You can be for the existence of a peaceful Israel that has entirely retreated within recognised borders and made amends for its past genocidal behaviour- but it's not what the current Israel is or, sadly, can ever be.
> There's still plenty of Labor or more progressive elements of the Israeli public who are against...
No. Not at all.
Shouldn't similar preconditions of making amends apply to whether or not we accept the existence of those Arab states?
And what if they should? Do you think it make Israel's genocide look better now?
Stop trying to change the subject or shift the blame, it's a trick and it's pathetic.
Curious you ask: https://www.reuters.com/article/world/israel-gaza-blockade-s...
This conversation went like this:
>>>> ppl keep railing about being pro or anti Israel and it's overly simplistic and also not really accurately describing things. It's more pro/anti Likud or Kahanists
To which I replied that Israel is constitutionally born out of a pre-planned colonisation and ethnic cleansing and it's wrong to think that its supremacist ideology only belongs to a part of its political spectrum- it could change but it's unfortunately unrealistic.
>>> Israel was literally born out of political scheming to get assigned a portion of someone else's territory for an exclusive ethno-nationalistic state; then out of ethnically cleansing that territory. It was necessary to the project and planned in advance.
To which the GP replied with something that tries to change the subject on Arab states, at the same time introducing a historical falsehood:
>> The Arab states haven't made amends for ethnically cleansing huge numbers of Jews
Now,
1) the Arab states are not born out of a planned ethnic cleansing of anyone (at least not in the recent past)
2) Many, perhaps most of the Jews that immigrated to Israel did so voluntarily (made Aliyah)
3) By the way, Israel itself even engaged in false flag terrorism to push Jews to emigrate from Arab countries to Israel.
And most importantly, the argument has no bearing with the original subject, which is whether its a specific political side that is determining Israel's course now or the country is constitutionally like that. Arab countries have nothing to do with the subject, they belong to a different conversation.
Hope it helps.
Also recall that it was only a UN recommendation, not a binding resolution.
Its more of a popular jewish movement that over 100 years changed the ethnic composition of the Palestine region from 1-2% in the 1840s up to 30% in the 1940s.
Political scheming is secondary and was born well after the 1840s.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_history_of_Palesti...
> changed the ethnic composition of the Palestine region from 1-2% in the 1840s up to 30% in the 1940s.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_history_of_Jerus...
Zionism itself is a product of 19th century nationalisms and of course of a (widespread at the time) colonial mindset.
Jewish people coming back to live on its ancient homeland has no legal basis; It's their collective will which allowed its coming into existence (continuous immigration from other countries since the 1840s).
The legality of its existence wouldn't help it survive even one second.
Thanks for answering your own question.
Then what was the purpose of your previous objection about ceasefire lines? None. You just threw it there hoping to derail the argument with a pointless distraction, and now that it didn't work you are saying legality doesn't matter. This fundamental, shameless dishonesty is common to most defenders of Israel and frankly unsufferable.
I personally think the borders should be decided between the Palestinians and the Israelis. The only agreement to date between them has been the 1991 Oslo accords, with A, B and C zones. Further talks about definitive borders stopped with the Second Intifada in 2000.
German and Bosnian WWII veterans, including a handful of former intelligence, Wehrmacht, and Waffen SS officers, were among the volunteers fighting for the Palestinian cause. Veterans of WWII Axis militaries were represented in the ranks of the ALA forces commanded by Fawzi al-Qawuqji (who had been awarded an officer's rank in the Wehrmacht during WWII) and in the Mufti's forces, commanded by Abd al-Qadir (who had fought with the Germans against the British in Iraq) and Salama (who trained in Germany as a commando during WWII and took part in a failed parachute mission into Palestine).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Arabian_Legion
Husseini is still regarded by many as 'the George Washington' of the Palestinian people, and if the Palestinians were to get a state of their own, he would be honored in the way our founding father is.
In February 1943 the first of three divisions was formed of Bosnian and Albanian Muslims, who wore fezes decorated with SS runes and were led in their prayers by regimental imams notionally under the supervision of the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem.(Mohammed Amin al-Husseini from 1921–1937)
If you think Zionism means something else, you have been lied to (even perhaps by Wikipedia!)
