I am quite certain the marchers are not shouting for Israeli sovereignty.
Israel - Palestine Discussion | Post Respectfully | Discuss more, tweet less
- Thread starter esmufc07
- Start date
I want a tacit acknowledgement that despite the horrific nature, Israel had no choice internally or externally but to respond to this Hamas attack with an invasion.
Whilst criticising the nature of their targeting is very valid (I'm doing it myself regularly), the idea that they should have sat back and done nothing is nonsensical. You can't respond to an attack like that by opening talks for a two state solution.
Israel is a relatively forwards thinking and liberal country internally. Certainly more so than many others, like say the USA. It has its problems, and those have accelerated in the last decades, but it's still ok.
I don't understand what you mean by it wants 'supremacy.'
I've never in my life used the term from the river to the sea. In any context.
It is thousands times safer to here it from a single idiot in a 100k march, than to here from the mouth of the fecking Israeli PM who controls thousands of soldiers. FFS cant people use their brain.
Yes, you used a more hateful term. You know we dont have a memory of a fish, we can remember discussion from 2 days ago. We know what you said and what you meant.
My question,
what is more dangerous, The Israeli PM holding a fecking map exterminating the entire Palestinian land and painting it all Israeli from the river to the sea?
or
Few idiots in a 100K march?
What I suggested is not against international law, not as a war crime or one against humanity. It's also not 'getting rid' of them to expand Israel (Egypt should take that land for all I care)
The suggestion I made is light years better for the Palestinians than any options they currently have. (And will also never happen.)
You think I'm stupid anyway, so please remind me the hateful term I used as I obviously do have the memory of a fish.
Maybe he's talking about ethnic cleansing?
The Jews who got ethnic cleansed pre WWII were surely better for it. Many groups have been better for it. Displacement can save lives and can or should be considered if:
a) The enemy [israel] is immutable within x period
b) The enemy will not stop attacks within x period
To argue against it logically you'd have to argue that either:
a) Israel can be moved or destroyed
b) Palestinians have a realistic hope for a state within a generation (I'm picking x period myself here. You could argue for maybe 20 years), without terrorism and resulting invasion resulting in more deaths.
If both of those hold untrue, it's better to move.
Oh yes, I forgot the Kuwait one too.
I'll give you that, it's not too difficult to concede unless you believe in some absurd notion of free will. Israel responded with the only way they could given the circumstances.
But, in the same vein, I'll also say that Hamas had no choice internally or externally but to respond to the crimes committed historically by the Israeli state on Gaza with their violent attacks. What we need is a concrete discussion about the economical/political/social factors that have lead to the formation of a group such as Hamas. And there is absolutely no avoiding that Israel's violent policy with respect to the palestinians since the baffling conditions of its institution is a major part of it.
" . It's also not 'getting rid' of them to expand Israel" (Egypt should take that land for all I care) if you want to cut out parts of sentences, you can make anything work.
And um, about it being a warcrime... it's complicated and dubious. I've argued with myself many times on that concept. Here's a primer: https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/ethnic-cleansing.shtml
I'm swinging towards if you did it in the way I said, it wouldn't be one, though the law is far from established and I could make arguments for it being one.
I agree somewhat. At least that the Hamas attacks were rational (or would have been on a far smaller scale.) I especially agree with the bold; Israel have put them in such destitution that they have not only been forced to violence as an only option, but forced into the arms of rogue nations who now use them as a proxy.
The problem is, their attack was too successful. There's no hope now for quite a while and that's only going to make things worse for the Palestinians, and sow hate more. Israel are also responding with what looks like massive barbarism which makes it worse. Thats why it all feels so depressing, this is just more in the cycle of killing.
Sure.
But when you make this argument, you make it with the knowledge that the Nazis lost the war.
When you say Palestinians should move, you are assuming that Israel wins. That nobody involved will suffer any kind of consequences for this ethnic cleansing.
Not only that: from the way you've positioned yourself in this thread, it's a fair guess that you don't want any kind of meaningful consequences.
It's a very different argument.
If I were you, I would leave the discussion on the technicalities. It's not worth it.
Yes, I feel that's a given at this stage. At least for a while. If and when the Jewish state falls, which could happen in the future, it will likely be bloody beyond imagination. I doubt we'll live to see it though. Do you not feel its a given?
And as for meaningful consequences: My suggestion was that they should be moved to a safe island, given it as a state, and that Israel should pay reparations to make it happen and build their state.
The disingenuous distraction of focusing on semantics rather than the war crimes which are currently taking place is ridiculous.
Seems to be part of a wider tactic to obfuscate the most pressing issue, which is civilians being killed right at this moment, every day, continously.
Seems to be part of a wider tactic to obfuscate the most pressing issue, which is civilians being killed right at this moment, every day, continously.
