When you know what father of Israel did during WW2 to fund the current Israel.

Uhg, too bad its not taught in school coz history is written by winners and you have to search for it yourself.

Yes Israel commits an ongoing genocide.

And I look at this only by lens of history.

It's not a country

There isn't really a single way to define a country. For background, I would recommend this video from the Map Men: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nB688xBYdY

But following their conclusion: the thing that makes you a country is being recognized as one by other countries. Most of the world recognizes Palestine as a country (including 157 UN member states). Here is a map where the green countries recognize Palestine, and grey do not: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/08/Palestin...

What are the Palestinians then?

Historically, Palestine has never been a country. The Romans captured Judea, and later expelled the Jews and renamed the province Syria Palaestina (after previous enemies of the Jews). After the Romans, many other empires held the land: the Arabs, Mamluks, Turks, British. But at no point was it a country. Even when the Egyptians and Jordanians captured Gaza and the West Bank, they didn't give independence to Palestine. Israel captured Gaza/West Bank. They gave full control to Gaza in 2005. So you could say Gaza is a country now.

Yes, that's the standard text, I know. (Just ignoring the arab movement since the 1880s to make it a country and the British promise to help with that).

But that wasn't my question. If Palestine isn't a country, then what are the Palestinians?

There are official old coins, newspapers, etc. with Palestine written on them. It has long been an entity.

Here’s a bit of history lesson: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandatory_Palestine

TL;DR has nothing to do with Palestine of today

Many countries disagree with that. However, virtually everyone agree that it is not Israeli territory.

oh nice, you are making us all sob with those tough words

> Palestine is a country under a brutal military occupation and progressive illegal colonisation that has been going on for 80 years.

If Mexico had started attacking the US across the border, what would the US do? I'm curious to hear what you think a country should do in this circumstance.

Are the US currently illegally occupying large parts of Mexico and progressively colonising it, displacing and oppressing the Mexican population?

And if that were the case, would you say that Mexico had started attacking the US across the border? Or would you say that the US are waging war against Mexico and Mexico is fighting back?

You have the timeline backwards. Palestinians attacked Jews first, then Jews occupied the invaders.

I disagree with this timeline (the Jews got there in the first place with the precise, declared intent of colonising somebody else's land. That's the whole point of Zionism).

But more in general, there's no point in following a tit-for-tat that goes back 80 years or more with the intent of finding "who was the first". Each event further down the chain completely reverses the assessment, and you can't base any solid reasoning on such grounds. What you have to look at is the big picture: who is occupying someone else's territory? Who is oppressing the other with overwhelming force? Which side keeps taking and which keeps losing?

> the Jews got there in the first place with the precise, declared intent of colonising somebody else's land. That's the whole point of Zionism

Yes, but they were doing it by legally purchasing land, not through violent displacement. Arabs then rioted against Jewish communities, and that started the cycle of violence.

And note how this push for Zionism coincides with a global expansion of antisemitism after WWI. The only place Jews could find reliable support was among their people and protected by the British who were bound to uphold the Barfour declaration.

> What you have to look at is the big picture: who is occupying someone else's territory?

But if you ignore the history, you can't actually determine whose territory it is can you? Jews purchased land from Arabs, Arabs repeatedly started conflicts with them and Jews repeatedly beat them back. Losers in a conflict lose territory, and the armistice following Israel's founding drew the expanded lines.

As for the occupation of Gaza and the West Bank today, I agree it's problematic, but what exactly Israel supposed to do when they keep getting attacked? They were attacked after the armistice with Jordan and Egypt, so once again, they didn't start anything.

If Mexico repeatedly attacked the US, they would do the same thing. Hamas continues to have over 70% support among Gazans, even now, and Hamas murders anyone who speaks against them.

> but they were doing it by legally purchasing land

This is false- the land they purchased was only 12% of what they claimed at the moment of independence. Besides, privately buying land doesn't give you any right to declare sovereignty over it- try that in your country.

> The only place Jews could find reliable support was among their people

Sucks for them, but absolutely can't be used to justify a crime against a third party- the Palestinians.

> Jews purchased land from Arabs, Arabs repeatedly started conflicts with them and Jews repeatedly beat them back

This is entirely false and even a cursory reading of actual history (not the passively repeated Zionist propaganda points that you're exposing here) would change your mind.

> As for the occupation of Gaza and the West Bank today, I agree it's problematic, but what exactly Israel supposed to do when they keep getting attacked?

First of all they should not occupy any territory that doesn't belong to them, because that makes the attacks entirely reasonable and justified.

  Are the US currently illegally occupying large parts of Mexico

This comment would depress a highschool history teacher.

Yeah, the annexation of Texas. Which is similar to Israel / Palestine in many ways.

The depressing thing is that you don't know that the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo was signed 178 years ago, and that territory can be legally ceded by means of peace treaties. The part of Palestine that is considered illegally occupied is the part that lies beyond the 1949 armistice borders and has never been legally ceded to Israel by any treaty.

> Israel had already killed many, many more civilians in Gaza than Hamas did in Israel with that attack.

And how does it justify Hamas killing unarmed civilians? How does it justify Hamas lobbing grenades at Nepali students?

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cy0kllzqk1vo

That's not what I am answering to, but the assertion "Hamas threw the first stone". No it didn't.