Zionism is a desire to have a majority-jewish state that is strong enough to protect jews from future pogroms. It is not a quest for a homogenous state.
And before you declare that the existence of Arab municipalities make Israel an apartheid state, all Israeli cities are mixed.
Likewise, there are Jewish villages. Few of these have Arab inhabitants, but it is not forbidden for them to move in.
All other people except Palestinians then? It sure seems like this is exactly the treatment they have received over the decades.
The Palestinians you have in mind are getting the treatment they are getting because they have not stopped being violent and holding hostages. This is a pattern that recurs over years and decades, always with the same side instigating violence. Yes the "Palestinians" lost some land after starting wars and losing said wars. That's what happens when you start needless wars against good people. Unfortunately there are some Palestinian and Israeli civilians caught in the middle. Your sympathy seems to be only with those civilians from the side who started the conflict, not with those civilians from the side trying to end it.
By your own logic here, you would suggest that the people killed in the heinous terrorist attack in october 2023 were killed because they did not stop being violent?
Of course that is a ridiculous statement.
Palestinians have been oppressed and attacked and their land taken, by Israel, for many decades. This does not justify terrorist attacks, but neither do the attacks justify what Israel has done.
We can keep in mind that the most promising peace deal was sabotaged by extremists from Israel.
I have no sympathy for terrorists of any nationality or designation, which is why I condemn both Hamas and the current administration of Israel.
Some of them stayed peacefully and are now happy citizens of Israel and those ones kept their land.
Others left on their own volition and at the recommendation of their own leaders after their side started a war and lost. And those ones have not been allowed to return and have lost their land. That’s what happens when you start a war and lose.
Others have been given land by Israel in deals where we have seen the result (the new gazans immediately burned to the ground the prosperity-building greenhouses that the Israelis left for them).
That's a nice euphemism for "they saw the next village massacred, so they ran away when the army approached their village".
You seem to assume that it is 0% of the former and 100% of the latter, which I find dubious.
Because even if it is let's say 50% and 50%, it is no longer true to say that all have left voluntarily.
Which part of that is false?
Remember, your own Bible states Jews should kill children to steal their land:
"16 However, in the cities of the nations the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes. 17 Completely destroy[a] them—the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites—as the Lord your God has commanded you." - Deuteronomy 20:16-17
And this is bolstered by the fact that Netanyahu himself recalls the old testament of erasing the memory of Amalek. in the fight to conquer Palestine, so you can't claim that the Old Testament doesn't matter.
I never said this in my post. This is a reflexive defense on your part as I never specifically called out Zionists, in general, supported genocide. I said, the vast majority of the Knesset, supports genocide. I will say though, zionists in general are wishfully ignorant of this fact.
>This is defamatory BS without any evidence at best
Which parts are defamatory? Are you seriously going to argue that the Religious Zionist Party doesn't support genocide? Cmon man, Bezalel Smotrich is wanted by the ICC.[1]
For better or worse, Netanyahu represents the Israeli governement, which represents Israel. Similar with Trump and the USA, or Putin and Russia. Sorry for the people who don't agree with them, but that's an internal power struggle, and as an outsider it is normal to abstract that away. For all of us: Your country is doing what it does.
As a Belgian, I spit on my idiotic, nasty governements. Insert tiny violin, whatever Belgium does on the international forum, I'll still be tarred with it. Similarly, we talk about Germany's role in world war 2, even if only about 10% of them were associated with the NSDAP.
Every power struggle is always represented overly simplistic. Sorry for both the jews and Israëli's who don't agree with it, you're probably good people. This time I am lucky to sit at a very comfortable sideline, criticising your country. But the point stands: Israel is correctly described as officially committing a genocide, and hence it can't be described as the good side.
The journalistic actions are beyond reprehensible - they are responsible for the deaths of so many children by encouraging Hamas to ensure child deaths. This is not some theory, if you speak Arabic go read the Gaza telegram channels. They're not shy about it.
No, I'm speaking about the most oft repeated lie about genocide.