The other option is that Israel is moved to Antarctica. So we now have two fairly decent options send palestinians to an empty island or send jewish israelis to Antarctica.
Last edited:
What a bizarre poster.
I’ve seen camp David accords come up a fair few times here.
Was written a while back by Mandela’s grandson but worth a read : https://www.aljazeera.com/amp/opinions/2020/7/18/how-israels-lobbyists-occupied-mandelas-legacy
Was written a while back by Mandela’s grandson but worth a read : https://www.aljazeera.com/amp/opinions/2020/7/18/how-israels-lobbyists-occupied-mandelas-legacy
They're really mentally ill
Yeah I love this arguement. When they talk about Nelson Mandela, they clearly only know about the white-washed version of him post-prison sentence.
Sorry but I don't share your views. And if I may add some of what you say about International Law etc I don't know how you can then make certain statements.
Israel doesn't want peace and everyone living under international law. It never did.
Israel wants supremacy. It wants the Arabs as it's inferiors with no rights. IDF can systematically beat up and arrest and shoot Palestinians but a Palestinian police officer cannot even chastise a Jew for breaking the law. Heck even Chelsea Clinton's kids don't have the same rights as Jews because she isn't a born Jew her husband is. Making the kids non Jewish (although this is against Jewish scripture)
What is Israel defending? It's rights to be the superior race amongst inferiors. That is supremacy.
Got a question for you.
During the current massacre, Israelangonto line when bombing refugee camps and hospitals is that there was a specific Hamas personnel in there.
Previous statements by Israelis and "experts" said that Israel has double agents at every level of the Hamas structure. Mossad are basically shit hot at what they do.
If they know where every tunnel is and where every member is how the hell did they not know about the precision planned attack on the 7th?
My point is not that Israel knew or the whole conspiracy of Israel did it to do what is currently happening.
My point is you can't have it both ways. As in either Mossad is shit hot at what they do or just shit.
Without putting words into your mouth, how I read your post is Israel should have done nothing following Hamas's attack on October 7th. Is this your view? It is a simple yes or no answer.
No.
However it was part of a larger conversation with a person who has reiterated certain points throughout the various conversations.
I can see why you have formed a certain understanding based on the post you quoted.
Every country, every individual, has a right to protect/defend themselves. It is, imo, fair to question what it is that is being defended.
My stance throughout has been that Israel are shit at intelligence and have got complacent and massively dropped the ball. It has been a complete ISR failure. You can see they know nothing from the way their ground troops move; they know nothing.
My strong suspicion is that the air force is getting a large number of its targeting packages from US intelligence and drones who quickly stepped in to provide the ISR that Israel had so spectacularly failed at. We won't know how true this is for a while though.
The bold is probably correct. They aren't shit, but have been bogged down by political appointments and complacency. They certainly have massively failed, which is why the whole country has turned against the government.
I'm not going into the whole international law thing with you because it's proved futile here. People attach (rightly?) emotional feelings to whether something breaks LOAC or not for example.
You have your right to an opinion, and honestly there's some truth to what you've said in some of your statements. Especially recently. If you wanted to add to your list of Israel hatred, there's the disgraceful treatment of the Bedouin. It's been an ongoing thing, but especially under recent governments has been bad.
I will say that what "Israel" wants isn't as clear as you make out. It's relatively clear towards the Palestinians in many ways, but not in a lot of other aspects. You see what the government wants, and the effect of a purist democracy which encourages instability and therefore power to the fringes. I think Israel 'wants' [or did when I was around] to be a relatively liberal and secular democracy with gay/reproductive rights etc, whilst also being a sanctuary for Jews who are endangered around the world. Whether "Israel" wants that to be exclusive of all other races, is a big question. Many don't for sure, I'd hope and imagine a majority don't.
Same done with Martin Luther King
I think it is possible for some of us - and I grant you, not everyone - to debate more than one thing at a time.
Well, that rather depends on who is doing the listening, which is the point. Activists/People/Marchers are using phrases that can be interpreted, due to their provenance, as intimidatory to jewish people who live here, at a particularly sensitive moment. Isn't that worthy of being pointed out too, by the people who are feeling intimidated. Don't they deserve a hearing?
How about people don't use a phrase that can be interpreted either as the desirability of Israel grinding its boots into Palestinian faces, or as the desirability of Israel being eliminated by Palestinians. FFS, can't people use their brain?
Last edited:
Its also worth noting how much of a perception game this conflict is in the age of social media, where phrases and imagery can easily sway public opinion in one direction or another. So in that respect, its not entirely surprising some are debating the actual meaning of words.
Hope these idiots realise that videos like this simply harden Israeli resolve and justify the larger use of fires and other obscene tactics in the eyes of the world as ground ops are dangerous.
Also, they posted that video of trophy intercepting their atgm, and even freeze framed it so you could see it was an intercept. Smart lads.