Israel/Palestine thread
Think this merits its own thread...
Discuss my fellow 2+2ers..
AM YISRAEL CHAI.
[QUOTE=Crossnerd]
The settlements grew under Labor governments, too; they are consensus, not right wing extremist. There's never been sufficient opposition to the settlements. Now they are a done deal, there's no Palestine left.
It's amazing that he has posted so much in this thread and doesn't realize this.
and I would go further than describing the settlements as merely consensus. they are integral to the Israeli Zionist project. Israel cant stop the settlements bc they are fundamental to their state. an Israel without settlements would no longer be Israel.
And that doesn’t represent everyone does it. It’s the voice of a few , made for the ears of many
And that doesn’t represent everyone does it. It’s the voice of a few , made for the ears of many
I think it does.
You logically think that a newspaper that’s allowed to broadcast on a national level , is freely and accurately representing the will of the people in Israel?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The newspapers are controlled by wealthy businessmen who answer to the government. Cmon bro
Plenty of Israeli publications are also speaking against the violence. Shows you’re wrong.
and I would go further than describing the settlements as merely consensus. they are integral to the Israeli Zionist project. Israel cant stop the settlements bc they are fundamental to their state. an Israel without settlements would no longer be Israel.
Victor is right that Israel has to control the Golan Heights and West Bank, or their lowland cities would be destroyed by above from Palestinian rockets. There is actually no real practical way to give up control of West Bank. Even if some theoretical Palestinian govt built a peaceful state, and 95% of the population bought in, the 5% would constantly be threatening and attacking Israel.
The Palestinian culture of support for mujihadeen fighting for the ummah really makes it an intractable problem.
brother, I am not just talking about newspapers.
also, "speaking out against" the gaza genocide has nothing to do with the settlements and expansion.
Theres a mein camp in missouri but its only disclosed to those who either look the part or complain enough about zionism to get invited
--Just a reminder that in November Victor's favorite Nazi's, the Houthis, took hostage 25 sailors (0 Israeli's) and have been holding them 4+ months with no imminent return. And Iran recently kidnapped 20 Filipino sailors of their own.
Just a reminder the value system of the people Israel, and the rest of the civilized world, is up against. Israel really is a shining light in a sea of Stone Age darkness.
--Oh yeah, look at a new set of laws Iraq just passed.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/04/27/middleeas...
Same-sex couples face up to 15 years in prison in Iraq’s LGBTQ crackdown
(15 year penalty was a compromise. Many lawmakers wanted the death penalty)
lol, you just keep piling on ad hoc rules for why no other people get to play the same game. Now there's a three-year limit on reporting?
It's not a falsely equivalent example at all, it's just when you see things from a neutral perspective, it's easier to see how asinine this moral framework you're cobbling together is.
They're not ad hoc, they aren't "piling on". You can't argue the logic so you insult. No, there's not a 3 year limit on reporting, I never suggested anything like that............ I said the closer to the trauma happening the more likely a group is to find this kind of thinking reasonable. Is 3 years ago closer than your example of 180 years ago? When you see things from a neutral perspective, it's easier to be less judgmental about completely understandable reasoning.
A linguistic group whose most recent mass trauma you could come up with occurred 2 centuries ago taking over the entirety of Europe is no different from a far far far far far far smaller area of land being by given by the UN to waves of people who are fleeing the Holocaust 3 years after it occurred? I'm the one being asinine about this? Look at it from a neutral perspective and tell me these is no noticable difference in these examples.
I can think of a group whose mass trauma started after the holocaust and still occurs today.
but we all know why that group is disqualified by you. we all know why you dont even consider them an example. they arent real people to you. altho, tbf, as a typical liberal I dont think you even recognize humanity.
They aren't disqualified and I've defended their rights and their ideology (even some awful aspects of it) as defensible and understandable. Please quit spreading lies about me.
A linguistic group whose most recent mass trauma you could come up with occurred 2 centuries ago..
Once again, how long is too long for there to be a valid claim? 80 years is not too long, but 100-180 is?
But also, if we were having this conversation in 1910, would you say "Yes Trolly, the Irish are just in retaking France?" Of course not, your logic doesn't work at any level. It's all so dumb.
As I have stated numerous times: there is no cut off date. It is a rapidly diminishing scale. 3 years ago is a strong argument. 80 is an extremely weak argument. 180 is weaker still. Why are you stuck on creating some ad hoc and arbitrary cut off date?
I have already addressed your question already:
In 1850 if people were outraged by that I would absolutely support them. If in 1850 people were discussing moving to a country where that wouldn't happen I would absolutely support them. If people in 2024 decided they were going to use that as a justification... yeah that's not quite as strong an argument. No statute of limitations, it's just a much weaker argument.
Why do you refuse to answer my question: "A linguistic group whose most recent mass trauma you could come up with occurred 2 centuries ago taking over the entirety of Europe is no different from a far far far far far far smaller area of land being by given by the UN to waves of people who are fleeing the Holocaust 3 years after it occurred?" Here's why you didn't answer:
It's extremely lucky to be privileged enough to think that you don't need a homeland because your homeland protects you enough that you think you would never feel insecure without it. What this mindset shows is how much some people take a homeland for granted. Having such security is not true for all groups: I highly doubt Jews wanted to return to Poland after WW2. As far as sp
Israel needs to man up and remove settlements and stop their expansion.
The moderate and left wing Israelis, including Arab Israelis btw, have stood by for way too long and allowed Bibi and other right wing extremists to subvert the rule of law that gives Israel moral and legal legitimacy.
It's never gonna happen. There are a half million heavily armed and well funded fanatical settlers. This would cause a civil war. Similar to Jews in Europe the Palestinians are gonna have to find a new land to call their own.
I think the privileged nature of the "homelands are silly" argument is made clear by the fact that if anyone here were to go to Gaza and argue to Hamas what is being argued here, then they would immediately be taken hostage and would be praying that news made it to their homeland and up the chain of command as swiftly as possible so that their homeland could fight for them back.
Protestors would be THRILLED by an eternal homeland for the Palestinians. We'd never hear the end of praise for it. This whole "don't agree with homeland" things is a joke itt.
Protestors would be THRILLED by an eternal homeland for the Palestinians. We'd never hear the end of praise for it. This whole "don't agree with homeland" things is a joke itt.
Eternal? Lol. If really lucky, humans have a few hundred years left.
And, protestors? Like you think protestors all agree on anything except there's been too many people killed?
And again, eternal? How much of your position here is that you're religious and you think the homeland part comes from god?
Come on man, if you don't know that "eternal" is hyperbole in here yet...
The entire concept of all of this is hyperbolic nonsense.
A Palestinian homeland would be THE ethnostate by definition. And we'd somehow find a way to say "this is totally fine"