Go look at who authored this report. It is not "Top Legal Investigators" as the title states. And just read the report itself.
Furthermore, Israeli actions on the ground clearly demonstrate our efforts to protect civilians. Clear among them are the warnings to civilians to evacuate structures before they are destroyed.
It is incredulous to you and I because our culture would never support such a thing. I implore you to look at the Arabic channels that Hamas and the other Islamic bodies publish.
It should be also noted, and this is extremely well documented, that between 1/3 and 1/5 of all Hamas rockets fall back into the Gaza strip. That is an extraordinarily dense urban area, and all those injuries are blamed on Israel. Culturally, it makes sense for Arab media to report them as "killed in a war with Israel". But Western media then translates and reports that as "killed by Israel".
This is not some conspiracy theory the Arabs status very clearly. I highly suggest that you go through the Arabic Telegram channels. I personally speak Arabic, but if you don't then Telegram has a built-in translation feature anyway. Or go through any other Arab media, it's all over the place.
If you don't want to see children getting hurt, then stop protecting and encouraging Hamas.
It means that Hamas has children stand guard around rocket launchers. As far back as a decade ago, when this started becoming more and more common, I saved a video of a Hamas rocket fuse failing, killing the children guarding it. That was quite when I started taking more of an interest in what is going on over there.
The human shields are Gazan citizens - many of which are themselves happy to die "for the resistance" thanks to UNRWA education. This I have been told at least twice by Gazans face to face, and dozens of times online. Yes, I know Gazans and I speak with them online in Arabic. I suffer a lot of abuse, I have a thick skin (I laugh that I'm divorced, you can't insult me more than my ex).
There is no euphemism. These are real people risking their lives - and sometimes loosing - to protect military equipment designed to exterminate Jews. That is not a euphemism either - even the Gazans who work in Israel clearly state that all Gazans would happily kill any Jew. Just a few weeks before the October attacks I was having a conversation, pleasant and civil, and the guy tells me "without your weapons the Arabs would trample you" - I was unsure if he was threatening me. Just a few weeks after that they overran the Kibbutz where I until recently worked, and killed over 10% of the population. That is literal, biblical, decimation.
I think you're overthinking this. We're taking about a country committing genocide here. You either support them or you don't.
But the bodies who promote the viewpoint that Israel is performing genocide, instead of the reality that Israel is protecting her citizens from genocide, are the ones who seek to destroy us. And to divide the West.
They rely on Western useful idiots to forgo examination of nuance, and to jump to an emotional stance after seeing manipulated footage.
Oh, wait, that was Likud's slogan long before anyone else used it.
Shame on you for your utter condescension that anyone remotely critical of Israel's behavior are "useful idiots" devoid of nuance.
But, how about Israel's declaration of independence? Arguably more representative of the consensus.
"WE APPEAL - in the very midst of the onslaught launched against us now for months - to the Arab inhabitants of the State of Israel to preserve peace and participate in the upbuilding of the State on the basis of full and equal citizenship and due representation in all its provisional and permanent institutions."
https://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/israel.asp
And guess what, those that listened are now part of the one million Israeli Arab citizenry.
I think if we see nuance we can acknowledge it. The worldwide campaign against Israel is devoid of nuance. Some western leaders pay lip service to the idea of removing Hamas and that Israeli hostages should be released but in fact they are taking actions that prolong the war and embolden Hamas. Basically the way the world looks at it is "we told Israel to stop and it doesn't" vs. the way it should be looking at is "What would any other country in the world be doing in these circumstances and what are the conditions Israel is looking for to end the violence and how do we get to those conditions.". There is also orchestrated pressure via social media and media like Al Jazeera that pushes narratives that we're seeing in this thread and is not factual. The cries of genocide started before Israel barely fired a shot after it was attacked and what we're reading today is the same talking points that have been flooding social media for the last two years alongside with an unprecedented flood of war imagery we have not seen in any other conflict because the sole purpose of Hamas is to get as many people killed and injured and attack Israel's image. It's been doing that really well.
