Can you name one Palestinian who has fought against Israel's occupation and is not considered a terrorist by you?
https://jcpa.org/the-parallels-between-yahya-sinwar-and-yass...
No. Jews migrated to Ottoman controlled land legally and paid for it. Palestinians were offered their own country but rejected that offer in favor of trying to expel the Jews and taking their land. Then they spend the next 70 years trying and failing to destroy Israel and rejecting every offer of their own country.
This is getting old, do you have any fresh hasbara for me?
Palestinians need to take responsibility for reacting to the formation of Israel in the most self-destructive way possible.
Do you dispute that Jews legally purchased land during the Ottoman period?
Do you dispute that the 1947 UN partition was rejected by Arab leadership?
Do you dispute that five Arab armies invaded in 1948?
Which specific historical claim do you think is incorrect?
Using "hasbara" as a dismissal tactic is essentially admitting you can't refute my factual claims on their merits.
For example, you recognize the fledgling UN's decision to partition the land but don't recognize any decision they've taken since, not like you're following those borders anyway.
I can all it Israeli state propaganda talking points if you want, hasbara is less of a mouthful though.
Do you find the Hamas attacks that killed 1,200 people relevant?
"you recognize the fledgling UN's decision to partition the land but don't recognize any decision they've taken since"
I know that the Palestinians have rejected at least two excellent offers from Israel for their own country. If they had accepted them they would be VASTLY better off then they are now.
You cannot absolve the Palestinians of their responsibility for their shitty lives due to their terrible decisions.
Relevant as far as its the latest and greatest excuse Israel can use to take more land and genocide the locals. US had a long history of doing the same when it came to Indians.
I wouldn't fault jews and other minorities in the holocaust for fighting back against their oppressors either.
" US had a long history of doing the same when it came to Indians."
Yes, and you don't see Native Americans trying to take back their land using military force and mass murder because they aren't evil and aren't stupid.
"I wouldn't fault Jews and other minorities in the holocaust for fighting back against their oppressors either."
The only people oppressing Palestinians in Gaza are Hamas.
Gaza immediately became a mafia state run by the Muslim brotherhood and subsisting off handouts and extortion. Consider it a failed experiment in self rule.
Please explain your reading if you're going to make such personal attacks.
All Muslims have their own agency. They are all humans capable of making their own decisions. And like all humans are happy to be held responsible for the decisions they make.
You do not believe the above.
> All Muslims have their own agency. They are all humans capable of making their own decisions. And like all humans are happy to be held responsible for the decisions they make.
And I'm not sure why you feel I don't recognise the agency of Muslims?
As I said previously please make an argument or explain your position and I'll respond to it, but it feels absurd to entertain these seemingly baseless ad hominems.
I grew up in a conflict zone and feel that I have some understanding of the group dynamics. That's totally reasonable and I encourage you to ask yourself if your apparent anger and incredulity here is misplaced.
“Violent Zionism” was inconsequential in comparison to the violence the Muslim population visited upon their Jewish (Zionist) neighbors/subjects/citizens from 700CE when Islam was formed through 1947 when the partition plan was proposed, and all the way to the present day.
So again, I say, you’re dehumanizing Muslims by refusing to acknowledge that they are responsible for their own actions. Because even if everything you claim was true (it isn’t), you are still claiming they are not capable of bearing responsibility for their own actions and instead any violence they commit is the responsibility of nebulous “western colonialism” and inchoate “violent zionism”. The bigotry requires to totally remove an entire religion’s agency is, as I said before: breathtaking.
You just have no idea of what you're talking about.
I have no idea what “legally affirmed” means in the context of sovereign states. The UN, or even the UNSC passing something doesn’t actually mean anything as it applies to sovereign nations. Paraphrasing Andrew Jackson: a law is only as good as the ability to enforce it. A bunch of random people agreeing to something even if they call themselves “The United Nations” doesn’t mean anything if that group of friends doesn’t have the will or ability to enforce whatever they’ve agreed to. They’re akin to you and your drinking buddies passing out edicts after one to many dry martinis.
If you strike military targets of an occupation force in a time of guerilla warfare you are not a terrorist. (Many palestinian fighters when there is an active conflict with Israel)
If you strike military targets of an occupation force in a time of relative peace, and your reignition of violence has no goal of achieving anything for your people, you are probably not a terrorist, but probably doing something wrong and stupid and horrible that hurts your own civilians, driven by nationalism or ideology or whatever. (Palestinian fighters on October 7 that struck military bases for example).
If you strike civilian targets or tage hostages, you are a terrorist. And worse if you do it at a time of relative peace to ignite violence against your own people. Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthi's have engaged in plenty of the latter since a long time.
By the way, if you level a building with 8 militants and 20 civilians that is brutal urban warcare but not terrorism. If you go to a festival and kill predominantly hundreds of civilians, that's terrorism.