pogrom.
Well "conquest" isn't a great word for this case. If you're living in Libya or Syria, who wouldn't jump at the chance to move to Europe. I don't think it's some planned thing by those countries to take over Europe regardless of the final outcome.
It's loaded, racist language. No one says white people are "invading" when they form an expat community in Mexico or whatever. If a Muslim guy moves in next door he isn't "invading" my neighborhood. It's all just more overtly racist claptrap from Kelhus.
on that I agree. the UN exists to legitimize mass murder and theft by the White Empire and its butcherous proxies. so in that sense, Israel is a deserving member.
Like I said, the main issue I had with the post was framing the Zionists as innocent farmers but can't blame them for not wanting to sit around Europe waiting for the next pogrom.
'Pogroms' (attacks on Jews) have occasionally happened in post-war Europe, as a result of Zionism, but they're more prevalent in Israel, Oct 7 being the most notorious recent example (but pretty certainly not the last). Zionism always was a fundamentally flawed idea.
on that I agree. the UN exists to legitimize mass murder and theft by the White Empire and its butcherous proxies. so in that sense, Israel is a deserving member.
No, UN was founded to keep diplomatic ties between adversarial nations open. That’s why the mass murdering regime of USSR was given a permanent security council seat.