Being critical of Israel's actions is 100% ok. I am very critical. But what we're seeing is public lynching, not criticism. There is nothing Israel can ever do that is right here. There are no suggestions or proposals for Israel to adjust course that make any sense. Calls for a "cease fire" don't and haven't made any sense because cease fire (which we've had) means Hamas remains in control of Gaza, can re-arm and attack Israel again, and keeps the hostages. Typically this is where the discussion goes to the standard talking points of "didn't start Oct 7th", "Gaza was occupied", "UN blah blah blah", and rhetoric which ignores Hamas and the role of Palestinians in getting where are today. We have maybe 5% of the people in these discussions (on both side - I'll admit that) who have any sense of nuance. We have maybe 1% of people who have enough knowledge on the topic/history etc. We have ideology and propaganda being the dominant forces.
So this is why this shouldn't be on Hacker News. There are enough other avenues for online "discussion" (which this is not) on the dividing topics of the day.
Israel just bombed residential Qatar the other day, killing and injuring civilians. Israel celebrated. They seem to be completely unrestrained.
So even if you're personally ok with Gazans being eliminated, there are other reasons we should be paying attention. Speaking of nuance.
A (failed) attempt to kill Hamas dimplomats who were there to discuss a ceasefire proposal. What does that tell you?
Israel's founding founders made no bones of the fact that they saw cleansing Palestine of Palestinians as key to your ethnosupremacist ambitions.
You talk with the utter condescension (to borrow the other reply's words) of a people who have been coddled by impunity for far too long, and there is way too much tolerance for your racist narrative in spaces like this.
Isn’t the only just response to completely eliminate the offending group, Hamas? Why should Israel and its resident tolerate ANY future risk to their residents?
Israel is eliminating far more than the "offending group" and they're doing it in a cold blooded, inhumane manner. That's why it's not "self defense". It's shameful.
This is factually incorrect, and even if it were true it's not exactly a great example for you to rest your case on.
> the IDF is actually doing far better than any other army in protecting civilians
According to who, Israel? Not according to the thousands of women and children they've murdered. Who likely far outnumber the number of militants they've killed.
Wasn’t sure who you were talking about there. Still not.
"Attacks began in 2001. Since then (August 2014 data), almost 20,000 rockets have hit southern Israel,[35][36] all but a few thousand of them since Israel withdrew from the Gaza Strip in August 2005."
...
"Some analysts see the attacks as a shift away from reliance on suicide bombing, which was previously Hamas's main method of attacking Israel, as an adoption of the rocket tactics used by the Lebanese group Hezbollah."
But we're going way back, during this ongoing war: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/liveblog/2024/10/7/live-hezbo...
"Updates: Hamas, Hezbollah fire rockets at Israel on October 7 anniversary"
I hope the answer to that last question includes those joining Hamas because of the first couple hundred thousands of Gazans killed.
What Israel's critics will add to that is that Israel has no right to self defense because it was occupying Gaza before the Oct 7th attack.
They'll also downplay the Oct 7th attack, claim Israelis killed their own, there was no sexual violence etc.
Then they'll look at the number of casualties as another proof. It's not "proportional". Israel is only allowed to kill a certain number of people in its wars. Otherwise it's clearly not self defense. But only for Israel, for other countries, still self defense.
People see bodies, children, on their social media feeds and destruction and that makes it very clear who the good guys and who the bad guys are.
Israel can't win this argument. Don't look for logic. Days after the Oct 7th attack Israel was already accused of genocide. Nothing Israel can do here is right and the actions western countries have taken (e.g. US post 9/11 or western response to ISIS) are not available to Israel because Israel shouldn't even exist and therefore should definitely not be allowed to defend itself (vs. the Americans and the Canadians who have lived on their land for 10,000 years and definitely didn't just steal it from the natives and kill all of them).
The only thing Israel can win is the actual war on the ground and so the leadership of Israel, while making many mistakes, is determined to win the war on the ground. Not all Israelis agree with that either. Personally I don't know if any other options really exist.
All that said, you can't really argue with the fact the population of Gaza is suffering immensely, many of them have lost everything they've had, many killed and injured, they live in terrible conditions. I mostly blame Hamas. I also blame the west for prolonging this war and not offering any reasonable solutions to Israel. Israel has faults and can and should do better but for the most part its hand is forced and has been forced by Palestinian violence/actions for some time. Maybe Gaza should have been taken immediately after Hamas took over in 2007. Maybe there would have been other courses of actions including post Oct 7. I donno. Oct 7th stunned me, it was an utter failure. Not really seeing anything proposed here at this point in time and don't recall seeing anything productive going back.
So all in all it's terrible. There's human suffering. We need to end it. The only way out I see is for Hamas to surrender. Let's get there and then we can debate what words mean, two states, one state, where do we go from here. This was is not going to end e.g. by the US telling Israel to end it.
With pressure on Hamas to surrender after being defeated in a war they started, this conflict would probably be over long ago.
However it still has considerable weaponry and underground facilities and it is still holding Israeli hostages. The issue isn't Hamas tomorrow. The issue is the consequence of letting Hamas retake the entire Gaza strip and rebuild itself, and the loss of deterrence when Hamas is going to declare they won the war once it ends on their terms.
I can relate to your point though and many people would agree with you. Let's stop killing people and see where this takes us is not an unreasonable position. But Israel is still in PTSD from Oct 7th and the mood is that it can't afford to take a chance here and that any stop/pause will just result in a higher price for Israelis and Palestinians paid a little down the line. The truly totally "unreasonable" side here is Hamas and I see how you can't understand their calculus because it is so death-cult fanatical.
The oppression is the biggest reason Hamas can grow. If that stopped I think with time Hamas would weaken and disappear. Like IRA in Northen Ireland eventually did.
Wrong. It is only their goal to occupy "everything" because they got attacked and need to secure their borders.
Israel already tried to completely withdraw from Gaza which evidently isn't a feasible solution. And this behavior, which cannot sensibly disputed, would also directly and thoroughly contradict any ambitions for genocide as well for that matter.
Israel has to leave the west bank eventually and what they do is wrong. But it is only tangentially related to the current war in Gaza.
I’m sure it’s not a sign of bias how often, eg, the UN writes reports on Israel versus murdered Christians in Africa.
I think a lot would have been won if the illegal settlements stopped and the apartheid like system ended. Hamas (and any other resistance) lives on the resentment created from that.
It think if Israel went back to the border of -67 and then did not try to expand its territories. It would with time resolve.
I can’t remember, was that the third or fourth time in 20 years that all of Israel’s neighbors simultaneously invaded it and lost territory? It’s hard to keep track with all of the wars of aggression against Israel that Israel won and gained territory from.
What would happen is exactly what did happen. Hamas would take over the entire territory. Arm to the teeth. Dig tunnels. And launch endless attacks against Israel.
I'm not a fan of the settlements but they are not the issue. The issue is Jewish presence in the middle east. When there were no settlements Israel was attacked. Pre-1967 it was still attacked. Pre-1948 Jews were still attacked. I don't think there should be any settlements and I would support dismantling them. I also condemn the settler violence against Palestinians. But again, this isn't really the issue, this is an outcome. Israel should have either annexed the west bank and given citizenship to all Palestinians or not allowed Israeli civilians to live there.
Tell me how the Jewish people murdered German civilians, broadcasted that to the world, committed hundreds of suicide bombing attacks in German cafes, supermarkets, malls and theaters, and fired 20,000 rockets at major German cities. Just so I can complete your analogy in my head. Also explain to me how what Israel is doing in Gaza to Palestinians is in any way comparable to the Nazis murdering six million Jews by rounding them up, loading them on trains to concentration camps, and then packing them in gas chambers. How does this compare with Israel targeting Hamas combatants, evacuating civilians population, and providing them with aid?
It's the mass murder of civilians part they have in common. Sure they haven't hit the million mark yet but they're getting there.
> Nazis murdering six million Jews by rounding them up, loading them on trains to concentration camps, and then packing them in gas chambers. How does this compare with Israel targeting Hamas combatants, evacuating civilians population, and providing them with aid
Somewhat similar if your look at the effect on innocent civilians. The Israelis are accused of starving them, blocking aid (and even targeting aid workers), and other crimes.
There is no such defence against a charge of genocide.
The lawyers who wrote the international treaty, many of whom themselves survived the Holocaust and lost their relatives in it, carefully considered whether to add such a defence. They did not add it. They considered that genocide is a crime for which there is no excuse. That is should be possible to defend yourself without resorting to it.
In any case, the group at issue is not Hamas. The genocide is being conducted against all Palestinians.
Your argument also conveniently omits the extreme level of military dominance which Israel has over the Palestinians.
The real reason many Israelis cannot conceive of a solution other than killing or expelling them, is: how can we leave them there, after the level of hatred, murder, violence, and abuse we have heaped on them over the last two years? We have taken revenge for our 36 dead children, won't they want revenge for their 20,000?
- hamas refuses to disarm
- nobody wants to be part of international force.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Shani_Louk
EDIT: More likely Naama Levy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kidnapping_of_Naama_Levy
But at this point, Israel exists. People have been born and died there. Its people's homes. Just as I rail against Israel causing forced displacement of Palestinans - a crime against humanity - I will not call for the same crime to be visited on Israelis.
Both peoples exist, have rights and deserve to exist in peace. Currently, Palestinians are treated as subhumans by the state of Israel and that has to stop, but none of that means that we shouldn't support Israel's right to exist. The alternative is to visit upon them the very same despicable crimes we criticise them for committing.
I'm pretty sure everyone here agrees that Israel can not exist on its own. Even with its nuclear capabilities, it's very small country and vulnerable. What do you think a war with Hamas or Iran would last if they don't receive daily shipments of weapons from allies, mainly the US? It's fully dependent on its Western allies; like any other colony, it will eventually collapse when money finally runs out.
Zionism is the idea of colonial occupation. The internal logic will always end in ethnic cleansing. It did in 1948. It's doing it now. American Manifest Destiny had a similar function, and it also resulted in massive genocide for which we have not atoned.
Zionism is done. A secular democratic state for all people with the right of return guaranteed for displaced Palestinians along with some kind of reeducation / denazification program for the genocidal citizens of the current state of Israel is the only viable solution.
As a Jew, I don't think Arabs should pay for Germany's crimes. I think Germany should pay. They paid a little already. They should pay more, especially now that they are supporting this genocide too.
But we often don't have world powers pay immeasurable or insurmountable amounts due to the game theory that slip-up's between world powers are inevitable, and when they find themselves in a compromising and vulnerable enough position that another nation state can exert enough power on them to "punish" them, those world powers are already decimated enough that the only logical reason for the punishment is retribution/revenge, thereby adding more "hurt" into the world - when that world power's decimation was already its justice.
A lot of people were displaced, forcibly moved to other areas, often to labor camps after WWII. Somehow we are able to accept this new order and live in peace. Arabs started multiple war over it, lost all of them, are still waging war today. The road to peace for them is to lay down arms, surrender and accept the resolution made by the winning side - exactly what we all have done after WWII.
Germany no, but the Arab states should definitely pay for ethnically cleansing the Mizrahi Jews who currently make up a majority of Israeli Jews.
Source: https://people.socsci.tau.ac.il/mu/noah/files/2018/07/Ethnic...
As a Jew, what do you say every Seder? Do you do a Seder? לְשָׁנָה הַבָּאָה בִּירוּשָלָיִם
There is no colonial occupation. There is immigration. Jews are not a colonizing force and Jews, and Israelis, have (with very very few exceptions) have never engaged in ethnic cleansing. Zionism acknowledged that the current people living in the region have rights. Those people didn't acknowledge the rights of the Jewish people.
As the other comment mentions, Jews were ethnically cleansed from many countries in the middle east. Their land and property stolen. Jews were attacked and ethnically cleansed in the land of Israel (e.g. Hebron, Tsfat, Jersualem, Gaza). Did you know Jews used to live in Gaza from the second century BCE until finally removed by force in 1929?
A secular democratic state for all people is what was offered to the Arabs when Israel was established! The Palestinians don't want that. Look at how Jews are faring in all other Arab countries today when you talk about "re-education". Antisemitism is rampant in those societies and Jews are erased.
You're entitled to your opinions ofcourse but IMO you are completely disconnected from your heritage and the reality on the ground. If you haven't already I recommend reading a book: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People_Love_Dead_Jews that might give you some glimpse into some history you might not be familiar with.
You are wrong. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plan_Dalet
2. This was during war time.
3. "This strategy is subject to controversy, with some historians characterizing it as defensive, while others assert that it was an integral part of a planned strategy for the expulsion, sometimes called an ethnic cleansing, of the area's native inhabitants".
4. This article seems to be pretty biased based on the terminology used. Wikipedia often is a political battleground.
5. This is regurgitating anti-Israel talking points. If you have a deeper insight please share it.
Let's just look at some details ( https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%AA%D7%95%D7%9B%D7%A0%D7%99... ):
" ב-29 בנובמבר 1947 החליט האו"ם על תוכנית החלוקה, שכללה את סיום המנדט הבריטי בארץ ישראל ואת הקמתן של מדינה עברית ושל מדינה ערבית בשטחה. יום לאחר מכן, ב-30 בנובמבר 1947, תקפו ערבים ביריות אוטובוס יהודי בקרבת פתח תקווה, הרגו חמישה מנוסעיו ופצעו שבעה. ביריות אלה נפתחה מלחמת העצמאות, שנמשכה כשנה ושבעה חודשים."
So post the UN resolution to end the British Mandate and create a Jewish (and Arab) state in the region (which the Arabs rejected) there was an attack that killed 5 civilians near Petah Tikva that started Israel's war of independence (terrorism has been a theme back then before there was Israel).
"המטרה האסטרטגית של הערבים: ליצור טרור ברחבי הארץ שיגרום להפסקת עלייה, לעזיבת יישובים יהודיים ולהתנוונות היישוב היהודי בארץ "
The Arabs' strategic plan was via terrorism to deter Jewish people from migrating to Israel and "ethnically cleanse" it from Jews (the text says "make them leave their villages").
" .
יש היסטוריונים הטוענים כי סילוק הערבים מתחומי המדינה היהודית היה המטרה העיקרית של התוכנית. חלקם סבור כי מטרת תוכנית ד' הייתה להשתלט על שטחי המדינה הערבית המיועדת ומניעת הקמתה. לדעת ההיסטוריון יואב גלבר קריאה כזו במסמכים מתמקדת בסעיף אחד ומוציאה אותו מהקשרו. לדבריו, סעיפים אלו הנוגעים להתנהגות עם האוכלוסייה הערבית הם משניים בתוכנית שעיקרה היה היערכות לפלישה הצפויה של צבאות ערב. בנוסף, הוא טוען כי קיימת התעלמות מכך שההנחיה לגרש כפריים התייחסה רק לאלו שיגלו התנגדות פעילה ויילחמו ולא למי שייכנע לאנשי ההגנה, וזאת מתוך כוונה למנוע מלוחמים ערבים להפוך את הכפרים לבסיסים נגד היישובים היהודיים הסמוכים.["
Some historians claim that removing Arabs from Israel was the main idea. However Yoav Gelber (mentioned here, a history professor that research this), says that was a minor portion of the plan that shouldn't be read out of context and points out that this only applies to villages that would be used as bases for attacking nearby Jewish towns during the war, where there are armed forces and refuse to surrender.
" "כיתור הכפר ועריכת חיפוש בתוכו. במקרה של התנגדות - השמדת הכוח המזוין וגירוש האוכלוסייה אל מעבר לגבול המדינה... במקרה של אי התנגדות - יוכנס חיל מצב לתוך הכפר, אשר יתבצר במקום או במקומות המאפשרים שליטה טקטית מוחלטת. מפקד חיל המצב יחרים את כל כלי הנשק, כל מקלטי א-ט [אלחוט רדיו] וכל כלי הרכב... יאסור את כל האישים החשודים מבחינה פוליטית. בהתייעצות עם הגורמים המדיניים ימונו מוסדות מבין תושבי הכפר להנהלת ענייניו הפנימיים. "
The plan was basically the strategic plan for being able to defend the territory of Israel against the attack by the Arabs (local and surrounding). So the context is already the understanding that once the British leave Israel will be attacked - which happened. It dealt with villages that were hostile, in certain areas, and with being able to create and control defensible territory against Arab armies. Only given armed resistance the population was to be expelled. This was 1948, maybe today this doesn't fly but this sort of stuff happened a lot in the world those days. At the end of the day, Israel was not ethnically cleansed in 1947-48, many Arabs live there to date. Of those that left (the 1948 refugees) the forced expulsion are a minority.
I'm not necessarily proud of all these aspects but given the creation of a new state, with armed forces threatening it from day 1, this is what happened. As I mentioned in other replies, Israel called on the Arabs to become full and equal citizens of the new state (a solutions some people are suddenly remembering to advocate for) and the Arabs refused. They refused. This conflict is not about the Arabs wanting to live in their property as equal citizens in a free/democratic country. They had this option and they refused. This conflict is about erasing Jewish presence in the region. Has been and still is.
Insinuating that diaspora Jews don’t do Seder, or don’t do it “the right way”, is insulting and gross.
I am making an assumption that a Jewish person who claims Jews have no connection to Israel doesn't practice those aspects of Judaism that emphasize this connection, of which there are many. I am also making this point for the benefit of the non-Jews who are not familiar with Jewish traditions who claim Jews have no connection to Israel and Zionism is some sort of modern invention of that connection.
But if I insulted anyone, given that Yom Kippur is upon us, I apologize and hope you forgive me.
Isn't the very goal of "progress" in progressive to move away from victimhood to self-determined?
Albert Einstein added his name to a famous letter to the NY Times in the late 40's, in which EXACTLY THIS was explained, in plain & uncompromising language, in the very first paragraph. For Israel to exist, it would have to be just like the Nazis. That's LITERALLY what that letter said.
The splitting of a non-existing hair argument that you're trying to do is just to avoid admitting that you've been wrong the entire time, and enough people warned (or boasted) about it from the very beginning that you really don't have an excuse for being this wrong.
Europe accepted millions of Ukrainian refugees to keep them out of harms way, why do they not extend the same helping hand to Palestinians from Gaza? who are, at least according to this UN report, in much worse condition?
My idea is to buy the gaza strip from the residents and they can take their newfound wealth to another arab country and be prosperous happy and peaceful there.
But yeah, the fact that no one is taking them in proves they are all a bunch of anti semites or virtue signallers. They don't care about palestinians, it's just politically convenient to pretend that they do.
It would be far less costly to give each family in Gaza $100k and a plane ticket than to continue this humanitarian disaster.
Just realise this: your propaganda playbook stopped working a long time ago. I doubt you have the slightest inkling of how much deep loathing much of humanity has developed for your Zionist Nazi movement. And every time you smirkly suggest that the victims should just surrender, you turn stomachs.
Your failing propaganda only works to convince others of the only possible solution. The end of this evil settler-colonial monstrosity, and the return of ALL the land to its native population.
But to be balanced it has to work both ways. Send everyone back where they came from! All the immigrants must go back to their home country. But the Jews! Where do they come from? Oh... Yeah.
If you don’t have the capacity to stop it but you do have the capacity to offer them a home shouldn’t you ?
Or is it the moral equivalent to the American “thoughts and prayers “?
It’s similar to the Ukrainian Russian meat grinder. The support is only extended enough for this to continue on forever
Nor is available power and leverage being brought to bear on stopping them. Any honest attempt at helping innocents being traumatized would start there.
Then yes, facilitating voluntary movement after that would help, without also blatantly facilitating those who want to drive them out.
I suppose you could that in theory but only in theory. In practice, the current situation is not very surprising given the overall trajectory since the inception of the country. It's very disturbing to see the memes that are coming out of the social media of the soldiers and even the general population.
Even if the current govt. of the country changes, I wouldn't hold my breath about the new government making reparations or taking any other positive steps.
I understand that that's the current shorthand, but it seems inaccurate and unnecessarily polarizing to me.